Re: [Minutes] 2014-04-09 (NB No meeting next week 16th)

I think I am confused about the times. What time of the date are phone
conferences scheduled for?

Yakov

On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The minutes of today's meeting are at
> http://www.w3.org/2014/04/09-csvw-minutes.html.
>
> Note that the WG will skip next week's meeting so that the next one is on
> Wednesday 23rd April.
>
> A snapshot of today's minutes are below.
>
>
>               CSV on the Web Working Group Teleconference
>
> 09 Apr 2014
>
>    See also: [2]IRC log
>
>       [2] http://www.w3.org/2014/04/09-csvw-irc
>
> Attendees
>
>    Present
>           AndyS, fresco, +1.937.207.aaaa, phila, JeniT, MathewT,
>           DavideCeolin, danbri, +44.777.586.aabb, jtandy
>
>    Regrets
>           Axel, Stasinos, Alfonso
>
>    Chair
>           Jeni
>
>    Scribe
>           Andy Seaborne
>
> Contents
>
>      * [3]Topics
>          1. [4]UCR
>          2. [5]Conversion
>          3. [6]Model for tabular data
>      * [7]Summary of Action Items
>      __________________________________________________________
>
>    <trackbot> Date: 09 April 2014
>
>    <scribe> scribe: Andy Seaborne
>
>    <scribe> scribenick: AndyS
>
>    <danbri> thanks AndyS!
>
>    AndyS: Regrets for next week.
>
>    <JeniT> JeniT: Regrets for next week
>
>    <JeniT> [8]http://www.w3.org/2014/04/02-csvw-minutes.html
>
>       [8] http://www.w3.org/2014/04/02-csvw-minutes.html
>
>    <danbri> looks good
>
>    AndyS: Not all actions recorded in the tracker
>
>    <danbri> 3 of them are for me; i'll make todos directly.
>
>    APPROVED: Minutes
>    [9]http://www.w3.org/2014/04/02-csvw-minutes.html
>
>       [9] http://www.w3.org/2014/04/02-csvw-minutes.html
>
> UCR
>
>    Davide: will sync with jeremy
>
>    phila: making progress on my action for a UC
>
>    <phila> ACTION: phila to add use case linking from metadata to
>    the data [recorded in
>    [10]http://www.w3.org/2014/04/09-csvw-minutes.html#action01]
>
>    <trackbot> Created ACTION-12 - to add use case linking from
>    metadata to the data [on Phil Archer - due 2014-04-16].
>
>    <danbri> (phil's action was on me last week as "chase phila for
>    his usecase in which a party provides metadata for another's
>    csv"; I declare my work done)
>
> Conversion
>
>    [11]http://w3c.github.io/csvw/csv2rdf/
>
>      [11] http://w3c.github.io/csvw/csv2rdf/
>
>    <JeniT> AndyS: we had a telcon yesterday
>
>    <JeniT> ... including jtandy, Gregg, Juan
>
>    <JeniT> ... we're looking at processing from CSV to CSV to
>    clean up the general data
>
>    <JeniT> ... eg fixing up new lines, delimiters, date formats
>
>    <JeniT> ... thought better to do that as rewriting CSV
>
>    <JeniT> ... then convert clean CSV to RDF/JSON/XML
>
>    <JeniT> ... R2RML is the nuclear option for complicated
>    transforms
>
>    <JeniT> ... we didn't push on the boundaries around that
>
>    <JeniT> ... similarly might want to do RDF-to-RDF or
>    JSON-to-JSON transforms after conversion
>
>    <JeniT> ... we don't want to repeat work done elsewhere, or add
>    more tools to end users' toolchain
>
>    <JeniT> ... we discussed on what's published
>
>    <JeniT> ... there's CSVs published as the outcome of a longer
>    process
>
>    <JeniT> ... shared schemas, shared transformations, custom
>    mappings
>
>    <JeniT> ... at scale & in volume; sharing parts of the files is
>    beneficial
>
>    <JeniT> ... vs someone taking CSV from data.gov.uk
>
>    <JeniT> ... and adding their own transform
>
>    <JeniT> ... they need something more self-contained
>
>    <JeniT> ... a single file to control the transformation
>
>    <JeniT> ... also whether the CSV was created without the web in
>    mind, or with the web in mind
>
>    <JeniT> ... particularly with spotting links & data formats
>
>    <JeniT> ... Gregg is going to look at pulling out his transform
>    description to apply it independently of JSON-LD
>
>    <JeniT> ... we're hopeful that there will be commonality in
>    conversion to JSON
>
>    <JeniT> ... which kind of depends on whether the conversion is
>    to JSON-LD
>
>    <JeniT> ... had a good chat with Ivan when we met up
>
>    <JeniT> ... comments on what's been written would be great
>
>    <JeniT> ... it's a bit scruffy, but the general approach is
>    there
>
>    <JeniT> ... I'm using the term 'basic mapping' rather than
>    'direct mapping'
>
>    <danbri> 'simple mapping'?
