Experiences with the form

Dear all,

I know that Newton, Carol et al are all involved in the web.br 
conference that Dee and I enjoyed going to last year but I wanted to 
share some experiences with the evidence form.

1. It takes a *long* time to fill in. Also it asks for a URL for every 
BP when I'm trying to assess a specific dataset, so I keep on pasting 
the same URL in each time.

2. All I've done so far is to find an example dataset (by looking at 
datahub.io and choosing the first one listed today) and worked with 
that. I haven't been able to finish filling in the form yet but there 
are several where my ideal answer would be 'partially passed' rather 
than a straight pass/fail.

I'm looking at https://datahub.io/dataset/loddw. The descriptive 
metadata is very poor, most of what is there is auto-generated by CKAN 
anyway. There certainly isn't the rich metadata we'd like to see.

I'll try and get to the end but it will take a while.

3. But! What I did notice was that the metadata includes the name of the 
individual responsible. So I thought I'd look him up and ask *him* to 
fill in the form (Twitter is *so* useful). See 
https://twitter.com/philarcher1/status/786560420341436417

Targeting individuals like this might be an efficient way of encouraging 
them to fill in the form?

And, @newton, sorry, but the form is out of date since it has the 
original locale BP still at no. 4. That really needs to be updated to 
match the doc for which we're gathering evidence of implementation.

I don't think there'll be a call tomorrow but I can't join one of there is.

Cheers

Phil.

-- 


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

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

Received on Thursday, 13 October 2016 15:54:33 UTC