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

[Minutes] 2016-02-17

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:05:24 +0000
To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <56C5F9D4.1010504@w3.org>
Dear all,

As ever, the minutes of yesterday's meeting are at 

This of course was the SDW meeting that welcomed the editors and other 
members if the DWBP WG - an idea it seems is to be repeated.

A text snapshot is provided below.

           Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference

17 Feb 2016


       [2] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160217

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/17-sdw-irc


           kerry, eparsons, robin, ScottSimmons, antoine, rachel,
           RaulGarciaCastro, BernadetteLoscio, frans, AndreaPerego,
           laufer, Caroline, jtandy, Linda, newton, SimonCox,
           MattPerry, ChrisLittle, phila

           Clemens, Andreas, Lewis, Lars




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

    <eparsons> Hello Newton - welocme

    <AndreaPerego> same here.

    <eparsons> try again I have only just connected to webex

    <eparsons> OK let me see...

    <eparsons> hello Caroline

    <eparsons> webex seems to be OK noew ?

    <eparsons> ah OK the password in wrong - will change topic

    <joshlieberman> +joshlieberman

    <eparsons> scribe: Kerry

    <scribe> scribeNick: Kerry

    <eparsons> Topic : Approve last week's minutes

    <eparsons> [7]http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-sdw-minutes

       [7] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-sdw-minutes

    <eparsons> Proposed : Approve last week's minutes

    <Linda> +1

    <eparsons> +1

    <RaulGarciaCastro> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <ScottSimmons> _1

    <jtandy> +1

    <ScottSimmons> +1

    <frans> +1

    <robin> +1

    <eparsons> Resolved : Approve last week's minutes

    RESOLUTION: approve last week minutes

       [8] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/03-sdw-minutes

    <eparsons> Topic : Patent Call

    <eparsons> [9]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

       [9] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

    no comments

    <eparsons> Topic : Short update on F2F Meeting last week

    geonovum hosted, thankyou Linda and genovum

    scribe: lots of work on deliverables
    ... key takeaway is that we have much more territory moving
    ... weekly calls will focus on a differnt deliverable each
    week, multiple calls each week, all together maybe only
    alternate weeks
    ... discussed at f2f
    ... will pin down next week
    ... geonovum meeting was productive

    <SimonCox_> And thanks to everyone who made the time and effort
    to attend! (AMersfoorth)

    <eparsons> Topic : Coordination with DWBP

    scribe: anything else must be said?

    ed: welcome to DWBP
    ... we will steal whatever content we can!

    <Caroline> we are happy to join this call :)

    ed: will hand over to Jeremy and linda, our best practice
    editors... we want to be coordinated

    ChrisLittle: i want to point out that we discuss things that
    seem out of scope e.g. time as they are in scope for us (not
    just spatial)



    jtandy: thankyou to dwbp for joining us; it is a great document
    now; tremendous job

    <eparsons> here..here !

    jtandy: our focus is more specific to dwbp, but we need to
    provide stuff that is additional for spatial data
    ... we will build on your work...
    ... the first thing "homework" was how DWBP is referencing
    spatial data and if they are done well
    ... e.g dubious use of rdf propert to reference a spatial
    ... but bp 2 6 8 9 are all using dct: spatial now
    ... has changed very recently

    <Linda> S/spatial/spatial

    <joshlieberman> dct:spatial

      [11] http://www.geonames.org/3399415

    <BernadetteLoscio> :)

    jtandy: is dct:spatial ok? I think so, what about others?

    <Linda> +1 ok to me

    phila_: it was dcterms: description I was worried about, not

    jtandy: the only dcterms:descriptions are ... [missed] nothing

    <jtandy> [dct:description "CSV distribution of the bus
    timetable dataset of MyCity."]

    BernadetteLoscio: pleasure to be here
    ... wanting to describe discovery metadata, temporal and
    spatial data about the dataset
    ... but you are interested in the data itself?

    <ChrisLittle> discovery is not actually mentioned in the BP is

    jtandy: correct -- largeley the structured spatial data but
    also the descriptions for discovery

    <joshlieberman> Also interested in the spatial data that is
    used as metadata for other datasets...

    jtandy: your spatial descriptions of dataset look good to me
    ... one BP I will raise
    ... BP16 use of standardised terms


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

    <frans> is [13]http://www.geonames.org/3399415 an instance of

      [13] http://www.geonames.org/3399415

    <jtandy> "The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) could define the
    notion of granularity for geospatial datasets, while [DCAT]
    vocabulary provides a vocabulary reusing the same notion
    applied to catalogs on the Web."

    <BernadetteLoscio> i agree!

    <phila> +1 to jtandy on that

    <BernadetteLoscio> +1

    jtandy: not a statement about spatial but it looks odd
    referring to OGC this way, may not be useful to say a sdo
    should do more work
    ... comments?

