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

Re: Call for consensus: publication of the Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices document as final WG Note

From: Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 00:34:25 +0000
Message-ID: <CAHrFjc=Q1k2YDi4Oe=Lq+qvtXJBWvykKZqOHO+a=6-ofcxHNhw@mail.gmail.com>
To: François Daoust <fd@w3.org>, "Little, Chris" <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Cc: "jtandy@wmo.int" <jtandy@wmo.int>, "l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl" <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, "Simon.Cox@csiro.au" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>, "andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu" <andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu>
Fantastic Job - At last weeks OGC meeting the document was referenced many
times, at least in this community it is starting to have a real impact-
Mission Accomplished !!

That said the document is only good if people read it so keep up with the
marketing, after all it's an easier pitch than EME ;-)


Ed


On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 at 03:16 François Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:

> Chris,
>
> You can safely ignore all missing references. That happens when ReSpec
> does not load or run properly. That seems to happen from time to time
> these days, I'm not sure why for now. Forcing a refresh of the document
> - possibly more than once - should fix things most of the time.
>
> Typically, the first reported "Please see for further details." will
> render as "Please see section 13. Gaps in current practice for further
> details." with a link to section 13, when ReSpec is loaded.
>
> To tell whether ReSpec loaded correctly, check the presence of the
> sticky "ReSpec" menu near the top-right of the page (and, on large
> screens, the presence of the table of contents on the left side). If
> it's not there, ReSpec failed to load or run!
>
> Note the published version of the document will not have ReSpec (that
> is, the published version will be the output of running ReSpec on the
> Editor's Draft, and won't include ReSpec anymore).
>
> Thanks,
> Francois.
>
>
>
> Le 20/09/2017 à 19:38, Little, Chris a écrit :
> > Jeremy, Linda, and François
> >
> > Thank you for all the hard work over an extended period. It is a good
> read.
> >
> > Also spotted some Coxisms and Portelents.
> >
> > I support publication providing there are fixes for the only Nits that I
> could find in paragraphs:
> >
> >   "Best practice criteria": what should "Please see for further
> details." point to?
> >
> >   "Coordinate Reference Systems (CRS)": paragraph 12, "it makes you[r]
> data more accessible"
> >
> >   "Linked Data": *** "CSV as well as of Excel)" delete "of"
> >
> >   "Spatial data identifiers" in the beige box, what should "how you
> might link to these authoritative identifiers, see ." point to?
> >
> >   "Indexable Data": in the beige box, what should "organize the Spatial
> Things into subsets, as described in ." point to?
> >
> >   "Linking data": in the beige box, what should "This gap in current
> practice is discussed in ." point to?
> >
> >   "Spatial data encoding" paragraph 3 what should "ontologies for
> spatial data is provided in ." point to?
> >
> > "Geometries and coordinate reference systems": in the beige box, what
> should "For a high-level comparison of common spatial data vocabularies,
> see ." point to? Also following sentence too.
> >
> > I am still only 1/3 of the way through the document and now going home.
> >
> > Maybe my browser (Firefox 51.0.1) is not picking up some links or
> styles? Some links are there, but it is not obvious what to click to follow
> them, and if 'moused' over quickly, the change in pointer style is not
> visible. Rather than having a hot link of a . or whatever, some text is
> needed, which would be better with assistive technologies too.
> >
> > Still great work, even if the ReSpec software needs tweaking, Chris
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu [mailto:andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 8:01 AM
> >> To: fd@w3.org; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> >> Cc: jtandy@wmo.int; l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl; Simon.Cox@csiro.au
> >> Subject: RE: Call for consensus: publication of the Spatial Data on the
> >> Web Best Practices document as final WG Note
> >>
> >> Great work indeed!
> >>
> >> Congratulations (and many thanks!) to the editors.
> >>
> >> Andrea
> >>
> >> ----
> >> Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
> >> Scientific / Technical Project Officer
> >> European Commission DG JRC
> >> Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
> >> Unit B6 - Digital Economy
> >> Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
> >> 21027 Ispra VA, Italy
> >>
> >> https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
> >>
> >> ----
> >> The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may not in any
> >> circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the
> >> European Commission.
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: Simon.Cox@csiro.au [Simon.Cox@csiro.au]
> >> Sent: 20 September 2017 04:54
> >> To: fd@w3.org; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> >> Cc: jtandy@wmo.int; l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl
> >> Subject: RE: Call for consensus: publication of the Spatial Data on the
> >> Web  Best Practices document as final WG Note
> >>
> >> Great document. Very Tandy-esque and Brinkish.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 19 September, 2017 15:58
> >> To: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> >> Cc: 'Jeremy Tandy' <jtandy@wmo.int>; Linda van den Brink
> >> <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
> >> Subject: Call for consensus: publication of the Spatial Data on the Web
> >> Best Practices document as final WG Note
> >>
> >> Hello Spatial Data on the Web Working Group participants,
> >>
> >> This is a Call for Consensus (CfC) to request publication of the latest
> >> Editor's Draft of the Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices document
> >> as a final Working Group Note.
> >>
> >> The latest Editor's Draft is available at:
> >> https://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/
> >>
> >> The document was reviewed internally by OGC Members over summer. A few
> >> recent changes were made to the document as a result of this review, as
> >> well as to fix remaining editorial issues that had been raised some
> >> time ago.
> >>
> >> Main changes:
> >> - A note was added to note the absence of scientific format in the
> >> "common format" table:
> >> https://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#applicability-formatVbp
> >> - Some text was added to the scope section to note that critical
> >> decision making scenarios based on spatial data are beyond the scope of
> >> this Best Practices document:
> >> https://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#scope-spatialdata
> >>
> >> You may check GitHub's commit history for details:
> >> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/commits/gh-pages/bp/index.html
> >>
> >> Please let us know if you have any concerns by next Monday 25 September
> >> 2017.
> >> Silence is considered consent.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Francois,
> >> W3C team contact
>
> --


*Ed Parsons *FRGS
Geospatial Technologist, Google

+44 7825 382263 @edparsons
www.edparsons.com
Received on Thursday, 21 September 2017 00:35:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:33 UTC