Re: suggested edits to bp doc

Thanks Kerry. I'll process these today.
On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 at 08:36, Kerry Taylor <Kerry.Taylor@acm.org> wrote:

>
> BP eds,
>
> Apologies for not using git for this --- I am in-between computers
> again.... I got a little way through a careful read of the bp doc. So far
> these are cosmetic rather than substantive suggestions.
>
> ---
>
> Abstract:
>
>
> -change "provides best practices" to "advises on best practice"
>
> -"provide a significant change of emphasis" to "suggest a significant
> change of practice "
>
>
> s1.1
> * <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#dfn-commercial-operator>*
>
> *-"Commercial operator
> <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#dfn-commercial-operator>s, including search
> engines" to "**Commercial operator
> <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#dfn-commercial-operator>s, including search
> engine operators"*
>
>
> *- "*would be substantially aided" to "would be much better"
>
>
> - "data published in SDI <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#dfn-sdi>s, " to
> "data published in  Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDIs),"
> <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#dfn-sdi> --- I do think this needs to be
> spelled out in the text here, especially as it is used in the next heading.
>
>
> "spatial data infrastructure" -- leading caps for consistency
>
>
> "These standards have a steep learning curve." to "These technologies have
> a steep learning curve."
>
>
> "they are an important factor for " to "they are  important players in the
> business of" (must be a better word than players here, too, that escapes me)
>
>
> "Semantically meaningful" bothers me as it is way too close to a
> tautology.
>
> How about just "meaningful" alone?
>
>
> "([GeoJSON <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bib-GeoJSON>] being the prime
> example" suggest "the" should be "a", so to not be too dated nor
> unnecessarily controversial
>
>
>  "Questions answered in this document include" suggest setting these out
> as dot points
>
>
> s2.
>
>
> "The introduction makes clear that" suggest delete- metalevel reference is
> unhelpful here.
>
>
> "second are better " s/are/is
>
>
> s2.1
>
> "These are people already have" insert "who"
>
>
> s2.2
>
> "An aim of this document is to make it easy for non-experts to work with "
> I doubt they want to be classified as non-experts. Suggest (also keeps in
> style with previous paragraph) just removing this sentence. Also "CMS"
> needs a glossary entry.
>
>
> s2.3
>
> I can't distinguish this group from the first nor the second....
>
> "in order for it to get used" -- suggest "so that it can be"
>
>
> s 3
>
>
> "applying thematic semantics to data." this migh require explanation to
> the intended audience!
>
>
> s6.1
>
>
> "a lighthouse standing somewhere at the coast is a" s/at/on
>
>
> BP1 (also BP3) later)
>
> "entity-level resources"  I don't understand what this means and it is not
> explained.  how about just "Entities" ?
>
>
> BP2
>
> "prevents having an abundance of copies and much doubt regarding the
> authenticity of the information."   maybe "because it discourages
> proliferation of disconnected copies of uncertain provenance"?
>
>
> Here we are using "Things" and SpatialThings" whereas before we talked
> about "Entities" . We have to be consistent.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>