Re: Princples...

Here's 2 suggestions ( that may need improvement).

No 5. That community good practice for 5 star linked data be followed, including the use of so-called cool uris and  ontology annotations ( references need to be attached)

No 6. That ontologies  conform (" are valid" ? check) to the language of  owl2 dl.
(The latter is important for spatial and temporal reasoning.)

No 7. ( perhaps number  0) That these principles are aimed specifically at data published in RDF but where appropriate may also apply to other spatial data published on the web.


Kerry

On 20 Apr 2015, at 8:17 am, "John Machin" <john.machin@abs.gov.au<mailto:john.machin@abs.gov.au>> wrote:


Hi Ed, Andreas,

I like the proposed principles so far.

Based on some of the comments in the last call, I wonder if we have to have a principle related to keeping the practices up to date?

I realise that this might over-commitment from a WG with a specified lifespan but if maintaining currency is a principle then the two sponsor organisations may be encouraged to reconvene WGs to review and update the Best Practices periodically.

Cheers,
--
John Machin

<graycol.gif>Andreas Harth ---18/04/2015 05:57:59 AM---Hi Ed, On 2015-04-16 14:10, Ed Parsons wrote:

From: Andreas Harth <harth@kit.edu<mailto:harth@kit.edu>>
To: <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>,
Date: 18/04/2015 05:57 AM
Subject: Re: Princples...

________________________________



Hi Ed,

On 2015-04-16 14:10, Ed Parsons wrote:
> So to start the ball rolling....
>
> Princple No.1 : The linkabilty of Geospatial Information published on
> the web should be improved.
>
[...]
>
> Princple No.2 : We will not reinvent
>
[...]
>
> Feel free to add to these, develop more ... when we reach a level of
> agreement I will transfer them over to the wiki

How about the following?

Principle No.3 : Best Practices have to be visible.

We will link to at least one (or two, three?) publicly available
example(s) of a non-toy dataset that follows the best practice.

Cheers,
Andreas.