W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-wg@w3.org > February 2013

[QB] Editorial structure question

From: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:25:23 +0000
Message-ID: <512E3373.8090008@gmail.com>
To: Government Linked Data Working Group <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
[Mostly for Richard, but on list so others can comment.]

I've started to look at the editorial changes needed for Data Cube [1].

Currently the spec has good (though I'm biased here!) explanatory 
material but the vocabulary reference is relegated to an appendix and 
uses a rather terse style.

I suggest that much of what is currently the body material should be 
marked as informative, the vocabulary reference should move into the 
body and be marked normative. Does that sound right?

Should we change the editorial style of the vocabulary to match DCAT and 

[I think the answer is yes, I like the terse style myself but I don't 
think I'm representative.]


[1] So far just switched to new respec and moved Jeni to the 
acknowledgements section, as she suggested.
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2013 16:25:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:52:05 UTC