minutes for 25 August 2011 POIWG conference call

Hi all,

The minutes for today's POI WG meeting are available here:

and as text below.

We discussed agenda items for the next F2F, staring with what we were interested in attending at the OGC technical plenary.  Alex is going to send out an email requesting topics too.  Registration is now open at:
	http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/45386/POI-F2F-2011-2/ (member-only)

Please register if you are a member, whether you are going or not.

We discussed a bit about the AR Community Group and how it may influence the work we're doing here.  This lead to discussion of Rob's link proposal, and how that is relevant to POI extensibility, with an AR profile being a good first use case/test ground.

At an upcoming meeting, date TBD, we'll have a Henning Schulzrinne to discuss IDs and categories.

The actions were as follows:

ACTION: ahill2 to send mail to public mailing list to poll for agenda topics for F2F
ACTION: cperey to keep POI WG up to date on 3D Summit agenda, publish it to POI WG list
ACTION: Raj to determine when he, Carl and others from OGC and OGC members who might want to attend F2F





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

                               - DRAFT -

            Points of Interest Working Group Teleconference

25 Aug 2011


      [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-poiwg/2011Aug/0004

   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/25-poiwg-irc


          robman, andy, karl_, cperey, Matt, ahill2


          Andy, Alex



     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]F2F
         2. [6]AR CG
     * [7]Summary of Action Items

   <trackbot> Date: 25 August 2011

   <robman> hey karl_

   <cperey> hello

   zkaim, aabb is karl_

   <cperey> cperey waves to ahill2

   <karl_> did you all get my draft edit pass?

   Karl's message (mangled)

      [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-archive/2011Aug/0443.html

   <scribe> Scribe: Matt


   -> [9]http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/45386/POI-F2F-2011-2/
   Registration Page

      [9] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/45386/POI-F2F-2011-2/

   tings/September_2011 Logistics

     [10] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/index.php?title=Face_to_Face_Meetings/September_2011

   -> [11]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/04-poiwg-minutes.html#item01 Last
   talk of F2F

     [11] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/04-poiwg-minutes.html#item01

   ahill2: First day has this ARML ad hoc meeting. Do we want to be a
   part of that?

   cperey: A regular WG we cannot attend unless we are members of OGC,
   while a Domain WG is open to other people, no intellectual property

   <cperey> +1

   <cperey> I will attend it

   karl_: It's 4 o'clock on Monday? Seems like a good one.

   matt: Let's do it.

   <andy> +1

   PROPOSED RESOLUTION: WG will attend ARML ad hoc meeting at 4pm on

   <cperey> Mass Market DWG

   <cperey> I'm going to attend the 3D Summit

   ahill2: There's a Mass Market Domain WG that meets from 1-3 on

   <cperey> [12]http://www.opengeospatial.org/event/1109tcagenda

     [12] http://www.opengeospatial.org/event/1109tcagenda


     [13] http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/groups/massmarketdwg

   <cperey> Google

   ahill2: Seems germane.

   cperey: The primary task seems to be the care and feeding of KML.
   ... It's the door through which ARML entered.
   ... The chair is Ed Parsons.

   <cperey> [14]http://www.opengeospatial.org/event/11093dim

     [14] http://www.opengeospatial.org/event/11093dim

   [[Discusion currently centers on the following topics: … KML …GeoRSS
   Geo in relation to Web 2.0…]]

   ahill2: Any others?

   cperey: 3dim, see above URL
   ... These people talk about things of interest. They talk about high
   density environments. They speak about and apply things like
   CityGML. I believe building information management comes in here
   ... Indoor 3d models, campus models, etc.

   ahill2: And the time?

   cperey: All day Tuesday.
   ... I believe they'll publish an update to their program soon.
   ... CityGML is on Wednesday

   ahill2: Realistically, what do we think about CityGML… *audio drop
   ... Don't know how we connect with CityGML.

   cperey: It's a spec WG anyway, we can't attend.
   ... CityGML and it's applications will be part of the 3d summit on

   <ahill2> please repost 3d summit link

   karl_: Maybe we can get feedback from the chairs?

   -> [15]http://www.opengeospatial.org/event/11093dim 3D Summit

     [15] http://www.opengeospatial.org/event/11093dim

   cperey: I'll do that, and forward new agenda to the list.

