W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-ssn@w3.org > June 2010

SSN-XG Meeting Minutes 16 June 2010

From: <Laurent.Lefort@csiro.au>
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:46:53 +1000
To: <public-xg-ssn@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B484B32EAEABE14AA5409575229CECF30127ED3BFC2A@EXNSW-MBX05.nexus.csiro.au>
Hi,

Thanks to those who attended the telephone conference last week.
And a special thanks to David for scribing. 
The minutes of the meeting are here: http://www.w3.org/2010/06/16-ssn-minutes.html 

I have quickly reported on my request to W3C to have the ontology located in a place where the namespace matches the physical location (so that it can be exploited in multiple context as an ontology resources used on its own and also as the "skeleton" of linked data resources. For more info, see: Status of ACTION-30 Define the final place where the XG ontology will be delivered http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/track/actions/30 

The remaining time was spent on the Definition of examples for the XG deliverable: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/track/issues/8

We used slides 3-6 of my talk at the Metadata Australia 2010 as a discussion starter: Semantically-enabled Standard Development http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/images/7/7e/Semantically-enabled_Standard_Development-27May.pdf 

To sum up this discussion:
- for the ontology deliverable, it is interesting to have examples based on sensors which performs the same function differently (e.g. the rain gauges in the talk),
- for the markup deliverable, we need cases where we have enough info about the sensor plus the data to be marked up
- for the mappings deliverable, we need an one A-to-Z story as complete as possible like the one from the talk (there was some discussion on whether the "extreme event" part of the story was important or not).

We have decided to focus first on the examples which covers the different sub-parts of the ontology and which are required to complete the Semantic Markup deliverable before trying to wrap up the XG with the end-to-end example matching the needs of the Mapping deliverable http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Mappings_Deliverable 

CSIRO can provide examples related to the Phenonet project (Agriculture Meteo) see http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Architecture and has also implemented SOS-based services in the Hydro domain http://wron.net.au/CSIRO_SOS/sos?Service=SOS&Request=GetCapabilities which can provide a basis for the Sensor Markup deliverable or more.

There are some parts of the ontology (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Semantic_Sensor_Net_Ontology ) which are harder to illustrate e.g. the Operating Model (Operational/survival range and restrictions) 
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Operating_Model 
We have already called for volunteers to contribute in these areas in liaison with the XG participants working on the specification and on the OWL product. 

Finally, two new actions were listed: 

[NEW] ACTION: Laurent to get updated information on the status of the European Zakim bridge from W3C [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/06/16-ssn-minutes.html#action02]

This action is linked to problems with the European part of the Zakim bridge (no access through the UK nor the French phone numbers see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/system-notices/2010AprJun/0000.html ). The situation has not changed since and is tracked here: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/track/actions/32 

[NEW] ACTION: Laurent to sum up this discussion and call for contributions of examples especially on topics which are not well covered yet [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/06/16-ssn-minutes.html#action01 ]
(see above and to be completed via this wiki page http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/Semantic_Sensor_Net_Ontology ) 

Cheers
Laurent
Received on Monday, 21 June 2010 15:47:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 21 June 2010 15:47:33 GMT