W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > February 2015

Re: Publication Request: one FPWD & an update

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:15:35 +0000
Message-ID: <54EC5D57.2060406@w3.org>
To: Jérémie Astori <jeremie@w3.org>, Webmaster <webreq@w3.org>
CC: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>, Newton Calegari <newton@nic.br>, Caroline Burle <cburle@nic.br>, "Deirdre Lee (Derilinx)" <deirdre@derilinx.com>, Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>, Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@stanford.edu>
+cc Michel Dumontier

Thanks Jérémie,

I ran the link checker against the FPWD but, stupidly, didn't on the UCR 
doc - which is the one that really needed it.

I've been through the UCR and made all the necessary corrections. Link 
checker now reports that all internal links are good.

As ever, it reports some errors where none exist.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts/1.9.ttl
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/coreconcepts
http://www.socrata.com/
http://opendatacommons.org/

Are all fine in a browser, i.e. not 404s

I am reluctant to remove the link to bio2rdf.org as I believe this is a 
temporary problem with that site. Michel Dumontier is one of the 
custodians of that site and has been altered (he's on the west coast so 
let's be reasonable!) If there's a bigger problem with bio2rdf then I'm 
sure he'll let us know.

Hope this is all good to go now.

Phil.


On 24/02/2015 00:30, Jérémie Astori wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> There are a few issues with these documents:
>
> ## NOTE
>
> - Just before "2.25 Web Observatory", one href is
> R-DataMissingIncomplete instead of #R-DataMissingIncomplete.
> - Just before "2.5 Dados.gov.br", one href R-SensitiveSecurity instead
> of #R-SensitiveSecurity.
> - http://www.gs1.org/digital is a 404
> - http://bio2rdf.org/ is a 503
> - Broken fragments:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-DutchBaseReg (lines
> 2378, 2456, 2493, 2558, 2701, 2744)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-OKFNTransport
> (lines 2368, 2378, 2387, 2398, 2408, 2436, 2446, 2467, 2546, 2592, 2609,
> 2616, 2631, 2642, 2653, 2776, 2785, 2794, 2805, 2868)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-AccessUpToDate
> (lines 934, 1369, 1870)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-MetadatAvailable
> (line 572)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#h4_can-req-versioning
> (line 2293)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-VocabOpen%20 (line
> 2110)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-AccessRelTime (line
> 1559)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-WindCharacterization (lines
> 2390, 2480, 2549, 2564)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-TheLandPortal (line
> 2367)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-VocabVersion%20
> (line 368)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-PersisentIdentification
> (line 938)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-AcessUptodate (line
> 1762)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-DataUsage (line 2867)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-DataUnavailabilityReference
> (lines 569, 2040, 2216)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-VocabReference%20
> (line 2110)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-VocabDocum%20 (line
> 2109)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-OpenExperimenatlFieldStudies
> (lines 2547, 2561, 2632)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-ISOGEOStory (line
> 2830)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#R-FormatMachineReadable (line
> 1371)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-OpenExperimentalFieldStudies
> (lines 2387, 2447, 2458, 2478, 2508, 2524, 2858, 2868)
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#h4_can-req-feedback
> (line 2307)
>
> Could you fix these please?
> Please run [1] when you are done with the fixes to make sure the links
> are fine.
>
> ## Removing the wrong document
>
> FYI, here are the steps I followed:
>
> [[
> jeremie@pompomgalli:~$ cvs co WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224/
> cvs checkout: Updating WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224
> U WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224/Overview.html
> jeremie@pompomgalli:~$ cd !$
> cd WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224/
> jeremie@pompomgalli:~/WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224$ rm Overview.html
> jeremie@pompomgalli:~/WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224$ cvs rm
> Overview.html
> cvs remove: scheduling `Overview.html' for removal
> cvs remove: use `cvs commit' to remove this file permanently
> jeremie@pompomgalli:~/WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224$ cvs ci -m
> 'Remove wrong document'
> cvs commit: Examining .
> /w3ccvs/WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224/Overview.html,v  <--
> Overview.html
> new revision: delete; previous revision: 1.1
> jeremie@pompomgalli:~/WWW/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224$
> ]]
>
> The empty repository remains but that's an unfortunate drawback of CVS.
>
