Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupI found the document well written and the use of code snippets extremely useful. I have not further editorial changes to ask. Approved -- GiulianoTaffoni - 2021-05-17Registry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself.
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupThe Simulation Data Model uses semantic (SKOS) vocabularies extensively.And members of the theory interest group have had extensive discussions about Vocabularies 2.0 in this context. Changes that were proposed were not implemented. That said, we think that theory does not need vocab 2.0 and will not block the RFC process. The Theory I.G. will where necessary propose its own recommendations for vocabularies describing simulations and their maintenance. Time Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeRadio Astronomy Interest GroupA well wriiten and pretty clear specification.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Approved -- FrancoisBonnarel - 2021-05-23 and MarkLacy
TCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupI found the document well written and the use of code snippets extremely useful. I have not further editorial changes to ask. Approved -- GiulianoTaffoni - 2021-05-17Registry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself.
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest Group | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | The Simulation Data Model uses semantic (SKOS) vocabularies extensively. And members of the theory interest group have had extensive discussions about Vocabularies 2.0 in this context. Changes that were proposed were not implemented. That said, we think that theory does not need vocab 2.0 and will not block the RFC process. The Theory I.G. will where necessary propose its own recommendations for vocabularies describing simulations and their maintenance. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes Committee | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Radio Astronomy Interest GroupA well wriiten and pretty clear specification. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Approved -- FrancoisBonnarel - 2021-05-23 and MarkLacy
TCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupI found the document well written and the use of code snippets extremely useful. I have not further editorial changes to ask. Approved -- GiulianoTaffoni - 2021-05-17Registry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself.
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes Committee | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
Radio Astronomy Interest GroupA well wriiten and pretty clear specification.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupI found the document well written and the use of code snippets extremely useful. I have not further editorial changes to ask. Approved -- GiulianoTaffoni - 2021-05-17Registry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself.
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupI found the document well written and the use of code snippets extremely useful. I have not further editorial changes to ask. Approved -- GiulianoTaffoni - 2021-05-17Registry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself.
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We noted the following specific issues:
* Abstract - The mention of three flavours is confusing here. The mention of classes and properties should state that these are RDF, perhaps as "and the two strict hierarchies of RDF classes and RDF properties on the other" (like it's made explicit in §4). * I've tried to simplify the language; feel free to further streamline it. -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Thanks for the updates. I've approved the RFC now. -- JamesDempsey - 2021-05-18 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupI found the document well written and the use of code snippets extremely useful. I have not further editorial changes to ask. Approved -- GiulianoTaffoni - 2021-05-17Registry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself.
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | dashes in volute rev 5954. Does this help? -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-17 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We noted the following specific issues:
* Abstract - The mention of three flavours is confusing here. The mention of classes and properties should state that these are RDF, perhaps as "and the two strict hierarchies of RDF classes and RDF properties on the other" (like it's made explicit in §4). * I've tried to simplify the language; feel free to further streamline it. -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working Group | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | I found the document well written and the use of code snippets extremely useful. I have not further editorial changes to ask. Approved -- GiulianoTaffoni - 2021-05-17 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Registry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-- TheresaDower - 2021-05-14
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We noted the following specific issues:
* Abstract - The mention of three flavours is confusing here. The mention of classes and properties should state that these are RDF, perhaps as "and the two strict hierarchies of RDF classes and RDF properties on the other" (like it's made explicit in §4). * I've tried to simplify the language; feel free to further streamline it. -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupApproved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator.I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-- TheresaDower - 2021-05-14
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupI found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12Data Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We noted the following specific issues:
* Abstract - The mention of three flavours is confusing here. The mention of classes and properties should state that these are RDF, perhaps as "and the two strict hierarchies of RDF classes and RDF properties on the other" (like it's made explicit in §4). * I've tried to simplify the language; feel free to further streamline it. -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working Group | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Approved, with current editorial changes and with externalizing Vocabularies stewardship as a separate role from WG chair, potentially held by someone else as is currently the case for document coordinator. I'd appreciate a footnote on tuples as well (per Laurent's comment above), it can be from Gray or the spec itself. -- TheresaDower - 2021-05-14 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Semantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working Group | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | Data Access Layer Working Group | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | I found the document to be well written and well thought out. Questions that came up while reading were answered clearly in the subsequent text. I found the code snippets very useful as they made some basic usage concepts more concrete. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | The spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Section 5.3 (Externally Managed Vocabularies) raises concerns for me in that I wonder if the the benefits of having a mirror of an external vocabulary will ever outweigh the maintainability and complexity costs in following the process. That said, I don't object to the section since it ensures that such a situation will not be handled in an ad hoc way, but I'm skeptical that it will be used (maybe a good thing?). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Approved -- TomDonaldson - 2021-05-12 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Data Access Layer Working Group | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | The spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
We noted the following specific issues: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | * Abstract - The mention of three flavours is confusing here. The mention of classes and properties should state that these are RDF, perhaps as "and the two strict hierarchies of RDF classes and RDF properties on the other" (like it's made explicit in §4). * I've tried to simplify the language; feel free to further streamline it. -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | * Abstract - The mention of three flavours is confusing here. The mention of classes and properties should state that these are RDF, perhaps as "and the two strict hierarchies of RDF classes and RDF properties on the other" (like it's made explicit in §4). * I've tried to simplify the language; feel free to further streamline it. -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-- JamesDempsey - 2021-05-10 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | Thanks for this very thorough review (and also the typo fixes before)! The changes are in Volute rev. 5952 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Thanks for this very thorough review (and also the typo fixes before)! The changes are in Volute rev. 5952 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApproved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11Applications Working GroupData Access Layer Working Group | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | The spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard. We noted the following specific issues:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | The spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-- JamesDempsey - 2021-05-10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Thanks for this very thorough review (and also the typo fixes before)! The changes are in Volute rev. 5952 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-11 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice Chair | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Approved. -- PatrickDowler - 2021-05-11 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Applications Working GroupData Access Layer Working GroupThe spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard.We noted the following specific issues:
