DWBP Candidate Rec Transition Material

The Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group would like to publish its Data on the Web Best Practices as a Candidate Recommendation.

Resolution to Publish

The primary vote was conducted by e-mail with a resolution on 8 July recognising the positive result.

Proposed date of Publication

21 July

Evidence that the document meets Working Group requirements

The document includes a matrix matching Requirements in the group's UCR document, with the relevant Best Practices.

Evidence that dependencies with other groups met (or not)

The WG's charter identifies 4 groups with which it should liaise.

• CSV on the Web Working Group. No longer in existence, however, the WG did seek direct advice from some of its former members. For example this exchange with Gregg Kellogg. Another member of that WG, Jeremy Tandy, is an editor of the Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices that builds on DWBP. Both he and (CSVW co-chair) Jeni Tennison attended the second F2F meeting of DWBP (TPAC 2014) and gave influential advice.
• The Internationalization Activity were also invited to the second F2F meeting and have been asked to review the document but this was too late to be included in this version of the document. However, we do not believe that the DWBP has major relevance to i18n except in one Best Practice.
• The charter cites the Privacy Interest Group as being relevant to another one of the DWBP WG's output, what is now known as the Data Quality Vocabulary. With hindsight, it is the Best Practices document that needs to take acocount of privacy concerns. WG Member Eric Stephan (PNNL) attended the PING's telco on 26 May and dsicussed the DWBP work. There were no direct actions arising from that discussion but Eric addressed privacy directly in the introduction by adding:

  Not all data and metadata should be shared openly, however. Security, commercial sensitivity and, above all, individuals' privacy need to be taken into account. It is for data publishers to determine policy on which data should be shared and under what circumstances. Data sharing policies are likely to assess the exposure risk and determine the appropriate security measures to be taken to protect sensitive data, such as secure authentication and authorization.

• The Data Activity Coordination Group no longer exists.

Evidence that the document has received wide review

Disposition of comments following 19 May 'LC' publication

Comments before LC

Also, note the views of of the Spatial Data on the Web WG whose own BP doc is being restructured (and reduced) to build more directly on DWBP.

Earlier comments

Evidence that issues have been formally addressed

See the WG's issue tracker. All issues for the DWBP Doc are closed.

Exit criteria & Implementation evidence gathering

Feedback form set up on W3C Brasil to collect implementation evidence.

Intention is to receive at least two independent reports that the test(s) for each BP have been passed.

Note also the Share-PSI project that has its own small set of complementary BPs. These are centred around implementation of the European Commission's (Revised) PSI Directive. The project is creating or updating localised guides for implementing the PSI Directive that will record when they offer consistent advice and/or cite the BPs. It is anticipated that many of those guides will also refer to DWBP's work as they are presented as two parts of a whole.

Patent Disclosures

None

Charter Implications

The WG will need a short extension to complete the evidence gathering required to exit CR. The group anticipates transition to PR during October 2016.