> ## FPWD
>
> The pubrules checker complains that the copyright statement is:
>
>  > Copyright © 2015 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio, Beihang), W3C liability,
> trademark and document use rules apply.
>
> instead of being:
>
>  > Copyright © 2015 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio, Beihang). W3C liability,
> trademark and document use rules apply.
>
> So, could you find the hidden typo?
> ", W3C" -> you put a comma instead of a dot! :-)
> Could you fix this please?
>
> Also, neither pubrules or the link checker could terminate. I am
> guessing one of the links within the documents doesn't respond and the
> systems never timeout. Could you check the links to see what happens in
> the document please?
>
> ---
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jérémie
>
> [1]:
> http://validator.w3.org/checklink?uri=http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/&recursive=on
>
>
> On 02/21/2015 03:19 PM, Phil Archer wrote:
>> Dear Webmaster,
>>
>> This is a publication request for two linked documents. The first is a
>> simple update:
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/
>>
>> is the latest version of "Data on the Web Best Practices Use Cases &
>> Requirements"
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp-ucr/,
>>
>> the previous one being at
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-dwbp-ucr-20141014/.
>>
>> Abstract:
>>
>> This document lists use cases, compiled by the Data on the Web Best
>> Practices Working Group, that represent scenarios of how data is commonly
>> published on the Web and how it is used. This document also provides a
>> set of requirements derived from these use cases that will be used to
>> guide the development of the set of Data on the Web Best Practices and
>> the development of two new vocabularies: Quality and Granularity
>> Description Vocabulary and Data Usage Description Vocabulary.
>>
>>
>> The document is in place and is, I believe, pubrules compliant.
>>
>> Record of WG resolution is at
>> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2015-01-23#resolution_3
>>
>> NB. This iteration marks a switch from WD to NOTE (this is a UCR, so
>> not on the Rec Track). But I goofed... I created
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-ucr-20150224/ which was a mistake.
>> Can you please delete this? Thanks.
>>
>> The WG has also resolved to publish the FPWD of its "Data on the Web
>> Best Practices"
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2015-02-20#resolution_2
>>
>> Ralph approved the short URL in a mail to you and me on 26 Jan.
>>
>> The doc is installed and pubrules compliant at
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20150224/
>>
>> Abstract:
>>
>> This document provides best practices related to the publication and
>> usage of data on the Web designed to help support a self-sustaining
>> ecosystem. Data should be discoverable and understandable by humans
>> and machines. Where data is used in some way, whether by the
>> originator of
>> the data or by an external party, such usage should also be
>> discoverable and the efforts of the data publisher recognized. In
>> short, following
>> these best practices will facilitate interaction between publishers
>> and consumers.
>>
>> I am not sure which category the UCR doc is in? But I'd like to create
>> a new category of 'Data on the Web' into which this BP doc and the
>> outputs of the Spatial Data on the Web WG will go in due course. Can
>> the UCR doc be included in this new category too?
>>
>> And before you ask, here's some blurb for the announcement:
>>
>> The <a href="/2013/dwbp/">Data on the Web Best Practices Working
>> Group</a> has today published the first public working draft of its
>> primary
>> output document. The WG is tackling the very broad topic of data
>> publishing, covering government, cultural heritage and commercial
>> data, open
>> data, closed data, linked data &hellip; it's a very broad canvas.
>> Consequently a number of issues remain very open and the working group
>> members
>> are keen to receive feedback so as to guide the work to completion.
>> The aim is to offer advice that is helpful today and likely to remain
>> helpful as technologies evolve. The first public working draft of the
>> <a href="/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20150224/">Data on the Web Best
>> Practices</a> is
>> complemented by a substantial update to the group's <a
>> href="/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/">Use Cases and
>> Requirements</a>. New use cases
>> include NASA's <a
>> href="/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-ASO">Airborne Snow
>> Observatory</a> (which is also relevant to the new <a
>> href="/2015/spatial/">Spatial Data on the Web Working Group</a>) and
>> the <a href="/TR/2015/NOTE-dwbp-ucr-20150224/#UC-SharePSI">European
>> Union-funded Share-PSI project</a>.
>>
>> I know you'll let me know if there are any queries.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Phil.
>>
>>
>>
>

-- 


Phil Archer
W3C Data Activity Lead
http://www.w3.org/2013/data/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1
Received on Tuesday, 24 February 2015 11:14:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 24 February 2015 11:14:27 UTC