Re: BP My Comments...

Thanks Ed ...

> 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 !

see other email:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Jan/0027.html

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

done.

> 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"

Done when I refactored the scope section this morning to better reference
the BP deliverables in the charter.

> 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>

Added this comment to ISSUE 191 <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/191>

> 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...

Added this comment to ISSUE 102 <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/102>

> 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

Created new issue for this point: ISSUE 204
<https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/204> ... and am assigning you the ISSUE
in the hope you'd write some decent copy

> BP10
>
> Are we looking for practical measures like CEP or RMS, or a more abstract
approach ?

You already added this comment into ISSUE 125
<https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/125> ... as with the other issues I have
referenced, we can work up improved content once we've got beyond FPWD. The
crucial point from my perspective is that the commentary (from you and
others) is visible to people reading the document.

Jeremy


On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 at 23:12 Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com> wrote:

> 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
>