BP My Comments...

Dear Ed(s)

Thanks for all your hard work, please find my comments for your
consideration, outright rejection and ridicule...

1.1 General introduction

I would replace the term "Geosptial Experts" with "Spatial Data Custodians"
you might be an expert without the responsibility  to publish data to an
SDI or you might be a creator of VGI and not an expert !

Add a link to illustrate what a linked data approach is perhaps
http://www.w3.org/standards/semanticweb/data

3. Scope

"Spatial data is typically well structured" - maybe for many SDI
publishers, but part of the problem with developing a "spatial ontology to
rule them all" is that many of the mainstream applications of spatial data
are interested in less well structured spatial data - "Teenage twitter
users currently downtown"

BP1

I think a narrative around the ability to link to a entity/spatialthing is
useful here, as a municipal engineer can I send a ink to a individual
street light in an email to a contractor ?  Identification of resources is
the "means to the end not the end itself" - sorry about the use of this
idiom <http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/a+means+to+an+end>

BP3

This is where GIS has traditionally been the tool of choice, I agree we
need to accept this as best practice despite the potential pitfalls...

BP 8

I think we have to be very careful with this section, we are rather loose
with language.. This is quite a good starting point as to why people use
different CRS.. https://www.mapthematics.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=251

BP10

Are we looking for practical measures like CEP or RMS, or a more abstract
approach ?

To be continued....

Ed

-- 

*Ed Parsons*
Geospatial Technologist, Google

Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501
www.edparsons.com @edparsons