Re: Discussion thread for review BP introduction

I've made some minor amendments to the intro section and offered a PR as 
a result.

Things I've done:

- I know this is weird but house style dictates that Web always has a 
capital letter and that what everyone else writes as website we should 
write as Web site (one for the pub one day).

- Trivial native-speaker tweaks without, I hope, affecting the style 
which is entirely up to the editors.

- Deleted a few extraneous entries in BP config as they were either not 
referred to in the text or they are already in specref. See 
http://www.specref.org/ for what's automatically included in the biblio.

- Added a link to the community spec for GeoJSON. My thinking being:
   + The context of the reference makes it clear that it's a community spec;
   + the Internet Draft expires soon and so the link will be out of 
date. Ideally, it will get to a stable ietf.org URI that we can point to.
   + The community site links to the draft.
   + AS this is a non-normative BP doc we can more or less do what we 
jolly well like.

I've also addressed Issue-56 in the GH issue tracker 
(https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/56)

HTH

Phil.



On 20/11/2015 17:13, Jeremy Tandy wrote:
> Hi Linda- I think that the intro looks good. I particularly like the style
> of your writing ... it's engaging and informal rather than dry (like a lot
> of other standards documents).
>
> The points from Frans regarding definitions are valid. We might want to
> include definitions for the roles of "commercial operators", "geospatial
> experts", "public sector" and "web developers" in our glossary. I can see
> us re-using those labels elsewhere in the doc.
>
> When we reference GeoJSON we need to make a citation - so it appears in the
> references section [1]. We'll need to add that to the local biblio for the
> doc.
>
> ( @phila: should we use the draft IETF reference [2], or the community
> specification [3] )
>
> I think that once you have addressed @eparson's comments about
> accessibility and discoverability and those noted by Frans and myself the
> intro is good enough for the FPWD; it sets the tone. As we add more content
> into the document we can review this section to make sure it continues to
> reflect the scope of the document as it evolves.
>
> Jeremy
>
> [1]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#references
> [2]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-geojson-00
> [3]: http://geojson.org
>
> On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 at 12:28 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote:
>
>> 2015-11-19 13:18 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Hi-
>>>
>>> regarding Frans' point #3
>>>
>>> - I think it would help to have explanations for things like WFS,
>>> SDI, WMS.. .Perhaps add hyperlinks to wikipedia pages explaining those
>>> concepts?
>>>
>>> Would suggest that we include definitions pertinent to the best practice
>>> within the BP doc itself (e.g. a glossary in an appendix); we can then use
>>> some respec magic to refer to these definitions where ever we use those
>>> terms.
>>>
>>
>> That looks like a good idea. Keeping definitions self-contained will
>> benefit durability of the document.
>>
>>
>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>> On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 at 11:03 Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Linda, That seems a great start..
>>>>
>>>> Only one comment, I think we need to make the point that the key
>>>> problems we are try to solve is discoverability and accessibility, it's not
>>>> that there is a lack of geospatial data, but the data that has been
>>>> published if difficult to find and often problematic to access for
>>>> non-specialist users.  How overarching goal therefore is to bring
>>>> publishing geospatial data into the web mainstream as a mechanism for
>>>> solving these twin problems.
>>>>
>>>> Ed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 at 10:15 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Linda,
>>>>>
>>>>> A few remarks:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     1. About "Spatial data, or data related to a specific location, is
>>>>>     what this Best Practice is all about": Shouldn't it be 'Best Practice
>>>>>     document' in stead of 'Best Practice'? And 'data related to a specific
>>>>>     location' seems to exclude coverage data. Shouldn't the document provide
>>>>>     best practices for coverage data too?
>>>>>     2. Perhaps the introduction is not the right place, but I think
>>>>>     there should be a reference to the UCR document somewhere, and the
>>>>>     requirements for best practices described there;
>>>>>     3. I think it would help to have explanations for things like WFS,
>>>>>     SDI, WMS.. .Perhaps add hyperlinks to wikipedia pages explaining
>>>>>     those concepts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Frans
>>>>>
>>>>> 2015-11-19 8:27 GMT+01:00 Linda van den Brink <
>>>>> l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As promised yesterday in the telecon – here’s a thread for review
>>>>>> comments on the Introduction section I wrote in the BP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please review this section:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#intro
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ... and then please post your comments as a reply to this email.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It’s a first draft, and I aimed to keep it short and readable. The
>>>>>> language is intentionally pretty informal. Any comments are welcome at this
>>>>>> stage!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Linda
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *______________________________________*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Geonovum*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Linda van den Brink*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Adviseur Geo-standaarden*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *a*: Barchman Wuytierslaan 10, 3818 LH Amersfoort
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *p*: Postbus 508, 3800 AM Amersfoort
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *t*:  + 31 (0)33 46041 00
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *m*: + 31 (0)6 1355 57 92
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *e:  *l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl <r.beltman@geonovum.nl>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *i*:  www.geonovum.nl
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *Ed Parsons*
>>>> Geospatial Technologist, Google
>>>>
>>>> Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501
>>>> www.edparsons.com @edparsons
>>>>
>>>
>

-- 


Phil Archer
W3C Data Activity Lead
http://www.w3.org/2013/data/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1

Received on Wednesday, 2 December 2015 16:46:15 UTC