Re: Status on Action-174 ?

It's good to see some ideas getting put out there for these terms. I do have a couple of concerns with the definitions here. First, I think we need to avoid definitions that use the same term they are defining. The definition of "consumer" here is tautological, relying on the words "consumer" and "consuming".

Second, I think the term "citation" suggests something narrower. In academia, if Alice writes a paper and Bob cites it, Bob is saying to the world that he used Alice's work. If Alice cited her own work in the work itself, it would be pointless. "Citation" doesn't cover the case of the originator of the work stating that someone else used it.

An awful lot of what we've been talking about is already defined in the annotations model [1]. For feedback, the current web annotations draft already covers that pretty well. Take a look at their motivations [2]. We might suggest additional motivations, but there are already "commenting", "editing", and "questioning". 

I think that what we should be focusing on is usage annotations, possibly just an additional motivation for the annotations model. Usage annotations can be the same for the publisher and the re-user. In both cases, someone is creating an annotation outside the original work (outside the published dataset) that says that particular dataset was reused by someone else. So, if Alice publishes a dataset and Bob uses it in creating a visualization, which Carol views online, Bob needs a way to tell the world that he used Alice's data, so that Carol can see it and so that Alice can be made aware of it. Alice could make the same annotation as Bob in her role as a webizen; she needn't adopt her role as the original publisher to do so. There is no need to distinguish between publisher and consumer. Either way, Carol can see it and Alice is also aware of it.

-Annette

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#motivations

On Apr 23, 2015, at 10:01 AM, Ig Ibert Bittencourt <ig.ibert@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Yaso and Eric,
> 
> Wonderful you've started the glossary. I would suggest some updates in the definition of the following concepts:
> 	• Data Producer: this entity represents an agent (human or machine) in the role of a data producer responsible for producing data (or even the dataset) in any phase of the data life cycle. It is important to say the production of new data can happen through the consumption/reuse of old data;
> 	• Data Consumer: this entity represents an agent (human or machine) in the role of a data consumer responsible for consuming data from one or more datasets.
> 	• Data Publisher: this entity represents an agent (human or machine) in the role of data publisher responsible for publishing one or more datases. It is important to say that this role is different from data producer, although they can be owned by the same agent;
> 	• Citation: Citations is an action performed by a citing entity to a cited entity, qualified/characterized as direct and explicit, indirect or implicit [1]. In the context of DWBP, it is a formal feedback (bibliographic reference in the form of published material as a book, paper, web page) performed by an agent (in the role of a data consumer or data publisher) to a dataset.
> Please, let me know if you agree of not. 
> 
> [1] http://purl.org/spar/cito
> 
> Cheers,
> Ig
> 
> 2015-04-23 12:33 GMT-03:00 <yaso@nic.br>:
> Hi Eric!
> 
> I'm glad you asked. I made a very rough draft and uploaded to my fork on github because the doc is still with no styling and proper IDs. I sent it to Phil and the editors to get some feedback, but had no answer till now.
> 
> Basically, I picked the idea of that conversation at the f2f and threshed the details of the Data on the Web Life cycle proposed by Bernadette. The draft is at [1] and you can see it rendered at [2].
> 
> What I am proposing is that we use actions that transforms data in to something else, like a dataset or metadata, as turning points to divide whether someone is a publisher or a consumer. Furthermore, as a data creator can be also someone that collects data from others using software, like facebook or yandex, I propose that we focus on 3 "representations" of data: data (as raw data), dataset (as encoded file or structured dataset) or metadata (whatever is the format).
> 
> Given this way of thinking the cycle of data on the web, data archiving techniques and data preparation or data planning are out of the scope of this WG, thought 303 pages and 404 are in. Data encoded in file formats is out of the scope also, but only if people involved with data mining and enriching wants.
> 
> The idea still have to be polished, but I think it is a good way out for our abstractsss discussions to focus on actions performed to delineate concrete lines of definitions.
> 
> I'm keen for the feedback of the WG.
> 
> [1] https://github.com/yaso/dwbp
> [2] http://yaso.is/dwbp/glossary.html
> 
> 
> Cheers
> Yaso
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting "Eric Stephan" <ericphb@gmail.com>:
> 
> Hi Ig,
> 
> There are quite a bit of definitions floating around, I was wondering if
> you needed help on this task.  Please let me know.
> 
> Eric S
> 
>   https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/174
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Ig Ibert Bittencourt
> Professor Adjunto III - Instituto de Computação/Universidade Federal de Alagoas (UFAL)
> Vice-Coordenador da Comissão Especial de Informática na Educação
> Líder do Centro de Excelência em Tecnologias Sociais
> Co-fundador da Startup MeuTutor Soluções Educacionais LTDA.

Received on Thursday, 23 April 2015 19:55:07 UTC