    <ChrisLittle> +1 to Jeremy on OGC comment

    antoine: i was involved in this, will try to track history,
    would say you are right

    <phila> OK if I raise an action in DWBP for you on that

    jtandy: that BP refers to use of standardised terms -- if we
    could find a codelist that does this would be good but not
    clear now

    <frans> I read it as an example: a domain standards
    organisation can provide definitions for domain concepts

    antoine: is there one at the OGC?

    jtandy: anyone know?

    <ChrisLittle> is granularity different from resolution?

    jtandy: is there a vocab or codelist for granularity of
    geospatial data sets?

    joshlieberman: is an iso19115 thing

    <AndreaPerego> I would say that temporal / spatial resolution
    is a specific type of granularity.

    <KJanowicz_> Agreed

    SimonCox_: level of detail is in citygml may be related

    <KJanowicz_> I do not think that those terms do yet exist

    <frans> I have seen LoD elsewhere in OGC documents too.

    jtandy: these codelists happen in lots of places

    BernadetteLoscio: I agree this needs to change, maybe present
    examples of codelists?

    jtandy: we could find an example of data refs a controoled

    <AndreaPerego> None I'm aware of.

    jtandy: anyone got one?

    <KJanowicz_> yes

    <BernadetteLoscio> ok! thanks!

    <KJanowicz_> See e.g., R2R

    jtandy: [silence]

    KJanowicz_: [cannot hear]

    <joshlieberman> units!

    <AndreaPerego> There's QUDT for units of measurement...

    KJanowicz_: ... very common use of codelists is observational
    data of mathematical [?] I can supply

    <phila> Any chance of a URL in the IRC pls KJanowicz_ ?

    jtandy: codelist for instruments -- is it published by a
    recognised authority?

    <AndreaPerego> QUDT (Quantities, Units, Dimensions and Data
    Types Ontologies): [14]http://www.qudt.org/

      [14] http://www.qudt.org/

    <KJanowicz_> [15]http://schema.geolink.org/voc/index.html

      [15] http://schema.geolink.org/voc/index.html

    KJanowicz_: yes -- i will provide the example

    <BernadetteLoscio> ok! thanks!

    <KJanowicz_> Just as one examplel:

      [16] http://schema.geolink.org/1.0/voc/nvs/L05.html#d4e575

    jtandy: DWBP please let us know if this is not what you need

    <joshlieberman> Granularity may be problematic since it is
    unclear that there is a single definition of spatial
    granularity, let alone a code list or metric.

    jtandy: now want to show some of our BPs


    <KJanowicz_> The source is: vocab.nerc.ac.uk

    antoine: : content looks ok but is the authority really there?
    Is it a NASA official thing? or just a project result?

    KJanowicz_: it is authoritative [not sure]

    SimonCox_: there are multiple groups in NASA doing units --
    qudt may not be the only one from NASA

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about normative and all that

    antoine: looking at second link it looks good

    phila: difference between 2 groups: dwbp is rec track so higher
    bar for references -- could ask Lewis to take a look for us

    <rachel> adam leadbetter

    phila: could look into stability, would need director approval
    to link to either, the NERC one looks better
    ... as long as we are not making a normative statement it could
    be ok -- only guidance

    <KJanowicz_> measuremen-types are a common example for shared
    codelists, e.g., for NitrateConcentration. another example are
    instrument types. Those codelists are used by large communities
    in data repositories such as R2R,BMO-DCO,...

    jtandy: asks simon about international rock types referenced by

    <rachel> yes, rare turn up for a weds !

    SimonCox_: custodianship is geoscience australia asking
    australian national data service, not yet stable
    ... content is stable but publication platform may not be

    <SimonCox_> See
    [17]http://resource.geosciml.org/classifier/ics/ischart/ for

      [17] http://resource.geosciml.org/classifier/ics/ischart/

    <Linda> What about the inspire codelists?

    rachel: I am on the working group for this -- is authoritative

    jtandy: dwbp and sdw neet tight links on some BPs
    ... anybody have an issue here -- BPs of DWBP that we

    frans: yes, the need for having indications of precision , geo
    coords are numbers
    ... does dwbp have something on precision e.g. significant

    jtandy: e.g. we often see 15 dec places where it should be 1

    <ChrisLittle> +1 to Frans comment

    <phila> I don't recall seeing anything on that in DWBP

    frans: yes it is wrong and space-consuming -- we see it in
    coordinates but it could be in other data on the web

    <KJanowicz_> This is not specific to spatial data, it is just a
    wrong way to report on accuracy.

    jtandy: not covered in dwbp now

    <ChrisLittle> Precision and accuracy need to be addressed

    newton: we do not work at this level of the data, we have not
    identified this requirement

    <rachel> there is a section on data quality, and precision
    could be included there?

    newton: we could work together for a new BP to do this

    jtandy: general problem around numerical data -- beter for dwbp

    antoine: i am wondering where this sits in our products... we
    are also doing a note on the quality vocab and precision can
    sit here

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to make ChrisLittle happy

    antoine: we have not identified such precise requirements

    <frans> precision can be expressed in metadata, but should be
    in the data themselves too

