W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-poiwg@w3.org > December 2010

[minutes] POI WG minutes 08 Dec 2010

From: Matt Womer <mdw@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 10:18:26 -0500
Message-Id: <1A764CE5-47BA-40DD-B66D-2568235B92B5@w3.org>
To: public-poiwg W3C <public-poiwg@w3.org>
Hi all,

Minutes from today's teleconference are available here:

And as text below.

A few reminders:
1. Members please be sure to register for the f2f whether you are attending or not:

2. We will be doing an overview of the various specifications we've listed here:

Please review them prior to the face to face so that we can discuss them.

3. There will be no teleconference next week as we will be in the f2f.

Action items:
[NEW] ACTION: Andy to talk with OGC about overview presentation [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/12/08-poiwg-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Matt to send note to list to encourage review of specs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/12/08-poiwg-minutes.html#action01]

See you next week!




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

            Points of Interest Working Group Teleconference

08 Dec 2010


      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-poiwg/2010Dec/0001

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2010/12/08-poiwg-irc


          Andy, Gary, Matt, Luca, Alex, Jacques

          Karl, Ronald, Jens, Carl, Christine, danbri




     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Use Case Review
         2. [6]Related Specifications
         3. [7]F2F Agenda Creation
         4. [8]Announcements
     * [9]Summary of Action Items

   <trackbot> Date: 08 December 2010

   <Ronald> Hi guys, sorry I can't be in the call due to another
   meeting. Will try to keep an eye on the IRC channel though.

   <gary> Sitting on mute so you don't hear me coughing and spluttering

   <scribe> scribe: Matt

Use Case Review


   <trackbot> ACTION-15 -- Andrew Braun to review use cases based on
   today's discussion -- due 2010-12-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [10]http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/15

     [10] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/15

   Andy: Reviewing the use cases: we had a meeting on 11/17 that
   surrounded the use cases. We agreed they were to be for testing the
   data format. Reviewing the minutes, numerous people stepped forward
   to review them. I looked at them, and it seems we have a good set of
   use cases from my perspective.

   <jacques> +jacques

   Andy: The one thing that's missing I think is real-time use cases.
   By that I mean things like Foursquare or Gowalla where there are
   things happening at places right now.

   I'm not sure if it's an extension or a core thing. But the data
   format needs to support something real-time.

   Andy: That's the use case I saw missing. I'll write it up in a
   generic way and send it to the list. I thought we could take a few
   minutes to discuss it here.

   Luca: Don't you think AR is kind of a real-time use case?

   -> [11]http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Use_Cases Use Case

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Use_Cases

   <alex_> +alex

   Andy: Looking at our use cases I didn't see the real-time nature of
   it being captured.

   <alex_> thanks, matt

   Andy: I'm wondering how we make use of the real-time Web, with
   constantly changing data. Maybe location base advertising is
   real-time, but it seems more fixed data.

   <gary> +q

   Luca: ?? communication, like my presence.

   alex_: With respect to AR, where we have guide/create/play has a
   good breadth to it and is a good reflection of what we have above
   it, but most of it I think we see as queries. Informational... would
   fall into the first bullet point of AR Guide.
   ... What I don't see is the typical case where I want to create
   real-time data and leave it for someone.

   [[Great point on creation Alex! +1]]

   alex_: We don't seem to cover quick peer-to-peer data real-time data
   exchange between users.

   <alex_> -q

   gary: From a definition and processing point of view, there's no
   difference between static and real-time.
   ... Yes, you are creating content and adding to the corpus, but I
   don't think that counts as real-time, it's just another content

   <alex_> +1 use case doesn't necessarily inform the data model or
   underlying standard

   gary: The use cases are a good representation now for a first round.
   Let's not get hung up on these now.

   <alex_> +q

   <Zakim> matt, you wanted to ask where we think we'll use this data,
   backend? directly in the clients? transform from JSON in a Web page
   or is this sort of a storage format?

   <gary> Matt - we can't hear you

   <Andy> +1 on alex

   <alex_> -q

   alex: I agree that more use cases won't necessarily inform the
   underlying data model, but more use cases are good.

   Andy: I'm concerned if we leave out some of the buckets then we risk
   having a format that doesn't fit.

   <gary> +q

   gary: The two main things we probably need to flesh out face-to-face
   next week: the use cases people have put together with good depth
   and breadth, despite not being all-inclusive, we should split into
   groups, one to look at real world use cases and another to look at
   the underlying data representation.
   ... Then another working on a straw man data format. Bring them
   together, see how they align, which blow holes in one another, etc.

   Andy: Good suggestion.


   <alex_> +1

   alex_: That sounds like a good beginning for an agenda item next

   <Andy> +2

   gary: I'd like to get at the f2f something we're happy with,
   refinements, work to be done, etc. Something concrete to say to the
   powers that be: "this isn't just a talking shop, isn't an extremely
   long winded group that after five years comes out too late"

   alex_: I agree, something concrete should be the major goal.

   <Andy> +3

   <Zakim> matt, you wanted to mention "fpwd"

   <alex_> yes, can hear

   <gary> "put out a first draft, don't be afraid to publish" ... +1 to

   <alex_> +1 to first darft of sepcification

   <alex_> +1

   Andy: Sounds like we're in agreement that some sort of pen-to-paper
   is the critical outcome of the f2f.
   ... Breakout groups on use cases and data format are useful as well.
   I'll craft something around that as a strawman.
   ... I'd hope to do the physical agenda creation at the meeting, but
   we'll have a good strawman based on these conversations.


