Re: WG state of play

Hi all, 

Since this discussion has been generalized to both of the vocabularies, I (and believe Berna and Sumit agree) that because we have received only a minimal amount of feedback on the Data Usage Vocabulary in the last few months that requesting another round of feedback may not be yield more results.

Further, from a personal observation, because the DUV heavily reuses other vocabularies, it is perhaps more susceptible than other vocabularies to having portions of our DUV superseded as the other vocabularies evolve (for example Web Annotation and the future DCAT 2.0).

In some respects because of the DUV's extensive vocabulary reuse, I can't help but think that the DUV best serves as a series of "recipes"  (borrowing an expression from the PROV community) patterns or profiles rather than a vocabulary about how to cite, provide feedback and describe dataset usage.  

Having said this, if the WG had extended time, I will be interested about how the DUV, DQV and BP can be applied in the real world applications.

Kind regards,

Eric S

Sent from a Pokemon GO tracking device

> On Aug 25, 2016, at 6:33 AM, Deirdre Lee <deirdre@derilinx.com> wrote:
> 
> Agree with Phil.
> 
> If there are further updates to be made to vocabs, we could publish final draft of vocabs with DWBP Recommendation doc - in Oct/Nov.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Deirdre
> 
> 
>> On 25/08/2016 11:48, Phil Archer wrote:
>> Understood, Antoine.
>> 
>> We're going to need to ask for an extension to the WG's charter, probably until December, so there will be time to gather further feedback on the vocabs and make further editorial changes, i.e. if we do publish a new iteration of the vocabs next week there will be an opportunity to publish further amendments after that. PR-wise, it would be good to have both the vocabs published with the CR doc though if you and Riccardo are happy for that to happen.
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> Phil.
>> 
>> 
>>> On 24/08/2016 15:48, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>>> Hi Phil,
>>> 
>>> Riccardo and I are working on the last edits.
>>> If we have to finish by Friday then we won't have time to go through our
>>> entire wishlist of editorial changes, but so be it. As I explained in
>>> the last calls, Riccardo and I were not foreseeing any change to the
>>> vocabulary itself, anyway.
>>> 
>>> Indeed Amrapali's mail has not been answered. Even though the last draft
>>> is actually from after Aug 4. We're working on it.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Antoine
>>> 
>>>> On 22/08/16 16:52, Phil Archer wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> 
>>>> With the BP doc Transition call just over 2 hours away I'm just
>>>> checking the overall state of play for the WG.
>>>> 
>>>> There are 4 open actions but these all relate to the i18n comments so
>>>> am I right that they can now all be closed?
>>>> 
>>>> I note a lot of traffic about the DQV on the comments list - that's
>>>> very good to see. There's one from Amrapali Zeveri on 13 Aug but the
>>>> latest DQV ED is dated 4 Aug so I take it that hasn't been acted on?
>>>> Will it be before final publication? (please take this as an entirely
>>>> neutral question, not as a demand for action).
>>>> 
>>>> DUV looks stable? But I see Issue 234 still open
>>>> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/234
>>>> 
>>>> As we line up in front of the Director - are we ready?
>>>> 
>>>> Shout if you need me or others to do something.
>>>> 
>>>> Phil.
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------
> Deirdre Lee, CEO & Founder
> Derilinx - Linked & Open Data Solutions
> Web:      www.derilinx.com
> Email:    deirdre@derilinx.com
> Address:  11/12 Baggot Court, Dublin 2, D02 F891
> Tel:      +353 (0)1 254 4316
> Mob:      +353 (0)87 417 2318
> Linkedin: ie.linkedin.com/in/leedeirdre/
> Twitter:  @deirdrelee
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 25 August 2016 14:39:05 UTC