Re: comments on Data on the Web Best Practices

Dear Andrea Maurino,

Thanks a lot for your comments on the FPWD of the DWBP document! After
gathering some feedback from the community some changes were made and we're
planning to publish a 2nd draft [1].

In the following, you can find some comments about your feedback on the
FPWD.

> Bp3  Use standard terms to define metadata
>
> Issue 6: IMHO there is the need that at least a very well defined subset
> of metadata terms MUST be described by means of standard terms and
> consequently if they must be expressed with well-known RDF vocabulary.
> Example of such mandatory list of metadata terms could include the owner,
> the type of license associated to the data, and date of last modification.
>
Changes were made on the metadata section and specific vocabularies are
mentioned in the Possible Approach to Implementation section [2].

> Best Practice 6: Provide data license information
>
> According to the experience of Comsode project  license is a mandatory
> requirement for publishing data on the web due to the fact without a
> license there is no clear indication about the limits (if any) of usability
> of such data and this lack significantly reduce the possibility to have a
> real web of data. It is possible to suggest that in case someone publishes
> data without license this will imply that such data can be consumed for
> free by both humans and machines but they cannot be modified, reused an so
> on without an explicit acceptation of the data owner.
>
I am not sure if we can make such suggestion because this may depend from
the policies of the organization. I think we can only suggest that data
license information should be available.

> Best Practice 8: Provide data quality information
>
> Issue 7 I suggest to draw some strategies related to how attach quality
> information. In some case such information are defined inside data (for
> example when the time of last modification of an item is part of the
> dataset itself), in other situations there are the need to express quality
> dimensions related to schema description only (e.g. conciseness of schema)
> , or  related to the dataset. I also suggest (but it is clear that I'm a
> little biased on such topic :) ) to better describe how to describe the
> quality information (including quality dimensions, adopted quality metric,
> and quality value see for example as starting point [1])
>
Thanks a lot for your suggestions, but I suggest to keep this discussion
for the Data Quality Vocabulary document [3].

> Best Practice 9: Provide versioning information
>
>  This is a crucial problem in particular in the case of linked data due to
> possible impact wrt. existing interlinked resources. Some good practice
> could be discussed
>
In the current version of the document there is a section for Data
Versioning [4] and two BP(Provide versioning information and Provide
version history) are proposed.

Best Practice 20: Preserve people's right to privacy
>
> This a big issue because if it is correct to protect the people's right to
> privacy there is also the "right to know" about activities realized by
> public administrations (for example legal sentences); In Italy, just as an
> example,  personal information including salary related to person working
> in Public administration at higher level or consultants paid with public
> money must to be released as open data due to Italy transparency decree for
> 5 years (after such period there is "the right to be forgotten" that many
> of you known related to the google vs European Union case).
>
> Thus I suggest to change the best practice in " Data publishers should
> preserve the privacy of individuals according to the law of the country of
> data owner ".
>
Some actions were taken to change BP for Sensistive Data [5]. Changes will
be made in the next version.

Best Practice 25: Provide data up to date
>
> Please consider that this BP is strictly related to the data quality bp
> due to the fact the way in which are calculated temporal-related  quality
> dimensions  and such two BP must be correlated and coherent.
>
This BP concerns how to keep data up to date instead of providing
information if data is being updated as expected. I think that the
discussion about data quality assessment is in the scope of the Data
Quality Vocabulary [3].

kind regards,
Bernadette

[1] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html
[2] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#metadata
[3] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html
[4] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#dataVersioning
[5] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#sensitive






>
>
>
>
> Best regards
>
>
>
> Andrea  Maurino
>
>
>
> [1] http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1184/ldow2014_paper_09.pdf
>
>
>



-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------