- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 21:10:08 +0000
- To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
As ever, this week's minutes are in colour at
http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes with a text snapshot below.
Thanks for a very productive first year everyone - enjoy the break, see
you on Wednesday 6th Jan 2016 at 20:00 GMT (Thursday 7th for Australia
of course)
The UCR doc is all set to be published by both SDOs tomorrow, the BP doc
is only a couple of working weeks behind it.
Merry Christmas and a happy New Year
Phil.
Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
16 Dec 2015
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20151216
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-irc
Attendees
Present
ClausStadler, DanhLePhuoc, Linda, eparsons, jtandy,
phila, LarsG, BartvanLeeuwen, MattPerry, billroberts,
MrJohnSCirincione, ScottSimmons
Regrets
clemens, Frans, Payam, Andreas, Rachel, Josh, Simon,
Andrea, Krzysztof, Jon
Chair
Ed
Scribe
Kerry, Jeremy Tandy
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]SSN and the definition of tasks
* [6]Summary of Action Items
* [7]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<eparsons> trackbot, start meeting
<trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group
Teleconference
<trackbot> Date: 16 December 2015
<Kerry> scribe:Kerry
<scribe> scribenick: Kerry
<eparsons> Topic : Approve last week's minutes
<eparsons> [8]http://www.w3.org/2015/12/09-sdw-minutes
[8] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/09-sdw-minutes
<eparsons> Proposed : Approve last week's minutes
<Linda> +1
<jtandy> +1
<phila> +1
RESOLUTION: approve last weeks minutes
<LarsG> 0 (missed most of the call)
+1
<eparsons> Resolved : Approve last week's minutes
<eparsons> Topic : Patent Call
<eparsons> [9]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
[9] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
<eparsons> Topic : Best Practice - Progress to date
<phila> C Nortgate Parkinson's law I believe
jtandy: BP pub delayed last week
... still developing -- linda and payam have been busy last
week
... up to bp 18 is looking good
... more for jtandy to do after that
... some respec errors
<phila> [10]Editors' Draft of the BP doc
[10] http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/
jtandy: on 6th jan will be spiffing [sic]
Linda: Payam and I have covered first half, looking pretty good
to there, some styling to go
jtandy: some outstanding points
... BP 9
<jtandy> [11]http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#relative-position
[11] http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#relative-position
jtandy: relative positioning/ linear referencing we picked this
up along the way
... refers to topo network eg directions along a street from a
reference point like a junction
... can be done in GML, is an edge case, not really common
practice
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to say we need to talk to AR people
about this
jtandy: want to know how important this BP is ---- or is it
geofluff [sic]
<jtandy> "geo-fluff"
phila: AR people need this, eg Christine Perey, we should check
with her
<jtandy> ACTION: jtandy to talk to Christine Perey about the
need for relative positioning [recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action01]
[12] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-128 - Talk to christine perey about
the need for relative positioning [on Jeremy Tandy - due
2015-12-23].
ed: is this broader than just linear referencing -- common in
engineering, but is it also a case of these other spatail
relationships?
s.spatial/spatial/
<billroberts> sorry I'm late!
jtandy: yes, but looking for advice on this, e.g. ed's upstairs
under the bed use case
<eparsons> ACTION: Ed to add more spatial relationship things
[recorded in
[13]http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action02]
[13] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-129 - Add more spatial relationship
things [on Ed Parsons - due 2015-12-23].
jtandy: ed can you write some paragraphs for the proforma that
would motivate this?
Ed: yes. might get a bit fuzzy but is important
jtandy: rachel also talked about chainage [sic] along a
geospatial survey... relative positioning between the points
... Linda awaiting actions from andrea and Josh ACTION-126 and
ACTION-127 re merging data formats
... but not present at meeting
Ed: missed last call -- one table or 2?
jtandy.... We liked the subjective stuff in Ed's table but also
Clemens formal/factual style and we want that.
scribe: not yet pinned down how to fit this in, but we want to
capture both in one place to start with... will come back later
ed: if you are really rushed you should skim through that for a
lot of information
jtandy: still a bit ambiguouls how this will be presented
... BP 3 and BP5 are flagged as requiring extra content
<jtandy> BP-3 [14]http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#lacking-ids
[14] http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#lacking-ids
<phila> [15]What DWBP says on that topic
[15]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20151217/#identifiersWithinDatasets
<jtandy> BP-5 [16]http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#ids-for-chuncks
[16] http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#ids-for-chuncks
jtandy: loads of identifiers in a CSV table... where is good
practice for converting local identifiers to http uris? we need
to find this.
