- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 15:15:57 +0000
- To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Minutes from today's meeting are at
https://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes with a text snapshot below.
Lots of discussion today about closing comments, some of which are very
old and have been dealt with a long time ago but the record doesn't show
that.
We're in the final straight towards Candidate Rec - i.e. the BP doc
needs to be essentially *finished* by the time we leave Zagreb next month.
Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
12 Feb 2016
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160212
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-irc
Attendees
Present
PWinstanley, deirdrelee, yaso, BernadetteLoscio,
Caroline, riccardoAlbertoni, phila, annette_g, laufer
Regrets
Eric S, Newton, Hadley
Chair
Dee
Scribe
PWinstanley
Contents
* [4]Topics
* [5]Summary of Action Items
* [6]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<deirdrelee> trackbot, start meeting
<trackbot> Meeting: Data on the Web Best Practices Working
Group Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 12 February 2016
<deirdrelee> not too many people on call....anyone else from
irc joining
<deirdrelee> scribe: PWinstanley
<phila> Decision - only a handful of people, so we'll have an
informal chat
<riccardoAlbertoni> i am trying
deirdrelee: Last week's minutes: accepted?
<deirdrelee> PROPOSED: Accept minutes of last week's meeting
[7]https://www.w3.org/2016/02/05-dwbp-minutes
[7] https://www.w3.org/2016/02/05-dwbp-minutes
<Yaso> +1
+1
<deirdrelee> +1
<phila> +1
<Caroline> +1
RESOLUTION: Accept minutes of last week's meeting
[8]https://www.w3.org/2016/02/05-dwbp-minutes
[8] https://www.w3.org/2016/02/05-dwbp-minutes
deirdrelee: Agenda: go bak to the BP doc and talk aout
implementation
<deirdrelee> PWinstanley: I'd offered to do some work on bps,
but would like to know what is the current workflow?
<phila> PWinstanley: I'd offered to do some work on the BPs,
but what is the current workflow for working with these?
PWinstanley: What is the workflow for working on BPs?
<BernadetteLoscio> [9]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp-status.html
[9] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp-status.html
PWinstanley: how do I get access to Github?
phila: make edits in own repo, give a pull request, then let
editors know and they will do the merging
PWinstanley: Fork repo, edit, and issue pull request
deirdrelee: In Chairs meeting we talked about implementations
for the BP doc, so that it gets to candidate rec, we need
examples of c. >2 of each BP
phila: because it is a BP rather than a tech spec, the issue is
what do you mean by an example...
... mobile web BPs asked people to try to implement and then
report back
... the other way (Share-PSI) is to link to handbooks
... we can make the case to the Director if an official doc
presents a BP then if our advice is consistent then we can
infer validity
... we need evidence that people agree with us
deirdrelee: 3 things: 1/ "evidence..."; should the evidence be
from outside the group?
phila: external validation is always better. We can use the
Zagreb F2F to get some of this
... however, internal evidence is also good. We can look at
Scottish or Irish or other guides that WG members are involved
in ... that is good too
... we need >2 implementations per BP
deirdrelee: 2/ when we go through there might be BPs that are
more challenging to get examples - so we should pick up those
early so that we are not rushing around at the last minute
trying to get them
phila: before candidate rec we mark "at risk", and they can be
removed. If we don't do that we are back to working draft if we
cannot find the examples
BernadetteLoscio: wht if the implementation doesn't work?
phila: if it becomes obvious that it is not working we rewrite
or remove
... there is no minimum period for candidate rec.... we can
turn round in a few weeks
BernadetteLoscio: so we can edit the doc?
phila: yes, but ideally you don't edit much. Once cand rec
ends, there is a call with a Director, and the Chairs/Editors
prove wide review and examples. Thereafter it is pretty much
done
deirdrelee: how should we start collecting implementations?
google doc? Suggestions please
phila: use the wiki or github? but a google form might be a
good idea. I have a model from share-PSI
<BernadetteLoscio> Phil, is this one:
[10]https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1I-pGDOotOR4adCHwnayX6qYqme
1K-UUHQgxuADNPQA0/viewform?c=0&w=1?
