W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > March 2016

[Minutes] 2016-03-04

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 17:02:49 +0000
To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <56D9BFB9.2020401@w3.org>
Today's minutes are at https://www.w3.org/2016/03/04-dwbp-minutes

With a text snapshot below.

Note that next Friday's call is the last before we head to Zagreb. The 
aim is that by the time we leave Zagreb:
- all issues are closed
- all editors have sufficient info to complete the docs ready for 
publication this month;
- for the BP doc, that means ready for the transition to Candidate Rec.

Expect firm chairing from Deirdre!

We'll be working out the agenda for Zagreb on Wednesday next week.

       Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

04 Mar 2016


       [2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160304

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/03/04-dwbp-irc


           deirdre, antoine, annette_g, riccardoAlbertoni, newton,
           phila, ericstephan, hadleybeeman, laufer,
           BernadetteLoscio, yaso




      * [4]Topics
      * [5]Summary of Action Items
      * [6]Summary of Resolutions

    <phila> chair: Dee

    <deirdrelee> agenda:

       [7] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160304

    Me too, hadleybeeman :-/ tryong to webex

    <newton> deirdrelee: showing agenda. we're focusing today in
    our f2f meeting in Zagreb

    <newton> ... the meeting will be our last f2f meeting

    <newton> ... it will be an opportunity share and exchange
    information with SharePSI group

    <deirdrelee> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of last week's meeting

       [8] https://www.w3.org/2016/02/26-dwbp-minutes

    <hadleybeeman> +1

    <deirdrelee> +1

    <antoine> +1

    <BernadetteLoscio> +1

    <newton> +1

    <phila> +0 absent

    RESOLUTION: Approve minutes of last week's meeting

       [9] https://www.w3.org/2016/02/26-dwbp-minutes

    <annette_g> +1

    <riccardoAlbertoni> my name is missing ..

    <riccardoAlbertoni> but it is not a big probelm

    <riccardoAlbertoni> yes

    <laufer> +1

    <riccardoAlbertoni> it could be ..

    <ericstephan> I was absent

    <newton> deirdrelee: get updates from each of the vocabularies

    <newton> ... where we are, the plans for the coming weeks

    <newton> ... let's discuss DUV vocabulary first

    <newton> ericstephan: our goal to next weeks is to make sure
    that we have the issues resolved before the f2f

    <deirdrelee> open issues

      [10] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/open

    <newton> scribe: yaso

    <newton> changing scribing role to yaso (thanks yaso!)

    ericstephan: we received a lot of comments on the citation

    no problem, newton


    deirdrelee: on the data usage vocab, any comments?
    ... if we can get a final version of these issues closed to
    zagreb, that would be awesome


      [11] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html

    <hadleybeeman> I had a FB exchange with Robin Berjon this
    week... who was looking at
    s . Said he'd seen DUV but didn't really understand it.

      [12] https://research.science.ai/article/web-first-data-citations

    riccardoAlbertoni: the issues that are open, I tried to write a
    proposal on this

    <hadleybeeman> Robin also said he'd talked to the editors, but
    still didn't get it. I'm not sure how to help sort this out?

    riccardoAlbertoni: I dont think we will close all the issues by

    antoine: I would like to raise the point of some external
    comments that we have
    ... the issues that came from external people,
    ... this way we may close some of issues, at least the day of
    the face to face

    phila: by the time we leave zagreb all the issues on the 3 docs
    have to be closed
    ... so antoine, please write to that people so we can close the

    antoine: we received one e-mail that we did not touched yet,
    there also a couple of discussions that are extremely long
    ... the discussion we have was extremely constructive, so that
    where we are now

    deirdrelee: makes sense to address the issues during the week
    ... so we can get them on their way before the meeting
    ... thinking in terms of the agenda for zagreb, we can focus on
    the best practices as well, but on the time dedicated to the


    scribe: we have to work on the vocabs because they have more
    issues open

    phila: the share psi people will be there on Tuesday, so we can
    think in terms of a day and a half


      [13] https://www.w3.org/2013/share-psi/wiki/Zagreb/social

    BernadetteLoscio: wanted to talk about zagreb

    antoine: to talk about vocabs and zagreb

    deirdrelee: topic: ZAGREB

    phila: look at the link so you can acknowledge when people are
    arriving and leaving
    ... there'll be some external interest, and my expectation for
    this afternoon is talking about evidence of implementation
    ... the motivation to put sharepsi and dwbp together is to ease
    the evidence of implementation talk

    BernadetteLoscio: we can also estimate how long we will be in
    the discussion

    deirdrelee: our focus should be about closing issues, the more
    ready we can be until zagreb better


      [14] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Comment_tracker_status

    deirdrelee: tks BernadetteLoscio for the idea

    BernadetteLoscio: I made a table at wiki, w/ the tracker
    comments, so the idea is to have an ideia of how long
    discussions will take
    ... and I think we could do the same for the vocabs

    lots of noise, someone typing really hard

    <riccardoAlbertoni> +1 to antoine

    <laufer> +1

    antoine, can you write down what you've said? I lost it

    Sorry: -/

    <antoine> I said it would be good to have some parallel
    sessions to start the F2F to be sure we can have prepared

    thanks, antoine !

