Re: New DQV editor's draft

A warm +1 from me too.

Christophe

--
Sent with difficulties. Sorry for the brievety and typos...
Op 26 mei 2015 13:48 schreef "Eric Stephan" <ericphb@gmail.com>:

> >> But of course, an REC for DCAT 1.1 would be seen by many as a good
> thing.
>
> +1
>
> Eric S.
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
>
>> If the WG has the capacity to take DQV and DUV through Rec track, then,
>> of course, it can (formally, I believe that the chairs and I would have to
>> make the case to the Director and possibly the members but I woudn't expect
>> that to be a problem). It means gathering evidence that the terms are
>> useful in the real world - which should be doable of course, it's a
>> question of time and resources.
>>
>> But of course, an REC for DCAT 1.1 would be seen by many as a good thing.
>>
>> As ever... it's up the WG ;-)
>>
>> Phil.
>>
>>
>> On 26/05/2015 09:23, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Phil,
>>>
>>>
>>>  I have a flight later today when I need to read through a lot of docs.
>>>> The Spatial data WG is also racing towards a publication next week so
>>>> if anyone fancies joining me in reviewing a UCR with more than 40 use
>>>> cases, be my guest!
>>>> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmm, not sure I have the bandwidth - but it looks like a very nice,
>>> complete document ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Against that, we're currently heading for DQV as a Note, not a Rec
>>>>>> (unless you want to put it through Rec Track). So in that sense, the
>>>>>> whole document is non-normative so dependencies are less critical.
>>>>>> And I re-raise the possibility of putting all these new terms, and
>>>>>> DUV, in the DCAT namespace. For me, that's the thing to do but it's a
>>>>>> WG decision of course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  [...]
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I am very eager to add our new elements to DCAT. But how would this
>>>>> work, in terms of formalities?
>>>>> Would we as editors of DQV/DUV have to become editor of the DCAT
>>>>> vocabulary? Is it possible to re-open something that is a W3C Rec, to
>>>>> put in it content that was supposed to be one of a Note?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The namespace and the definitions are separate. A Note that said "we
>>>> define the following new terms in the DCAT namespace" would exist in
>>>> TR space (presumably at /TR/vocab-dqv) and we'd add the actual terms
>>>> to /ns/dcat#. The DCAT REC remains unchanged. Likewise for DUV of
>>>> course *if* that's what the WG decides.
>>>>
>>>> On the downside, it means that definitions of terms in the DCAT
>>>> namespace are spread across several documents. Therefore, the
>>>> community-minded thing to do would be to create a single doc that
>>>> listed all the terms.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm... isn't that what a namespace doc is for? Shame to say, we never
>>>> did create an HTML doc at http://www.w3.org/ns/dcat - we really should
>>>> have done - and should still do. I would be happy to take on the task
>>>> of creating such a page if that's the direction the WG wants to take
>>>> (and I actually have time to do this over the summer).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, a namespace doc could have everything it. And you should count on
>>> all editors to help you with it!
>>> Personally I would still find the setting strange, where a main Rec
>>> wouldn't include everything that the corresponding NS includes, and the
>>> NS would mix Rec- with Note-level elements.
>>> But well, if this is discussed in W3C process circles and it's alright,
>>> then why not.
>>>
>>> Note that I too should have a bit more time to help pushing something to
>>> Rec status, if the WG and/or W3C decides to do so. It would be a shame
>>> to end up with the current WG work being seen as looking slightly lame,
>>> if the only reason for this is process stuff (of course if the content
>>> is not judged Rec-level, then we'd be in a much different situation).
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Antoine
>>>
>>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Phil Archer
>> W3C Data Activity Lead
>> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>>
>> http://philarcher.org
>> +44 (0)7887 767755
>> @philarcher1
>>
>>
>