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

Re: Lars's comments on the BP document (was: BP document is FROZEN pending vote to release next WD)

From: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:01:42 +0000
Message-ID: <CADtUq_2KkKZy25qYzPpTXVV527Y5=21ZxuMy=CoTSREY46v=6A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Svensson, Lars" <L.Svensson@dnb.de>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Hi Lars -

Your issue (3) relates to BP14 (I think) ... BP14 will get a thorough
review in this sprint. That said, I think the first of your suggestions is
correct, so I've queued that up in my working copy.

Regarding the editorial comments - thank you! Fresh eyes and all that.

(1), (2) and (3) are fixed in this commit [1] ... although I could only
find one of the "[[" instances for (2) - perhaps that was fixed already?

(4) was fixed in an earlier edit - you'll see a green note box-out in §8
CRS intro listing a few options for conversion tools.

Regarding (5), I've elected to keep the order as was. We had a discussion
on this during the London F2F and the working group concluded that we
wanted to provide material that went from easy (and widely useful) down to
edge cases. Hopefully you can live with that?

Jeremy

PS: I'm putting a discussion about sitemaps (BP4) on the agenda for
tomorrow's call for some further discussion.

[1]:
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/582/commits/fff65afab47cfada5a233ab3c391b3786f2e493d


On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 at 10:43 Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de> wrote:

> All,
>
> On Monday, February 06, 2017 12:01 PM, Jeremy Tandy [mailto:
> jeremy.tandy@gmail.com] wrote:
>
> > BP document is FROZEN and ready for people to read/review (see emails in
> this thread
> > [1] for the change-log).
>
> First of all: The changes have made the document much easier to read and
> it's much clearer, what is the proposed outcome when someone wants to
> implement the BPs. A large bunch of kudos to the editors and contributors!
> And +1 from me to publish this as a WD.
>
> And I have some comments.
>
> 1) What has happened to the references? I cannot find them in the github
> version... [1]
>
> 2) BP4 [2] says that "sitemaps currently are limited to several thousands
> of entries and will not work for larger datasets". IMHO this is not
> correct. The sitemap specification [3] says that "each Sitemap file that
> you provide must have no more than 50,000 URLs and must be no larger than
> 50MB (52,428,800 bytes)". It then goes on to state that you can provide
> multiple sitemaps and list them in an index file and that "index files may
> not list more than 50,000 Sitemaps and must be no larger than 50MB
> (52,428,800 bytes)". You can, however, have multiple index files, too. But
> even using just one index file means that you can list 50.000^^2 URLs in
> your sitemaps which should be enough for most applications. For the next
> iteration, I propose the following text:
> [[
> You may also consider using Sitemaps to direct the Web-crawler; please
> refer to the sitemap protocol specification [
> https://www.sitemaps.org/protocol.html] for more information.
> ]]
>
> 3) BP4 (again) in sec 3 (Decide what spatial relationships to use) says
> "The geographical, topological and social hierarchy should be described
> with clear semantics and registered with IANA Link relations." What exactly
> should be registered with IANA link relations? Is the following meant:
> [[
> The geographical, topological and social hierarchy should be described
> with clear semantics and use relations registered in the IANA Link
> relations registry.
> ]]
> or
> [[
> The geographical, topological and social hierarchy should be described
> with clear semantics. If you use relations not registered with IANA Link
> relations registry, please register them there.
> ]]
> Put differently: Is the BP to use only relations already registered with
> IANA, or is the BP to register new relations with IANA?
>
> The rest of my comments are only editorial:
> 1) In §5 [4] you refer to the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (yay!). Please
> don't use the URL you see in the browser. Instead use the CMS-independent
> one [5].
> 2) There are two places in the document where references start with two
> square brackets "[[". As a result there are no hyperlinks to the (missing)
> references section.
> 3) s/converstion/conversion/ (somewhere in sec 8)
> 4) §8 and BP 17 say "Alternatively you can re-project your coordinates to
> WGS84 Long/Lat using many available tools online." Do we want to point to
> specific tools?
> 5) §8 says "So we are now at the point where 99.9% of people can stop
> reading". If we really assume that 99.9% of all readers at that point they
> will never reach the very interesting information about the surface of the
> earth moving and the impact of that on self-driving cars that is two
> paragraphs further down... Maybe we should put the final paragraph as
> number three in §8.
>
> [1] https://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/
> [2] https://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#indexable-by-search-engines
> [3] https://www.sitemaps.org/protocol.html#index
> [4] https://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#spatial-things-features-and-geometry
> [5] http://www.dnb.de/
>
> Talk to you later,
>
> Lars
>
>
> *** Lesen. Hören. Wissen. Deutsche Nationalbibliothek ***
> --
> Dr. Lars G. Svensson
> Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
> Informationsinfrastruktur
> Adickesallee 1
> 60322 Frankfurt am Main
> Telefon: +49 69 1525-1752 <+49%2069%2015251752>
> Telefax: +49 69 1525-1799 <+49%2069%2015251799>
> mailto:l.svensson@dnb.de
> http://www.dnb.de
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 28 February 2017 11:30:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:30 UTC