[Minutes] 2017-05-25

Re-sending to the correct list. Sorry for the spam.

The minutes of today's meeting are at
  https://www.w3.org/2017/05/25-dxwg-minutes with a text snapshot below. 
Thanks to Ruben for scribing.

Thank you to Ixchel, Jaroslav and Rob for offering to be our Use Cases 
and Requirements doc editors. The skeleton exists at 

There was agreement that we want to collect the first complete round of 
use cases by the end of June - so if you haven't already done so, please 
add yours at

Please read others' use cases before adding your own to minimise 

There were lots of volunteers to edit DCAT - which is very encouraging - 
but as today is a holiday in many European countries, we decided to hold 
off on appointing the final list until the next meeting which will be on 
*Monday 5 June* at 14:00 UTC. This is the new regular time. However, it 
is expected that the WG will split into several task forces and they 
will meet at different times to suit those WG members.

Finally, please let us know whether you plan to come to the F2F in 
Oxford in July. See (and edit)


       [1] https://www.w3.org/

              Dataset Exchange Working Group Teleconference

25 May 2017

    [2]Agenda [3]IRC log

       [2] https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2017.05.25
       [3] http://www.w3.org/2017/05/25-dxwg-irc


           achille_zappa, alejandra, AndreaPerego, annette_g,
           ByronCinNZ, Caroline, erics, fanieli, Jaroslav_Pullmann,
           Jean, kcoyle, LarsG, mathieu, newton, phila,
           PWinstanley, RiccardoAlbertoni, Rob Atkinson,
           RubenVerborgh, SimonCox

           Antoine, Colleen, Jacco, Kate, Luiz




      * [4]Meeting Minutes
          1. [5]Approving Minutes
          2. [6]Introductions
          3. [7]Use cases
          4. [8]start discussing DCAT
          5. [9]F2F in Oxford, July
          6. [10]setting the meeting time
      * [11]Summary of Resolutions

Meeting Minutes

    <Alejandra> [12]https://www.w3.org/2017/05/18-dxwg-minutes

      [12] https://www.w3.org/2017/05/18-dxwg-minutes

Approving Minutes

    Resolved: Last week's minutes approved

    Alejandra asks for what appears in the minutes

    <Caroline> [13]https://www.w3.org/wiki/IRC

      [13] https://www.w3.org/wiki/IRC

    phil: the queue system: if you want to speak, just type q+

    <Alejandra> thanks!

    see [14]https://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html

      [14] https://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html

    and [15]https://www.w3.org/2002/03/RRSAgent

      [15] https://www.w3.org/2002/03/RRSAgent


    Jean: works at NIC.br, PhD student on topic of open data

    <Caroline> [16]https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/

      [16] https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2017.05.25

    <Caroline> III. Use case task: Use Case Working Space:
    discussing the Use Cases addressed and defining the editors

Use cases

    Alejandra: will there be a deadline for use cases?

    Caroline: it is flexible, but would be nice to have a deadline,
    so we can move on with the requirements

    Karen: let's not wait too long for use cases

    <PWinstanley> +1 to the idea of a month

    Let's set a deadline of a month?

    +1 for a month

    <Present_Thomas> +1 for me (a month)

    <Alejandra> +1 for a month

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1 to setting a deadline in one month

    <erics> +1 for 1 month

    <ByronCinNZ> +1 for a month

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about iterations

    Karen: also, other work can go on in the background

    Phil: we could then have a first public working draft with use

    can still have updates then

    kcoyle: this also means we'd have complete use cases before the
    first F2F

    <roba> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    Proposal: establish deadline for use cases

    <Present_Thomas> +1

    <phila> PROPOSED: Use Cases to be collected by the end of June

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <newton> +1

    <Alejandra> +1

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1

    <PWinstanley> +1

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

    <Caroline> +1

    <ByronCinNZ> +1

    <kcoyle> +1

    <LarsG> +1

    <erics> +1

    <Present_Thomas> +1

    <achille_zappa> +1

    <annette_g> +1

    Resolved: Use Cases to be collected by the end of June

    <SimonCox> +1

    <roba> +1

    <newton> phila: is explaining how the process works

    <newton> ... showing the minutes and explaining how the
    resolutions are recorded

    <newton> Caroline: suggest to define the editors of Use Cases

    <newton> fanieli: can be one of the editor of the UC doc

    <newton> Caroline: anyone else would like to be an editor with

    <RubenVerborgh1> Phil: whichever document we're talking about,
    editing a document is a scary thing

    <PWinstanley> I will help in this

    <RubenVerborgh1> you may be put off by HTML and GitHub

    <RubenVerborgh1> but you will be helped

    <RubenVerborgh1> these technical things shouldn't stop you from
    being an editor

    <RubenVerborgh1> Alejandra: I want to edit one of the other

    <RubenVerborgh1> but how much time should I consider for that?

