Re: Text suggestions for recent comments

Hi Annette,

Thanks for your feedback! I understand your point and I'd like to make a
new proposal:

For some data publishers, it is important to know who has downloaded the
data and how they have used it. There are two possible approaches to
gathering this information. First, publishers can <em>invite</em> users to
provide it, the user's motivation for doing so being that it encourages the
continued publication of the data and promotes their own work. A second and
less user-friendly approach is to require registration before data is
accessed. In both cases, the Dataset Usage Vocabulary [[Vocab-DQV]]
provides a structure for representing such information. When collecting
data from users, the publisher should explain why and how information
gathered from users (either explicitly or implicitly) will be used. Without
a clear policy users might be fearful of providing information and thus the
value of the dataset is reduced.

Please let me know if this ok for you!

Thanks,
Berna

2016-06-22 15:28 GMT-03:00 Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>:

> I agree with most of this, but I think the text for comment 6 creates a
> false dichotomy. It reads as though the two options for tracking usage are
> (1) voluntarily using the DUV and (2) requiring registration. I see no
> reason why DUV terms could not be used in gathering required registration
> information. Either way you ask a user to fill in a form reporting their
> usage. The difference is whether access to data is gated on that. If you
> are thinking of the voluntary usage of the DUV in terms of publishing one's
> own usage in metadata, that would not meet the needs of a publisher who
> wants to collect usage statistics. For someone who really needs to report
> statistics, finding such usages would be prohibitively difficult, and many
> users would either never publish a result or would publish but fail to
> learn and use the DUV in their metadata. I see lots of possibility for
> creating new tools that make it much easier to take advantage of the DUV,
> but there isn't yet a way to push usage information to the original
> publisher. Furthermore, whether data is collected from users voluntarily or
> is required for access, the user should be informed of the purpose of
> collecting the data and how it will be used.
>
> -Annette
>
> On 6/22/16 4:53 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio wrote:
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> Thanks a lot for your suggestions and improvements!
>
> We're gonna update the document and send messages to the commenters asking
> for their feedback.
>
> Cheers,
> Berna
>
> 2016-06-17 12:41 GMT-03:00 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>:
>
>> As promised in today's meeting, I'd like to suggest some comments and
>> minor amendments to the proposals in the wiki [1]
>>
>>
>> Comment 1 - I agree with the proposal.
>>
>>
>> In Comment 2, Ivan asks for a reference to the CSVW work, which I agree
>> is good to add. The para chosen for the addition is from the intro:
>>
>> The Best Practices proposed in this document are intended to serve a more
>> general purpose than the practices suggested in, for example, Best
>> Practices for Publishing Linked Data [LD-BP] since DWBP is
>> domain-independent. Whilst DWBP recommends the use of Linked Data, it also
>> promotes best practices for data on the Web in other open formats such as
>> CSV.
>>
>> The current proposal is to add a reference to the CSVW Primer - good, but
>> I think it needs a linking sentence so that we have:
>>
>> ... DWBP recommends the use of Linked Data, it also promotes best
>> practices for data on the Web in other open formats such as CSV. Methods
>> for sharing tabular data, including CSV files, in a way that maximizes the
>> potential of the Web to make links between data points, are described in
>> the Tabular Data Primer [[Tabular-Data-Primer]].
>>
>>
>> Comments 3, 4 & 5 - OK.
>>
>>
>> Comment 6.
>>
>> I think Andrea makes a good point and it's a good hook for the DUV.
>> Indeed, the high frequency of data publishers who require registration was
>> a key motivation for the development of the DUV in the first place. Reading
>> the intro to the access section, where it is proposed to address his point,
>> I think it can go higher up than suggested. And I also note that the first
>> paragraph is a little confused so I offer this alternative:
>>
>> ===Begins===
>> <p>Providing easy access to data on the Web enables both humans and
>> machines to take advantage of the benefits of sharing data using the Web
>> infrastructure. By default, the Web offers access using Hypertext Transfer
>> Protocol (HTTP) methods. This provides access to data at an atomic
>> transaction level. This might be through the simple bulk download of a file
>> or, where data is distributed across multiple files or requires more
>> sophisticated retrieval methods, through an API. The two basic methods,
>> bulk download and API, are not mutually exclusive.</p>
>>
>> <p>For some data publishers, it is important to know who has downloaded
>> the data and how they have used it. There are two possible approaches to
>> gathering this information. First, publishers can <em>invite</em> users to
>> provide it, the user's motivation for doing so being that it encourages the
>> continued publication of the data and promotes their own work. The Dataset
>> Usage Vocabulary [[Vocab-DQV]] provides a structure for doing this. A
>> second and less user-friendly approach is to require registration before
>> data is accessed. In this case, the publisher should explain why and how
>> information gathered from users (either explicitly or implicitly) will be
>> used. Without a clear policy users might be fearful of providing
>> information and thus the value of the dataset is reduced.</p>
>>
>> <p>In the bulk download approach, bulk data is generally...
>>
>> === Ends ===
>>
>> *Although* I would delete the second instance of the word bulk in that
>> existing para so it just reads: "In the bulk download approach, data is
>> generally pre-processed server side where multiple files or directory trees
>> of files are provided as one downloadable file."
>>
>> Comment 7 & 8 - OK.
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> For tracker, this is action-285
>>
>>
>>
>> [1]
>> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Status_of_comments_about_the_last_call_working_draft
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Phil Archer
>> W3C Data Activity Lead
>> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>>
>> http://philarcher.org
>> +44 (0)7887 767755 <%2B44%20%280%297887%20767755>
>> @philarcher1
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> Centro de Informática
> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> --
> Annette Greiner
> NERSC Data and Analytics Services
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
>
>
>


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