Text suggestions for recent comments

As promised in today's meeting, I'd like to suggest some comments and 
minor amendments to the proposals in the wiki [1]


Comment 1 - I agree with the proposal.


In Comment 2, Ivan asks for a reference to the CSVW work, which I agree 
is good to add. The para chosen for the addition is from the intro:

The Best Practices proposed in this document are intended to serve a 
more general purpose than the practices suggested in, for example, Best 
Practices for Publishing Linked Data [LD-BP] since DWBP is 
domain-independent. Whilst DWBP recommends the use of Linked Data, it 
also promotes best practices for data on the Web in other open formats 
such as CSV.

The current proposal is to add a reference to the CSVW Primer - good, 
but I think it needs a linking sentence so that we have:

... DWBP recommends the use of Linked Data, it also promotes best 
practices for data on the Web in other open formats such as CSV. Methods 
for sharing tabular data, including CSV files, in a way that maximizes 
the potential of the Web to make links between data points, are 
described in the Tabular Data Primer [[Tabular-Data-Primer]].


Comments 3, 4 & 5 - OK.


Comment 6.

I think Andrea makes a good point and it's a good hook for the DUV. 
Indeed, the high frequency of data publishers who require registration 
was a key motivation for the development of the DUV in the first place. 
Reading the intro to the access section, where it is proposed to address 
his point, I think it can go higher up than suggested. And I also note 
that the first paragraph is a little confused so I offer this alternative:

===Begins===
<p>Providing easy access to data on the Web enables both humans and 
machines to take advantage of the benefits of sharing data using the Web 
infrastructure. By default, the Web offers access using Hypertext 
Transfer Protocol (HTTP) methods. This provides access to data at an 
atomic transaction level. This might be through the simple bulk download 
of a file or, where data is distributed across multiple files or 
requires more sophisticated retrieval methods, through an API. The two 
basic methods, bulk download and API, are not mutually exclusive.</p>

<p>For some data publishers, it is important to know who has downloaded 
the data and how they have used it. There are two possible approaches to 
gathering this information. First, publishers can <em>invite</em> users 
to provide it, the user's motivation for doing so being that it 
encourages the continued publication of the data and promotes their own 
work. The Dataset Usage Vocabulary [[Vocab-DQV]] provides a structure 
for doing this. A second and less user-friendly approach is to require 
registration before data is accessed. In this case, the publisher should 
explain why and how information gathered from users (either explicitly 
or implicitly) will be used. Without a clear policy users might be 
fearful of providing information and thus the value of the dataset is 
reduced.</p>

<p>In the bulk download approach, bulk data is generally...

=== Ends ===

*Although* I would delete the second instance of the word bulk in that 
existing para so it just reads: "In the bulk download approach, data is 
generally pre-processed server side where multiple files or directory 
trees of files are provided as one downloadable file."

Comment 7 & 8 - OK.

HTH

Phil

For tracker, this is action-285



[1] 
https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Status_of_comments_about_the_last_call_working_draft


-- 


Phil Archer
W3C Data Activity Lead
http://www.w3.org/2013/data/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1

Received on Friday, 17 June 2016 15:41:22 UTC