[10]
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1I-pGDOotOR4adCHwnayX6qYqme1K-UUHQgxuADNPQA0/viewform?c=0&w=1?
PWinstanley: if thereis a BP that doesn't 'work' then add it as
an antipattern
<phila> Yes, that one BernadetteLoscio
annette_g: are our use cases illustrations of implementation?
phila: I guess so, but we need validation from others having
implemented them
Caroline: it is important to make the google doc/form - I don't
think we will have time to handle emailed material
BernadetteLoscio: about the Use Cases. I am afraid of using
these as evidence as we used these for requirements and the
challenge from which we developed BP. We need to avoid the
circularty
... it is a circular argument
deirdrelee: to create an action for BP editors to develop a
process that we can start using from next week
Caroline: we can have 2 actions, one for editors and another
developed from the Share-PSI quesitons (so we are not starting
from the ground up)
<deirdrelee> ACTION for phila to send bp editors
implementation-questionairre template
<trackbot> Error finding 'for'. You can review and register
nicknames at <[11]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
[11] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users
<deirdrelee> ACTION: phila to send bp editors
implementation-questionaire template [recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[12] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-229 - Send bp editors
implementation-questionaire template [on Phil Archer - due
2016-02-19].
<deirdrelee> ACTION: Caroline to create process for gathering
evidence of implementations, e.g. wiki, google form [recorded
in [13]http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action02]
[13] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-230 - Create process for gathering
evidence of implementations, e.g. wiki, google form [on
Caroline Burle - due 2016-02-19].
deirdrelee: back to BP issues...
<Caroline> [14]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp-status.html
[14] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp-status.html
BernadetteLoscio: Yaso and Annette - I need help with the
section on APIs, it is still open and there needs to be
agreement re: the proposed changes. Needs to be done ASAP
annette_g: I was planning to help
BernadetteLoscio: do we need an action? when we are going to
ask for implementations, the BPs need to be stable. We have
many BPs in this section. The work needs to be done before we
ask for evidence
<Caroline> thank you annette_g :)
deirdrelee: target date is 19 Feb - next Friday. The following
week we should be able to put out the call for implementations
phila: This needs a convo with the Director. It may only be
done after Zagreb. Transition to CR is done after isses and
actions are all closed. The WG has to think it is finished.
deirdrelee: so the main focus is on clising issues and comments
BernadetteLoscio: the table by Newton is for examples and test.
The BP needs to be reviewed too - the whole thing needs a
review, not just examples and tests
deirdrelee: for the next 30 mins - open issues?
... comments first please
<deirdrelee> Open comments:
[15]https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwb
p-20150224/
[15]
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/
deirdrelee: 10 open comments. What is the status?
Caroline: I think we need to go down the list ....
... most of them are old
phila: given that they are so old, ...
BernadetteLoscio: some can be closed - the ones from Christoph,
for example
... the ones from Eric remained open because I didn't know how
to answer
... others have a resolution already
phila: I think this needs to be discussed on the Chair's call
on wednesday. they need to be closed, but that depends on
whether they have been answered
BernadetteLoscio: I think most already have a resolution.
deirdrelee: is there a need to contact the author again.
phila: in the case of Eric's then the comments are being worked
on, but we need to focus on process - the group needs to be
satisfied that the comments have been worked on
deirdrelee: going through them now
annette_g: can I wrap things up with Eric? what's the protocol
<Caroline> :))))
phila: just chat with eric and sort it out, then reply back.
that will work
<deirdrelee> ACTION: annette_g to talk to Eric Wilde about open
comments and reach resolution [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action03]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-231 - Talk to eric wilde about open
comments and reach resolution [on Annette Greiner - due
2016-02-19].
