- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:10:40 +0100
- To: Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>
- CC: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Frans Knibbe | Geodan <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
Hi Alejandro, No mystery to adding an issue to the doc. You simply add in a Div with a class of issue and then include a link to the relevant thing in Tracker. e.g. <div class="issue"> <p>This requirement is not clear. See <a href="http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/15">Issue 15</a></p> </div> And then this looks like, for example: http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#h-issue1 ReSpec puts in the IDs etc. Phil On 02/06/2015 10:56, Alejandro Llaves wrote: > Thanks, Phil! I've just accepted the pull request. > > Today, I will try to reply Frans' pending emails and address the latest > comments on the spreadsheet (SSN, Time and Coverage) to integrate them into > the UCR document, between ESWC talks. > > On the last telecon, there was a proposal to add tracker non-resolved > issues as warnings in the document. How is this done using ReSpec? > > Cheers, > Alejandro > > On 2 June 2015 at 00:12, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote: > >> Frans, Alejandro, >> >> I've been through the UCR today to make editorial changes of two types: >> - native speaker edits; >> - simplifying the spelling for our American friends (they do get so upset >> with metres and optimisations). >> >> I've also added a skeleton Acknowledgements section - to which you may or >> may not choose to add specific names. >> >> I've sent a pull request that you may or may not wish to accept. >> >> In doing this, I also have some more substantive comments (below). *None* >> of these, IMO, should be a brake on publishing an FPWD of the doc, they're >> just links between UCs that came to mind as I read through them all (yes, I >> read the doc from start to finish!). >> >> Not all the related requirements seem to show up. This might be a ReSpec >> thing, but it might be more serious. For example, Locating A Thing has >> >> <p class="relatedRequirements"><a href="#TimeDependentCRS"></a></p> >> >> But the text isn't being written into the hyperlink. Can you check these >> through please? >> >> use Cases 4.7 and 4.8 (your two Frans) perhaps relate to Andrea's one on >> the GeoDCAT-AP as well? >> >> 4.9 seems to relate to Ed's 4.6 >> >> 4.9 also seems to relate to 5.45 and 5.51 >> >> 4.10 refers to identifiers. The DWBP's BP Doc has a section on this - that >> I have an action item to improve in the coming 24 hours or so. That *might* >> be enough for SDW but time will tell. >> >> 4.14 seems to call for things like ID management, privacy etc. ? >> >> >> 4.15 has this: >> * Agreed-upon vocabulary for metadata about spatial datasets >> >> Which seems to relate to 4.7, 4.8 and Andrea's GeoDCAT one. >> >> 4.16 seems to call for very similar issues as 4.15. might they be combined? >> >> 4.18 has: >> * user can subset the data by x,y,z limits >> >> which looks like Jeremy's UC (4.2) ? See also 4.35 and 4.37 >> >> 4.22 again looks like it relates to 4.7 and 4.8 >> >> 4.24 looks really interesting - but what's the spatial angle? >> >> 4.28 looks very similar to Manolis's work on Greek forest fires - can they >> be combined do you think? >> >> 4.33 Seems to call for detailed provenance info - might that be a new req? >> >> 4.47 sounds like a whole new WG! >> >> HTH >> >> Phil. >> >> -- >> >> >> Phil Archer >> W3C Data Activity Lead >> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ >> >> http://philarcher.org >> +44 (0)7887 767755 >> @philarcher1 >> > > > -- Phil Archer W3C Data Activity Lead http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2015 10:10:30 UTC