[minutes] 2016-04-08

The minutes of today's meeting are at 
https://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes

Next week we'll be voting on publications, so please take time this week 
to review all the docs - the BP doc will be frozen at the end of today.

Minutes in text form below...


                               DWBP Weekly

08 Apr 2016

    [2]Agenda

       [2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160408

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-irc

Attendees

    Present
           PWinstanley, hadleybeeman, newton, BernadetteLoscio,
           Caroline, phila, yaso, riccardoAlbertoni, annette_g,
           antoine, ericstephan, laufer, SumitPurohit

    Regrets
           Ghislain, Dee

    Chair
           Hadley

    Scribe
           annette_g

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]BP doc
          2. [6]Data Quality vocab
          3. [7]DUV
      * [8]Summary of Action Items
      * [9]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <hadleybeeman> agenda:
    [10]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160408

      [10] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160408

    <scribe> scribe: annette_g

    <hadleybeeman> [11]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/01-dwbp-minutes

      [11] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/01-dwbp-minutes

    <ericstephan> sorry time got away from me, calling in shortly

    PROPOSED: accept last week's minutes.

    <yaso> +1

    <hadleybeeman> +1

    <BernadetteLoscio> +1

    <riccardoAlbertoni> +1

    +1, given that Phil fixes the date

    <ericstephan> +1

    <phila> +1

    <newton> _1

    RESOLUTION: accept last week's minutes.

    <newton> +1

    <Caroline> +1

    hadleybeeman: 30 seconds of update on the BP doc

    BernadetteLoscio: it's almost ready!

BP doc

    <phila> [12]Ed Draft of BP

      [12] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html

    BernadetteLoscio: we're finishing some more updates, can finish
    during the day today and freeze at the end of today

    hadleybeeman: please send a message out when it's time to start
    reviewing

    BernadetteLoscio: we want comments during the week. We'll wait
    to update the doc.
    ... also, we need some help
    ... with examples, the structural metadata example in
    particular. Can Phil help?

    phila: I'll ask people who are more connected with the csv
    work, but I will try.

    <ericstephan> yes Gregg would be great

    BernadetteLoscio: If it's not possible, we'll freeze like this.

    phila: I'll ask Greg Kellogg
    ... or someone from the CSV group

    BernadetteLoscio: is it okay to freeze later today?

    hadleybeeman: yes

    BernadetteLoscio: we made some editorial changes on intended
    outcomes of some best practices, so I want feedback about that.
    ... we are trying to have a standard way of presenting the
    outcomes. So if something isn't correct, please tell us

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to ask about native speaker bits

    PWinstanley: had a question about policy of content. Is it a
    good idea to link to live example? One example is the API
    stuff.

    hadleybeeman: we should copy stuff into our doc if we can

    PWinstanley: would like to change the API documentation

    <ericstephan> We could find a Citation to a paper written on
    the Flood project

    phila: I want to do a native speaker review on the doc
    ... is it okay to do that while it's frozen?

    forking -1

    hadleybeeman: my inclination is to do it in parallel but add
    them at the end with all other changes

    BernadetteLoscio: the editors think it's okay, Phil can choose

    <ericstephan> Is this editorial "fracking"? ;-)

    phila: I wouldn't do a merge

    hadleybeeman: it sounds to me like that should go with the
    other changes

    <ericstephan> sorry its something being done in the US where
    people search for oil underground and create havoc for those
    living above ground

    annette_g: my experience as an editor screams "don't fork it"

    newton: would someone help with validating the RDF in the doc?

    phila: I'll do that as part of my review

    <riccardoAlbertoni> thanks!!

    hadleybeeman: congrats to the editors for doing a fantastic
    job!

    <phila> PROPOSED: Vote of thanks to the BP doc editors for
    doing so much work

    <riccardoAlbertoni> to the editor of bp

    <phila> +1

    +1

    <yaso> +1

    <ericstephan> ++++1

Data Quality vocab

    <newton> :-)

    <riccardoAlbertoni>
    [13]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html

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

    RESOLUTION: Vote of thanks to the BP doc editors for doing so
    much work

    <BernadetteLoscio> :)

    riccardoAlbertoni: we've had some great input, but still have
    to do some work. Given that the BP doc is where it is, we're
    thinking about how to schedule the DQV. we could consider
    another round of feedback or try to take advantage of the 3
    weeks in which we're waiting for comments on the BP doc.
    ... I'd like to hear the opinion of the group. From the point
    of view of transparency, adding a new working draft is a good
    option, but I'm worried that if we add new comments that will
    distract us from ongoing edits.

