- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 6 May 2016 15:58:16 +0100
- To: Public DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
The minutes of today's meeting are at
https://www.w3.org/2016/05/06-dwbp-minutes with a text snapshot below.
Thanks to Eric K for scribing.
Yaso will be writing about this separately but please note that we
decided this week that we will vote on publishing the three documents in
next week's call. These are expected to be the last versions that are
decided by us. Any future variation will be following *external*
comments. So if you have comments, speak up in the coming week or, erm,
keep them to yourself :-)
Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference
06 May 2016
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160506
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/06-dwbp-irc
Attendees
Present
ericstephan, yaso, phila, BernadetteLoscio, newton,
Eric_Kauz, laufer
Regrets
Annette, Hadley
Chair
yaso
Scribe
Eric_Kauz
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]BP doc
* [6]Summary of Action Items
* [7]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<yaso>
[8]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160506
[8] https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160506
BP doc
Yaso: start by discussing open comments.
<phila> [9]Editr's draft
[9] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html
<BernadetteLoscio>
[10]https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Comments_to_be_considered
_in_the_last_call_working_draft
[10]
https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Comments_to_be_considered_in_the_last_call_working_draft
BernadetteLoscio: comment on data sensitive still open the rest
is addressed
<ericstephan> yaso - did we vote on last week's minutes? Just a
reminder just in case.
<yaso> ericstephan, yes! you're right :-)D
<yaso> I'll go back to them
BernadetteLoscio: sent message that comments were almost all
addressed. Group should look at comments and commits.
<ericstephan> :-)
<yaso> thanks
BernadetteLoscio: really happy :)
... 87 comments, still have a few issues we can deal with next
week, but feels we can publish this version.
... data safety and approach to implementation for real time
access.
... still need to correct some URIs. included on separate html
page, annette made comment on URIs, still need to correct
yaso: congrats, really impressive, forgot to vote minutes., Now
need to vote minutes
<yaso> [11]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-dwbp-minutes
[11] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-dwbp-minutes
<phila> PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes
[12]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-dwbp-minutes
[12] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-dwbp-minutes
<yaso> +1
<ericstephan> +1
<BernadetteLoscio> +1
<phila> +1
+1
RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes
[13]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-dwbp-minutes
[13] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-dwbp-minutes
<ericstephan> thank you Phil for getting the minutes out, it
really helps reviewing them after the meeting
yaso: should we discuss data sensitive section? Can we address
it here.
BernadetteLoscio: yes can address it, make a proposal and later
on talk to annette, understands here point on this.
<ericstephan>
[14]https://gregnorc.github.io/ping-privacy-questions/
[14] https://gregnorc.github.io/ping-privacy-questions/
ericstephan: reconnected with privacy interest group. Review
last week on web annotations vocabulary, email talked about
different privacy questions. still evolving.
... one of the areas that struck him about sensitive data,
questions publishers should ask themselves about sharing
privacy data, need to let people know when their privacy
information is being shared
... there are some concepts we can add to data sensitivity
section (not completely broken). Intro section and best
practices do not match.
BernadetteLoscio: agrees with Eric and Annette, problem is best
practice is about explaining why some data is not available,
not only about sensitive data, if data is not available explain
why it is not.
... need to change introduction to be more general and not talk
about sensitive data or move best practice to data access
section. best practice to stay the same. Way it is now is not
good
... title of section should not be sensitive data. do not
address privacy issues, out of scope of document
yaso: agrees with bernadette, second one is the best option.
focuses more on availability not type of data. should not
address privacy
ericstephan: agrees mostly with bernadette, but need to include
people should be conscious about what they are publishing and
it may be privacy data, should include a caution.
<BernadetteLoscio> yes
phila: we have had best practives that are weak about
preserving privacy. agrees that intro to section does not match
best practices.
... some of text can be adapted and moved as part of data
enrichment section. orphan section (data enrich) give examples
there and could take information in intro and put it into data
enrichment section.
yaso: agrees
BernadetteLoscio: agrees
... likes Phil's idea.
yaso: for data not available is not just because it is not open
ericstephan: thinking about descriptive metadata section, may
be good idea to also include it in descriptive metadata as a
pointer.
... blend sensitive data section into data enrichment or taking
best practice into section or both.
BernadetteLoscio: best practice goes to sensitive data section
ericstephan: proposing some work on privacy and provenance.
becoming conscious on when you share metadata. provenance
requires metadata
... if we are putting sensitive data in data enrichment
section, but a citation in section that if it includes
sensitive information, here are some guidelines, a reference if
cleanly described.
BernadetteLoscio: do you think we will have sensitive data in
metadata
ericstephan: with provenance, these are kind of things privacy
group is working, when necessary share descriptive metadata but
be aware for example clinical health data,
yaso: doesnt know how to cover this issue in data enrichment
section
<ericstephan> I think an intro in the metadata section would be
fine
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to suggest that Eric offer some text
to cover that?
