W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-comments@w3.org > May 2013

Re: The RDF Data Cube Vocabulary - W3C Working Draft 12 March 2013

From: Ulrich <ulrich.atz@theodi.org>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 11:54:11 +0100
Cc: public-gld-comments@w3.org, Jeni Tennison <jeni@theodi.org>
Message-Id: <1B09D1EF-164F-406B-A178-359539416D33@theodi.org>
To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Dave, yes your changes make sense.

Many thanks,
Ulrich





On 14 May 2013, at 08:45, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Ulrich,
> 
> Sorry to hassle you, but it would be really helpful if you were able to let us know if this response was acceptable to you.
> 
> Best wishes,
> Dave
> 
> On 09/05/13 14:38, Dave Reynolds wrote:
>> Hi Ulrich,
>> 
>> Thank you again for your comments on the Data Cube Last Call draft.
>> 
>> I just wanted to follow up our discussion to let you know we have made
>> the editorial changes we discussed. Details below. The current editor's
>> draft is at [1].
>> 
>> Please can you let us know if you are satisfied with this response.
>> 
>> On 08/04/13 17:54, Ulrich wrote:
>>> Overall: yes the comments are editorial and aimed at helping newcomers
>>> such myself grasp the concept. All your comments I don't address
>>> specifically are fine and make sense.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>>> To ease understanding, the most effective change I suggest is moving the
>>> part of section 7 without sub-heading forward.
>> 
>> Good suggestion, done.
>> 
>> On 05/04/13 12:13, Ulrich wrote:
>> >   * Link to the SDMX User Guide 2.1, especially /2.2 Background/ eases
>> >     understanding for newcomers.
>> 
>> DONE Added reference within introductory section on SDMX.
>> 
>> >   * Make examples earlier.
>> 
>> Added a complete RDF rendering of the running example as an Appendix
>> and linked that from section (now) 5.4.
>> 
>> >   * I'd recommend avoiding the term "non-statistical data" as I have
>> >     /only/ heard it in the context of official statistics. Or what
>> >     exactly makes data statistical? (see e.g. section 5.1)
>> 
>> DONE (removed use of the term)
>> 
>> >   * The slice example is good, but could do with a shorter sentence.
>> 
>> Fixed.
>> 
>> >   * Example 5.3 -- /can we have some actual final code in there? /Even
>> >     if it anticipates some sections.
>> 
>> Done via the new appendix with a forward reference.
>> 
>> >   * Example 6.3 I find it hard to see where we define the nested
>> >     structure of the data - include reference to example 4 or call it
>> >     something more telling than "example".
>> 
>> Retitled.
>> 
>> 
>> Best wishes,
>> Dave
>> 
>> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/data-cube/index.html
>> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 14 May 2013 10:55:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 14 May 2013 10:55:02 UTC