    @hadleybeeman help never hurts, but yes

    riccardoAlbertoni: I'd like to know the group's preference.

    antoine: I think I"m okay getting feedback. We're already
    aiming in that direction.

    riccardoAlbertoni: but should we do that with a new draft or
    not?

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to be the ex-advertising bloke

    phila: we're heading towards a date when we'll be saying the BP
    doc is done unless you think otherwise (last call).

    <ericstephan> and in conclusion e=mc squared..

    phila: it's a nice PR message

    <phila> I'm saying we should get feedback on all docs together

    <ericstephan> :-)

    <Zakim> hadleybeeman, you wanted to ask about implementations

    <ericstephan> +1 hadleybeeman

    hadleybeeman: the vocabs are not rec track, but we do get a lot
    of credibility by demonstrating that it's not stuff we just
    made up by ourselves. It would be good for the vocabs to go out
    to the general public and help us build up our documentation to
    justify the decisions we're making.

    ericstephan: I understand the need to say we've completed these
    activities, but the data modeler in me says that vocabs will
    continue to change because they always do. How do we deal with
    that in the future?

    <ericstephan> oh no

    phila: one the WG is closed, the team is responsible for
    maintenance.

    <ericstephan> nice

    <ericstephan> regarding content negociation by profile

    phila: the next working group will be doing an update of DCAT,
    will look at content negotiation by profile, could potentially
    also come back to the DQV and DUV to put them on the rec
    track..

    <BernadetteLoscio> great :)

    hadleybeeman: there's a certain amount of stability that we
    need to emphasis by completing a version of this (or anything).
    Industry or developers need to be able to focus on something
    stable for a length of time.

    ericstephan: one of the things we found in the DUV is that
    there are holes in DCAT, so I"m very excited about the revision
    of DCAT. The DUV could in some ways update based on what DCAT
    does.

    hadleybeeman: back to riccardoAlbertoni's question. Should they
    get feedback in parallel with the BP doc or use the time to
    write?

    riccardoAlbertoni: would the doc continue to be a public
    working draft?

    hadleybeeman: yes, until it becomes a note

    antoine: I'm leaning toward making a public working draft

    riccardoAlbertoni: that means we have to finish up some things.
    Is that okay for you, antoine?

    antoine: we can put in some notes marking things as unfinished
    and asking for feedback

    hadleybeeman: in order to publish next week, we still need to
    get the working group to vote, which means we have to be okay
    that it's not finishted.

    <phila> Yes, there is more time for changes for the vocabs than
    for the BP doc

    hadleybeeman: I don't want people to be saying we should not
    publish because they still want to make changes. there will
    still be plenty of time for changes afterward.
    ... are you guys okay with that

    antoine: yes

    hadleybeeman: DUV update?

DUV

    <ericstephan> [14]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html

      [14] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html

    <ericstephan>
    [15]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_usage_schedule

      [15] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_usage_schedule

    ericstephan: the DUV right now has been making some slight
    changes in some of the examples (more elaborate, aligned with
    the bus timetable example), we tried to link in from the
    vocabulary overview section. We're trying to put things into
    some sort of a final state. There was a request for a schedule.

    <ericstephan> [16]https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016

      [16] https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016

    ericstephan: BernadetteLoscio provided some editorial changes,
    so we pushed things out to April 10. Also coming up this week
    is that I'm going to be going to a Force 11 conference where
    we'll present a poster on the DUV. We hope to get community
    feedback there.
    ... any questions?

    phila: thank you eric for getting into the Force11 event. Have
    you created the poster, can we get some images of it and you in
    Portland?

    ericstephan: yes, I'll be happy to do that
    ... I was asked to participate in a debate about good open
    standards practices. I want to refer to our best practices doc.
    ... I've reached out to some communities about how you measure
    citations. If you reference a paper, what is the value of that?
    There should be some interesting nuances in data usage that I
    can come back with.

    <phila> Thank you Eric

    <ericstephan>
    [17]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#conclusion

      [17] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#conclusion

    ericstephan: one last thing: this may be a bit controversial, I
    put a conclusion in. It brings up future work. I don't know if
    this is protocol.
    ... I don't know what's normal for that, but these are our
    desires for where this work could go.