BernadetteLoscio: if we also have sensitive metadata this
applies to different types and thus difficult to include in
just one best practice, difficult to see where we will have
sensitive metadata
<laufer> +1 to talk that privacy applies to all published data,
including metadata
<ericstephan> Yes I will send something out today.
phila: could Eric find a place to put it and create text, can
Eric take action item
<laufer> this include feedback too
ericstephan: yes, he will take action item
<phila> ACTION: ericstephan to suggest sentence/location for
sentence to cover sensitive data in metadata section [recorded
in [15]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/06-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[15] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/06-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-278 - Suggest sentence/location for
sentence to cover sensitive data in metadata section [on Eric
Stephan - due 2016-05-13].
<ericstephan> do we want to propose to put the section in the
data enrichment and hold the vote in email so Annette can
comment?
<phila> PROPOSED: To move and adapt sensitive data intro text
into intro for data enrichment. Move data unavailable BP to
Data Access
<ericstephan> +1
BernadetteLoscio: would like to do this asap. better to do this
and have annette decide ot like or not like
<yaso> +1
<phila> +1
<BernadetteLoscio> +1
<newton> +1
BernadetteLoscio: is good with proposa;
+1
<laufer> +1
RESOLUTION: To move and adapt sensitive data intro text into
intro for data enrichment. Move data unavailable BP to Data
Access
<ericstephan> Phila delivers "asap"
phila: can help with text after the call
yaso: other topic is discuss open comments.
BernadetteLoscio: just comment 20 about data identifiers. In
best practice 11.
phila: does not agree with annette
... annette says it BP is more about creating your own and not
reuse, but section does cover both. Use other's URIs, include
products too :)
... thinks this advice is consistent with subject of best
practice.
... subheading is not what whole best practice is about , Phil
is happy with section as it is.
yaso: will contact annette.
phila: would be a good place in BP to refer to GS1 work, can
put link in
<phila> Eric_Kauz: On GS1 we've done a lot of work on products
IDs of course and a product vocab, and BPs in terms of URIs to
represent IDs.
<phila> ... Our product IDs and producers
<BernadetteLoscio>
[16]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#identifiersWithinDatasets
[16] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#identifiersWithinDatasets
<ericstephan> It is a good practical example +1 using gs1
phila: massage section to include work of GS1 on identifiers.
<phila> action Eric_Kauz to offer text for BP 11 to refer to
Digital GS1
<trackbot> Error finding 'Eric_Kauz'. You can review and
register nicknames at
<[17]http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
[17] http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users
<phila> action Kauz to offer text for BP 11 to refer to Digital
GS1
<trackbot> Created ACTION-279 - Offer text for bp 11 to refer
to digital gs1 [on Eric Kauz - due 2016-05-13].
<ericstephan> I think we are very close on real time access
implementation
yaso: do you want to go down to some details.
BernadetteLoscio: talk about schedule first. do we need to wait
until next friday to vote.
... can we vote by email, worried about time.
... from point of view of editors, do not have a lot of changes
to make.
phila: changes have been incremental. having resolved three
issues, it would be good for chairs to advertise that we will
be voting next week.
... people can review comments and document, suggest we
advertise that on Friday 13th we will be voting to publish this
document as final document that group will produce
... state period of time that we will accept comments on
document.
... would also like to vote on vocabulary as well.
yaso: agrees, may need to advertise the voting so group can be
present to vote it.
BernadetteLoscio: doesnt feel we need to freeze it for one week
and wait another week., likes Phil's proposal.
phila: asking yaso to send email to the group. resolved issues
and expect to be on call next week Vote equals that we have
completed document to best of our abilities and want to vote on
Vocabs as well.
BernadetteLoscio: document will be frozen today.
... send message that we will vote next week. No need to say it
is frozen.
<laufer> could we have in the email a single url with all the
updates?
phila: no issue with proposal. need end point, minor changes,
we discussed them, by Tuesday it will be done, no major changes
to documents.
yaso: will send email
BernadetteLoscio: would like to ask group about best practice
for republication, and data enrichment, were thinking of making
a simple visualization, using a map as an example to
compliment. were thinking of CSV distribution and visualizatopn
... is this a good idea or not necessary
<ericstephan> I like the idea
yaso: thinks bernadette has time and it is a good idea
<newton> open street maps
phila: open street map may be better but needs to check
licencing
<phila> From the licence page OpenStreetMap is open data: you
are free to use it for any purpose as long as you credit
OpenStreetMap and its contributors
phila: can do it, open street map is open, need to credit them.
<phila> See [18]http://www.openstreetmap.org/about
[18] http://www.openstreetmap.org/about
<BernadetteLoscio>
[19]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#context
[19] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#context
BernadetteLoscio: changed explanation section on context,
changed diagram and text.
<ericstephan> nice!
<ericstephan> thank you, I will work on my two parts today
<yaso> bye all!
yaso: closing call,
<laufer> bye
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: ericstephan to suggest sentence/location for
sentence to cover sensitive data in metadata section [recorded
in [20]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/06-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[20] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/06-dwbp-minutes.html#action01
Summary of Resolutions
1. [21]Accept last week's minutes
https://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-dwbp-minutes
2. [22]To move and adapt sensitive data intro text into intro
for data enrichment. Move data unavailable BP to Data
Access
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 6 May 2016 14:58:19 UTC