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

Re: Editing "Issues"

From: Emmanuelle Bermes <manue@figoblog.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 17:46:59 +0200
Message-ID: <CAODLZ4iSVD=cwtq2o7GROLJcydXJdoGtAV5s_qb1dEhtJBQAQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Cc: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, public-xg-lld <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 11:43 PM, Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 11:26:44PM +0200, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>> I've made some changes in the "Current Situation" (ignoring the sub-section on "available data, which I've seen too many times lately)
>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Draft_issues_page_take2&diff=6212&oldid=6141
>>
>> this diffs gathers several things, including a merging of two sub-sections discussed elsewhere, andone change by Tom... Notable changes by me are:
>>
>> 1. In "Library data is not integrated with Web resources"
>>
>> [There is a considerable amount of bibliographic data on the Web as well as data that shares data points such as dates, geographic information, persons, and organizations. In a future Linked Data environment, these dots could be connected.]
>> ->
>> [There is a considerable amount of bibliographic data and other kinds of resources on the Web that share data points such as dates, geographic information, persons, and organizations. In a future Linked Data environment, all these dots could be connected.]
>>
>> I did not really get that sentence, so I tried a reformulation, with an "all" that tries to tie with the "Library data [that] resides in databases" from the previous sentence.

It seems to me that we could be more specific regarding the kind of
"more deep integration" of library data with the Web that we expect :
links, and not only APIs or search interfaces (either for humans or
machines).

I tried a change to reflect that, diff at
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Draft_issues_page_take2&diff=6291&oldid=6247

BEFORE :
"Library data today resides in databases which, while they may have
Web-facing search interfaces, are not more deeply integrated with
other data sources on the Web."

AFTER :
"Library data today resides in databases which are only accessible on
the Web through search interfaces, and not through links with other
data sources on the Web."

>
> Looks good!
>
>> 2. In "The library community and Semantic Web community have different terminology for similar metadata concepts"
>> [while the Semantic Web community lacks concepts equivalent to "headings" or "authority control."]
>> ->
>> [while the Semantic Web community lacks notions clearly equivalent to "headings" or "authority control."]
>> That reflects some nitpicking of mine: when searching, one could find something in LD domain that somehow reflect what happens in the library one.
>> Also, the heading for that section is about similar metadata concepts. Starting by arguing that there are concepts that are absent in one domain seems going a different way...
>
> +1
>
>> 3. In "Rights issues" I've made the following paragraph a bit shorter:
>> [
>> Some library data has restricted usage based on local policies, contracts, and conditions and may not therefore be published openly. Library bibliographic data can have unclear and untested rights issues that can hinder their release as Open Data. Rights issues vary significantly from country to country, making it difficult to collaborate on open data publishing.
>> ]
>> ->
>> [
>> Some library data has restricted usage based on local policies, contracts, and conditions. These restrictions, sometimes unclear and untested, can hinder the release of library data as Open Data. Rights issues vary significantly from country to country, making it difficult to collaborate on Open Data publishing.
>> ]
>
> Careful...  The longer text says that because of restrictions "data can have
> unclear and untested rights issues" and the shortened text says that the
> _restrictions_themselves_ are "unclear and untested".  What is untested: the
> issues or the restrictions?  A formulation like: "Data can therefore have
> unclear and untested rights issues that hinder their release as Open Data."
> would be closer to my understanding of this point.
>
>> And I've replaced one occurrence of "bibliographic data" by a more general "library data".
>
> +1
>
> Tom
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 7 September 2011 15:47:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 September 2011 15:47:30 GMT