Re: Editing examples

Irene,

Yes, we should keep the examples to a limited subject. I've just
updated examples 3,4,5 using foaf:Person since people are also used in
Issue Management.

Perhaps when the spec is more stable we can do a pass through it and
unify the examples further.

-- Arthur

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Irene Polikoff <irene@topquadrant.com> wrote:
> Yes, this is very true. Having realistic names and examples would be very
> helpful.
>
> The realistic examples currently in the spec now use the issue management
> system. Having all examples use the same vocabulary and the subject matter
> would improve understandability and provide a consistent way to introduce
> the reader to different constraints. Issue management is rich enough area
> to support most of examples - assuming it is expanded as needed. For
> example, LessThanConstraint could be illustrated using openDate and
> closeDate.
>
>
> Irene
>
>
>
>
>
> On 9/25/15, 4:39 PM, "Arthur Ryman" <arthur.ryman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Karen,
>>
>>I support your proposal to use realistic examples, although they
>>should also be kept brief so they are  easy to understand. We should
>>avoid completely generic names, or nonsense names like foo and bar.
>>The WG requires that all language features be justified by real-world
>>use cases, so there should be no problem in finding names that
>>illustrate each language feature. For example, to illustrate the
>>predicate pair LessThanConstraint, birthDate and deathDate are
>>perfect.
>>
>>-- Arthur
>>
>>On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:
>>> As I think I have mentioned before, I feel that many of the current
>>>examples
>>> are perhaps overly brief and may be hard to read for many people. I
>>>would
>>> like to suggest that we at least approximate real examples "to the
>>>extent
>>> possible", using terms that may be familiar to readers.
>>>
>>> Looking at the Linked Open Vocabularies[1] list of vocabularies, the top
>>> four, based on use, are:
>>>
>>> DCterms http://purl.org/dc/terms/
>>> DCelements http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/
>>> FOAF http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
>>> SKOS http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core
>>>
>>> The actual use of these is better understood via the statistics on term
>>> use.[2]
>>>
>>> I would be happy to contribute new examples for the (very few) examples
>>>that
>>> I understand, but if I can get some help with understanding what is
>>>there I
>>> will be able to do even more.
>>>
>>> If anyone thinks this needs to be an "issue" please let me know.
>>>
>>> kc
>>> [1] http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov
>>> [2] http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/terms
>>> --
>>> Karen Coyle
>>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
>>>
>>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 15 October 2015 15:55:51 UTC