Re: Text suggestions for recent comments

Thanks a lot Annette!

I just made the update [1].

Cheers,
Berna

[1]
https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/commit/64d71cb6bd4a3761cf61e3eb8670b834be6d3119

2016-06-24 13:50 GMT-03:00 Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>:

> Yes, that’s great!
> -Annette
>
> > On Jun 24, 2016, at 9:26 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Annette,
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback! I understand your point and I'd like to make a
> new proposal:
> >
> > 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. A second and
> less user-friendly approach is to require registration before data is
> accessed. In both cases, the Dataset Usage Vocabulary [[Vocab-DQV]]
> provides a structure for representing such information. When collecting
> data from users, 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.
> >
> > Please let me know if this ok for you!
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Berna
> >
> > 2016-06-22 15:28 GMT-03:00 Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>:
> > I agree with most of this, but I think the text for comment 6 creates a
> false dichotomy. It reads as though the two options for tracking usage are
> (1) voluntarily using the DUV and (2) requiring registration. I see no
> reason why DUV terms could not be used in gathering required registration
> information. Either way you ask a user to fill in a form reporting their
> usage. The difference is whether access to data is gated on that. If you
> are thinking of the voluntary usage of the DUV in terms of publishing one's
> own usage in metadata, that would not meet the needs of a publisher who
> wants to collect usage statistics. For someone who really needs to report
> statistics, finding such usages would be prohibitively difficult, and many
> users would either never publish a result or would publish but fail to
> learn and use the DUV in their metadata. I see lots of possibility for
> creating new tools that make it much easier to take advantage of the DUV,
> but there isn't yet a way to push usage information to the original
> publisher. Furthermore, whether data is collected from users voluntarily or
> is required for access, the user should be informed of the purpose of
> collecting the data and how it will be used.
> >
> > -Annette
> >
> > On 6/22/16 4:53 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio wrote:
> >> Hi Phil,
> >>
> >> Thanks a lot for your suggestions and improvements!
> >>
> >> We're gonna update the document and send messages to the commenters
> asking for their feedback.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Berna
> >>
> >> 2016-06-17 12:41 GMT-03:00 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>:
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> >> Centro de Informática
> >> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
> >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > --
> > Annette Greiner
> > NERSC Data and Analytics Services
> > Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Bernadette Farias Lóscio
> > Centro de Informática
> > Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>


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