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

Re: Capturing the discussion (was Re: NY Property Tax Explorer)

From: <yaso@nic.br>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 15:57:10 -0300
Message-ID: <55199C86.60606@nic.br>
To: public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi all

I would like to point that there are other kinds of data that can be 
extracted from files that are available on the Web, and other methods 
that are not connected with linked data or the use of tabular data out 
there :-)

In the call Steve mentioned facial recognition on videos, for example, 
but there are a lot of examples that I could give.

On 03/29/2015 05:08 AM, Phil Archer wrote:
> I thought I'd look at the doc and see how and where this discussion 
> might be reflected.
>
> There are two relevant sections: metadata and data formats.
>
> I believe we have consensus that when we talk about metadata we 
> shouldn't talk about the format of the data described.
>
> BP1 and 2 say that metadata should be provided for humans, ideally as 
> a Web page, and (BP2) that the data should also be machine readable 
> using either an alternative representation of that page or one of the 
> technologies for embedding it.
>
> So here we're talking about providing something separate from the 
> dataset itself. That's because in our heads we're thinking data 
> portals, catalogues, landing pages etc. We are not thinking about 
> documents, images and videos that have their own embedded metadata, 
> which is what Steve has been championing.

For mostly publishers of open data it is true, but there is the point of 
view of the data consumer that works harvesting data on the web that is 
in this files.
There is a lot of data that is extracted from files that are on the Web, 
files that are in different formats representing documents (pdf 
included!), videos, images, etc. It seems to me that the processing, 
delivery for reuse and collecting of this kind of data that can be 
extracted from files (that are on the web) is something that the working 
group could adress.

Although we do should not mention file formats, which I agree is not in 
our scope, maybe we can work with best practices for using and reusing 
data extracted from documents that are on the Web (we might call it 
public data). I see that there is space for this in some best practices. 
Privacy Best Practices, for example.

It is interesting to think in best practices that can help people that 
work with harvested data from files to make this data reusable and 
readable by machines and humans. Softwares like FRED [1] (it produces 
RDF/OWL ontologies and linked data from natural language sentences) need 
to be on our horizon when it thinking about data on the Web. I'm sure 
that we already have Best Practices for this cases, but we can work on 
the approaches and specify some use cases.

For me, metadata can be data that is not only available on user's 
purpose (when people upload pictures to flickr, for example) - thus data 
that can be extracted from files using certain techniques. For instance: 
considering yahoo (flickr) as a publisher and some developer analyzing 
data from a set of pictures to make sense of, say, colors, my question 
is: does our BP serve for both of them as guidance?


cheers
yaso

[1] http://wit.istc.cnr.it/stlab-tools/fred



>
> Suppose I create a PDF and embed within that a bunch of metadata, have 
> I done the job?
>
> Well, it depends on the context. As far as Google is concerned, yes. 
> As far as a less sophisticated portal or catalogue is concerned, 
> usually no. In other words, that's only enough *if* there is a machine 
> to read that embedded metadata. And I believe this is not (currently) 
> true in CKAN and CKAN-like portals for example (dunno about Socrata).
>
> So maybe we need to say explicitly that when publishing data, metadata 
> should be available independently. Where the dataset contains embedded 
> metadata, the publishing environment might extract it automatically 
> but where this is not the case, the publisher should provide it 
> separately.
>
> As for the data formats section, I think it's pretty good as it is, 
> but suggest that we do encourage the publication of any tabular data 
> in a machine readable format separate from, but linked to, any 
> document that describes, presents or summarises it - which is a long 
> winded way of saying that if you publish a PDF that includes tabular 
> data, you are encouraged to publish and refer to the original data as 
> well (like a researcher does/should).
>
> HTH
>
> Phil.
>
>
>
> On 28/03/2015 21:58, Phil Archer wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28/03/2015 13:21, Makx Dekkers wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> I didn't mean to imply that and apologise if I did.
>>
>> I'm not calling anyone stupid and, as usual, agree with all that you 
>> say.
>>
>> As Laufer says, there's a lot of agreement in this thread. Let's
>> capture that in the doc.
>>
>> Phil.
>>
>>   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]
>>> 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
>>> <mailto: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 Monday, 30 March 2015 18:56:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 30 March 2015 18:56:14 UTC