W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-csv-wg@w3.org > November 2014

Re: Agenda for 2014-11-11 telcon

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 14:54:20 +0000
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=55FetWOqbGk_hUcNN3-_4WWHFm0yvb8OwL=SzkCOk-MA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "public-csv-wg@w3.org" <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
On 11 November 2014 13:15, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
> Agenda for tomorrow's call:
> https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/Meeting_Agenda_2014-11-12
> As recently agreed, it leans heavily on our Github editorial issue
> lists and the "requires telecon discussion/decision' label, so please
> also review:
>   https://github.com/w3c/csvw/labels/Requires%20telcon%20discussion/decision
> Editors, please make sure that the issue tracker is up to date. A
> snapshot of current issues (with labels) are copied below, but we'll
> go with the latest state of the github tracker tomorrow.

Here's another run-through of the issues, adding URLs and dropping
Prov as we resolved it last week.

Reading through the details on Github I tried to categorise these as
"relatively simple question e.g. boolean question" vs "in depth", and
pretty much all the metadata spec questions were in the simple
category, while the mapping topics were in the latter.

I suggest we start with the metadata spec and then try to get as far
through the mapping topics as we can.

I've interjected a few opinions below, while I'm at it. Talk to you all soon.


Discussion Issues from Metadata vocabulary document:

https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/54  Pattern string formats for
parsing dates/numbers/durations

[ dan personal opinion: propose we drop the pattern string requirement ]

https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/48  Using JSON-LD for the metadata
document (" is it useful for CSV
metadata to be interpretable as JSON-LD? ")

[ this seems a yes/no, and our work so far is assuming yes. ]

https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/23   CSV Dialect Description ("Do
we want a way to describe the "dialect"
of the CSV in the Metadata document (e.g. separator is ';')")

[ dan personal opinion: the editors draft contains such a design, I
propose we endorse that decision ]

Discussion Issues from Mappings:

https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/20  Is row by row processing sufficient?
 - CSV to JSON mapping, CSV to RDF mapping

    https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/62  Should the RDF/JSON
transformation check the values?
 - CSV to JSON mapping, CSV to RDF mapping

  https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/59 How should ``language`` be
used in RDF mapping?
 - CSV to RDF mapping

https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/39  What should be generated for a
value with datatype in the case of JSON
 - CSV to JSON mapping

https://github.com/w3c/csvw/issues/30  How to interpret fixed string
type values ("Table", "Row",...)
 - CSV to JSON mapping
Received on Wednesday, 12 November 2014 14:54:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:27:45 UTC