RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue

Hi all, 

Jeremy and I decided to remove the CSIRO register links for now, since they can't be trusted to be stable (see Simons explanation below). 

Also, we decided not to add a link to the TC211's Excel file because this is a proprietary format. For now, all we have are the formal ISO document references.

The relevant PR is here: https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/865

However, we consider this an editorial change and could put the links back in once a more stable service becomes available. This could be done in the final version created by this WG or even afterwards. After all, the BP is a Note and can be amended. 

Linda 

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au] 
Verzonden: maandag 8 mei 2017 02:47
Aan: portele@interactive-instruments.de; Linda van den Brink
CC: chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk; L.Svensson@dnb.de; phila@w3.org; jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Onderwerp: RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue

Right. The CSIRO register is definitely a sandbox. It was just a one-time dump of the ISO terminology register, which I threw together to illustrate a potential publication pathway for ISO. Andrew Jones has continued to work on it in the background, but I fear that ISO will not publish it on any useful timeframe.   

CSIRO can probably transition these to a more stable service on the timeframe of final publication (e.g. Research Vocabularies Australia, hosted at ANDS), but not within the next week or two. 

Simon 

-----Original Message-----
From: Clemens Portele [mailto:portele@interactive-instruments.de]
Sent: Saturday, 6 May, 2017 20:02
To: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
Cc: Little, Chris <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>; Svensson, Lars <L.Svensson@dnb.de>; Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>; Tandy, Jeremy <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Subject: Re: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue

I agree. In particular as the content should be the same in both the excel and the CSIRO registry.

However, one concern about the links to the entries in the CSIRO registry: These point to the "Sandbox register for testing" in the registry which is marked as "experimental", which to me indicates that it will not be persistent.

Clemens

> On 6. May 2017, at 09:02, Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl> wrote:
> 
> I'd prefer not to link to an Excel spreadsheet... 
> 
> What do others think??
> 
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Little, Chris [mailto:chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk]
> Verzonden: vrijdag 5 mei 2017 18:23
> Aan: Linda van den Brink; Svensson, Lars; Phil Archer
> CC: public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Tandy, Jeremy; Simon.Cox@csiro.au
> Onderwerp: RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue
> 
> Hi Linda,
> 
> I'm happy to keep those links. The CSIRO site is webbier and direct to the definition, even if not the authoritative owner. 
> 
> Let us keep both the CSIRO and TC211 Spreadsheet links - in some of my emails I gave a more comprehensive link text.
> 
> Chris
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Linda van den Brink [mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl]
>> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 10:44 AM
>> To: Linda van den Brink; Little, Chris; Svensson, Lars; Phil Archer
>> Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Tandy, Jeremy; Simon.Cox@csiro.au
>> Subject: RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue
>> 
>> Also, I kept the references to the TC211 glossary hosted at CSIRO. If 
>> this is not appropriate please let me know so I can remove these, or 
>> provide a PR doing so.
>> 
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: Linda van den Brink [mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl]
>> Verzonden: vrijdag 5 mei 2017 10:51
>> Aan: Little, Chris; Svensson, Lars; Phil Archer
>> CC: public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Tandy, Jeremy; Simon.Cox@csiro.au
>> Onderwerp: RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue
>> 
>> For now, I will link to the persistent URI of the current version of 
>> Wikipedia articles, to be on the safe side.
>> 
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: Little, Chris [mailto:chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk]
>> Verzonden: donderdag 4 mei 2017 18:45
>> Aan: Svensson, Lars; Phil Archer
>> CC: public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Linda van den Brink; Tandy, Jeremy; 
>> Simon.Cox@csiro.au
>> Onderwerp: RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue
>> 
>> Lars,
>> 
>> Thank you for a good point.
>> 
>> Maybe we should be guided by the W3C policy? If they have one.
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Svensson, Lars [mailto:L.Svensson@dnb.de]
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 5:16 PM
>>> To: Little, Chris
>>> Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org; Linda van den Brink; Tandy, Jeremy; 
>>> Simon.Cox@csiro.au
>>> Subject: RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue
>>> 
>>> Hello Chris, all,
>>> 
>>> On Thursday, May 04, 2017 4:55 PM, Little, Chris 
>>> [mailto:chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk] wrote:
>>> 
>>>> As I work through the highlighted issues in the Glossary, I have 
>>>> been using a limited number of online resources:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Wikipedia articles. These have reasonably persistent URLs to 
>>>> human
>>> readable pages.
>>> 
>>> A meta-meta-issue: Do we cite the Wikipedia article using the
>> "general"
>>> URL (e. g. [1]) or do we cite a specific version of the article (e.
>> g.
>>> [2])? The latter is generally considered the better practice since
>> the
>>> article contents might change and the cited text might not be 
>>> contained any more (although that is probably not the case for this 
>>> kind of information).
>>> 
>>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geohash
>>> [2]
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Geohash&oldid=773640793
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Lars
>

Received on Monday, 8 May 2017 12:02:42 UTC