- From: Yakov Shafranovich <yakov-ietf@shaftek.org>
- Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2014 09:33:19 -0400
- To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Cc: Public CSVW WG <public-csv-wg@w3.org>
Thank you! On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote: > Ah, I think you may have been caught by the change to summer time in Europe. > > Times for this WG are fixed at 13:00 London time, i.e. the next meeting is > http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=CSVW+WG&iso=20140423T13&p1=136 > > Phil. > > > On 09/04/2014 14:09, Yakov Shafranovich wrote: >> >> 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 >>> >> > > -- > > > Phil Archer > W3C Data Activity Lead > http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ > > http://philarcher.org > +44 (0)7887 767755 > @philarcher1
Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2014 13:34:17 UTC