   <scribe> ACTION: cperey to keep POI WG up to date on 3D Summit
   agenda, publish it to POI WG list [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - Keep POI WG up to date on 3D Summit
   agenda, publish it to POI WG list [on Christine Perey - due


   <trackbot> ACTION-32 -- Christine Perey to invite Henning after Matt
   has put ID requirements in the wiki -- due 2011-03-16 -- CLOSED

   <trackbot> [17]http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/32

     [17] http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/32

   cperey: I wrote to Henning, but he was busy, he wrote me back just
   this week.
   ... He asked if it was still relevant and if we wanted his input. I
   said sure and asked him for which Thursdays he might be able to

   <andy> am i the only one have audio problems

   cperey: I don't think we finished the topic, but punted. I'd like to
   at least punt on it knowingly.

   <ahill2> Christine was cutting out on me, too

   cperey: He's very into categories and IDs.

   karl_: Since there's a proposal we have now, we could run it by him.

   cperey: Exactly.
   ... I asked him to take us on a quick tour of IDs, categories, etc.
   ... Asked him for input on the spec,e tc.
   ... Asked him if a URI is sufficient or appropriately robust for our

   <karl_> great

   matt: Let's go for it.

   cperey: When he replies, I'll copy you, Matt.

   matt: Copy Andy and Alex too please.

   ahill2: Conference call or f2f?

   cperey: I actually invited him to the f2f too.
   ... I also asked him to submit something for the AR standards
   community meeting too.
   ... He wanted to start with a conference call.

   matt: Thank you!

   <cperey> yes

   <cperey> no other suggestions

   <cperey> when are we going to work?

   matt: Any other suggestions for things on OGC?

   ahill2: I think that's good enough. Set aside some time on Tuesday
   for the 3d summit, and ARML on Monday.

   karl_: Outside of those, we'll probably sweep the draft. What about
   hot topics? Let's poll the team on weakest points or outstanding

   ahill2: Sounds good, karl_?

   karl_: IDs are the most germane. Link too, very empowering, that we
   allude to with a handful of predicates, but we need to shore that
   ... Decide what links are for and not for, relative to
   relationships, etc.
   ... We're not going to be able to specify all of the predicates, so
   how do you handle the open-endedness of link predicates?

   ahill2: How do we go about avoiding a situation where there are a
   lot of us in the room but we don't have good answers to these

   <cperey> GOOD QUESTION!

   <cperey> I've been in that room!

   ahill2: Is there a Dan Brickley or someone else that can be at this
   F2F to help us out? Can OGC identify someone maybe?

   <cperey> yes, but... who?

   <cperey> Carl Reed is the best

   ahill2: It would be neat if people who were there at the meeting
   could be invited to come join us for relevant parts.

   matt: That's part of the idea of collocating. We should figure out
   who want and when.

   karl_: Links, we need help there.

   <cperey> but he's fully deployed during the TC

   karl_: That's got to be a common thing across many specs. There has
   to be an expert out there.

   <cperey> I haven't identified anyone in OGC informed on links...more
   than Raj

   ahill2: Let's figure out who we want to invite over.

   <robman> I think my audio isn't loud enough...but i did discuss
   links in detail with Dan and he seemed happy with my proposal

   matt: Raj probably knows who to talk to off the top of his head, but
   failing that we can go through the presenters, etc, and see who we

   <ahill2> robman, I avn't heard you yet

   cperey: Raj is an expert, as is Carl.

   <robman> maybe my mic has died

   matt: I suppose we should confirm with Raj.

   <robman> doh

   <scribe> ACTION: Raj to determine when he, Carl and others from OGC
   and OGC members who might want to attend F2F [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-101 - Determine when he, Carl and others
   from OGC and OGC members who might want to attend F2F [on Raj Singh
   - due 2011-09-01].

   <robman> headset

   cperey: There's another way we can approach this, there's an OGC
   mailing list from the TC. When people are looking for something
   specifically, a press release, etc, it gets issued to this mailing
   ... If we can specify the area of expertise that we're looking for,
   maybe Carl or Raj can send something to that list.

   <ahill2> +1

   cperey: e.g. "We're seeking a few people with knowledge in X, Y, Z
   to attend the POI WG"

   ahill2: I think that's a great idea.
   ... Incumbent on us to write up a list that OGC members can look at
   and they can say "I can contribute here".

   cperey: Like Carsten who attended the POI WG in Amsterdam.

   ahill2: Shall we table the specifics of our agenda until next

   matt: I think between Karl's suggestions on link and id, plus OGC
   stuff, we've got two days full. I don't think we'll be lacking
   things for the third day.

   karl_: Let's poll the POI mailing list.

   cperey: Step 1, send poll to mailing list, step 2 have Raj send to
   TC list topics we're seeking input on.

