Re: suggested edits to bp doc

Hi Kerry. I've processed your comments (many thanks!) and incorporated them
into the BP. Where you didn't provide specific text, I've raised an issue
for the WG to consider.

See the commit [1] and Pull Request [2] (which has now been merged into the
main branch).

Jeremy

[1]:
https://github.com/6a6d74/sdw/commit/f9f781a405738c0a52ff3e423e2fb89d6d548cf8
[2]: https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/192

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 at 08:38 Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>