Wish List

The list bellow suggests what the DWBP WG see as possible topics to be developed, that were not in the scope or could not be covered by this WG.

• Multimedia data on the Web
• DCAT update see in particular:
  • For DQV:
    • Elaborate on Parameters for metrics (Issue-223)
    • Investigate alignment between DQV and quality features of hcls dataset profile (Issue-221)
      • Especially wrt representing some categorical quality assignments as annotations. See discussions with Michel Dumontier and Amrapali Zaveri at https://docs.google.com/document/d/19hLOK5OX5FKvBo1zJprn09stXZfvq0VCoLd418HAEtA/ and with discussion with Andrea. A big related issue is whether to keep dqv:value only for literal values or to be able to use any resource that looks like a measure.
    • Alignment with other quality vocabularies - and try to have these vocabularies use DQV patterns instead of keeping different wheels (Radulovic et al., Fürber et al, sister-ontologies of daQ).
    • Guidance on how DQV can work with quality statistics vocabulary shall be provided with future versions of the DQV documentation.
    • Discuss adding attributes for the severity of a quality problem, as per discussion with Amrapali Zaveri https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-comments/2016Aug/0028.html
    • Discuss adding attributes for the 'provenance' of a quality measurement in a part of a dataset, as per discussion with Amrapali Zaveri https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-comments/2016Aug/0028.html
    • Multilingual Translation for DQV
    • Should we rename QualityCertificate? the current name is a little misleading, it seems it is a quality certificate rather then an annotation pointing to a quality certificate .
    • Check how the existing implementations implement DQV, and update the page if new implementations.
    • Investigate whether we want to have more integrity conditions (in SHACL?) to enhance interoperability between DQV implementations.
    • Check the 3-4 editor's notes in the DQV document that call for further action and investigation, e.g. update of the references to Web Annotation (once it is a Proposed Recommendation)
  • Best practices for creating vocabularies,
    • Issues about Vocabulary Content Negotiation
• BPs for JSON-LD API
• A way to use web annotations and/or web mentions with DQV and DUV to facilitate finding out about other people's use/opinions of a given dataset. In particular, it would be helpful to be able to discover reuses and references with minimal effort on the part of the person reusing or referencing.