- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 22:46:37 +0100
- To: <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi Annette, There are some sources that use 'precision' for what is called 'resolution' elsewhere, indeed. Riccardo and this inflicted ourselves some reading on this during a side session of the F2F ;-) The original need expressed by SDW is really about resolution/precision. But with the general aim being to show that too fine resolution can be completely pointless, so you shouldn't worry. To reflect this we will have to touch a bit the notion of accuracy. We'll invite you to check the result of the action of course! Cheers, Antoine On 3/16/16 7:58 PM, Annette Greiner wrote: > The use of the term "precision" here is a little alarming to me in light of the distinction between precision and accuracy. We should avoid any incentivization of high precision, as precise values are not necessarily accurate. The precision reported for a measurement needs to be appropriate to the accuracy with which it was taken. Resolution is a different thing altogether, and the references listed in the action are about resolution, not precision and not accuracy. > -Annette > http://en-us.fluke.com/training/training-library/test-tools/digital-multimeters/accuracy-resolution-range-counts-digits-and-precision.html > > On 3/16/16 6:35 AM, Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> dwbp-ACTION-271: create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace >> >> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/271 >> >> Assigned to: Riccardo Albertoni >> >> >> On product: Quality & Granularity Vocabulary >> >> create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace >> >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 16 March 2016 21:47:09 UTC