W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > February 2017

Re: WG discussion: proposal to remove BP2 - Provide context required to interpret data values

From: Clemens Portele <portele@interactive-instruments.de>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:14:54 +0000
To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
CC: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2080E361-6471-473E-8E17-CB7705764201@interactive-instruments.de>
Hi Jeremy,

I agree with the removal. However, I do not see where DWBP provides any actionable guidance on this topic and it still is a problem that occurs with spatial data. Maybe we need a place somewhere in the document where we can list topics for which we cannot identify a general "best practice" at the moment?

Best regards,
Clemens

On 27 Feb 2017, at 13:04, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com<mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hi - in this sprint for the BP document, the editors are proposing to REMOVE BP2 [1].

We think that:
1/ this is not a spatial problem (and so is probably covered by DWBP somewhere)
2/ the current BP text is ambiguous and not actionable - what are we telling people to do

I recall that we had a _huge_ discussion about how to encode unit of measurement (etc.) back in July 2016 ("Units of Measure (BP, SSN, Coverages,Time?", see my summary post here [2]) but I don't think we drew any actionable conclusions about Spatial Data?

So, we will REMOVE BP2 ... unless someone can write content to make this (i) specifically relevant to spatial data, (ii) actionable, and (iii) best practice that is evident in the wild.

WG members. What do you think?

Jeremy


[1]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#provide-context
[2]: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Jul/0160.html


Received on Monday, 27 February 2017 12:16:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:16:59 UTC