Fwd: Re: New Web Annotation motivation for (data quality) assessment?

Hi,

For info, here's the progress made on Action-208 [1]
I forgot to cc our own WG list :-/
Anyway, I think the action is done, and we've got a satisfactory solution.
To sum up: we have to keep creating/defining our DQV instance of the Web Annotation Motivation class (dqv:qualityAssessment), but the WA WG have added a new motivation (oa:assessing) that we can use to "anchor" our new motivation to. This allows us to follow their best practices for doing such extensions of the WA motivation framework.

Antoine

[1] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/208

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: New Web Annotation motivation for (data quality) assessment?
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 23:35:16 +0200
From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
To: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>
CC: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C Public Annotation List <public-annotation@w3.org>

Hi Rob,

Sorry for the delay answering. I actually wanted to answer after the update of
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html#dqv:qualityAssessment
which is now done.
So when you'll update the reference version of WA our link will point to oa:assessing.
I think we're done. Thanks a lot to the WA WG for the help!

Cheers,

Antoine

On 01/06/16 17:11, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>
> Well, we decided already to change reviewing to assessing, which is in the most recent editor's draft on github :)
> I expect this version is what will be taken to CR, so it should hopefully go up on W3C by the end of the June.
>
> And then dqv:qualityAssessing skos:broader oa:assessing seems like an easy addition.
>
> http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/model/wd2/#motivation-and-purpose
>
> Rob
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 6:38 AM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl <mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl>> wrote:
>
>     Dear all,
>
>     Thanks for the feedback on this.
>
>     I will forward the suggestions for motivation vs subclassing.
>
>     About the introduction of new motivation(s) in WA to support our case: I think Rob's solution is workable on our side.
>     Is it possible to know when the WA group would make a decision about it?
>     I reckon that if DQV keeps dqv:qualityAssessment and the only change we have to make is to add a skos:broader statement between it and a new 'assessment' motivation in the WA namespace, this can be done very easily. But it would make our life easier if we can have an idea of when the motivation would be available for us to link to.
>
>     Cheers,
>

Received on Friday, 17 June 2016 13:56:24 UTC