    <phila> [18]DQV

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

    phila: am putting in link to dqv -- t his is the right place,
    but the people for this are not here now
    ... e.g. lawrence Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and
    pacific northwest people

    <AndreaPerego> @Antoine, I think precision / accuracy can be
    indeed in scope of DQV (along with granularity)

    phila: will raise an issue in dwbp to work on this
    ... those o ther vocabs also dataset usage will be useful at
    another time

    <ChrisLittle> good examples are temperature and currencies

    joshlieberman: say something provocative... granularity
    ... bp like "use an api" to enable fine-grained access
    ... but only bp is to provide that api data access but we want
    finer grained access to data elements
    ... is the dwbp thinking fine-grained access is not a big

    phila: APIS comes up a lot -- this is not stable in BP doc

    Caroline: need to work a lot on APIs , is a weakest piece,
    would someone here like to help?

    <Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask what the timescales are for
    resolving the API-related best practices?

    phila: suggest dwbp asks josh and SDW to review this area -- is
    'any API on the web" the good scope? we have a lot of feedback
    from eric wilde
    ... hoping to go to CR mid march, ie 4 weeks

    Caroline: putting schedule on irc
    ... expect to delay another week

    <Caroline> [19]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp-status.html

      [19] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp-status.html

    joshlieberman: question not whether you should use an api, but
    practice on granularity of data e.g. really small bits like
    just a latitude alone
    ... we can share this for spatial and temporal
    ... waht is the minimum granularity that is useful?

    phila: comes up more in sdw than dw -- it might be dw that
    handles this

    joshlieberman: agree, but all is connencted to everything

    KJanowicz_: we have to stop triplifying all data--- what should
    be triples and what not?

    <Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask about bp26

    jtandy: bp 26 "use an api"' relates to our "convenince" apis.
    we suggest you desing your api for a partiular purpose around
    useful questions
    ... we also think APIs can describe what they can give you
    ... we also want an api search function -- give us the right
    resource about a plce called London
    ... these might also be relevant for DW API thinking
    ... an additional call for APIs topic?

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    BernadetteLoscio_: We should come back to this. As said it has
    been discussed but not stable.

    <jtandy> [jtandy is happy to contribute to the further API

    eparsons: will organise a followup meeting

    <jtandy> [and that follow up meeting needs to be _soon_ given
    their timescales]

    <scribe> ACTION: eparsons to organise followup meeting on APIs
    with Data on the Web [recorded in

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/17-sdw-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-146 - Organise followup meeting on
    apis with data on the web [on Ed Parsons - due 2016-02-24].

    <KJanowicz_> +1

    ChrisLittle: tilesets need differen levels of granularity --
    needs to be teased out

    <Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask a question about Memento and

    ChrisLittle: [another example scribe missed]

    jtandy: versioning BP8 makes use of memento
    ... waht is adoption of Memento that justifies this?

    <jtandy> [Best Practice 8: versioning information]

    phila: not a should or must -- but many people keen -- uneasy
    as it may not be adopted much -- may ask for comment on thi

    BernadetteLoscio_: we tried to give 2 examples, one without
    Memento and one with
    ... we can also include other implementation approaches as

    <jtandy> dct:publisher:transport-agency-mycity

    BernadetteLoscio_: was only to show examples

    <ChrisLittle> ض+

    jtandy: turtle example had 2 colons without pred and obj -- not
    well formed turtle, is in a few places

    eparsons: api meeting may be with a subset of SDW team

    BernadetteLoscio_: identifiers: we should also discuss this as
    we both have something here

    jtandy: ok -- running out of time-- next week? after Chris
    talks about time

    <Zakim> rachel, you wanted to suggest building on the transport
    example in our examples - with full geometry of routes, live
    bus locations etc

    eparsons: could be next week

    <Caroline> we may join again next week :)

    rachel: yes, lets make our BPs aligned could build on our
    transport example, could also match naming

    <newton> [21]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#Conneg

      [21] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#Conneg

    newton: bp 22 conneg, I am involved in this and will work on it
    tomorrow, please send email jeremy

    <BernadetteLoscio_> +1 Rachel

    <BernadetteLoscio_> thank you!!!

    eparsons: will pick this up next week too

    <frans> Thank you. Getting the two WGs together was a good

    <Caroline> thank you!

    <AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye!

    <newton> Thank you! Bye

    eparsons: will do conneg, apis and chris issues

    <BernadetteLoscio_> bye!!

    <Linda> Bye!

    <laufer> bye...

    <rachel> bye!

    <eparsons> bye

    <RaulGarciaCastro> bye!

    <KJanowicz_> bye bye

    <robin> Bye

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: eparsons to organise followup meeting on APIs
    with Data on the Web [recorded in

      [22] http://www.w3.org/2016/02/17-sdw-minutes.html#action01

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [23]approve last week minutes

    [End of minutes]
Received on Thursday, 18 February 2016 17:05:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:44 UTC