<deirdrelee>
[17]https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwb
p-20150224/3048
[17]
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/3048
<annette_g> but but but
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to highlight
[18]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#EnrichData
[18] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#EnrichData
Caroline: the data enrichment document will be prepared
elsewhere and the link put into the BP, but this has not yet
been done
<phila> [19]BP on enrichment
[19] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#EnrichData
phila: annette, are you aware that there is a BP in the doc, it
is light on content, but needs completing
annette_g: there are more ways of enriching data than simply
adding more metadata
BernadetteLoscio: this BP needs to be complemented
annette_g: my initial problem was that it seemed to be looking
only at adding metadata or doing some machine learning, but
data enrichment can also be about e.g. segmenting a visual
dataset to isolate patterns that have meaning. This whole side
is missing
phila: rather than it being for Annette, it should be for
Giselle and there is not enough interaction with the WG so we
will have problem in finding evidence. The action is on UFMG
but it is quesionable that this BP will survive without
significant effort
<laufer> +1 to phil
phila: but it is for others to do this
<annette_g> I'm on the queue
annette_g: this is a BP I care about. maybe it isn't only UFMG,
and perhaps we need to merge their point of view with mine
BernadetteLoscio: what annette is describing is different to
what UFMG were thinking - they are more ML people so enrichment
by addition of metadata was their 'thing'
... we need a definition here to help clarify the topic
Caroline: maybe annette could collaborate with them?
... would this work? do we still have time?
annette_g: I am worried about workload, but can give it a try
<phila> Personally, I think the conversation with Erik Wilde
should take a higher priority
<BernadetteLoscio> It should be possible to perform some data
enrichment tasks in order to aggregate value to data, therefore
providing more value for user applications and services.
<Caroline> +1 to phila
BernadetteLoscio: we can have the discussion by mail - but we
need clarification on the semantics of 'enrichment'/ I think
the requirement is closer to what annette was describing
... i agree that the chat with eric is important, it should
take priority
deirdrelee: 2 others for annette .... can these be looked at as
well please.
... last few minutes....
BernadetteLoscio: we have comments from Maurino Andrea - I
contacted him before publicaiton of the second draft. I think
these can be closed. Chairs can confirm.
... I can message the list with the links
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to ask for help with a JSON problem
<phila> action-228
<trackbot> action-228 -- Phil Archer to Fix bpconfig.js to
restore contributors to bp doc -- due 2016-02-12 -- OPEN
<trackbot> [20]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/228
[20] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/228
<phila> [21]BPConfig file
[21] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bpconfig.js
<annette_g> I could look at it
<Yaso> I can help
phila: I need help with an action to fix (action 228) - I
cannot debug it. The BP config file isn't showing up the list
of contributors
<Yaso> :-) We need an action for that or it's ok?
annette_g: in talking with eric I will focus on the API stuff,
but there is more that Eric commented on. Will that be dealt
with at the Chairs' meeting?
deirdrelee: perhaps the BP editors should check first, then
writing Eric a note
BernadetteLoscio: we already provided comments in the tracker.
Open ones are because we don't know how to handle them
annette_g: we need to see if we have replied to Eric ....
BernadetteLoscio: we had a lot of discussion with him on the
mailing list. his messages were replied to promptly
... I am going to go through all the comments and send the
group a message indicating status for each
deirdrelee: thanks to all for the useful meeting.
<laufer> bye all...
<riccardoAlbertoni> bye, have good weekend|
<annette_g> bye!
<Caroline> bye! great scribing PWinstanley!
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: annette_g to talk to Eric Wilde about open
comments and reach resolution [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Caroline to create process for gathering evidence
of implementations, e.g. wiki, google form [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: phila to send bp editors
implementation-questionaire template [recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[22] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action03
[23] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action02
[24] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/12-dwbp-minutes.html#action01
Summary of Resolutions
1. [25]Accept minutes of last week's meeting
https://www.w3.org/2016/02/05-dwbp-minutes
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 12 February 2016 15:15:56 UTC