    <antoine> Having the plenary discss everything may be
    counter-productive as we've got very diverse issues

    phila: we can have an extra room if we need it

    laufer: what we expect from zagreb
    ... I want to know from phila if we still have time for a new

    phila: if you it ready before the zagreb, and the editors
    acknowledge that

    laufer: but we would not have comments from public

    phila: if you got the evidence, examples and all, then the
    group can have a look at it, and theres no process that says
    you can't

    deirdrelee: is something straightforward?

    laufer: we have some best practices that talk about specific
    domains, for example specs for timetables, or feeds
    ... when people want to publish a dataset, don't know if this
    can be a " data set type"
    ... for example, the open transport is a way to distribute

    deirdrelee: so laufer you should send an email today, so we can
    see and analyze to solve this quickly

    phila: I think we already got a BP for this, is "use
    standardized terms"
    ... maybe you should include this on the use standardized
    terms, instead of a new BP for this
    ... SDW is a specialization of what this group is doing

    deirdrelee: i don't want go down on this topic now...


    <annette_g> standard data model

    laufer: its more than only using the terms. Is about an
    specific way of distributing the files

    deirdrelee: we should move on to the BP doc
    ... for zagreb, what are our goals, BernadetteLoscio

    BernadetteLoscio: what the SDW is doing is an extension, I
    think we should include their work in ours

    phila: you got a lot of introductory material

    <deirdrelee> open knowledge discussion on APIs and GTFS....


    phila: you can just write "this doc is generic, please bare in

    <Zakim> newton, you wanted to talk about implementation report

    newton: about the BP doc, we need implementation, I'd like to
    know when we are going to start the implementation report

    phila: I have to do this, and I'll do. What you need is people
    trying to use it
    ... i'll probably will do a google form for it

    deirdrelee: coming back to the BP doc and editors plan

    <newton> phila, should create an action to that?

    <phila> I already have one

    deirdrelee: from the table that you've prepared, do you see
    that those are adressable?

    BernadetteLoscio: the table is for the comment tracker

    <newton> ok, let me know if I can help you with that

    BernadetteLoscio: for external comments. Most of them are ok, I
    saw that annette_g sent a messagem about eric's comments, and I
    really hope that we can close this comments

    <phila> It's my action-229, newton

      [16] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/229

    BernadetteLoscio: because I should discuss the open issues at
    the f2f

    phila: the wg csv has been closed, and in their f2f they had a
    closed time to each issue

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to offer some advice on time boxing

    phila: and if they don't resolve that in the closed minutes
    that goes to the end of the day
    ... and it is a great way to work on issues

    <hadleybeeman> +1 to phila's recommendation.... that worked
    well with csv on the web

    +1 to phila

    deirdrelee: we have 27 open issues, and we will not have time
    at the f2f to solve all of them there, so we can try to close
    them and resolve the issues and comments in the next week
    ... I know it's easier said than done, but
    ... so giving resolutions should be priority to the editors


      [17] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/open

    deirdrelee: we have kind of putting aside the open actions
    ... but as the chairs of the group we are going thru that
    actions and see what can be closed or not
    ... +1 to the idea :-)

    <BernadetteLoscio> its ok!

    <newton> I'm gonna work full time on the BP doc next week

    deirdrelee: we have to try to have as much as possible of
    things prepared to the f2f

    <newton> yaso: there's nobody from the InWeb (data enrichment
    guys) on the call today

    <phila> [18]Draft Member Submission from InWeb

      [18] http://www.inweb.org.br/w3c/dataenrichment/

    <newton> ... InWeb sent us an email asking if they could send
    to group a Member Submission with BP related to data enrichment

    <newton> ... I don't know if we should talk about it without
    them on the meeting

    <newton> deirdrelee: nobody feels very strong on it

    <annette_g> -1 for dropping it

    <newton> yaso: I would like to know what the group think

    <newton> phila: to get this document to rec, we should proof
    that every BP is implemented


    <newton> ... we might struggle to get the BPs of data
    enrichment implemented

    phila: we might struggle to prove that it's been done in more
    that 1 place (about that BP)
    ... we can flag that as "at risk"

    deirdrelee: realistically, the inweb team has to provide
    examples, and take ownership on that

    <phila> +1 Dee



    antoine: I can provide some examples of implementation on the
    data enrichment
    ... the BP itself is alright, maybe a bit generic

    deirdrelee: maybe is about removing the link between the member
    submission and the BP
    ... and we can refer to the MS, but not necessarily
    ... does that makes sense?


    BernadetteLoscio: I'm not sure
    ... maybe the BP needs to be rewritten

    deirdrelee: more comments?



    Ok, perfect, deirdrelee !

    BernadetteLoscio: I think that this should not be a decision of
    the editors

    +1 to BernadetteLoscio

    <ericstephan_> +1 BernadetteLoscio

    deirdrelee: next friday: preps for zagreb

    <BernadetteLoscio> :)

    <hadleybeeman> :)

    <riccardoAlbertoni> cool!!!

    phila: people told me that they like what they are doing

    <antoine> :-)

    <laufer> :):)

    <annette_g> :)

    <newton> nice :)

    <BernadetteLoscio> cool!!!

    phila: so I'm optimistic and happy etc

    <ericstephan_> bye


    <newton> thanks yaso for scribing and deirdre for chairing :)

    <riccardoAlbertoni> bye 1

    <annette_g> bye!!

    <laufer> bye all...

    <newton> bye

    Bye all!!!

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [20]Approve minutes of last week's meeting

    [End of minutes]
Received on Friday, 4 March 2016 17:02:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 4 March 2016 17:02:59 UTC