- From: Benedikt Kaempgen <kaempgen@fzi.de>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:24:56 +0000
- To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
- CC: Government Linked Data Working Group <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
Hello, Thanks for the confirmative feedback, Dave. Does anyone else (Phil, Richard,...) still have comments to the QB-UC document [1]? Otherwise, it would be great if we put the document on our agenda for Thursday's call. Best, Benedikt [1] <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/data-cube-ucr/index.html> ________________________________________ Von: Dave Reynolds [dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 27. Juni 2013 17:56 An: Benedikt Kaempgen Cc: Government Linked Data Working Group Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: [QB-UCR] Review comments Hi Benedikt, I am satisfied that you have addressed my feedback comments. While further polishing of the document would be possible I would be happy to see this published as a Working Group note. Sorry to have taken so long to take a look at this. Dave On 11/06/13 07:09, Benedikt Kaempgen wrote: > Dear Dave, > > I have now implemented all your feedback [1] as discussed in the last emails. > > Thanks for your great help in improving the data cube use cases document. > > It would be great if you could let us know whether you are happy with the changes. > > Best, > > Benedikt > > [1] <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/data-cube-ucr/index.html> > > ________________________________________ > Von: Dave Reynolds [dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. Mai 2013 15:37 > An: Benedikt Kaempgen > Cc: Government Linked Data Working Group > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [QB-UCR] Review comments > > Hi Benedikt, > > On 30/05/13 14:25, Benedikt Kaempgen wrote: >> Hi Dave, >> >> Thanks a lot for the case study. >> >>> I've attached a draft of this for inclusion in your document when you >>> are ready to do so. Feel to tweak it to fit your structure if >>> necessary. >> For the other case studies, I mentioned expected benefits of using the data cube vocabulary. Can you maybe name some for this case study? > > OK. I suggest: > > * Explicit metadata describing the forecast process, coverage and > phenomena being forecast; making the data self-describing. > > * Linking to other linked data resources (particularly geographic > regions and named places associated with the forecast locations) > enabling discovery of related data. > > * Ability to define slices through the data for convenient consumption > by applications. > > Dave >
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 21:25:21 UTC