   <robman> the link model that's already proposed and that was in
   todays agenda would be good

   <scribe> ACTION: ahill2 to send mail to public mailing list to poll
   for agenda topics for F2F [recorded in

   <trackbot> Created ACTION-102 - Send mail to public mailing list to
   poll for agenda topics for F2F [on Alex Hill - due 2011-09-01].


   <robman> yes

   <robman> 8P

   <karl_> lets just irc it

   <robman> faster

   <robman> so what aspect of the CG did we want to talk about

   ahill2: I gather everyone has read the emails related to the CG.
   It's not really that we need to rehash that discussion, but I wanted
   to see if everybody was on the same page about how that influences
   what the POI WG is doing.
   ... There's been discussion about the AR notes, and some frustration
   about how we've been handling AR. There has been important issues
   with the POI side though. And some issues around link proposal from
   ... I want to make sure we're all on the same page about where the
   effort into AR should go.
   ... Will we spend more time on AR in the calls, or focus on the

   <robman> the CG is really just for the broader AR discussion as far
   as i'm aware

   <robman> and should not impact the POI stuff...just have input

   <robman> it's really just an engagement thing

   <robman> yes...but there's not really enough time is there

   ahill2: There have been suggestions that we need to be dedicating
   more time in these meetings to AR related content. My feeling is
   that if we focus on the next agenda item, the linked data stuff,
   then maybe that's addressing a lot of the AR concerns.
   ... The way it's going to connect up to other content has been a big

   <robman> if we add an AR profile to that link proposal...it is very

   <robman> just adding orientation etc to certain elements

   <robman> sorry

   matt: I agree with Rob said. AR profile would be simple in that

   ahill2: The proposal robman made, I agree with 100%. The POI spec
   should be lightweight and leverage other existing media types and
   effectively link to those.

   <robman> +1

   ahill2: That part of the discussion really satisfies a great part of
   the AR requirements, then the rest can be an AR profile. I'm excited
   to see that we've come around to this point.

   <robman> i was aiming to have a draft RDF/etc version for discussion
   for next week (if i have time)

   ahill2: We just need to do the hard work of figuring out to what
   extend do we do things like time, labels, location, etc in there.

   <robman> yep

   karl_: The conversation centers around links, and we should make
   sure we're talking and working on it in such a way that it's
   flexibly expansible and sufficient for AR use case linkages. It'll
   help us flesh out the linking model if it can support AR.

   ahill2: Exactly.

   <robman> it should not have to just be rdf though

   <robman> 8)

   ahill2: It also needs to support the concerns of people like
   yourself and others who come from industry. We don't want to turn it
   into an RDF ball of spaghetti that no one wants to deal with.

   +1 to not just RDF

   karl_: Labels, categories and links: if we discuss what's allowable
   where, we can still keep the spec lightweight with just those

   <robman> but aren't categories and labels just links too

   <robman> i think the less primitives we have the better

   <robman> but location is definitely key

   <robman> muzak

   karl_: About categories and labels just being links, well, that
   centers in my mind around "do you want it to just be a ball of
   links?" I think that's not where you want to go.

   ahill2: Because of overhead and complexity?

   <robman> if links can be inlined that can make it more consumable

   <robman> links are just for the canonical src reference

   karl_: The consumability of it. You want people to be able to easily
   concoct a POI and share it. Names, locations, with out off board

   <robman> yes...duality is good

   <robman> definitely not exclusively external links

   karl_: If everything is forced down the role of links that need to
   be dereferenced, I think that's too far.

   <robman> peep

   <robman> kml does work like that now-ish

   ahill2: Rob has both serialized and referenced links. I'm not sure
   how that works in practice. If I get serialized links, at what point
   do I go to the authoritative version?
   ... How does that serialization affect you karl_?

   karl_: Perhaps.
   ... I try to look at the specs in terms of readability.
   ... I'd have to look at an example.

   <robman> 8)

   karl_: That seems easy.

   <robman> shoot

   <robman> it has the inline

   <robman> but not the ref

   <robman> correct...not dual in one use...but it uses both patterns

   ahill2: About KML: I'm not sure I agree with KML working like that.
   It has links to external data that have refresh properties and
   things like that, but they don't have this sort of dual mode where
   you -- unless you're referring to just doing a link or declarative

   <robman> but in different places

   <robman> html5 is that links are all external...but that's just a
   cultural choice

   ahill2: Wouldn't the W3C/HTML5 be that we'd have markup with
   primitives and link people to those?
   ... Either it's external HTML or it's inline in a more traditional
   ... As opposed to reinventing the link.

