Re: More BPs added

I agree with Phil that locale parameters should go with the discussion of metadata rather than formats. Attached find a starter for that particular BP that I put together.
-Annette

On Jan 13, 2015, at 5:00 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:

> Bernadette, Newton,
> 
> 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.
> 
> IMO the doc is looking better but still needs work before Friday.
> 
> 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!).
> 
> @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??
> 
> Phil.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> Phil Archer
> W3C Data Activity Lead
> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
> 
> http://philarcher.org
> +44 (0)7887 767755
> @philarcher1
>