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApplications Working GroupData Access Layer Working Group | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | The spec is well thought out and a very good definition of how vocabularies should be defined and implemented. We note that sections 1 and 2 have quite complex sentence structure and recommend these be edited. This would enhance readability and accessibility of the standard. We noted the following specific issues:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Data Model Working Group[changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] I've a few comments that do not requires document changes: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
and a few non blocking suggestions from a novice reader | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Approved -- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | A build of svn trunk with some typos removed is available at https://docs.g-vo.org/Vocabularies.pdf | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | A build of svn trunk that already includes fixes after reviewer comments is available at https://docs.g-vo.org/Vocabularies.pdf | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApplications Working GroupData Access Layer Working GroupData Model Working Group | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | [changes in volute commit 5948 -- MarkusDemleitner - 2021-05-04] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
and a few non blocking suggestions from a novice reader
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Approved -- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plans for the consumer side:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this document | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApplications Working GroupData Access Layer Working GroupData Model Working GroupI've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for Comments | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | Vocabularies in the VO, version 2, proposes formats and practices to manage | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Vocabularies in the VO, version 2, proposes formats and practices to manage hierarchical word lists that need consensus within the VO. See http://ivoa.net/rdf the vocabularies currently in use or under consideration. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | hierarchical word lists that need consensus within the VO. See http://ivoa.net/rdf the vocabularies currently in use or under consideration. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | Note that this is not “Semantics in the VO”, i.e., further applications of RDF (e.g., full ontologies) are by no means excluded by this specification. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Note that this is not “Semantics in the VO”, i.e., further applications of RDF (e.g., full ontologies) are by no means excluded by this specification. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Latest version of Vocabularies in the VO 2 can be found at: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A build of svn trunk with some typos removed is available at https://docs.g-vo.org/Vocabularies.pdf
Reference Interoperable Implementations | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | Vocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Vocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | standards: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | The code managing the RDF repository is available at https://volute.g-vo.org/svn/trunk/projects/semantics/voc-source | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | The code managing the RDF repository is available at https://volute.g-vo.org/svn/trunk/projects/semantics/voc-source | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Implementations on the consumer side:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On processes defined:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Plans for the consumer side:
Implementations Validators | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | The vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | The vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this documentComments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deleted: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment.
IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.
TCG Chair & Vice ChairApplications Working GroupData Access Layer Working GroupData Model Working Group | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | I've a few comments that do not requires document changes:
-- LaurentMichel - 2021-04-22 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for Comments | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < | Note that this is not “Semantics in the VO”, i.e., futher applications of RDF (e.g., full ontologies) are by no means excluded by this specification. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Note that this is not “Semantics in the VO”, i.e., further applications of RDF (e.g., full ontologies) are by no means excluded by this specification. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Latest version of Vocabularies in the VO 2 can be found at: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | A build of svn trunk with some typos removed is available at https://docs.g-vo.org/Vocabularies.pdf | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this documentComments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApplications Working GroupData Access Layer Working GroupData Model Working GroupGrid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsAccept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this documentComments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApplications Working GroupData Access Layer Working GroupData Model Working GroupGrid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperations | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Added: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > | Accept. -- MarkTaylor - 2021-03-20 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Standards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Changed: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
< < |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> > |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<--
|
Vocabularies in the VO 2 Proposed Recommendation: Request for CommentsReference Interoperable ImplementationsVocabularies of the type described here are in use by several existing standards:
Implementations ValidatorsThe vocabulary process itself is in some sense self-validating because the input files are parsed and mangled. A “deeper” validation (“are these concepts any good?”; “can people work out from a description what is and what is not within the concept?”) is probably beyond what automated validators can do. As to the external interface, common RDF validators can be used to check the syntactic correctness of our artefacts, for instance the W3C RDF validator.Comments from the IVOA Community during RFC/TCG review period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03The comments from the TCG members during the RFC/TCG review should be included in the next section. In order to add a comment to the document, please edit this page and add your comment to the list below in the format used for the example (include your Wiki Name so that authors can contact you for further information). When the author(s) of the document have considered the comment, they will provide a response after the comment. Additional discussion about any of the comments or responses can be conducted on the WG mailing list. However, please be sure to enter your initial comments here for full consideration in any future revisions of this documentComments from TCG member during the RFC/TCG Review Period: 2021-03-22 through 2021-05-03WG chairs or vice chairs must read the Document, provide comments if any (including on topics not directly linked to the Group matters) or indicate that they have no comment. IG chairs or vice chairs are also encouraged to do the same, althought their inputs are not compulsory.TCG Chair & Vice ChairApplications Working GroupData Access Layer Working GroupData Model Working GroupGrid & Web Services Working GroupRegistry Working GroupSemantics Working GroupData Curation & Preservation Interest GroupEducation Interest GroupKnowledge Discovery Interest GroupSolar System Interest GroupTheory Interest GroupTime Domain Interest GroupOperationsStandards and Processes CommitteeTCG Vote: TBDIf you have minor comments (typos) on the last version of the document please indicate it in the Comments column of the table and post them in the TCG comments section above with the date.
<--
|