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: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 15:16:08 +0200
To: "'Scott Simmons'" <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
Cc: "'Linda van den Brink'" <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, "'Jeremy Tandy'" <jtandy@wmo.int>
Message-ID: <06b501d336c9$a187e300$e497a900$@w3.org>
Thanks Scott, that works for me!

> From: Scott Simmons [mailto:ssimmons@opengeospatial.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 2:14 PM
> 
> Hi François,
> 
> This is our standard Best Practice status statement:
> 
> " This document defines an OGC Best Practice on a particular technology or
> approach related to an OGC standard. This document is not an OGC Standard
> and may not be referred to as an OGC Standard. It is subject to change
> without notice. However, this document is an official position of the OGC
> membership on this particular technology topic.”
> 
> I would be happy to modify as follows:
> 
> " This document defines an OGC Best Practice on a particular technology or
> approach related to an OGC standard. This document is not an OGC Standard
> and may not be referred to as an OGC Standard. However, this document is
> an official position of the OGC membership on this particular technology topic.
> This document was prepared by the Spatial Data on the Web Working Group
> (SDWWG) - a joint W3C-OGC project (see charter) following W3C
> conventions.”
> 
> Best Regards,
> Scott
> 
> > On Sep 26, 2017, at 1:56 AM, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> > [+Scott explicitly]
> >
> > Hi Scott,
> >
> > In the Status of This Document section of the Best Practices document that
> we're about to publish, what should the OGC part say? Would the following
> text work for instance? (I'm omitting markup for readability but this would
> have the appropriate links)
> >
> > "For OGC: This is an OGC Best Practice document prepared by the Spatial
> Data on the Web Working Group (SDWWG) - a joint W3C-OGC project (see
> charter), in accordance with OGC Policies and Procedures section 8.6 Best
> Practices Documents. The document is prepared following W3C
> conventions."
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Francois.
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Linda van den Brink [mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 9:17 AM
> >> To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> >> Cc: 'Jeremy Tandy' <jtandy@wmo.int>
> >> Subject: RE: Call for consensus: publication of the Spatial Data on the Web
> >> Best Practices document as final WG Note
> >>
> >> Hi Francois,
> >>
> >> As far as I know the OGC is all done voting, at least the motion to publish
> this
> >> as a BP has passed the technical committee.
> >>
> >> You're right about the type, could you add that to the PR?
> >>
> >> Linda
> >>
> >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> >> Van: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org]
> >> Verzonden: maandag 25 september 2017 16:58
> >> Aan: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
> >> CC: 'Jeremy Tandy'; Linda van den Brink
> >> Onderwerp: RE: Call for consensus: publication of the Spatial Data on the
> >> Web Best Practices document as final WG Note
> >>
> >> Jeremy, Linda,
> >>
> >> I prepared a minor editorial update to add a "changes since 11 May 2017"
> >> section and to adjust the Status of This Document (SOTD) section
> accordingly:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/970
> >>
> >> There may be further updates to make to the OGC part of the SOTD.
> >>
> >> Could you check and merge, please?
> >>
> >>
> >> Also, I noticed the following sentence in a recent commit:
> >> "Technically, there is nothing stop one writing, say, a GRIB decoder in
> >> JavaScript"
> >>
> >> ... and I wonder whether there might be a typo there. Or is that proper
> >> English? I would have expected something like:
> >> "Technically, there is nothing *that stops one from* writing, say, a GRIB
> >> decoder in JavaScript"
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Francois.
> >>
> >>
> >>> From: Francois Daoust [mailto:fd@w3.org]
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 9:58 PM
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> 
Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2017 13:16:34 UTC

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