- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 16:22:33 +0100
- To: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "public-dwbp-comments@w3.org" <public-dwbp-comments@w3.org>
Hi Frans, Thanks for this. We had a telco a little earlier today and discussed your comment - so far without any resolution. There is sympathy with the point you raise but it's debatable whether it applies specifically to data on the Web as opposed to numeric data in general. Plus we're concerned that there is pretty much no time to create and receive reviews of a new BP. No definite decision yet though! By copying this reply to the DWBPs comment list, it is already in the system. no need to send it again unless you want to add more detail. Thanks Phil. On 27/05/2016 11:05, Frans Knibbe wrote: > Hello Phil, all, > > Thanks, the document looks great and hope many will read it and take it to > heart. > > One thing I miss is the advice to use significant figures in numerical > data. It is an easy way to make the data match their uncertainty, and in > many cases it helps to compact data too. Numerical data with the wrong > number of significant digits is a very common problem in geographical data > (e.g. geographic coordinates with nanometre precision). > > Should I post a personal comment about this to public-dwbp-comments@w3.org? > Or do want to comment on significant figures as a group? > > Regards, > Frans > > > > 2016-05-25 10:26 GMT+02:00 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>: > >> Dear all, >> >> As you may have seen, last Thursday the DWBP WG published a new version on >> its BP doc and supporting vocabularies. These are now stable with a couple >> of specific issues in the vocabs and no known issues for the BP doc which >> is expected to transition to Candidate Recommendation next month. >> >> So we're now in the final call for comments ahead of the call for >> implementations which comes next. >> >> The input provided by the individuals in the To line of this mail are >> already acknowledged but if there are further comments, please get them to >> the WG by 12 June. I'm thinking in particular of the alignment with SDW BP >> to make sure that the latter sensibly builds on DWBP. >> >> Please see >> >> Data on the Web Best Practices >> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-dwbp-20160519/ >> >> Data Quality Vocabulary >> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-vocab-dqv-20160519/ >> >> Dataset Usage vocabulary >> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/WD-vocab-duv-20160519/ >> >> Thanks >> >> Phil. >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Phil Archer >> W3C Data Activity Lead >> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ >> >> http://philarcher.org >> +44 (0)7887 767755 >> @philarcher1 >> >> > -- Phil Archer W3C Data Activity Lead http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Friday, 27 May 2016 15:22:35 UTC