W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > January 2015

Re: Call for comments on open questions about the audience for the DWBP doc

From: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 15:02:54 -0200
Message-ID: <CA+pXJihJJf+y5WT6HzFz+_xwBn2PA=kQoFSYw1botQMBCM4y-A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
Cc: Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>, "public-dwbp-wg@w3.org" <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
+1

abrcLau



2015-01-07 11:50 GMT-02:00 Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm doing the updates on the document and I'd like to know your opinion
> about the text for the Audience section.
>
> After our last meeting, we got an agreement that the doc may have a
> primary and a secondary audience.However, I'm not sure if it is necessary
> to say this explicitly on the text.
>
> The current text is:
> This document provides guidance to those who publish data on the Web, as
> well as those who consume data on the Web. These best practices have been
> written to meet the needs of many different audiences from developers and
> information management staff to scientists interested in sharing and
> reusing research data on the Web. Every attempt has been made to make the
> document as readable and usable as possible while still retaining the
> accuracy and clarity needed in a technical specification.
>
> I propose to change the first sentence to:
> This document provides best practices to those who publish data on the Web.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks!
> Bernadette
>
>
>
> 2014-12-19 11:29 GMT-03:00 Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>:
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bernadette,
>>
>>
>>
>> Ø  I am still not convinced that the DWBP document is not interesting
>> for re-users (already using the terminology presented by Makx) even if the
>> scope is just BP for data publishers. If re-users will manipulate the data,
>> don't you think that it will be good if they have some knowledge about the
>> best practices used to create and publish the data?
>>
>>
>>
>> So let’s try to define ‘audience’. I think the ‘audience’ for the BP
>> document is the group of people that we want to act on the best practice.
>> In the BP document, we’re trying to tell data publishers to do things in a
>> certain way.
>>
>>
>>
>> This does not say that we’re not allowing anyone else, especially the
>> data consumers; to read the document, but we’re not telling them to do
>> anything themselves.
>>
>>
>>
>> What will happen is that when data consumers read the document, they
>> might note that a particular publisher does not follow best practice as
>> described in the BP document. If that happens, they could contact the
>> publisher and complain.
>>
>>
>>
>> This is similar to the European Union’s Directive on the re-use of public
>> sector information. That Directive tells public sector bodies what they
>> MUST and MUST NOT do. Anyone who wants to re-use information can read the
>> Directive and the national law that implements it and then complain if a
>> particular public sector body does not adhere to the principles laid down
>> in the Directive.
>>
>>
>>
>> Makx.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> Centro de Informática
> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>



-- 
.  .  .  .. .  .
.        .   . ..
.     ..       .
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2015 17:03:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:30 UTC