   <trackbot> ACTION-16 -- Andrew Braun to review specs mentioned on
   the list and to ping those who posted and see if they want to
   present on the next conference call -- due 2010-12-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [12]http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/16

     [12] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/16

Related Specifications

   Andy: I sent a few emails, but this will be an agenda point at the
   f2f. I'll have this action done before the end of the day tomorrow.

   ACTION-16 due 2010-12-10

   <trackbot> ACTION-16 Review specs mentioned on the list and to ping
   those who posted and see if they want to present on the next
   conference call due date now 2010-12-10

   Andy: We probably want to do these specs prior to the breakout.

   gary: Sounds quite reasonable.

   alex_: I think what I wanted to hear was that we'd try to make a
   stab at the specs before we go into breakout groups?

   <alex_> got it

   Andy: At the f2f we should review the specs from the page.
   ... For instance, alex_ would present KARML prior to the breakouts.

   <Zakim> matt, you wanted to ask about OGC specs and who knows what?


     [13] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Related_Specifications

   matt: Raj won't be at the f2f, we need someone to review those.
   ... If someone could pick up some of the information on OGC, that
   would be great.

   alex_: I think we should take it upon ourselves to review some of
   these specs so we aren't flying blind next week.


   <scribe> ACTION: Matt to send note to list to encourage review of
   specs [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - Send note to list to encourage review
   of specs [on Matt Womer - due 2010-12-15].

   <alex_> +1 get a slide deck from Raj

   matt: My gut says we've got experts on: KARML, ARML, GML*, the
   SemWebby ones. Not all at the f2f unfortunately. But I think we're
   missing experts on GeoPriv, OpenStreetMap, etc.


   <trackbot> ACTION-17 -- Karl Seiler to add samples to flesh out the
   Anchor definition in the data model -- due 2010-12-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [15]http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/17

     [15] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/17

   alex_: I think Karl said he hadn't gotten to it yet.


   <trackbot> ACTION-18 -- Alex Hill to flesh out the 'extent' section
   of the data model -- due 2010-12-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [16]http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/18

     [16] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/18

   alex_: I'll do it by the time we meet.

   ACTION-18 due 2010-12-13

   <trackbot> ACTION-18 Flesh out the 'extent' section of the data
   model due date now 2010-12-13


   <trackbot> ACTION-19 -- Matt Womer to break out the datamodel with
   TBD sections in the wiki -- due 2010-12-08 -- OPEN

   <trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/19

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/19

   ACTION-19 close

   <alex_> +1 to a closed action item


   <trackbot> ACTION-19 Break out the datamodel with TBD sections in
   the wiki closed

F2F Agenda Creation

   Andy: I had three things:
   ... 1. Specs review 2. Use Case review 3. Doc Start
   ... I think we've got agreements on those. Are there other things
   that need to be on the agenda outside of what we talked about?
   ... Should we have a data model section?

   gary: I'd say that is probably the fourth part. It's sitting in
   between 1 and 3.
   ... Probably go on co-simultaneously in breakout groups.

   <Andy> +1

   alex_: What is the breakout?

   gary: I'd say break out during the use case review into 2 or more
   groups: 1. review use cases with real world uses 2. the physical
   definition of a POI. Then regroup and utilize that new information
   to codify into a new first draft.

   alex_: That clarifies to me that we do this fourth item, that we sit
   down and figure out what we're going to write.


   gary: Will we have white boards and/or big sort of A3 size pads for
   scribbling? Net access? Projection?

   alex_: That sounds great, I'll do everything I can to accommodate
   that. I think we can.

   Andy: If anything else needs to get there, let me know sometime
   monday morning.

   alex_: We've got them if we need them. I will send out between Andy
   and I some sort of doc describing more formally where to go, etc.

   gary: Hopefully we will all have phones to get us there. Also,
   halfway decent coffee would help.

   alex_: When you're on the ground, the address is going to have to
   have more information to get there without confusion.

   gary: Sounds like a use case.
   ... Use each of the services and see how easy it is to get there.

   <Andy> ACTION: Andy to talk with OGC about overview presentation
   [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Talk with OGC about overview
   presentation [on Andrew Braun - due 2010-12-15].

   Andy: The other thing about the agenda, I tend to err on the side of
   less is better. Given that we have four pretty broad topics here,
   there's maybe one or two things we might add that are more specific,
   but not a whole lot.

   <gary> +1 to flexible and less rigid agendas

   <alex_> +1 too many agenda items just lets us stay on cruise control

   <Luca> +1 flexible agenda

   +1 we always end up creating new agenda items in the meeting itself.

   alex_: Sometimes too rigid an agenda puts the meeting on cruise
   control and makes it hard to get to the real work.


   Andy: Christine has her AR standards workshop in Barcelona.

   Gary: A general question: do we know the headcount for next week?

   Andy: 9 I think.

   <JonathanJ> +1 clarification


     [19] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/45386/POI-F2F-2010-1/

   matt: Please register for the f2f!

   <alex_> +1 done

   matt: Also if you are interested in being an editor, please contact
   andy and I.

   <alex_> +1

   gary: Sounds like we're done! For those that will be there next
   week, I look forward to meeting you.

   <Andy> Jonathan I will add AR notes to the agenda

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: Andy to talk with OGC about overview presentation
   [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Matt to send note to list to encourage review of specs
   [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version 1.135
    ([23]CVS log)
    $Date: 2010/12/08 15:15:48 $

     [22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2010 15:18:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:48:26 UTC