- From: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 11:00:57 -0300
- To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Cc: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>, Newton Calegari <newton@nic.br>, Christophe Guéret <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>
- Message-ID: <CANx1PzwGxL1rHfHsMcRtK_e7bgo-qJnvin9afbNAm31AbqRGTg@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Phil, Thanks a lot for your contribution! My comments are inline. I've added some more BPs to the metadata section today. There's one more I > really want to write ASAP which will be about providing structural metadata > (what Mark Harrison called intrinsic metadata). That will include links to > things like VoID for RDF datasets, the CSV work for those files etc. > and the domain vocabularies, do you also consider them as structural metadata? > > IMO the doc is looking better but still needs work before Friday. > Yes, I agree! Now, we have contributors working on several different sections: data formats, data access, data licenses, data quality, data vocabularies, sensitive data and data provenance. > Personally, I don't think we should include incomplete BP templates in the > FPWD. I'd rather see a list of the BPs to be inserted at that pint in the > doc, so, for example in data formats just a simple list like: > > Provide machine-readable data > Provide data in standardized formats > Provide data in open formats > Provide data in multiple formats > Provide locale parameters > > (that list prompts all sorts of questions by the way - why aren't we just > using the 5 star model? Shouldn't locale parameters be in the metadata > section? etc.) > I think that's a more honest reflection of the current situation and allows people to see which BPs have been drafted and therefore in need of review (or ridicule!) I agree that we shouldn't include incomplete BP. @Christophe, might you have time to add normative statements to the BPs you > wrote? i.e. add in the RFC 2119 keywords in the intended outcome sections? > > And, wrt. Issue-115, IMHO the 'What' section can be merged with the Why - > I think in all cases, unless you/others think differently?? I agree with merging the two sections! Cheers, Bernadette > > > Phil. > > > -- > > > Phil Archer > W3C Data Activity Lead > http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ > > http://philarcher.org > +44 (0)7887 767755 > @philarcher1 > -- Bernadette Farias Lóscio Centro de Informática Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 13 January 2015 14:01:44 UTC