- From: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 05 May 2017 06:35:14 +0000
- To: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CADtUq_3n3VLc4Po2VfXKVst4bj0eZKgd4zQwyEbAivoEa5Jabw@mail.gmail.com>
Oh- one more thing. Regarding the Vocab/Profile Conneg open issue in the Conclusions, it would be good to add a link to this new section from the yellow-highlighted text in BP3 [1]. Feel free to amend the yellow text to suit. [1]: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#linking However, HTTP Request headers are limited to specifying media-type, character set, encoding (e.g. for compression) and language. There is no mechanism to request that data is provided according to a particular data model or 'profile' (see [RFC6906 <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bib-RFC6906>] "profile" Link Relation Type), nor request data in a particular coordinate reference system. On Fri, 5 May 2017 at 07:30 Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Linda- > > looking through the Detailed Plan, I see a couple of sections where we > need to agreed who is doing what: > > Conclusions [1] > #2) How to express units of measurement in an interoperable way (see discussion > thread > <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0531.html> and > summary > <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Jul/0160.html>which > provides a reasonable outline of the problem) > #3) Content negotiation (as recommended in DWBP Best Practice 19: Use > content negotiation for serving data available in multiple formats > <https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/#Conneg>only works for *media type* - not for > choosing data vocabulary / profile or CRS representation ... (*note > the draft charter for Dataset Exchange WG > <https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/charter/>(DXWG) who aspire to provide a REC for > "content negotiation by profile"*) > > I see that the Conclusions section already has a section on Conneg for > CRS; but this doesn't cover all the concerns of (#3) - choosing a data > vocab or profile > > I could do (#2) - I think I wrote the summary of the thread way back when. > > Could you look at (#3)? > > Also the Conclusions section needs a bit of introductory text; e.g. to > indicate that "here's where we talk about things where there is no best > practice, but can cause you problems". I wonder even if "Conclusions" is > the correct title, or if it should just be "Gaps in best practice"? > > Do you have some text from your other paper that could go in there? > > Editorial [2] > > - *(1) tbd* | Add a *Contributors* section (following the list of > *Editors*) to the document header (as per DWBP > <https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/> to reflect the hard-working working > group members and also update Appendix E. Acknowledgements > <http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#acknowledgments> - if you're listed as > having contributed on GitHub, you're on the list (14 in total as of 28-Mar) > ... also see request to use ORC-IDs for contributors > <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Mar/0251.html> and > the follow on email thread > - *(2) tbd* | Add list of namespace prefixes of the > vocabularies/schemas used in the BP document > - *(3) tbd* | Check that we are consistent in use of "geospatial" and > "spatial" terms (see GitHub Issue 206 > <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/206>) > - *(4) tbd* | Ensure consistent style of text and reference citation - > see GitHub Issues 193 <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/193> and 222 > <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/222> > - *(5) tbd* | Check that all the "How to test" statements are action > oriented; e.g. "Check that 'a', 'b' and 'c' can be found" > > > I think you're already working on (4) > > I can do (1) and (2) over the weekend. > > Could you have a go at (5)? > > We said we'd need to wait until the document is complete for (3) ... such > purely editorial corrections could be managed as errata (?) after we start > the TC vote perhaps. > > ... > > Please let me know if you're happy with this. I will be working through > the weekend to get all my changes done :-( > > Jeremy > > [1]: > https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Detailed_planning_BP_document#Conclusions > > [2]: > https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Detailed_planning_BP_document#Editorial2 > >
Received on Friday, 5 May 2017 06:35:58 UTC