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

Re: NY Property Tax Explorer

From: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 10:54:19 -0300
Message-ID: <CA+pXJigXOUWyKSfSa13dHvPbr4+9UVYU+OUwEsPoydbu-GAx1w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>
Cc: DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
As I said, Makx, I think we all are, in general terms, agreeing.

The discussion in this thread is an example of a communication process and
the implicit not automatic way of a common understanding, the semantic
thing.

For me, the BPs are, mainly, a way to enhance the quality of the
communication process between publishers and consumers.

Outside the web we also have this process, many times only with printed
documents. Metadata is not an invention of the web.

In a first moment, it's ok to simply distribute the printed documents on
the web.

But the web give us the possibility to allow machines (and people, of
course) to access these documents in a global scale.

Repeating, I think we all agree with this idea and is a matter of how to
put this things in a good text (with examples) in our documents.

Best Regards,
Laufer

Em sábado, 28 de março de 2015, Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>
escreveu:

> Hi Laufer,
>
>
>
> Maybe a misunderstanding. I was not saying people should not publish
> metadata. It is not clear to me how you could get that impression from the
> message I sent.
>
>
>
> I was saying we should not make absolute and unqualified statements that
> may be read as if we think that people who publish PDFs are stupid. We
> should on the contrary convey positive messages pointing out that it is
> more useful to publish tabular data in formats that are better suited for
> machine-processing.
>
>
>
> Makx.
>
>
>
>
>
> *De:* Laufer [mailto:laufer@globo.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','laufer@globo.com');>]
> *Enviado **el:* 28 March 2015 13:08
> *Para:* Makx Dekkers
> *CC:* DWBP WG
> *Asunto:* Re: NY Property Tax Explorer
>
>
>
>  Makx,
>
>
>
> I cannot see in our document we saying to people to not publish metadata.
> On the contrary, the first BP in the document is to publish metadata.
>
>
>
> I think we all agree (in general) about this matter. What we need is a
> very good text in the introduction of our document summarizing the text of
> this thread.
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Laufer
>
>
>
> Em sábado, 28 de março de 2015, Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mail@makxdekkers.com');>> escreveu:
>
> >
> > Anyone publishing tabular data in a PDF really needs to have a word with
> > themselves.
> >
>
> Can we maybe try not to get into these kinds of absolute, unqualified
> statements?
>
> I agree that if someone has tubular data and creates a PDF that contains
> only a table with just that table is not doing anyone a service. However,
> if
> such a table is included in a document that contains explanations and
> analysis of the data, aimed at a human readership, I don't think PDF is a
> bad choice. Of course, the data in the table should be published in a
> better
> machine-readable format alongside the PDF. What I would not want to see is
> that we encourage service providers to publish data only as CSV and
> discontinue publication of any human-readable information.
>
> As Annette says, it depends on the intention.
>
> Makx.
>
>
>
>
> --
> .  .  .  .. .  .
> .        .   . ..
> .     ..       .
>


-- 
.  .  .  .. .  .
.        .   . ..
.     ..       .
Received on Saturday, 28 March 2015 13:54:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Saturday, 28 March 2015 13:54:47 UTC