W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dpvcg@w3.org > June 2019

Re: dpvcg-ACTION-115: Sends out an email with pointer to the reviewable spec and rdf files by the end of the week to the list for insternal review.

From: Harshvardhan J. Pandit <me@harshp.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 19:04:42 +0100
To: public-dpvcg@w3.org, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
Message-ID: <e9be33ea-5dbc-154c-0baf-d46cb92bf7fd@harshp.com>
Hello Bert, All.
As agreed, here's the first draft containing HTML+RDF files [1]
A few items of note:
1) IMP: There is a separate Legal Bases vocabulary. I haven't bundled 
the NACE vocab - is it supposed to be served under w3.org as well or 
separately provided e.g. via Github?
2) Issues are added at the end (bottom), with comments from spreadsheet 
appearing as notes in their respective classes
3) Text is no longer synced from the Google Docs via the script, so any 
further edits will have to be made on the HTML directly (unless someone 
is willing to manually copy+paste)
4) There is a 'combined' file containing all terms (dpv.ttl) and 
individual 'modules' (e.g. Consent.ttl). Should we provide such 
combined+modular format or only a combined vocabulary?
(IMO modular is better if someone only wants to use part of it. They're 
all served under the same namespace anyway)
5) I have added ontology metadata to each file
6) Do we need to define owl:versionIRI?
7) What license should be specified in the ontology metadata?

[1] The files are on Github https://github.com/dpvcg/extract-sheets/
dpv main vocabulary
html: https://github.com/dpvcg/extract-sheets/blob/master/docs/index.html
rdf: https://github.com/dpvcg/extract-sheets/blob/master/docs/rdf/dpv.ttl

dpv-gdpr vocabulary
html: https://github.com/dpvcg/extract-sheets/blob/master/docs/dpv-gdpr.html

@Bert are these in the required format?


On 05/06/2019 22:24, Harshvardhan J. Pandit wrote:
> Update: https://dpvcg.github.io/extract-sheets
> The link is for DPV documentation
> There will be a similar document for dpv-gdpr and dpv-nace.
> All work is on Github http://github.com/dpvcg/extract-sheets/
> I'd request not making major changes to the Google Docs spec, and if any 
> edits are made, to ensure they are reflected in the version/changes.
> Regards,
> Harsh
> On 05/06/2019 16:15, Harshvardhan J. Pandit wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> FYI: I plan to generate HTML+rdf files as per ACTION-115 tomorrow 
>> using the reSpec tool [1].
>> This is to raise the issue that at some point, the script to automate 
>> linking the Google Doc and Spreadsheet to generate HTML/RDF 
>> documentation will no longer be feasible.
>> We can continue commenting or making edits on the Google Doc for now, 
>> but the text would manually have to be added in to the HTML hereafter.
>> [1] https://github.com/w3c/respec
>> On 04/06/2019 15:36, Data Privacy Vocabularies and Controls Community 
>> Group Issue Tracker wrote:
>>> dpvcg-ACTION-115: Sends out an email with pointer to the reviewable 
>>> spec and rdf files by the end of the week to the list for insternal 
>>> review.
>>> https://www.w3.org/community/dpvcg/track/actions/115
>>> Assigned to: Harshvardhan Pandit

Harshvardhan Pandit
PhD Researcher
ADAPT Centre
Trinity College Dublin
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2019 18:05:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:27:57 UTC