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about [vocab-dcat] and
    normative/nn in vocabs

    <ericstephan> I am all ears

    phila: It's difficult.
    ... I struggle with putting this in a document like this. I
    think this belongs more in a blog post or group page. I'll
    think about it some more. I recognize that that's how it's done
    when you publish scientific research.

    ericstephan: I love the idea of if it's on our web site.

    <ericstephan> understood :-)

    phila: we have to think about what the frozen group web page
    looks like when we finish up.

    <ericstephan> interesting, ok no normative

    phila: becaues it's a note, nothing is normative, so it's not
    appropriate to talk about normative /non-normative

    <ericstephan> thank you phila!

    <phila> I believe the reference for DCAT is vocab-dcat

    <ericstephan> thank you hadleybeeman!

    hadleybeeman: it's really useful to be able to go back and see
    what we wanted to do next, so it will be good to capture that
    somewhere useful.
    ... let's look at actions

    <phila> We have a process for translations

    <phila> Labels etc in the RDF file can be added reaily enough

    ericstephan: there is one thing in the schedule I want to
    mention. Those of us a the national labs have a lot of
    connection to people who speak different languages. we'd like
    to get as many different languages into the DUV as possile.
    Japanese, mandarin, russian, spanish, portuguese, all would be
    good to cover.

    <hadleybeeman> [18]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/

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

    phila: docs in /tr space link to translations. we normally run
    things past a translator person. DCAT has labels in a bunch of
    languages all in one document, which is pure pornography if
    you're a UTF person.

    <phila> action-208?

    <trackbot> action-208 -- Antoine Isaac to Contact oa wg to see
    whether they would consider adding dqv motivation -- due
    2016-04-01 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [19]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/208

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/208

    hadleybeeman: is that still open?

    antoine: yes, that continues

    action-210

    <trackbot> action-210 -- Eric Stephan to Investigate the
    relationship between dqv and duv wrt citations that can be
    considered as a quality annotation -- due 2016-04-04 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/210

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/210

    <phila> action-210?

    <trackbot> action-210 -- Eric Stephan to Investigate the
    relationship between dqv and duv wrt citations that can be
    considered as a quality annotation -- due 2016-04-04 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [21]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/210

      [21] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/210

    hadleybeeman: is that still open, Eric?

    <phila> action-226

    <trackbot> action-226 -- Newton Calegari to To move the indexes
    and keep the BP Summary at the top of the doc -- due 2016-02-12
    -- PENDINGREVIEW

    <trackbot> [22]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/226

      [22] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/226

    ericstephan: yes

    hadleybeeman: newton, what's the status?

    newton: we can close this one

    <phila> close action-226

    <trackbot> Closed action-226.

    phila: done!

    <phila> action-227?

    <trackbot> action-227 -- Antoine Isaac to Work with eric s on
    writing section on evolution of duv wrt reuse of namespaces
    etc. -- due 2016-04-01 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [23]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/227

      [23] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/227

    hadleybeeman: is it open still?

    antoine: yes

    <phila> action-229

    <trackbot> action-229 -- Phil Archer to Send bp editors
    implementation-questionaire template -- due 2016-03-15 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/229

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/229

    phila: that has come screaming up my todo list

    <phila> phila: Expect it next week

    <hadleybeeman> action-230?

    <trackbot> action-230 -- Caroline Burle to Create process for
    gathering evidence of implementations, e.g. wiki, google form
    -- due 2016-03-15 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [25]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/230

      [25] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/230

    Caroline: this is something we discussed in zagreb, we can
    close it

    <hadleybeeman> action-231?

    <trackbot> action-231 -- Annette Greiner to Talk to eric wilde
    about open comments and reach resolution -- due 2016-02-19 --
    OPEN

    <trackbot> [26]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/231

      [26] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/231

    <hadleybeeman> annette_g: I spoke to him. We weren't able to
    resolve it. He had concerns we hadn't addressed.

    <hadleybeeman> ...We have addressed it since then. There have
    been several attempts to get his response, but he has hasn't
    replied.

    phila: he responded today

    <phila> I just forwarded Erik's mail to the list in case it
    didn't make it

    <hadleybeeman> action-232?

    <trackbot> action-232 -- Antoine Isaac to Look into reference
    to ogc in
    [27]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#metadatastandardized
    (raised during joint call with sdw) -- due 2016-02-24 --
    PENDINGREVIEW

      [27] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#metadatastandardized

    <trackbot> [28]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/232

      [28] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/232

    hadleybeeman: sounds like that's still open

    antoine: I think that's been sent to SDW, and I haven't heard
    anything, so I think we can close it.

    hadleybeeman: should we follow up with them?

    antoine: if someone else wants to do that, they can do that
    ... if there's a new version, hopefully they will get in touch.

