W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Review of relevant technologies section of final report

From: Emmanuelle Bermes <manue@figoblog.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2011 18:56:08 +0200
Message-ID: <CAODLZ4i9m8PdxZJEXG--6RjMxOgU9DfTbYqjjrvW_E_Zz5oLKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "gordon@gordondunsire.com" <gordon@gordondunsire.com>
Cc: public-xg-lld@w3.org

Thanks for sending the review. I've just added it to our list of reviews [1].


[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/DraftReportReviewerAssignments

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 12:22 PM, gordon@gordondunsire.com
<gordon@gordondunsire.com> wrote:
> All
> I volunteered to review the Relevant technologies section of the final
> report, on the basis that I had paid little attention to it and could look
> at it with fresh eyes ;-)
> What follows is a mix of nit-picking detail and general observations; it is
> all meant to be constructive. In order of appearance:
> "Fortunately, the principles of Linked Data are not tied to any particular
> tool ..." - This reads like an opinion; i.e. that this is fortunate.
> "The following examples are not exhaustive ..." - examples of what? Tools?
> Technologies?
> "From a non-technical perspective, these technologies are relevant because
> they support the creation and use of HTTP URIs that identify and describe
> discrete and recognizable individuals." - 1. Is this true for all "these
> technologies"? 2. "HTTP URIs" is a technical term in a "non-technical
> perspective". 3. What are "individuals"?
> "The Semantic Web has been around many years ..." - would be useful to be
> explict; how many years, roughly? Librarians may have a different pov of
> what constitutes "many years".
> "Linked Data http URIs are 'Cool' ..." - (and elsewhere) inconsistent
> capitalization of "http/HTTP". Also inconsistent capitalization of
> "web/Web".
> "... requests may be impractical for dataset with ..." - should be
> "datasets" or "a dataset".
> The link from "mash up" should be attached to its first mention, not second.
> "... SKOS, which is an OWL ontology for dealing with a broad base of
> conceptual schemes including the management of preferred and alternate
> labels." - "concept schemes" is better, but most librarians would understand
> "controlled terminologies and other concept schemes" best.
> "As historically the emphasis on publishing information on the web has had
> to do with publishing web pages, these technologies ..." - "Because web
> pages have been the main way of publishing information on the web, these
> technologies ..." might be clearer.
> "It has noteably gained prominence ..." - remove "noteably" as it is
> superfluous and possibly distracting. The rest of the paragraph, and the
> remainder of the section could do with a rewrite to make it more succint and
> reduce the "opinion" wording ("seems like it would", "does not appear to be
> the case", etc.)
> "Modulo bugs in the search engines' parsers it is even possible to do both
> in the same web page." - ???
> "As the Web has grown in popularity ... around web technologies." - can be
> more succintly stated as: "The software development community has created a
> variety of software libraries, often referred to as web application
> frameworks, that make it easier to create, maintain, and reuse web
> applications. They typically implement the Model-View-Controller (MVC)
> pattern, and encode and encourage best practices
> with respect to the REST Architectural Style and Resource Oriented
> Architectures."
> "However web developers are sometimes turned off ..." is opinion; this needs
> rephrased.
> "... serializing and sharing entity state in a database neutral way ..." -
> ???
> "Most web developers however face a steep learning curve before being able
> to exploit it, and for many application requirements this is too much of a
> burden." - does this imply that the learning curve is a burden which
> prevents development of appropriate services, or that many applications
> don't need such services?
> "Web Services for the most common uses ..." - Not sure what this means.
> "... custom-coded agents." - again, what does this mean?
> "... form of an application programming interface (API)." - API is mentioned
> earlier, without an acronym expansion - should be swapped around.
> Generally, a lot of "opinion" statements seem to be made; direct factual
> statements would be better.
> Also, there is an awkward mix of lay explanation and technical terminology.
> Library managers are unlikely to read it through or follow up links - they
> will probably turn the whole section over to their technical staff to
> digest. Is the section aimed at managers, technical staff, or both?
> Cheers
> Gordon
Received on Tuesday, 2 August 2011 16:56:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 August 2011 16:56:46 GMT