>
>    <JeniT> ... there's a progression of complexity
>
>    <danbri> 'wishfulthinking mapping'
>
>    <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to ask status of test case csvs for
>    this exploration
>
>    <JeniT> danbri: are there test files?
>
>    <JeniT> AndyS: there's tests in the repo
>
>    <JeniT> danbri: are they mainstream examples or test cases?
>
>    <JeniT> AndyS: the test ones from gkellogg are focused
>
>    <JeniT> danbri: we'd like mainstream examples
>
>    <JeniT> AndyS: I've put some of those in the document
>
>    <JeniT> ... if you could work through one of the examples you
>    want to put in, that would be great, like jtandy did
>
>    <danbri>
>    [12]https://github.com/w3c/csvw/blob/gh-pages/examples/simple-w
>    eather-observation.md
>
>      [12]
> https://github.com/w3c/csvw/blob/gh-pages/examples/simple-weather-observation.md
>
>    JTandy: we also talked about was charter and metadata in RDF
>    ... may be distinct from the mapping framing (not in RDF)
>    ... want to test this with WG.
>
>    <JeniT> AndyS: yes, metadata about the CSV file may or may not
>    be in RDF
>
>    <JeniT> ... it might be simpler to have one language that
>    drives all the mappings
>
>    <JeniT> ... which might include provenance etc
>
>    <phila> from the charter "The vocabulary should be defined, or
>    should have an encoding, in standard RDF and, wherever possible
>    and appropriate, should refer to, and reuse, existing
>    vocabularies developed elsewhere." - i.e. it doesn't have to
>    *only* be in RDF
>
>    <JeniT> ... even in JSON-LD, the context part isn't RDF
>
>    <JeniT> jtandy: we talked about gkellogg pulling out the
>    transformation stuff from JSON-LD to see if it could be
>    expressed in Turtle
>
>    jeniT: easy to write might mean TTL
>    ... want to see the things it will say to guide the syntax
>    choice.
>    ... separating CSV-specific xform from JSON-LD will be good.,
>    ... nudged Rufus and Ross Jones re JSON.
>
>    <JeniT> [13]https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/Conversions
>
>      [13] https://www.w3.org/2013/csvw/wiki/Conversions
>
>    <danbri> aside - another JSON-LD launch at google this week:
>    [14]https://devsite.googleplex.com/webmasters/business-location
>    -pages/schema.org-examples (i.e. we like JSON-LD)
>
>      [14]
> https://devsite.googleplex.com/webmasters/business-location-pages/schema.org-examples
>
> Model for tabular data
>
>    jenit: e.g. import into relational DB
>
>    davide: may have some interesting data as example
>
>    <jtandy> danbri - that looks like an internal link (googleplex)
>    ... just tried it :-)
>
>    subtopic: null fields
>
>    <JeniT>
>    [15]http://w3c.github.io/csvw/syntax/#core-tabular-data-model
>
>      [15] http://w3c.github.io/csvw/syntax/#core-tabular-data-model
>
>    jenit: "What is a null field" comment from D Booth
>    ... absent and empty : same? different?
>
>    jtandy: in the discussion, defaults value need to be handled.
>
>    <danbri> lost audio
>
>    jtandy: empty field returned. Have a explicit "null" marker
>    (999, whatever)
>
>    subtopic: packaging
>
>    <JeniT> [16]http://w3ctag.github.io/packaging-on-the-web/
>
>      [16] http://w3ctag.github.io/packaging-on-the-web/
>
>    jenit: TAG work
>
>    <jtandy> the "999" marker would be declared in the metadata
>    annotation as a token indicating a "null field" / missing field
>
>    jenit: need arises in various places
>    ... general need for web development
>    ... we need to do similar - CSV(s) and metadata
>
>    <JeniT>
>    [17]http://w3ctag.github.io/packaging-on-the-web/#downloading-d
>    ata-for-local-processing
>
>      [17]
> http://w3ctag.github.io/packaging-on-the-web/#downloading-data-for-local-processing
>
>    jenit: link to draft of the TAG direction with a specific
>    example for this WG
>    ... individual file are still on the web
>    ... but that a "package fetch" pulls them all at once.