    <phila> +1 to hadleybeeman

    hadleybeeman: we should ask them to make sure they do review
    it.

    action-233

    <trackbot> action-233 -- Newton Calegari to Check if the turtle
    and rdfa examples are validated -- due 2016-04-01 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [29]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/233

      [29] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/233

    <phila> close action-237

    <trackbot> Closed action-237.

    hadleybeeman: you were asking for help on that

    <phila> See previous about getting SDW review

    <phila> I don't think it's needed as SDW is watching us anywat

    <BernadetteLoscio> I think so!

    <BernadetteLoscio> We had a lot of discussions about this

    <BernadetteLoscio> yes, I agree!

    action-239

    <trackbot> action-239 -- Peter Winstanley to Check on using an
    example about real-time data for bp23 -- due 2016-03-25 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [30]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/239

      [30] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/239

    <phila> close action-232

    <trackbot> Closed action-232.

    <BernadetteLoscio> Eric sent a first version and we included in
    the doc!

    PWinstanley: that's what eric and I were working on just
    recently, we're likely to have something very soon

    <phila> action-241

    <trackbot> action-241 -- Hadley Beeman to Review bp 22 -- due
    2016-03-18 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [31]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/241

      [31] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/241

    hadleybeeman: Phil and I did that last week

    <phila> close action-241

    <trackbot> Closed action-241.

    action-242

    <trackbot> action-242 -- Newton Calegari to Follow up on issue
    220 -- due 2016-03-18 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [32]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/242

      [32] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/242

    newton: we can close that

    action-243

    <trackbot> action-243 -- Caroline Burle to Arrange redseign of
    the challenges diagram -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [33]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/243

      [33] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/243

    <phila> close action-242

    <trackbot> Closed action-242.

    Caroline: it's still open because we need help with it

    <phila> phila: I think that's on my plate

    hadleybeeman: what do you need?

    <phila> SVG

    <BernadetteLoscio> yes! SVG :)

    <phila> I like playing with SVG :-)

    <yaso> I can help, depending on the schedule

    <yaso> I like svg too

    Caroline: we discussed in zagreb, phila said he might help us,
    but he already has this huge job of the native speaker review.

    hadleybeeman: phila, I can help with the native speaker review

    PWinstanley: I can help with it too

    Caroline: you guys rock

    <Caroline> thank you! :)

    hadleybeeman: let's have PWinstanley look at both of our
    sections

    <phila> close action-243

    <trackbot> Closed action-243.

    <phila> ACTION: phila to redo the challenges diagram [recorded
    in [34]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]

      [34] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-272 - Redo the challenges diagram [on
    Phil Archer - due 2016-04-15].

    action-244

    <trackbot> action-244 -- Newton Calegari to Remove the 2nd line
    of test section and rewrite the intended outcome of the bp2
    provide descriptive metadata -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [35]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/244

      [35] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/244

    <phila> action-244?

    <trackbot> action-244 -- Newton Calegari to Remove the 2nd line
    of test section and rewrite the intended outcome of the bp2
    provide descriptive metadata -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN

    <trackbot> [36]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/244

      [36] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/244

    newton: we can close this

    <phila> close action-244

    <trackbot> Closed action-244.

    <riccardoAlbertoni> thanks all ...

    <laufer> bye all... nice wkd...

    <Caroline> thank you!!

    <ericstephan> Will the phone line be open for a few minutes?

    <riccardoAlbertoni> bye

    <yaso> Bye!

    hadleybeeman: we should close the call at this point.
    Eveyrbody's homework is to review the BP doc.

    <SumitPurohit> Thanks...

    <hadleybeeman> Next week: Vote to publish new draft of BP doc
    and DQV.

    <ericstephan>
    [37]https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-primer-20130430/#deriv
    ation-and-revision-1

      [37] 
https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-prov-primer-20130430/#derivation-and-revision-1

    <BernadetteLoscio>
    [38]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/252

      [38] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/252

    <phila> [39]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HATEOAS

      [39] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HATEOAS

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: phila to redo the challenges diagram [recorded in
    [40]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]

      [40] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes.html#action01

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [41]accept last week's minutes.
     2. [42]Vote of thanks to the BP doc editors for doing so much
        work

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________

Received on Friday, 8 April 2016 15:28:22 UTC