[2015-02-11] Minutes

The minutes of today's meeting are at 
http://www.w3.org/2015/02/11-sdw-minutes.html and are linked from the 
wiki as you'd expect. A snapshot is provided below.

                              SDW WG Weekly

11 Feb 2015


       [2] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20150211

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2015/02/11-sdw-irc


           eparsons, Frans, kerry, Clemens, +1.412.390.aaaa,
           CoryHenson, Payam, DanhLePhuoc, MattPerry, ingo,
           billroberts, +61.4.331.2.aabb, ahaller2, SimonCox,
           ChrisLit, aharth, IanHolt, RaulGarciaCastro,
           Alejandro_Llaves, Ioannis, Linda, Adila,
           +34.65.631.aacc, OscarCorcho, AndreaPerego, AndreasHarth

           Rachel_Heaven, Krzysztof_Janowicz, Antoine_Zimmermann




      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Clarifying Use Cases Work
          2. [6]editors for use case deliverable

    <phila> chair: Ed

    <Clemens> I??P8 is me

    <Frans> How can you tell wich P* is you?

    <RaulGarciaCastro> Frans, Looking at the chat in the moment you

    <Frans> thanks Raul

    `scribe: kerry

    <scribe> scribe: kerry

    <eparsons> Thanks Kerry !

    <Ioannis> zakim ?? p25 is me

    <SimonCox> zakim said +Simon when I think I connected, but my
    IRC tag is SImonCox

    meeting starts

    <phila> PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes

       [7] http://www.w3.org/2015/02/04-sdw-minutes.html

    <SimonCox> +1

    <Frans> +1

    <Clemens> +1

    propose: approve previous minutes -- ed

    <MattPerry> +1


    <phila> +1

    <Alejandro_Llaves> +1

    <DanhLePhuoc> +1

    <ChrisLit> +1

    <eparsons> [8]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

       [8] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call


    <phila> RESOLVED: Accept last week's minutes

       [9] http://www.w3.org/2015/02/04-sdw-minutes.html

    eparsons points out patent call

    agenda item 1 new members?

    billroberts introduction

    <phila> present RaulGarciaCastro

    swrl in uk, lod publishing with technology, help to do things
    like other people , based in manchester

    no more new attendees

    <Ioannis> +Zakim, ??P25 is me

    inext agenda item : adding items to agenda

    please email to list by FRIDAy of previous week before meeting

    <Adila> zakim who is on the phone?

    all members can ask for items on agenda to be considered by the

    <ChrisLit> +1

    <billroberts> +1

    <Frans> +!

    <IanHolt> +1

    <ingo> +1

    <Frans> +1

    <RaulGarciaCastro> +1

    <MattPerry> +1

    <Alejandro_Llaves> +1

    <DanhLePhuoc> +1

    next agenda item: clarify use case work

    frans had cirulated some questions

Clarifying Use Cases Work

    frans: from use cases to requirments -- want to invite

    phil has asked public LOD gropu already

    <phila> [10]Phil A's mail to the LOD list

      [10] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2015Feb/0036.html

    ed: broader range of use cases as we can -- we should reach out
    --open activity

    happy to get feedback/input

    frans -- e.g. developers who may not be here

    ed: what are we missing?


    frans: invite them to look things over

    kerry: share use cases with web of things?

    <phila> [11]The Web of Things Interest Group

      [11] http://www.w3.org/WoT/

    <ChrisLit> +q

    chrislittle: I approached medical domain people and
    medical/environmental, I dont have anything yet

    chris: also talking to 3D people

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about medical and satellites

    phil: medical university member is joining wg to add stuff for
    us in this domain

    <billroberts> +q process for contributing use cases?

    phil: satellite imagery and sensors chinese academy of sciences
    -- but meeting time is bad for them

    <SimonCox> And Melbourne!

    <Zakim> process, you wanted to discuss contributing use cases?

    scribe is lost...

    <eparsons> edit the wiki !!

    <billroberts> understood! will do

    eparsons: cut off date prior to f2f

    cutoff date for use cases on wiki to be 1 march


    <Linda> +1

    <ChrisLit> +1

    <SimonCox> +1

    <OscarCorcho> +1

    <RaulGarciaCastro> +1

    <CoryHenson> +1

    <billroberts> +1

    <Frans> Is the cutoff date the same as the start date for

    PROPOSED: deadline for use cases 1 March

    <IanHolt> +1

    <Alejandro_Llaves> +1

    <Clemens> +1

    <MattPerry> +1

    <Frans> +1

    <Adila> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <Ioannis> +1


    <DanhLePhuoc> +1

    <billroberts> what's the likely frequency of F2F meetings?
    (speaking as someone who can't make the March Barcelona mtg due
    to prior obligations)

    requirements development will start at the f2f meeting,
    including grouping common requirements

    ed: is this ok? other views?

    frans: I start seeing things already emerging from use cases :
    also this is the time to invite external stakeholders

    clemens: some use cases are general, others specific

    <Zakim> Clemens, you wanted to discuss detail of use cases

    clemens: most use cases will need more work before requirements

    ed: process on document development -- use cases may be brought
    up to common level as we develop the deliverable?

    <ChrisLit> +q

    phil: generally editors will be responsible for this , there
    will be a style by looking at other use case documents

    ed: at some point the whole group must be satisfied, all drafts
    visible on github,

    each doc gets url plus latest version url that allows for keep
    updating, you can publish first draft when it is not finished
    but is ready for public comments

    <Frans> So it is up to the editors to get started with the
    requirements document?

    once it transitions to TR space it cannot then be edited

    chris: suggest editors take whats on wiki then structure with
    actors, processes, tabular format bu we do not lose original
    text -- need to trace back to original

    ed: use cases finishes 1 march, then a couple of weeks starting
    on doc, and f2f to validate and same page

    <billroberts> yep +1

    <IanHolt> +1

    <Frans> +1

    <ChrisLit> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <Alejandro_Llaves> +1

    <CoryHenson> +1

editors for use case deliverable

    phil: meeting new head of standards of OGC tomorrow to ensure
    we can line up for both standards bodies

    <phila> [12]https://github.com/w3c/dwbp

      [12] https://github.com/w3c/dwbp

    phil: explains w3c process by reference to data on the web

    <phila> [13]https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/blob/gh-pages/bp.html

      [13] https://github.com/w3c/dwbp/blob/gh-pages/bp.html

    <phila> [14]http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html

      [14] http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html

    html has a lot missing, because respec adds this stuff like
    headers and TOC

    editor must write html by hand or there are special editors,
    but you do not do logos or style sheets

    phil: respec becomes easy to use,phil and ingo will help

    ed: send email to put your hand up:


    ingo: docs go through several committees

    <ChrisLit> +q

    <Linda> +q

    chirs: tech commitee then planning ctee process is getting
    looser, standards groups can do prelim releases to public
    before freezing doc

    <ChrisLit> -q

    <SimonCox> use-case document would probably be OGC 'Discussion
    Paper' ?

    linda: is the OGC view that we are SWG or DWG?

    <SimonCox> It will not recommend any tech or practices,
    therefore not a 'Best Practice'

    <phila> Here's an example of a first public working draft of a
    use case document. Note the open issues etc

      [15] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/WD-csvw-ucr-20140327/

    ed: dwg , but we will create SWG when we are ready

    <Clemens> +1 to Simon

    <SimonCox> SWG per normative recommendation

    simon: use case doc is not a "best practice" in ogc, more
    likely a discussion paper

    ed: aob?
    ... summarises use case development plan
    ... close meeting

Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2015 20:44:18 UTC