W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > March 2016

Re: dwbp-ACTION-271: create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace

From: Riccardo Albertoni <albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 15:30:02 +0100
Message-ID: <CAOHhXmTRyqOT73kw5-9jtCjY4byoNTATNgfmW-yb_FxV-pXT=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Cc: DWBP Public List <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi all,
I have added the precision instance [1] and an example showing how accuracy
and precision can be documented with DQV  [2].

Reading again the email from  Andrea [3], the only thing we still have not
addressed is  a way to  formally express the scale of the quality
measurement. A formal representation of the scale would be useful to
convert  automatically measurements coming from different parties.

Unfortunately, I think we do not have time  to  go deep on that, even if
there are already some solutions defined by third parties (e.g., [4] )    I
am not  comfortable in adopting a solution in such a short time.

my view is that
If (due to the short term schedule)  we are not in the position to suggest
the best way  ( or at least a good way) to document the scale of
measurements, we should consider to  leave  open the formal definition of
scale ...

If there are no further comments, I would suggest to close this action and
to forward the example to Andrea and the SDW group.

[1] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#dqv:precision
[2] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#ExpressDatasetAccuracyPrecision

On 17 March 2016 at 01:40, Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov> wrote:

> Ah, good. Sounds like you're thinking about this smartly.
> Thanks,
> -Annette
> On 3/16/16 2:46 PM, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>> 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
> --
> Annette Greiner
> NERSC Data and Analytics Services
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Riccardo Albertoni
Istituto per la Matematica Applicata e Tecnologie Informatiche "Enrico
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
via de Marini 6 - 16149 GENOVA - ITALIA
tel. +39-010-6475624 - fax +39-010-6475660
e-mail: Riccardo.Albertoni@ge.imati.cnr.it
Skype: callto://riccardoalbertoni/
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardoalbertoni
www: *http://www.imati.cnr.it/ <http://www.imati.cnr.it/>*
Received on Friday, 25 March 2016 14:30:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 25 March 2016 14:30:34 UTC