Re: Comments. W3C Editor's Draft 10 February 2016

Hi Dave,

These comments seem to be about the substance of the CSV on the Web standards, which became Recommendations in December 2015 after a long period of being open for comments.

If you have editorial comments on the Primer, that’s great, but we can’t make changes to the substance of the Recommendations now.

Jeni

> On 10 Feb 2016, at 15:46, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> [w3c](http://w3c.github.io/csvw/primer/#introduction)
> 
> "@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/csvw",  context? Sort of see it, but surely
> 'format' (possibly include a version?) more reasonable, since that's what
> it defines? And why insist on json? Restrictive. That's application layer?
> Seems unecessarily complex compared to first line (custom and  practice?)
> 
> Seems to be drifting into semantics? Too much so? (section 3.1).
> Are you equating this with an xml format? If so keep the 'schema' layer
> apart from this spec.  3.4 drifting towards xml-schema hell?
> 
> 
> Why is 'usage' in here? Transformation - section 4? Inappropriate IMHO.
> 
> 6.4 skips over non 'comma' separated columns. Rather too glib? Why not
> spec the separator in the metadata as per Ex 117? Other characters do
> have fair reasoning.
> 
> This section is pretty key - why so late in the document?
> 
> 6.6
> "As a publisher, you can control where processors look for metadata
> for your CSV files by listing the locations to look at within the
> /.well-known/csvm file on your server. " Why assume all CSV is served
> on the web? #weak
> 
> 
> regards
> 
> --
> Dave Pawson
> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> Docbook FAQ.
> http://www.dpawson.co.uk
> 

--
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/