Re: Best Practices Cross-Reference Section

Hi Laufer,

Thanks a lot for sharing the BPs highlights!

I agree with you that we need to "create a BPs Cross-Reference with an
explanation of how to use this cross-reference section as a guidance to the
reading of BPs". Could you please help us with this section? I already
included a new section on the document to group BP according to benefits
[1] and I used the BP highlights to help to classify BP. Maybe we can
complement this section with the guidance that you mentioned. What do you
think?

If possible, it would be great to have your feedback on the BP Benefits
section [1] as well.

Cheers,
Bernadette

[1] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#bp-benefits

2015-10-19 13:48 GMT-03:00 Laufer <laufer@globo.com>:

> Hi, All,
>
> We have a scope issue since the beginning of the group around the type of
> thing that we should deal with our Best Practices. As Phil pointed during
> the last F2F, maybe the name of the group should be different, to clarify
> in a better way the things the BPS refer.
>
> We have decided that the group will not treat things like the choice of
> data, its domain, neither the way it is collected or how to guarantee data
> quality, etc.. We decided, too, that we will not treat only Linked Data
> Publications. Maybe a more appropriate name could be Data on the Web
> Publishing Best Practices (as Phil has talked about).
>
> We have now a long discussion about how to facilitate the reading of our
> document and the term webby has been introduced by Eric. I think it is a
> very good way to see the things but I also think that we have to deal with
> features of a published document that are not so directed to this term.
> And, again, we have to deal with not LD things, as CSV files, for example.
>
> In our work process we have started with collecting a set of use cases and
> then we listed a set of requirements that should be took into account in
> the BPs. We defined a template for the BPs where we have a Why and an
> Intended Outcome sections that should, in some sense, address these
> requirements. But we do not have an explicit relation between the
> requirements and the BPs.
>
> I think that a way to facilitate the user that want some guidance in how
> to publish a document with best practices, is to give a cross-reference of
> these BPs, using some taxonomy that would consider the requirements and the
> features for a webby data proposed by Eric in [1], and other
> characteristics.
>
> Each Bp has each own Why and Intended Outcome, but there are common
> features (characteristics, criteria, I do not know the better term...) that
> could group BPs ins a way to help a Publisher to achieve a more clear
> objective.
>
> Bernardette has listed some of these characteristics that she collected
> from the BPs [2].
>
> I made an exercise highlighting some sentences (mainly verbs) used in the
> Why and Intended Outcome sections of the BPs. I think that we could make a
> collective effort to define a taxonomy and create a BPs Cross-Reference
> with an explanation of how to use this cross-reference section as a
> guidance to the reading of BPs.
>
> -- Erik List
> Linkable
> Parseable
> Understandable
> Linked
> Usable
>
> -- Bernadette List
> Comprehension
> Discoverability
> Reuse
> Trustworthiness
> Linkability
> Processibility
> Interoperability
> Accessibility
>
> -- BPs Highlights
> Humans Understand the Metadata
> Machines Process the Metadata
> Humans Understand the Nature of the Dataset
> Machines Automatically Discover the Dataset
> Understand and Manipulate the Data
> Improve Re-Use of Data
> Interpret the Meaning
> Enable Automated Translation Services
> Understand Internal Structure
> Automatically Process the Structural Data
> Assess the Usability of Data
> Understand Possible Restrictions On the Use of A Distribution
> Know the Origin or History of Data
> Easy the Dataset Selection
> Increase Chances of Re-Use
> Document Data Quality
> Document Quality Issues
> Uniquely Identify A Dataset
> How Data Changed Over Time
> Understand How the Dataset Typically Changes from Version To Version
> Understand How Any Two Specific Versions Differ
> Enables Data Identification and Comparison
> Pre-Condition For Proper Data Management and Re-Use
> Datasets Must Be Discoverable and Citable Through Time
> Refer to a Specific Version of a Dataset and to Concepts Such as a
> 'Dataset Series' and 'the Latest Version'
> Machines Easily Read and Process Data Published On the Web
> Data Consumers Use Computational Tools Typically Available In the Relevant
> Domain to Work With the Data
> Data Consumers Re-Use of Data Without Investment in Proprietary Software
> Work With the Data Without Transforming It
> Enable Interoperability and Consensus Among Data Publishers and Consumers
> Encourage Re-Use of the Data
> Data Should Not Be More Complex to Produce and Re-Use Than Necessary
> Data That Can Identify an Individual Person Must Not Be Published Without
> their Consent.
> Provide Access to Bulk Data
> Provide Machines Data Access in a Variety of Formats
> Provide Data Access Using Browser s a Client
> Provide Real-Time Access to Critical Time Sensitive Data
> Provide Data Up-To-Date
> Explicit Update Frequency of Data
> Make API Versioning Separated from Data Versioning
> Keep the Old Versions of APIs
> Make Possible To Read and Load a Dataset into a Database Even if its
> Software is no Longer Supported
> Improve the Quality of Published Data
> Encourage Publication of New Data Help Data Publishers Understand Data
> Consumers Needs
> Enhance the Consumers' Collaborative Experience
> Make Data a More Valuable Asset
>
> [1] http://dret.github.io/webdata/
>
> [2]
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IT6IEeyGUY9crIYY9hDQLgdVx4XVzzKYf21N7YQrO5s/edit?ts=560b0172&pli=1
>
> Cheers,
> Laufer
>
> --
>
> . . . .. . .
> . . . ..
> . .. .
>
>
>



-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------