    <SimonCox> How long is a piece of string?

    <RubenVerborgh1> Phil: use cases document is probably one of
    the simplest

    <RubenVerborgh1> difficult thing is keeping track

    <RubenVerborgh1> but not a huge job

    <Alejandra> thanks

    <RubenVerborgh1> time is hard to say, half a day a week until
    it is done maybe

    <SimonCox> Editing UC document: Largely about being organized
    in keeping lists and cross-references, and making things look a
    bit uniform

    <RubenVerborgh1> Eric: Should we have sample data for use

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to pick up on Eric's question

    <RubenVerborgh1> phila: yes, having real data in the use cases
    makes them much stronger, definitely encouraged

    <RubenVerborgh1> phila: definite +1 for real data

    <RubenVerborgh1> newton: Happy to help and contribute with
    GitHub and HTML

    <RubenVerborgh1> roba: Comment on the use cases: it's useful to
    distinguish between use cases and example scenarios differently

    <PWinstanley> I agree with roba that we need a canonical model
    for use cases

    <RubenVerborgh1> Jaroslav_Pullmann: documents important to know
    how current standards have to be changed

    <RubenVerborgh1> more than 20 use cases, very impressive

    <RubenVerborgh1> if more editors are needed, I can help

    <RubenVerborgh1> helps extract requirements

    <RubenVerborgh1> for new version of DCAT

    <RubenVerborgh1> Alejandra: In terms of documents, if we are
    working in parallel tracks?

    <RubenVerborgh1> …role of editors: are they the only ones

    <RubenVerborgh1> …others just make issues?

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: everything we approve as group must
    be in the document

    <RubenVerborgh1> …that's the main role of the editor

    <RubenVerborgh1> kcoyle: I would suggest that Jaroslav_Pullmann
    and fanieli edit the document

    <erics> you can distinguish between editors and contributors

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: we can have 3 editors as well

    <Alejandra> +1 for pull requests

    <RubenVerborgh1> roba: contributions can also be done through
    pull requests for editors

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1 to erics about distinguishing between
    editors and contributors as we did in other group

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: other editors?

    <roba> will be happy to join as editor - can help with git

    <RubenVerborgh1> PROPOSED: Have Jaroslav_Pullmann and fanieli
    as editors

    <erics> +1

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1

    <Present_Thomas> +1

    <annette_g> should probably say what they are editing

    <SimonCox> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <Present_Thomas> Three, I thought

    <Caroline> PROPOSED: Have Jaroslav_Pullmann, fanieli and roba
    as editors of the Use Cases document

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <ByronCinNZ> +1

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

    <mathieu> +1

    <erics> +1

    <roba> +1

    <RubenVerborgh1> +1

    <Caroline> +1

    <LarsG> +1

    <annette_g> +1

    <SimonCox> +1

    <achille_zappa> +1

    <newton> +1

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> s\t+1\+1

    <PWinstanley> +1

    <fanieli> +1

    <RubenVerborgh1> roba: no need to vote on GitHub

    <Caroline> RESOVED: Have Jaroslav_Pullmann, fanieli and roba as
    editors of the Use Cases document

    Resolved: Have Jaroslav_Pullmann, fanieli and roba as editors
    of the Use Cases document

    <Caroline> IV. Starting discussing DCAT and defining the

start discussing DCAT

    <RubenVerborgh1> Alejandra: I volunteer

    <PWinstanley> I will help

    <SimonCox> q

    <SimonCox> I will assist too

    <Present_Thomas> I can help also

    <mathieu> I can help too

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> i will help as contributor..

    <RubenVerborgh1> kcoyle: Given that a number of people couldn't
    attend, maybe we shouldn't finalize this.

