- From: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 10:09:28 +0000
- To: Clemens Portele <portele@interactive-instruments.de>
- Cc: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
- Message-ID: <CADtUq_1ZJ_iu-2XPE021RMTV-JVcT3On+_Poj-3G5Y2n2hSUSg@mail.gmail.com>
agreed. that said, it's magic that works _much_ of the time, so I'm happy with that ... On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 at 09:47 Clemens Portele < portele@interactive-instruments.de> wrote: > Thanks, Jeremy. > > git can be a mystery at times … > > Clemens > > > > On 11 Mar 2017, at 10:25, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Clemens > > all merged. although I had to work around a merge conflict on PR 604. > > Jeremy > > On Sat, 11 Mar 2017 at 05:09 Clemens Portele < > portele@interactive-instruments.de> wrote: > > Jeremy, Linda, all, > > a pull request has been created > > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/603 > > It covers the discussion below and the decisions concerning BPs 12 and 13 > in the meeting on March 8: > > • BPs 12 and 13 have been removed as agreed in the meeting on March 8, > 2017. > • The BP markup for the two BPs has been kept to avoid renumbering of BPs > in this edit. > • Some content has been moved to section 12.6 and BP 11 and other content > from the email discussions has been added. > • References to BPs 12 and 13 have been updated. > • Section 12.8 is obsolete and has been removed, too. > > I have also created a separate pull request to include a paragraph in BP > 11 about the recent OGC White Paper on Open Geospatial APIs ( > http://docs.opengeospatial.org/wp/16-019r4/16-019r4.html) and in > particular about the "OGC API Essentials". > > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/604 > > Best regards, > Clemens > > > On 9 Mar 2017, at 17:02, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote: > > yes please to all of the above! > > Jeremy > > On Thu, 9 Mar 2017 at 16:00 Clemens Portele < > portele@interactive-instruments.de> wrote: > > Jeremy, > > I just had a look at the section and agree that it does not add anything > important to what we have already in 12.6 / BP11. > > I could make the change / PR together with the edits for BP12/BP13 (I just > looked at the minutes from yesterday). I will make the changes discussed in > the email discussion and update all references to these BPs - by Saturday > at the latest. > > I assume I should leave stubs for BP12 / BP13 in there for now to avoid > renumbering and we deal with the order/numbering in the last sprint? > > Best regards, > Clemens > > > On 9 Mar 2017, at 16:44, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote: > > > SDW-BP section 12.8 "Dealing with large datasets" [1] doesn't contain any > best practices itself, and only seems to duplicate information in the > revised BP11. > > It exists because we intended to echo the headings from DWBP. > > I don't think we need it anymore. > > Clemens, Linda; what do you think? > > If you agree, I'd like to invite one of you to delete the offending > section and submit a PR. Please. > > Thanks, Jeremy > > > [1]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bp-large-datasets > > > > >
Received on Saturday, 11 March 2017 10:10:12 UTC