- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:21:19 +0000
- To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Jeremy, Your list of requirements mean that I can't help but support BP 2's removal. However, I am sorry to say that this issue was not addressed in DWBP. The nearest advice would be DWBP 3, provide structural metadata (which refers to CSVW among other things), and BP 13 which is about locale neutral data (separate currency and value, rather than give a value as "£12.50" or whatever). I know that Dave Raggett (in cc) has been looking at the issue of UoM for WoT. The QUDT vocab is too heavy weight for his needs. He may have something else to add to this. That said, it does seem to me that SDW BP2 overlaps somewhat with BP1 (which talks about CRS ad TRS as well) so I see why BP2 can go without too much loss. Phil On 27/02/2017 12:04, Jeremy Tandy 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 > -- Phil Archer Data Strategist, W3C http://www.w3.org/ http://philarcher.org +44 (0)7887 767755 @philarcher1
Received on Monday, 27 February 2017 12:21:37 UTC