    <erics> oooh good point

    <achille_zappa> i think it would be better wait for missing

    <mathieu> that's a good point

    <RubenVerborgh1> yeah, the short notice and the holiday are a
    bit unfortunate for major decisions

    <SimonCox> - good point Karen - though there will always be
    missing members (e.g. next week I will not be in the meeting)

    <annette_g> I think our charter says we have to do that

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1 to kcoyle about not finalising the list
    of editors..

    <roba> ok by me

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: shall we leave the decision open
    about use cases as well then?

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <achille_zappa> wait at least for DCAT

    <kcoyle> +1

    <RubenVerborgh1> LarsG: let's set editors now for use cases,
    given short amount of time

    <Present_Thomas> +1 to wait for DCAT

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +

    <mathieu> +1 on waiting

    <RubenVerborgh1> PROPOSED: waiting a week for DCAT

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

    <RubenVerborgh1> +1

    <phila> +1 to wait a wewek

    <LarsG> +1

    <Alejandra> +1

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1

    <Caroline> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <kcoyle> +1

    <achille_zappa> +1

    <annette_g> +1

    <ByronCinNZ> +1

    <PWinstanley> +1 or waiting

    Resolved: let's wait a week for DCAT

    <SimonCox> Is 'next week' monday?

    <erics> +1 it should be noted that this is for the editor vote

    <Caroline> V. Announcing the F2F at the University of Oxford on
    July 17-18 (see Oxford Attendance and logistics)

    <Alejandra> I think it is actually Monday

F2F in Oxford, July

    <RubenVerborgh1> SimonCox: when are the next decisions made?
    next meeting is Monday, right?

    <annette_g> next Monday is too soon

    <RubenVerborgh1> SimonCox: tripping over ourselves with short
    notice and deadlines

    <mathieu> next monday is also bank holiday in England

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: next Monday is too soon, let's
    decide not next Monday, but the one after that

    <erics> Monday June 5

    <Present_Thomas> +1 on 5/6

    <RubenVerborgh1> Is there a point in having a meeting at all
    next Monday? given short time in between

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1 to 5/6

    <SimonCox> However - we have to be a bit careful about
    everyone's holidays ... THere will be a holiday most weeks in
    one place?

    <PWinstanley> +1 for June 6th

    <RubenVerborgh1> PROPOSED: deciding on editors on June 6th

    <erics> Monday/Tuesday

    <Caroline> PROPOSED: deciding on editors of DCAT on June 6th

    <RubenVerborgh1> 6th is Tuesday? totally confused…

    <annette_g> +1

    <AndreaPerego> June, 6th, is Tuesday.

    <Alejandra> June 5th

    <SimonCox> June 5th is Monday

    <ByronCinNZ> +1

    <annette_g> GMT

    <RubenVerborgh1> PROPOSED: deciding on editors of DCAT on June
    5th 2PM UTC

    <RubenVerborgh1> aargh

    <erics> +1

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

    <mathieu> +1

    <annette_g> +1

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1

    <Caroline> +1

    <RubenVerborgh1> +1

    <Present_Thomas> +1

    <kcoyle> +1

    <fanieli> +1

    <newton> +1

    <roba> +1

    <LarsG> 0 (but as said it's a holiday)

    <SimonCox> Lets stick to date and time in UTC

    <SimonCox> +1

    Resolved: deciding on editors of DCAT on June 5th 2PM UTC

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: back to F2F now

    <annette_g> +1 to SimonCox

    <RubenVerborgh1> Alejandra: could be good to know ASAP how many
    people tend to attend, for size of room (25)

    <PWinstanley> I plan to attend

    <erics> Will remote attendees be supported?

    <Caroline> I plan to attend

    <RubenVerborgh1> Alejandra: sent around hotels

    <RubenVerborgh1> attendance doc: [17]https://www.w3.org/2017/

      [17] https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Oxford_Attendance_and_logistics

    <roba> would love to - but its a bit short notice for funding

    <RubenVerborgh1> Phil: remote attendees will be supported

    <erics> great, thank you!

    <RubenVerborgh1> fanieli: how will F2F be different then what
    we're doing from week to week?

