Re: dwbp-ISSUE-144: There is a technological bias in several parts of the document [Best practices document(s)]

Hello group,

On 3 February 2015 at 18:56, Augusto Herrmann <augusto.herrmann@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Dear Carlos, Bernadette, and all.
>
> We need to remember this document is about the best practices for data *on
> the web*, and not best practices for data on the internet.
>
> Considering this, IMO any technologies mentioned in the World Wide Web
> Architecture [1] document should NOT be technology agnostic on the DWBP.
> That includes terms such as HTTP, URLs and URIs, which should be
> specifically and explicitly addressed (and not just IDs and protocols in
> general).
>

Ok, good. Why then not to refer to HTTPS or IRIs instead? Are those
disallowed? Should we mention all in every case? What if we get a new HTTPX
or new CURIs in a few months?



> As for the technological bias regarding the SW and LD, how about moving
> the parts that are specific about those to separate, non-normative sections
> dedicated to publishing LD? I agree that they could be confusing for LD
> outsiders, but I still think those could be useful practices when
> publishing LD, and there's no point on having a separate "Linked Data on
> the Web Best Practices", or is there?
>

I don't think that's necessary. LD techniques will be as valid as
techniques for any other technology. All content at the implementation
approach sections is expected to be technical and there is a place for LD
techniques there as well. The only part of the document where we should be
removing LD specific references (or those for any other tech) is the
general discourse (intros and the like)

Best,
 CI.



>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/
>
> Best regards,
> Augusto Herrmann
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br
> > wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Thank you very much for your detailed review of the BP document! We're
> gonna review the document again and we're gonna try to remove as much
> as possible the techonological bias that you mentioned in your
> comments. Some parts of the text were changed already, but we're gonna
> make another review.
>
> I have a comment about vocabularies and data models, but I'm gonna
> discuss this in a more appropriate thread, ok?
>
> Cheers,
> Bernadette
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2015-01-30 10:51 GMT-03:00 Carlos Iglesias <carlos.iglesias.moro@gmail.com
> >:
> > Hi Caroline and everyone,
> >
> > Sorry but the belated response, but I was heavily traveling during the
> week
> > (hint: ccy'ing to the personal email address may also help to get quicker
> > responses when you want to address someone specifically :)
> > I have just made a quick&dirty review to get you some pointers to
> specific
> > examples. You can see the results at
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ecwweAM5t4UVFEjcXnFhXmCUBnRDvwZ1smRLtiKkBEI/edit?usp=sharing
> >
> > Sorry for the GDoc, I know it is not really friendly with the W3C
> archiving
> > policy, but this time I just needed to keep this time and effort wise in
> > order to keep advancing. Also this has been widely discussed before
> through
> > the mailing list and specific issues raised and tracked, so I expect Phil
> > may forgive me just for this time.
> >
> > Please note that I'm focusing only on the editorial tech-bias review
> here,
> > but my other points and issues raised before [1-6] still remain valid as
> > well (although looks like some have been already fixed).
> >
> > [1] - [
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jan/0186.html]
> > [2] - [
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jan/0225.html]
> > [3] - [
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jan/0178.html]
> > [4] - [
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jan/0183.html]
> > [5] - [
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jan/0264.html]
> > [6] - [
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jan/0177.html]
> >
> > Best,
> >  CI.
>



-- 
---

Carlos Iglesias.
Internet & Web Consultant.
+34 687 917 759
contact@carlosiglesias.es
@carlosiglesias
http://es.linkedin.com/in/carlosiglesiasmoro/en