W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-wg@w3.org > April 2013

[ORG] LC Summary updated

From: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:14:14 +0100
Message-ID: <516581C6.2080107@gmail.com>
To: Government Linked Data Working Group <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
In preparation for the f2f ...

I have updated the ORG Last Call tracker page [1] to use the improved 
tabular style adopted for Data Cube. I've improved the links for some 
entries and recorded our two new comments from this recent extended 
period. The latter don't raise any new issues.

So we have already dealt with all external and all formally tracked 
internal comments.

We did make some small vocab changes during the process but I think we 
can reasonably argue that they do not really invalidate the Last Call 
(giving users additional freedom by removing some constraints).

In doing the clear up I see that the only internal comment which has not 
been closed off is Joćo Paulo's suggestion to replace the diagram by a 
complete UML style diagram. The last discussion on that was [2] of which 
the relevant section is repeated below.

 > I would also like to see the more complete diagram that we have drawn
 > included (in a non-normative part of the document, see
 > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2012Nov/0026.html),
 > because I believe it would be useful for users to grasp the ontology. 
 > the issues have been addressed, we can produced an updated diagram. (This
 > is an editorial issue only.)

As previously discussed I prefer the non-normative diagram to be compact
and relatively readable. It need not be complete. It is to help someone
get their heads round the important parts of the ontology, not to be a
complete reference.

I also have reservations about the use of UML notation which represents
literal-valued properties so differently from object properties (e.g.
org:classification v. org:identifier) on your draft diagram.

However the choice of which to use is partly aesthetic and I'm therefore 
a biased judge.

If you can produce a diagram that reflects the changes we have just
made, and you feel is a clearer alternative then we can look at it and,
if necessary, put it to a working group vote.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_LC_comments

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Feb/0073.html
Received on Wednesday, 10 April 2013 15:14:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:38 UTC