W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > January 2019

Re: [dxwg] Editorial revision to sec "Quality Information" (#652)

From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2019 21:54:57 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-453869177-1547416496-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@riccardoAlbertoni  thanks for the explanation. I'm afraid I'm still lost however. I understand that the BPs in the DWBP document cannot specify a testing plan in detail, and I'm fine with it. But I'm really struggling how the DBWP as a whole can be the source of any conformance test. I would expect that the derivation would be from specific BPs.

Maybe my issue is more visible with example 7 than with example 5. I'm not sure how one could say that a test that in its title is said to be derived from the INSPIRE regulation would have only one `prov:wasDerivedFrom` statement and that this statement would have DWBP as a whole as an object, which DWBP is probably much more general than INSPIRE.

GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/652#issuecomment-453869177 using your GitHub account
Received on Sunday, 13 January 2019 21:54:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:06 UTC