Re: [QB] Last Call document draft

Dave,

I made two small fixes to the document.

First, there were some broken anchors and a leftover link to a non-existing qb:AggregatableHierarchy in the vocabulary index section. I also ordered the hierarchical code list terms alphabetically into the overall lists.

Second, there was an issue in the IC-19 section. The domain of skos:inScheme is unspecified in SKOS, and the range of skos:member includes not just concepts but also collections (for nested collections).

Because of this, the IC-19 constraint would accept observations where the dimension value is actually not a skos:Concept but a skos:Collection or some non-concept thing is in a skos:inScheme relation with the code list.

I fixed this by requiring { ?v a skos:Concept } as part of the FILTER NOT EXISTS clause for each part of the constraint.

I also tweaked the paragraph before the rule a bit for clarity.

Best,
Richard


On 7 Mar 2013, at 17:30, Dave Reynolds wrote:

> Hi Richard,
> 
> Many thanks, those are good suggestions and I have made all those proposed changes.
> 
> I've done various fixes to conform to pubrules and generated a static snapshot that is pubrules clean [1]. It is at:
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/data-cube/static.html
> 
> Cheers,
> Dave
> 
> [1] There are some issues to be aware of with pubrules if you need to change the document and regenerate a snapshot.
> 
> (a) Use "Save as HTML (source)" not XHTML, I got too many XHTML validation failures to be worth addressing.
> 
> (b) Pubrules doesn't like us using https to link to the W3C style sheets so I have left them as http. This means that Chrome will not display the styling when viewed from https://dvcs.w3.org because it is a non-https link to a different domain. Firefox is happy and Chrome is happy with the live source so that's all we need.
> 
> (c) Pubrules doesn't like the copyright statement that respec inserts. This seems to be pubrules not handling whitespace rather than an actual problem. I gave in trying to fix this at the respec end so did a manual replace of the copyright header of the respec output with the approved text. However, the copyright statement that pubrules suggests can't be cut and pasted directly because that breaks validation (sigh). So you have to take the pubrules text and replace "acronym" with "abbr" and than manually replace the respec output with it. I.e. with:
> 
> <p class="copyright"><a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright">Copyright</a> © 2013 <a href="http://www.w3.org/"><abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium">W3C</abbr></a><sup>®</sup> (<a href="http://www.csail.mit.edu/"><abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr></a>, <a href="http://www.ercim.eu/"><abbr title="European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics">ERCIM</abbr></a>, <a href="http://www.keio.ac.jp/">Keio</a>, <a href="http://ev.buaa.edu.cn/">Beihang</a>), All Rights Reserved. W3C <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Legal_Disclaimer">liability</a>, <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#W3C_Trademarks">trademark</a> and <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/copyright-documents">document use</a> rules apply.</p>
> 
> 
> 
> On 07/03/13 16:14, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
>> Dave,
>> 
>> Here are my comments. Some of them I already mentioned in the call.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Richard
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Remove the headline of sub-heading 2.1 "A Data Cube Vocabulary", just leave these paragraphs directly as the start of Section 2.
>> 
>> Remove "This section is non-normative" from sub-sections 2.2-2.5. It's redundant since the entire Section is non-normative.
>> 
>> Remove the Note in 2.3 regarding SDMX 2.1.
>> 
>> Propose dropping Section 2.4, "Relationship to SCOVO", as it's really only of historical interest right now. If you find this is too controversial at this stage, add a note along these lines: "At Risk: While this subsection provided useful context when this specification was first drafted, the editors feel that it is now only of historical interest and perhaps best removed in the interest of brevity." If removed, perhaps add a bit to the Acknowledgements: "Data Cube was motivated by a desire to improve on earlier work in the area of representing statistical data in RDF. The SCOVO specification, written by Danny Ayers, Lee Feigenbaum, Wolfgang Halb, Michael Hausenblas, Tom Heath and Yves Raimond, was a noteworthy inspiration."
>> 
>> Rename Section 3. "Namespaces" to "Namespaces and Document Conventions", and move the contents of 2.6 "Document conventions" into the section. The result would be that all sub-sections of 2 are non-normative.
>> 
>> Section 3 needs to add a mapping for the eg: prefix, perhaps to http://example.org/ns# or somesuch. Just to make clear that eg: is really just an example prefix.
>> 
>> I'd prefer if the table in Section 3 started with the qb: prefix. It's currently not in the table, but mentioned only in a prose sentence below the table. That is kind of easy to miss, and the namespace URI is a really important piece of information.
>> 
>> I edited the document and removed the <h2>Conformance</h2> title from the markup in Section 4. We had two headlines there, because ReSpec automatically adds the headline for the section that has id="conformance".
>> 
>> Propose to move Section 6 "An example" to 5.3.
>> 
>> Propose to rename 12 "Abbreviation and normalization" to "Abbreviated and normalized data cubes".
>> 
>> Propose to remove the term "flattened" from Section 12 (and everywhere else it's mentioned), use the better term "normalized" instead. So we have "abbreviated" and "normalized" cubes.
>> 
>> Add a note to 12.1 saying it's At Risk. Move last paragraph before the 12.1 headline into 12.1 to make things more self-contained.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 5 Mar 2013, at 14:28, Dave Reynolds wrote:
>> 
>>> I've released what I hope is a reasonable initial candidate for the Last Call WD for the Data Cube vocabulary. This is preparation for the vote on Thursday.
>>> 
>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/data-cube/index.html
>>> 
>>> I'll send a separate note around on where we are with the various issues. However, I think this draft resolves each of the issues in the way discussed in the separate email threads.
>>> 
>>> Richard please check this. Feel free to fix minor problems or ask me to. Major problems should probably be raised on the list.
>>> 
>>> Benedikt - thanks for volunteering to do a review check. Please let us know of any problems that you spot.
>>> 
>>> The most substantial change from the last WD is the section on criteria for well-formed Data Cubes (ISSUE-29 [1]). The criteria discussions have been on the list. The SPARQL queries which are provided (to back up the narrative descriptions of the criteria) have all been checked on at least some positive and negative examples. The code for this is in the same repository where the vocabulary source sits [2].
>>> 
>>> I have one more task before putting down the edit token, which is to find a way to have a "Contributors" section to list Jeni, rather than leave here in the Acknowledgements.
>>> 
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/29
>>> 
>>> [2] https://code.google.com/p/publishing-statistical-data/
>>> 
>> 
> 
>

Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 18:32:25 UTC