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

Re: Excel??!!

From: Carlos Iglesias <contact@carlosiglesias.es>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:22:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CAAa1XzngB1vuwyHqSXWtJnvCTVj_DtMrPOBdxXGgtCnxK0xWjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>
Cc: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Indeed removing XLS for being a proprietary format (I also suggest to
replace by ODS then) is a little bit inconsistent with leaving " to have
the necessary tools to parse proprietary or (preferably) non-proprietary
data formats" in the text.
On the other hand, there are certain proprietary formats that are industry
de-facto standards and have no clear replacement (e.g. SHP). Then, what
about splitting this in too, one BP about machine-readable and standardized
formats and other about non-proprietary formats?

Best,
 CI.

On 22 January 2015 at 20:42, Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov> wrote:

> I’m fine with removing Excel. Perhaps we should remove the reference to
> proprietary formats, too. I think it would be acceptable to use a
> proprietary format in the case where the vast majority of users would
> prefer it, but that is a pretty unlikely case. Using nonproprietary formats
> seems to me the general best practice. A format like Excel can readily be
> converted to something nonproprietary, like CSV.
>
> A couple sentences got smashed together as well. And now that I think of
> it, I don’t think we should mention vocabularies here. That is covered way
> too much elsewhere already. In fact, that last sentence “Standard data
> formats as well as the . . .” is redundant with the “Why”. I think we
> should just remove it.
>
> The intended outcome was rewritten and should read:
> "Published data on the web must be readable and processable by typical
> computing systems. Any data consumer who wishes to work with the data and
> is authorized to do so must be able to do so with computational tools
> typically available in the relevant domain."
>
> -Annette
>
> --
> Annette Greiner
> NERSC Data and Analytics Services
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
> 510-495-2935
>
> On Jan 22, 2015, at 4:05 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just noticed that the BP "Use machine-readable standardized data
> formats" included this:
> >
> > "Consider which data formats potential users of the data are most likely
> to have the necessary tools to parse proprietary or (preferably)
> non-proprietary data formats, including but not limited to MS Excel, CSV,
> NetCDF, XML, JSON and RDF. Standard data formats as well as the use of
> standard data vocabularies will better enable machines to process the data."
> >
> >
> > No no no no no no no
> >
> > Microsoft Excel is a proprietary format that has no place in a W3C
> standards document. I have removed it.
> >
> > True, MSFT 'gave' the standard to ISO but it's not an open standard in
> terms of the way it was developed and is effectively a proprietary one.
> >
> >
> > For tracker: ISSUE-67
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > Phil Archer
> > W3C Data Activity Lead
> > http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
> >
> > http://philarcher.org
> > +44 (0)7887 767755
> > @philarcher1
> >
>
>
>


-- 
---

Carlos Iglesias.
Internet & Web Consultant.
+34 687 917 759
contact@carlosiglesias.es
@carlosiglesias
http://es.linkedin.com/in/carlosiglesiasmoro/en
Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 20:22:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 22 January 2015 20:22:56 UTC