Re: Comments on Data on the Web Best Practices

Hi Doug,

Thank you so much for your comments and also for the pull requests.

I really liked the idea of adding short descriptive names to the namespaces
table. I agree that it is less intimidating.

I also agree with changing the name used in the examples. I have to say
that for me is very common to use names like "João" and "Maria" when I give
examples during my classes. So, it was very natural to use John in the
example. But, I'm gonna be more aware of this ;)

We're gonna work to have all fixed for the final version!

cheers,
Bernadette







2017-01-10 5:09 GMT-03:00 Doug Schepers <standards@schepers.cc>:

> Hi, Data on the Web Best Practitioners–
>
> Thanks for publishing the Data on the Web Best Practices spec [1]. This
> will be useful for me, so I just finished reading it. Nicely done!
>
> As discussed on Facebook, I have a few minor suggestions on the PR draft.
> :) I know this is late feedback, so please feel free to ignore it or push
> it to the next version. However, I would be considered any of these changes
> editorial, since none of them affect any conformance criteria.
>
> I made a Github PR for each of these.
>
> First, I noticed that two of the diagrams weren't accessible, so I made
> (mostly) accessible SVG versions of them. One of them (challenges.svg)
> originally used script to navigate in the main spec, and I replaced this
> with simple links to do the same thing (note: this technique needs the
> filename of the spec, which I assumed is "Overview.html", rather than
> "index.html"… change as needed). I adjusted the HTML file to use the
> preferred <object> element, rather than the <embed> element, to include
> these.
>
> Newton has graciously already accepted this PR [2].
>
> Second, I fixed a few minor typos and grammar problems [3]. These should
> be uncontroversial.
>
> Third, I added short descriptive names to the namespaces table, with links
> to the bibliography (where present… you don't reference RDF). I think these
> short names would make it clearer and less intimidating to the new reader
> what those namespaces are for, but I understand if you don't consider that
> editorial at this stage. It's in the same PR as the typos, but you can
> easily roll it back.
>
> Finally, I was really struck that the example data provider is named
> "John", rather than some gender-neutral name like "Adrian". While certainly
> unintentional, this risk perpetuating gender stereotyping in tech, and I
> think it's a good opportunity to use a gender-neutral name (and, for that
> matter, maybe one that isn't so obviously English-language). I'd be happy
> to make a PR for this, which would also affect some of the other
> dwbp-example files, and would need a couple of changes of pronoun from "he"
> to "they" (or to just avoid pronouns altogether). This would be a PC PR PR.
> :D
>
> Again, I don't mind if you ignore or push these last comments off to a
> next version, but I thought I'd suggest them.
>
>
> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/PR-dwbp-20161215/
> [2] https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/pull/504
> [3] https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/pull/505
>
> Thanks!
> Doug
>
>
>
>


-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------