>    ... individual files LInk back to their metadata
>    ... streamable proposed based on multi-part
>    ... comments invited
>
>    <jtandy> ok - packaging stuff looks interesting
>
>    <phila> no questions but it's interesting, thank you
>
>    danbri: Other groups feedback?
>
>    jenit: no HTTP changes
>
>    danbri: what about HTTP layer optimizations? e.g. caching
>
>    jenit: overlap with HTTP/2
>    ... would need packaging aware caching to cache sub parts but
>    format allows cache header per part
>    ... will write to the list
>
>    subtopic: metadata packaging
>    ... metadata format
>
>    jenit: hold back until we know what's in it
>
>    jtandy: been looking at "Simple Data Packaging" (now renamed)
>    looks very close
>    ... start from that?
>
>    jenit: Would be good to start from there - except it assumes
>    JSON.
>
>    jtandy: start with the JSON assumption and see how it is
>    received on WD
>
>    <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to say start from SDP as a
>    *vocabulary* is fine, but something that fits with RDF is also
>    important
>
>    danbri: schema.org ==> vocabulary start good, but syntax of
>    JSON only might be a barrier.
>
>    <jtandy> +1 to taking SDP metadata and expressing in RDF over
>    JSON-LD
>
>    phila: Uncomfortable if excludes the dataprotocols work when it
>    need not.
>    ... significant community
>    ... at least add conversions to/from.
>
>    <JeniT> AndyS: I think there was something that said the data
>    package might become JSON-LD
>
>    <danbri> i can't find a good link for SDF, was it renamed?
>
>    <JeniT> ... I'd like to get a sense of how successful that
>    format has been
>
>    <JeniT> ... and if there are any others
>
>    <danbri> [18]http://dataprotocols.org/tabular-data-package/
>
>      [18] http://dataprotocols.org/tabular-data-package/
>
>    <JeniT> ... I thought it was a good starting point, but I
>    realised I didn't know what the reception had been
>
>    jenai: DSPL alternative
>
>    jenit: DSPL alternative
>
>    <danbri> DSPL is [19]https://developers.google.com/public-data/
>    ; Omar I mentioned earlier was working to migrate this to
>    schema.org / RDF / JSON world
>
>      [19] https://developers.google.com/public-data/
>
>    <danbri> [20]https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/LookInside
>
>      [20] https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/LookInside
>
>    jenit: used the format in our (ODI) tools
>    ... and providing feedback (ldodds)
>    ... would they contrib a draft?
>
>    phila: Rufus is IE in this WG because it helps align the work.
>    ... this WG will likely go beyond that work as extensions.
>    Maybe WG NOTE for existing work.
>
>    <danbri> I'd suggest we take it as expressivity requirements
>    and we 'should' at least have a clear mapping
>
>    jenit: will contact Rufus
>    ... can we take into account data package work?
>
>    <JeniT> ... in the conversions
>
>    <JeniT> [21]http://w3c.github.io/csvw/syntax/#package
>
>      [21] http://w3c.github.io/csvw/syntax/#package
>
>    jenit: AOB?
>
>    jtandy: timescales?
>    ... next publication esp UCR doc?
>
>    phila: no lower limit on repub cycle
>
>    jtandy: Happen to move forward in May
>
>    <jtandy> s /Happen/Happy/
>
>    jenit: UCR will remain "open" to capture new discoveries.
>
>    jtandy: requirements are placeholders, more categorization and
>    "accept" requirements
>
>    jenit: aim of mid May with more UCs.
>    ... ??
>    ... after Easter , process to accept requirements.
>
>    danbri: propose skip next week
>
>    <jtandy> +1 to skip
>
>    danbri to chair next time, 2 weeks time. Wed after Easter.
>
>    ADJOURNED
>
>    <phila> DNM 23 April
>

Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2014 13:10:21 UTC