Re: Comments on Data on the Web Best Practices: BP-1 & BP-2

Dear Andrea,

Thanks a lot for your message!

Looking forward for your feedback on the 2nd draft!

kind regards,
Bernadette

2015-06-18 8:02 GMT-03:00 Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>:

> Dear Bernadette,
>
> Thanks for giving me this opportunity, and sincere apologies for my late
> reply.
>
> I've just reviewed the relevant sections, and I think that issues I
> contributed have been at least partially solved.
>
> Actually, I have some comments on the new version of the BP doc, but
> I'll submit them when the 2nd draft is officially published.
>
> Meanwhile, I just report a typo:
>
>
> BP1, "Possible Approach to Implementation": a closing bracket is missing:
>
> "[...] should be used to provide descriptive metadata (see Section 9.9
> Data Vocabularies."
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrea
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 11:49 PM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> <bfl@cin.ufpe.br> wrote:
> > Dear Andrea,
> >
> > As mentioned in my last message, we're planning to publish the 2nd draft
> of
> > the DWBP document and it is really important to have your feedback about
> > changes that were made based on your comments on the FPWD of DWBP
> document.
> >
> > If possible, please let us know if you agree with the proposed changes no
> > later than next Friday.
> >
> > Thank you!
> > Bernadette
> >
> > 2015-03-19 18:12 GMT-03:00 Andrea Perego <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
> >:
> >>
> >> Thanks a lot for your reply, Bernadette.
> >>
> >> I'm looking forward to reading the revised version of the BPs.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Andrea
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> >> <bfl@cin.ufpe.br> wrote:
> >> > Dear Andrea,
> >> >
> >> > Thank you very much for your comments on the DWBP document!  We are
> >> > planning
> >> > to restructure the section of best practices for metadata and your
> >> > comments
> >> > will be very useful. Please see my comments inline.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. BP-1 ("Document data") seems to mix two different requirements:
> >> >> (a) publishing data documentation (metadata)
> >> >> (b) publishing metadata in human-readable formats
> >> >> Is this correct?
> >> >> In such a case, shouldn't these be rather addressed by two different
> >> >> BPs? The requirement of publishing metadata shouldn't necessarily
> >> >> address *how* this is done. This would also be inconsistent with the
> >> >> fact that the requirement about publishing metadata in
> >> >> machine-readable formats is addressed by a specific BP (BP-2).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yes, it seems that BP1 is not clear. Originally, we had two distinct
> BP:
> >> > Provide metadata and Provide metadata for humas and machines. Then, we
> >> > decided to remove the general BP Provide Metadata and to keep one BP
> for
> >> > metadata for humans and another one for BP for machines. We're gonna
> >> > review
> >> > this structure.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. BP-2 ("Use machine-readable formats to provide metadata"), section
> >> >> "Intended outcome":
> >> >> "It should be possible for computer applications, notably search
> >> >> tools, to locate and process the metadata easily, which makes it
> human
> >> >> readable metadata, machine readability metadata."
> >> >> (a) It is unclear why this "makes it human readable metadata".
> >> >> (b) There's probably a typo in "[... ] machine readability metadata"
> -
> >> >> shouldn't this rather be "[...] machine readable metadata"?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Yes, this is not correct! We're gonna correct this sentence.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> 3. BP-2 makes the point about the use of machine-readable formats for
> >> >> data discovery via software agents, including search engines. It
> >> >> points also to specific machine-readable metadata serialisations that
> >> >> can be embedded in human-readable metadata, and that are currently
> >> >> used by search engines to optimise discovery. However, I have two
> >> >> questions on this:
> >> >> (a) Shouldn't be a requirement for human-readable metadata to
> *always*
> >> >> embed their machine-readable version? This also when machine-readable
> >> >> metadata are available separately. I see a couple of use cases for
> >> >> this - e.g., optimising discovery via search engines, existing
> browser
> >> >> plug-ins able to read RDFa, etc.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > BP2 says that "Metadata in machine-readable formats must be published
> >> > together with the data". In a way, it means that machine-readable
> >> > version
> >> > must always be available, but there is no relation with the
> >> > human-readable
> >> > version.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> (b) Do you think that the requirement of being "discoverable" by Web
> >> >> search tools should be extended to data? BP-12 partially address
> this,
> >> >> but not explicitly. I'm asking since this issue may be relevant to
> the
> >> >> SDW WG - see [2].
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Again, I think the BP is not clear. The idea is that metadata may be
> >> > used to
> >> > make data discoverable, i.e., it should be easy to discover the data
> and
> >> > not
> >> > the metadata. In this sense, BP4 (Provide discovery metadata)
> >> > complements
> >> > BP2.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks!
> >> >>
> >> >> Andrea
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> > Bernadette
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ----
> >> >> [1]http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/F2f_Barcelona
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> [2]
> http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Requirements#Content_need_to_be_crawlable.2C_then_able_to_ask_search_engine_or_other_service
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
> >> >> Scientific / Technical Project Officer
> >> >> European Commission DG JRC
> >> >> Institute for Environment & Sustainability
> >> >> Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data
> >> >> Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
> >> >> 21027 Ispra VA, Italy
> >> >>
> >> >> https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
> >> >>
> >> >> ----
> >> >> The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
> >> >> not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
> >> >> position of the European Commission.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> >> > Centro de Informática
> >> > Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
> >> >
> >> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
> >> Scientific / Technical Project Officer
> >> European Commission DG JRC
> >> Institute for Environment & Sustainability
> >> Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data
> >> Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
> >> 21027 Ispra VA, Italy
> >>
> >> https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
> >>
> >> ----
> >> The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
> >> not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
> >> position of the European Commission.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> > Centro de Informática
> > Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> --
> Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
> Scientific / Technical Project Officer
> European Commission DG JRC
> Institute for Environment & Sustainability
> Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data
> Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
> 21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>
> https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
>
> ----
> The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
> not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
> position of the European Commission.
>



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