... also BP 5 fragment identifiers
... (problem with typo in chunks discussed with jtandy, linda,
phila)
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about possible navigation
<scribe> ACTION: Linda to change fragment identifier for chunks
in BP doc [recorded in
[17]http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action03]
[17] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-130 - Change fragment identifier for
chunks in bp doc [on Linda van den Brink - due 2015-12-23].
jtandy: we don't know what to add in here -- we need more
phila: you are missing extra navigation on top of the list
(DWBP maybe has too much)
<phila>
[18]http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20151217/#challenges
[18] http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20151217/#challenges
<phila>
[19]http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20151217/#bp-benefits
[19] http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-dwbp-20151217/#bp-benefits
phila: DWBP uses SVG diagram to group them, also grouped by
benefits (also generated), but respec duplicated the lists
... which or both of these is useful for SDW bp?
jtandy: agreed, but is is mandatory for fpwd?
phila: no
ed: agrees useful but ths should come later -- too hard now
jtandy: lets try -- phila agrees to do the scripting
ed: how many BPs do we have real BP examples to point to?
jtandy: http identifiers: nanaimo
... reuse -- anything that uses geonames
... identifiers -- from sdi used in a web environemnt -- this
must exist
ed: before FPWD we need at least some of these filled in
... need to show that we stand behind waht we say
... want to give people homewoerk to find these things
jtandy: we had planned to wait for after FPWD
ed: how about doc actually stating this intention then -- if
not actually doing it?
linda: in intor or scope there is a statement like this -- all
being founded on real live practice -- could add intent to put
examples in but every bp has an example section to show it is
expected
ed: ok that sounds ok
jtandy: questions?
ed: hope the BP editors still get a holiday!
<jtandy> scribe: Jeremy Tandy
<jtandy> scribenick: jtandy
<eparsons> Topic : SSN - Tasks definition SSN Tasks
SSN and the definition of tasks
Kerry: we have 3 SSN editors on the call
<Kerry> [20]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/SSN_Tasks
[20] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/SSN_Tasks
Kerry: list of tasks is not necessarily final
... first on the list
... BTW: this is early warning of where we want people to help
... so first - modularisation of the SSN ontology
... Krystof (spelling?) is taking this forward; using a pattern
based approach
... [missed no. 2]
... [other topics] need to determine the scope of SSN - base on
requirements
... align SSN with PROV-O
... align with RDF Data Cube
... need to work out how SSN can work with satellite data
... will revisit the multilingual annotation
... look at the 'actuation' concerns - although handed off to
WoT folks
... shall we develop targeted 'profiles' of SSN for different
purposes
... not quite sure how to document that
phila: we don't have a standard that enables us to define
profiles - but w3 does have a WG to define that
... there are things like SPIN and shape expression -
... the way we define a profile at the moment is to publish a
PDF
... it's that there are several ways to publish the profile
... does anyone have any thoughts
Kerry: good point - slightly off scope, but maybe we could set
the best practice for defining profiles in this group
<billroberts> is this what you mean by 'shape expression'
phila? [21]https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/
[21] https://w3c.github.io/data-shapes/shacl/
Kerry: PROV-O is a good example of documentation of an ontology
- but this is a tremendous amount of work
... adding deeper 'OWL axiomisation' ... but not sure what that
means
... could mean the removal of reliance on DULCE?
... more stuff that relates to modularisation
... this is a big list
... is there anything we've forgotten?
eparsons: big list - is this realistic?
Kerry: you could be right - we must do the documentation, but
we're not starting from scratch
... the redesign [modularisation] is needed
... profiles are prob optional
... we might be able to miss out the tutorial
... aligning with PROV-O is harder - because we're not quite
sure how to do this
... yes, there's a lot of stuff, but much of this has been done
before and we can reuse
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to ask about SSN as a FPWD
Kerry: obviously it depends on how much work people put in :-)
phila: so you also have SSN ... I'm thinking about my next WG
that I can't call 'licensing'
... there the FPWD will be ODRL, this is similar to SSN
... would a lot of cutting & pasting from the earlier work be
sufficient?
