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

RE: SDW BP Glossary Meta-issue

From: Little, Chris <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 21:52:22 +0000
To: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
CC: "L.Svensson@dnb.de" <L.Svensson@dnb.de>, "phila@w3.org" <phila@w3.org>, "Tandy, Jeremy" <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>, "portele@interactive-instruments.de" <portele@interactive-instruments.de>, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Message-ID: <3DAD8A5A545D7644A066C4F2E82072883E2CC316@EXXCMPD1DAG4.cmpd1.metoffice.gov.uk>
Linda,

I agree - a good compromise.

Chris

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Linda van den Brink [mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl]
> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 1:02 PM
> To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> Cc: Little, Chris; L.Svensson@dnb.de; phila@w3.org; Tandy, Jeremy;
> portele@interactive-instruments.de; Simon.Cox@csiro.au
> Subject: 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 21:53:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 8 May 2017 21:53:01 UTC