   <robman> that's a fair comment

   <robman> but there's nothing logically stopping the dual use

   ahill2: This seems central to us moving forward with linking.


     [20] http://code.google.com/apis/kml/documentation/kmlreference.html#link

   ahill2: I get that we've got consensus that we want to go that way,
   but we've got to do it in a way that makes it both easy and

   <robman> see that example ahill2

   <robman> it has an ID in the link tag

   <robman> but there's also body content wihtin the link

   <robman> so if the id were an href/url src

   <robman> yes...but if we use url's for ids

   <robman> then we get that

   <robman> i have a script typing for me

   matt: But that ID is to identify the link itself, not external info,

   <robman> well i think any useful link could be searialised

   karl_: You want to conflate using the body content and the link,
   right robman?

   <robman> link ref should be the canonical location

   <robman> but using the serialised version is useful

   <robman> ahill2 is right...what i've proposed is not completley in
   use now

   <robman> but it is logically possible

   ahill2: There is body content within the link in KML, but that
   content isn't what comes across in the link. The link is to other
   KML content. There are some elements that can go into the link
   element, but KML doesn't actually have this model of serializing
   some of that data inside the link element.

   <robman> and i've only proposed it to make consumption easy

   <robman> hehe

   ahill2: But, they do have a link element with content.
   ... And they do combine that with hrefs to external content.

   <robman> then we could use normal http cache control etc for ref

   karl_: The way I interpreted it: labels are descriptive text,
   categories are triples, and links are references.

   <robman> but in html5 links are really just external predicates

   karl_: You could argue that I could address what labels do with
   categories, or do it with links, and I don't that's a bad thing.

   <robman> but do we have to define all the categories etc. if they're

   karl_: Labels for descriptive things, categories are triples and
   links are links. I think that's good.

   <robman> where if we use links they can be extended

   <robman> ok

   <robman> that's my big fear

   <robman> 8)

   karl_: We're not going to define categories. We can't get into the
   business of describing the universe. A category is just a means to
   an end.
   ... It's a way to describe things in the spec.

   <cperey> +1

   karl_: We can give some rough guidance on what labels and categories
   (maybe not that word) and links are for, but people are free to use
   them as they need.

   <robman> but if you look at what i proposed to dan

   <robman> that was using links as triples

   <robman> well part of a triple

   ahill2: I'm getting the impression that we have this existing
   proposal with some primitives that we can leverage when appropriate,
   serialize inline, and be able to alternately use links.

   <robman> yep

   ahill2: Some of robman examples are asking questions about elements
   and attributes, etc, so let's use elements with inlines, without
   having to add complexity of links per se. I don't know if that's
   possible, but there's part of me to which that sounds appealing.

   matt: Me too.

   <robman> i'm sure there's lots of devil in the detail ...but its' a

   <karl_> yes, i have to run

   <cperey> I'm signing off

   <cperey> bye for this week!

   ahill2: Let's finish the call and meet again next week.

   <karl_> adios

   <robman> cool

   <robman> cya all

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: ahill2 to send mail to public mailing list to poll for
   agenda topics for F2F [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: cperey to keep POI WG up to date on 3D Summit agenda,
   publish it to POI WG list [recorded in
   [NEW] ACTION: Raj to determine when he, Carl and others from OGC and
   OGC members who might want to attend F2F [recorded in

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [24]scribe.perl version 1.136
    ([25]CVS log)
    $Date: 2011/08/25 15:06:04 $

     [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

   [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43
Check for newer version at [26]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002

     [26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: Matt
Inferring ScribeNick: matt
Default Present: Matt
Present: robman andy karl_ cperey Matt ahill2
Regrets: Ronald
Agenda: [27]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-poiwg/2011Aug/00
Found Date: 25 Aug 2011
Guessing minutes URL: [28]http://www.w3.org/2011/08/25-poiwg-minutes.ht
People with action items: ahill2 cperey raj

     [27] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-poiwg/2011Aug/0004
     [28] http://www.w3.org/2011/08/25-poiwg-minutes.html

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

   End of [29]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

     [29] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm

Received on Thursday, 25 August 2011 15:55:14 UTC