W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openactive@w3.org > May 2017

Re: Activity List Discussion Summary

From: Leigh Dodds <leigh.dodds@theodi.org>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 16:27:27 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJsy4=PW_4YthwW4LvxL6WQVjWR6psx6nUqh6u5dGBTjMSn33Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-openactive@w3.org
Hi,

As a reminder, if you have feedback on the activity list or editorial
guidelines, please can you leave a comment or suggested edit on the
documents linked below?

To help move things forward I suggested on our call this week that we
should:

* refine the editorial guidelines, so we have an agreed scope. So please do
add your thoughts

* look to validate the list against existing open data, to help us test how
well it fits and possibly identify any gaps

* arrange a face to face meeting to help us move forward with producing a
more public draft. I think if we can could get a small group together we
could iterate on this pretty quickly.

If you're interested in attending a F2F workshop to discuss and revise the
Activity List, can you please complete the following Doodle poll? We'll
hold the meeting at the ODI offices in London:

https://doodle.com/poll/udx8iiyd5cm7e9uv

Cheers,

L.

On 12 May 2017 at 16:43, Leigh Dodds <leigh.dodds@theodi.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This is the second of the summaries from our hangout this week. In the
> second half of the call we reviewed the progress and plans around
> developing our shared activity list.
>
> This call was our first chance to discuss the initial progress of
> developing the list, lead by Kim, Becky and Jade. The ongoing, working
> draft version is at [1].
>
> We discussed:
>
> * requirements for the list, e.g. its use in supporting searching and
> browsing for opportunities, integrating data across platforms and in
> reporting. There's a clear need to balance these requirements: the list
> needs to support searching by end-users, but data integration is also an
> important enabler for openactive as a whole
>
> * The top terms of the list. The key decision was to remove the top-level
> split between Sports and Physical Activities, if these are retained they
> will be handled as collections. This reduces the list to 2 levels, not 3
>
> * Whether to have a single or multiple levels in the hierarchy. I think
> the consensus, based on our previous discussions is to have multiple
> levels, but also note we need to include, e.g. in the primer, some notes
> about how the list can be used, to support searching
>
> * Need for more detailed review of some terms, including their labelling,
> descriptions, etc
>
> * Focusing on the terms and their metadata before working further on
> collections
>
> * Using trademarks as an indicator for including branded programmes in the
> list. It's one useful indicator of visibility to participants
>
> * That the list may need review by additional groups. Jade has reached out
> to UK Active for input.
>
> * That the list should include unique identifiers to help with versioning
>
> * That the term labels will be formatted for display to users.
>
> The key debate was around the process for moving forward. There were some
> different views about the best way forward, e.g:
>
> * just publish the list, after some further review by the group
> * inviting further review and feedback from specific groups before
> publishing more widely
>
> The balancing act here is fulfilling immediate needs of developers who are
> looking to use a list, whilst ensuring that it is reasonably coherent. But
> without spending a huge amount of time trying to create a perfect list.
>
> Based on the discussion, I think that the way forward is to:
>
> * share some editorial guidance, that will help us draft the list and
> inform its development
> * set ourselves a target date for publishing a first version
> * work iteratively, aiming to:
>  * refine the list within the group, over the next few weeks
>  * then invite comment and feedback, within a clear time window, from a
> wider group (to be determined)
> * ensure that it is clear to everyone, in the group and beyond, how and
> when feedback can be provided, and what type of feedback we are looking for
> * continue to work within the Google spreadsheet for now, to collate
> feedback
> * review the list again in our next call, with feedback on the document in
> the meantime
>
> There is an early draft of an editorial guide at [2].
>
> Please feel free to add comments to the draft activity list spreadsheet.
>
> Cheers,
>
> L.
>
> [1]. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yWpVXGr91NiqWuCr7EBdVI2uhzxgN
> 3Qw-oIKNMuhTeQ/edit#gid=735540001
> [2]. https://docs.google.com/document/d/15-bSByBhoIdckmlh6Dz3J27xQv7OeTYR
> 0qv-OZh_Mls/edit#
>
> --
> Leigh Dodds, Senior Consultant, theODI.org
> @ldodds
> The ODI, 65 Clifton Street, London EC2A 4JE
>
>


-- 
Leigh Dodds, Senior Consultant, theODI.org
@ldodds
The ODI, 65 Clifton Street, London EC2A 4JE
Received on Friday, 26 May 2017 15:28:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 26 May 2017 15:28:03 UTC