- From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
- Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:07:57 +0000
- To: <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org>
Thanks Antoine - Yeah - I created a few 'milestones' a few weeks ago because the labels had gotten out of control. (milestones seem to work like labels). Then I deleted the unused labels a couple of weeks ago already - about 20 - so it was even worse prior to that! Your review looks more systematic. I'm happy to change as suggested except also need to check that it doesn't break the links here: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/DCAT_Vocabulary_team_working_space#Resources -----Original Message----- From: Antoine Isaac [mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl] Sent: Wednesday, 9 May, 2018 10:57 To: Dataset Exchange Working Group <public-dxwg-wg@w3.org> Subject: Re: ACTION-109: to fix labels (Dataset Exchange Working Group) Hi everyone, I’ve gone through all our labels: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels?page=1&sort=name-asc I have replaced content_negotiation by profile_negotiation https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/profile_negotiation While I was at it, I’ve gone through all labels and their associated issues. Many are just fine. I am grouping the others in three groups: - Labels proposed for deletion: they do not act very efficiently as ‘clusters’ - they look much less important than others - Suggested renaming - Requiring clarification What do you think? Antoine === Labels proposed for deletion: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/access-restrictions https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/aggregate https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/coverage https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/cc-rel https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/data_cube https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/dataset (too generic? unless this is dcat:Dataset, in which case it should be renamed, also to match the convention for other DCAT elements) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/distribution (unless this is dcat:Distribution, in which case it should be renamed, also to match the convention for other DCAT elements) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/documentation (too vague/big cluster) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/federation%20and%20citation https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/formal%20description (I’m not sure why it’s used for some issues and not others) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/meta-level%20%26%20methodology (I’m not sure we need a view on this across our milestones) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/meta (same as meta-level; actually I don’t understand why we’d need these two) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/odrl https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/publication https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/representation https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/resolution https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/semantics (a lot of what we do would be about semantics) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/space https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/time https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/void === Suggested renaming: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/alignment -> dcat_alignment (to make it clearer what it is) https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/catalog -> dcat_catalog https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/service -> dcat_service ? === Requiring clarification: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/referencing https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/status https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/usage%20control vs https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/usage_control https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/versioning vs https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/labels/version On 08/05/18 11:40, Dataset Exchange Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: > ACTION-109: to fix labels (Dataset Exchange Working Group) > > https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/109 > > On: Antoine Isaac > Due: 2018-05-15 > > If you do not want to be notified on new action items for this group, please update your settings at: > https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/users/39566#settings >
Received on Wednesday, 9 May 2018 10:08:32 UTC