W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > June 2015

Re: Editorial amendments to UCR

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:10:40 +0100
Message-ID: <556D8120.6040507@w3.org>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:17 UTC