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

Re: Suggestion for context section

From: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 18:57:29 -0300
Message-ID: <CANx1PzwrRH4XqXFzX1eMNi5LkzaOY+m7=W0GtpWQ2pLb3nqBZA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Cc: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>, Newton Calegari <newton@nic.br>, Caroline Burle <cburle@nic.br>
Hi Phil,

Thanks a lot for your message!

On the comments received, it's necessary to show that we have responded to
> the commentators. This should be done by simply replying to their e-mail,
> including the relevant archive (remember that only WG members can post to
> *this* list, but there is the
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-comments/ list which is
> open to everyone.
> In an ideal world, there's a reply from the commentator indicating that
> they're happy with the resolution. if there's no reply, OK, we move on
> (documents don't get held up).

I sent another message to the commenters (Andrea Perego and Andrea Maurino)
and just Andrea Perego answered. He said that he is ok with our proposal
and that he's gonna make more comments on the 2nd draft.

> Also, I'm not surprised to see that the context section is throwing up
> questions. For me, the diagram and associated text should be in the section
> on data versioning, not a separate section about the context of the whole
> document.
> How would you feel about moving it to
> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#dataVersioning ? And then adding an
> issue saying that this is something we're keen to hear comments about,
> including comments on the potential use of DCAT+PAV.

I liked your proposal for the context section and I moved the diagram and
part of the text to the Versioning section [1]. I also included a new issue
[2]. However, I think that the context section is still necessary because
we should tell that we're using the dataset definition proposed by DCAT.
Later on, this section can be improved with other information that is
relevant for the overall understanding of our BP.

> Bigger question: does the WG feel motivated and able to develop DCAT 1.1
> to include versioning?

I feel motivated because IMO this is something really important that needs
to be done! However, I am not sure if we are able to do this :) Let's see
the opinion of the rest of the group ;)

Are there initiatives to develop this extension?


[1] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#dataVersioning
[2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/192

> Phil.
> --
> Phil Archer
> W3C Data Activity Lead
> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
> http://philarcher.org
> +44 (0)7887 767755
> @philarcher1

Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
Received on Thursday, 18 June 2015 21:58:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 18 June 2015 21:58:20 UTC