Re: Editorial amendments to UCR

In relation to this, please see my email in response to Action 47 [1] that
shows how you can link the ISSUE class to the details in the issue tracker.

Jeremy

[1]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2015Jun/0033.html

On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 at 11:10 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:

> 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
>
>