- From: Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:00:28 +0100
- To: Hadley Beeman <hadley@linkedgov.org>
- Cc: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKckEu47UQBc3Sx4rCscxBiXFE_pogyugmL4T6bBzOqeDnCt7A@mail.gmail.com>
Unfortunately I will not be able to be on the call today. On the issue of the Quality vocabulary, people here may be interested to know that the upcoming Share-PSI workshop has a session to discuss quality aspects. The results will be fed back into the work of DWBP. Antoine and Bart are aware of this. Makx Op 26 feb. 2015 13:42 schreef "Hadley Beeman" <hadley@linkedgov.org>: > Hi all, > > The agenda for tomorrow's call is now up, and is pasted here for your > convenience. Lots of good stuff to discuss! Looking forward to seeing you > tomorrow. > > Cheers, > > Hadley > > https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20150227 > > > Main agenda > > Today is a vocabularies meeting! > > > We have three things to settle today: > > 1. Question 1: Should the Data Usage vocabulary and the Data Quality > vocabulary be one vocabulary? We should decide this today. > 2. Question 2: Should the Data vocabulary(ies) be extensions of DCAT? > Or is it too early to tell? > 3. Question 3: (to the vocabulary editors): We have a year and a bit > left for this working group. How do we plan out milestones to get this done? > > > Ideally, we could/should demonstrate: > > - that what we recommend is currently in use (implementations) > - that we've had lots of outside input, and have responded (by > comments and replies) > - that the entire working group supports the recommendation (by > working group votes to publish) > > > But officially, we just need to vote to publish what is written. See > https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Quality_vocab_timetable for more info > on our W3C obligations. > >
Received on Friday, 27 February 2015 13:09:13 UTC