Re: QB UC WG Note - Call for Reviewers

I'm happy with the changes. Thanks, Benedikt!

On 2013-05-28, at 7:40 AM, Benedikt Kaempgen wrote:

> Hi James,
> 
> Thanks again for the valuable feedback you gave on the QB UCR.
> 
> I have now implemented it [1]:
> 
>>> s/organisation/organization/ (to be consistent with ORG)
> Done.
> 
>>> s/has been existing/has existed/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/introduction of the specificities of modelling statistics/introduction to modelling statistics/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/or feedback to the earlier data cube vocabulary version/or from
>>> feedback to the earlier version of the data cube vocabulary/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/the name data cube vocabulary/the term "data cube vocabulary"/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/the challenge of an RDF vocabulary/the challenge of authoring an
>>> RDF vocabulary/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/modeling/modelling/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/fails with representing/fails to represent/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/To allow correct/To allow for correct/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/illustrates this specificitiy of modelling/illustrates these
>>> details/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/Illustration of specificities in modelling of a
>>> statistic/Modelling a statistic/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/sharing of statistical data/sharing statistical data/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/uses "multidimensional model"/uses a  "multidimensional model"/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/that caters for the specificity of modelling statistics/to meet
>>> the above challenges in modelling statistics/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/It allows to describe/It can describe/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/compatible to SDMX/compatible with SDMX/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/If aggregated we refer to statistical data as "macro-data"
>>> whereas if not, we refer to "micro-data"/We refer to aggregated
>>> statistical data as "macro-data" and unaggregated statistical data
>>> as "micro-data"/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/ ,/,/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/RDBs/relational databases/
> Done.
> 
>>> s/give contextual information/gives contextual information/
> Done.
> 
>>> I'm not at all sure what "a registration fashion" means.
> Added definition of SDMX 2.1: "A registry allows a publisher to announce that data or metadata exists and to add information about how to obtain that data."
> 
> It would be nice if you could shortly confirm 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: James McKinney [james@opennorth.ca]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 19. Mai 2013 22:06
> An: Benedikt Kaempgen
> Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org
> Betreff: Re: QB UC WG Note - Call for Reviewers
> 
>> Thanks a lot for your review up to section 3.
>> 
>> It surely is not too late. The last status of the QB UCR was that Phil will do a clarity check and Dave will do a more spec-related review.
>> 
>> Do you think the UC document would still need Phil as a reviewer?
> 
> It can't hurt! Especially for the sections I haven't reviewed yet.
> 
> 
>> I will implement all of your feedback as soon as possible.
>> 
>> For "registry", I will use the definition of SDMX 2.1: "A registry allows a publisher to announce that data or metadata exists and to add information about how to obtain that data.", if that is ok for you.
> 
> Sounds good to me.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James
> 
> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Benedikt
>> 
>> ________________________________________
>> Von: James McKinney [james@opennorth.ca]
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Mai 2013 16:53
>> An: Benedikt Kaempgen
>> Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org
>> Betreff: Re: QB UC WG Note - Call for Reviewers
>> 
>> I meant to come back to this to complete the review, but I'll send what I have now (hopefully not too late). Entirely editorial changes, I think.
>> 
>> Up to section 3:
>> 
>> s/organisation/organization/ (to be consistent with ORG)
>> s/has been existing/has existed/
>> s/introduction of the specificities of modelling statistics/introduction to modelling statistics/
>> s/or feedback to the earlier data cube vocabulary version/or from feedback to the earlier version of the data cube vocabulary/
>> s/the name data cube vocabulary/the term "data cube vocabulary"/
>> s/the challenge of an RDF vocabulary/the challenge of authoring an RDF vocabulary/
>> s/modeling/modelling/
>> s/fails with representing/fails to represent/
>> s/To allow correct/To allow for correct/
>> s/illustrates this specificitiy of modelling/illustrates these details/
>> s/Illustration of specificities in modelling of a statistic/Modelling a statistic/
>> s/sharing of statistical data/sharing statistical data/
>> s/uses "multidimensional model"/uses a  "multidimensional model"/
>> s/that caters for the specificity of modelling statistics/to meet the above challenges in modelling statistics/
>> s/It allows to describe/It can describe/
>> s/compatible to SDMX/compatible with SDMX/
>> s/If aggregated we refer to statistical data as "macro-data" whereas if not, we refer to "micro-data"/We refer to aggregated statistical data as "macro-data" and unaggregated statistical data as "micro-data"/
>> s/ ,/,/
>> s/RDBs/relational databases/
>> s/give contextual information/gives contextual information/
>> 
>> I'm not at all sure what "a registration fashion" means.
>> 
>> James
>> 
>> On 2013-04-25, at 11:16 AM, Benedikt Kaempgen wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello everyone,
>>> 
>>> As discussed in the call, I would like to ask for reviewers of the QB UC document [1].
>>> 
>>> The document's main purpose is to motivate use cases and requirements of the QB spec to an audience that considers QB in applications. As such, technical background in QB is helpful, but not necessary.
>>> 
>>> Reviewing the clarity of the text could be reviewed by nearly everyone and would already be helpful.
>>> 
>>> The deeper relationships between the QB specification and the QB UC document probably only can be reviewed by Dave or Richard.
>>> 
>>> Any help with getting the document out as a WG Note would be appreciated.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Benedikt
>>> 
>>> [1] <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/data-cube-ucr/data-cube-ucr-20130227/index.html>
>>> 
>> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 28 May 2013 15:18:28 UTC