- From: Annette Greiner <amgreiner@lbl.gov>
- Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 17:40:14 -0700
- To: public-dwbp-wg@w3.org
Ah, good. Sounds like you're thinking about this smartly. Thanks, -Annette On 3/16/16 2:46 PM, Antoine Isaac wrote: > Hi Annette, > > There are some sources that use 'precision' for what is called > 'resolution' elsewhere, indeed. Riccardo and this inflicted ourselves > some reading on this during a side session of the F2F ;-) > The original need expressed by SDW is really about > resolution/precision. But with the general aim being to show that too > fine resolution can be completely pointless, so you shouldn't worry. > To reflect this we will have to touch a bit the notion of accuracy. > > We'll invite you to check the result of the action of course! > > Cheers, > > Antoine > > On 3/16/16 7:58 PM, Annette Greiner wrote: >> The use of the term "precision" here is a little alarming to me in >> light of the distinction between precision and accuracy. We should >> avoid any incentivization of high precision, as precise values are >> not necessarily accurate. The precision reported for a measurement >> needs to be appropriate to the accuracy with which it was taken. >> Resolution is a different thing altogether, and the references listed >> in the action are about resolution, not precision and not accuracy. >> -Annette >> http://en-us.fluke.com/training/training-library/test-tools/digital-multimeters/accuracy-resolution-range-counts-digits-and-precision.html >> >> >> On 3/16/16 6:35 AM, Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group >> Issue Tracker wrote: >>> dwbp-ACTION-271: create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace >>> >>> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/271 >>> >>> Assigned to: Riccardo Albertoni >>> >>> >>> On product: Quality & Granularity Vocabulary >>> >>> create a dimension for precision in the DQV namespace >>> >>> >>> >> > -- Annette Greiner NERSC Data and Analytics Services Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Received on Thursday, 17 March 2016 00:40:48 UTC