Kerry: modularisation needs to be done
... that's numbers 1, 2 and 12 from the list that Kerry was
referring to [ref?]
<eparsons> jtandy relationstionship between OGC activities and
this - how is this manifested at the ontology level
jtandy: talking about the O&M ontology work from Simon Cox
<MrJohnSCirincione> Present John Cirincione Collateral
Analytics
Kerry: this might be done in the modularisation / refactoring
... treat O&M as an upper ontology ... making the mapping
explicit
DanhLePhuoc: several tasks on the list can be merged; e.g.
numbers 1 & 2
<eparsons> hello john will give you introduction in moment..
DanhLePhuoc: also specifying best practices and the tutorial
action
Kerry: agrees
eparsons: notes that MrJohnSCirincione has joined us
MrJohnSCirincione: introduces himself
eparsons: please talk to myself or kerry offline to get some
more context - at the moment we're in the weeds of a topic [not
too accessible for a new starter]
Kerry: there's also ClausStadler_
ClausStadler_: introduces himself and notes some technical
difficulties in joining
... am from Leipzig University
eparsons: happy to brief you offline too
Kerry: right now we're focused on SSN, would welcome assistance
on that
<MrJohnSCirincione> Ed and All, many thanks for the warm
welcome, Sincerely John C.
Kerry: so - I'm looking for feedback on what the SSN
deliverable looks like
... can you point to things that we should copy (e.g. other
ontologies)
... what about user documentation
... are we talking about a family of documents
... I like PROV-O - but that's a lot of work.
<Kerry> [22]http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview/
[22] http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview/
eparsons: does anyone have any views?
jtandy: suggests a primer
<phila> Primer++
Kerry: so this is like a tutorial ... a bit like it
jtandy: primer is for bootstrapping people
Kerry: so we're talking about many things .., tutorial, primer,
howto
phila: surely the primer is a howto?
eparsons: primer is not so much of a beginner - but someone who
has more that a passing (academic) interest in the topic
BartvanLeeuwen: it's difficult to see how this fits with this
group ...
... I'm interested in this because I'm creating a linked data
fire engine which is covered in sensors
... but how does this fit with spatial data
eparsons: I see that ... sensors fit in 'space' so there's a
spatial element
<Zakim> phila, you wanted to raise a point I remember Ralph
making in DWBP
eparsons: but you're right that we need to make things coherent
in [regards to the work of the _spatial_ data on the web group]
<Kerry> +q
phila: agrees - notes that in his other WG, it was odd that
there was no cross referencing between the documents published
within that group
jtandy: there will be cross referencing ... there are sections
for dealing with sensor and observation data
Kerry: in our planning we put the BP stuff first ...
... [missing]
... we will need to pin down [the relationship between the
deliverables] at some point in the future
eparsons: so in a future call we need to talk about the scope
of the SSN work; the over arching scope
... the BP doc will touch on sensor data, but the SSN
deliverable will be much more detailed
... we need an overarching scope to bind all the deliverables
together [in terms of spatial data]
Kerry: agreed - sensor data _is_ spatial data
eparsons: BartvanLeeuwen can be our barometer of whether we've
done this
BartvanLeeuwen: I can see this - but it still feels different
<Zakim> Linda, you wanted to ask people to record their
attendance of the next f2f
<Linda> [23]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Attending_F2F3
[23] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Attending_F2F3
jtandy: refers to the Linking Geospatial Data conference in
London, 2013 ... this is where the scope of the WG was defined
<phila> I hear Ed getting his light sabre ready
Linda: please can you all record if you're going to attend the
next f2f near Amsterdam
eparsons: thanks for your efforts, goodnight & merry christmas
<LarsG> happy christmas all
<billroberts> thanks all - bye
Kerry: see you next year!
<eparsons> May the force me with you !!!
<eparsons> thanks scribes
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Ed to add more spatial relationship things
[recorded in
[24]http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: jtandy to talk to Christine Perey about the need
for relative positioning [recorded in
[25]http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Linda to change fragment identifier for chunks in
BP doc [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action03]
[24] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action02
[25] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action01
[26] http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes.html#action03
Summary of Resolutions
1. [27]approve last weeks minutes
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Received on Wednesday, 16 December 2015 21:09:58 UTC