- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 17:32:09 +0100
- To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
- CC: Government Linked Data Working Group <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
Dave, Thanks very much for moving this forward so quickly. I'm very pleased to see the conformance section as you've written it but have two comments: 1. Picking up on Richard's point about the line: "it does *not* use terms from other vocabularies instead of ones defined in this vocabulary that could reasonably be used." I think that's clear but it might make it very slightly clearer if the word 'instead' were emphasised. Further: * MAY include terms from other vocabularies; could become: * MAY include additional terms from other vocabularies; 2. I'd really like this to become boiler plate for all vocabularies if possible so I wonder if specific references to ORG can be removed from the conformance section thus: * may use only a subset of ORG terms. Becomes * may use only a subset of terms defined here. An 'ORG profile' becomes 'Application profile' or, if preferred, 'Vocabulary profile' Phil. On 01/10/2012 09:58, Dave Reynolds wrote: > I've carried out the agreed changes, and a number of editorial > improvements, to the ORG specification and believe it is now ready for > review. > > A static version dated 2012-10-01 is at: > > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/org/static.html > > Notes > > (1) I also updated the "conformance" section based on the current > discussion between Richard and Phil, adapted for ORG rather than DCAT. > I've used the term "data interchange" to represent the thing that > conforms - meaning this to cover publication (by file, SPARQL or > embedded) and exchange protocols. > > (2) ORG has a couple of references to the OPMV vocabulary. I considered > whether these should be changed to use PROV-O [1]. Technically that > would be easy, for those parts used in ORG then PROV-O is basically the > same as OPMV except for names. However, PROV-O is still at WD stage so > if we made that a dependency we would be blocked waiting for PROV-O to > proceed. When PROV-O is published it seems likely that someone will > provide mappings between it and OPMV, in which case our use of OPMV > would automatically be compatible with PROV-O. > > (3) I've left the document status as Editor's draft, I assume that's > right until we've reviewed and voted. > > Dave > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/ > > -- Phil Archer W3C eGovernment http://www.w3.org/egov/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Monday, 1 October 2012 16:32:48 UTC