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: I see it as a marathon

    <RubenVerborgh1> …2 days, very intense, lot of work, great work

    <RubenVerborgh1> …still use IRC to document

    <RubenVerborgh1> …also hands-on, write down ideas

    <RubenVerborgh1> …discuss them, have as many resolutions as

    <RubenVerborgh1> …go deeper, profound about things

    <RubenVerborgh1> phila: meeting online is baffling until you
    get used to it

    <RubenVerborgh1> …in a F2F, two important things happen

    <RubenVerborgh1> …we get through a lot, intense discussion

    <RubenVerborgh1> …but also, "there's no such thing as a virtual

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> ;o)

    <Caroline> +1 to "there's no such thing as a virtual beer"

    <Present_Thomas> Lol

    <RubenVerborgh1> …when you get together, you interact socially
    as well as professionally

    <RubenVerborgh1> …group comes together much better after F2F

    <erics> It is well worth it if you can attend! I'd rather visit

    <SimonCox> not just budget, also travel *time* which is large
    for some ...

    <Alejandra> thanks, yes, Caroline told me about this - I hope
    it should be fine

    <RubenVerborgh1> …satisfying and lot of fun

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: we can always have F2F in other

setting the meeting time

    <Caroline> VI. Setting regular meeting time

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: is always difficult

    <RubenVerborgh1> …but let's discuss with group, we can change

    <RubenVerborgh1> …It's a group discussion

    <RubenVerborgh1> …we'll now follow the Doodle

    <SimonCox> Doodle poll was clear. Monday 1400

    <RubenVerborgh1> …if we decide to split in task forces, they
    can adjust

    <RubenVerborgh1> phila: if the group splits, which is likely,
    those subgroups can have their own times

    <phila> [18]UCR

      [18] https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/

    <RubenVerborgh1> Phil: set up the skeleton

    <phila> RubenVerborgh1: Should the next meeting be on Monday on
    the week after that?

    <phila> ... Its' very short notice if it's this coming Monday

    <annette_g> didn't we just vote to wait a week?

    <RubenVerborgh1> Jaroslav_Pullmann: should agree on some

    <RubenVerborgh1> …are we going to merge the use cases out

    <RubenVerborgh1> kcoyle: yes, you end up editing them into a
    coherent document

    <roba> merge and group

    <RubenVerborgh1> …let's use Monday to actually talk about use

    <RubenVerborgh1> …possible that not every use case will end up
    there, because of duplication

    <SimonCox> Current use-cases - [19]https://www.w3.org/2017/

      [19] https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space

    <kcoyle> AndreaPerego: even though there is overlap, you may
    want to keep most of them, and group them by categories

    <RubenVerborgh1> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we should pertain the
    different areas that they are covering

    <kcoyle> andrea: contributors maybe should indicate which of
    their use cases overlap or relate to other use cases

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> ok

    <RubenVerborgh1> phila: I would recommend to work out early on
    criteria for relevance of use cases

    <RubenVerborgh1> …will be edge cases, people will want this or
    that in

    <Caroline> +1 to work out early on criteria for relevance of
    use cases

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> it is probably useful to take a look to use
    cases document prepared in previous w3c working group just to
    get inspired.

    <RubenVerborgh1> …document those criteria, can save a lot of

    <phila> Next Meeting Monday 5 June

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> fine!

    <roba> +1

    <SimonCox> bye bye

    <RubenVerborgh1> Caroline: keep discussions on e-mail by now

    <ByronCinNZ> Bye

    <newton> bye

    <Jaroslav_Pullmann> bye bye

    <annette_g> bye all!

    <Present_Thomas> Bye bye

    <achille_zappa> bye

    <LarsG> Thank you Caroline, By

    <mathieu> Bye

    <Alejandra> thank you!

    <Alejandra> bye

    <fanieli> bye

    <RiccardoAlbertoni> bye

    <AndreaPerego> Thanks and bye!

    <roba> bye

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [20]Last week's minutes approved
     2. [21]Use Cases to be collected by the end of June
     3. [22]Have Jaroslav_Pullmann, fanieli and roba as editors of
        the Use Cases document
     4. [23]let's wait a week for DCAT
     5. [24]deciding on editors of DCAT on June 5th 2PM UTC

Received on Thursday, 25 May 2017 15:34:46 UTC