W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > June 2015

[Minutes] 2015-06-17

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:03:44 +0100
Message-ID: <55817E40.80200@w3.org>
To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
The minutes of today's meeting are, predictably enough, at 
http://www.w3.org/2015/06/17-sdw-minutes and there's a text version below.

Topics this week were:

* Editors for the BP doc are Lewis, Payam and Jeremy

* Audience for the BP doc;

* Time line for FPWD of BP doc

* TPAC registration, future OGC TCs.

Thanks to Linda for scribing.

           Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference

17 Jun 2015

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2015/06/17-sdw-irc


           eparsons, Phil, kerry, Linda, LarsG, Frans, billroberts,
           Alejandro_Llaves, ahaller2, MattPerry, AndreaPerego,
           lewismc, PhilippeThiran, ChrisLittle

           Antoine, Zimmermann, Jeremy, Christine, Payam




      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]Approve Minutes
          2. [5]Patent Call
          3. [6]Best Practice principles
          4. [7]Proposed timeline
          5. [8]TPAC Registration
          6. [9]ANOB

    <trackbot> Date: 17 June 2015

    <eparsons> scribe: linda

    <scribe> scribe: Linda

    <phila> scribeNick: Linda

Approve Minutes

    <eparsons> [10]http://www.w3.org/2015/06/10-sdw-minutes

      [10] http://www.w3.org/2015/06/10-sdw-minutes

    eparsons: opens meeting
    ... first item: approve last weeks minutes

    <phila> Not present so can't say

    <billroberts> +1

    <eparsons> PROPOSED: Accept last weeks minutes

    <Frans> +1

    <ahaller2> +1

    <kerry> +1

    <MattPerry> +1

    <eparsons> +1

    <Alejandro_Llaves> +1


    <lewismc> +0

    <eparsons> RESOLVED: Accept last week's minutes

Patent Call

    eparsons: next item: patent call

    <eparsons> [11]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

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

Best Practice principles

    eparsons: main topic today is the principles
    ... announcing the editors of the best practice document:
    ... one of whom is on the call: Lewis

    <eparsons> Welcome Editors,

    lewismc: introduces himself

    <eparsons> Lewis McGibbney (NASA)

    <eparsons> Payam Barnaghi (University of Surrey)

    lewismc: looking forward to it, thanks for the opportunity

    <eparsons> Jeremy Tandy (Met Office)

    eparsons: other two are not here today, Payam and Jeremy. So we
    have 3 editors.
    ... will be an important piece of work


      [12] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Principles

    eparsons: proposal: work throught the BP principles together
    during this call. Numbered them for easy of reference.
    ... principles are to create the context in which the BP is set
    and the audience.

    <ChrisLittle> +1 agreed

    <lewismc> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    eparsons: important to agree on the idea that the audience of
    the BP doc is going to be as broad as possible.

    <lewismc> Absolutely

    <Frans> +1

    <Alejandro_Llaves> +1

    <billroberts> +1 I agree with that

    <ahaller2> +1


    <MattPerry> +1

    <LarsG> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <kerry> +1 -- but remember scope of 5* linked data

    Josh: would be useful to [...] (didn't hear)

    phila: I hope that web people could read this without any
    spatial literacy. It's about bridging that gap.

    <joshlieberman> Best practices should address a broad audience,
    but assert / communicate a reasonable level of geospatial

    thx josh

    <AndreaPerego> +1 to PhilA

    scribe: terminology will be important. BP should help people,
    not turn them away.
    ... if possible, without turning away those who are GI experts.

    <ChrisLittle> asking for earth, moon, mars etc ;-)

    <Frans> +1 to PhilA

    joshlieberman: example of spatial literacy:
    ... web community and spatial community define coordinates

    <AndreaPerego> +1 again to PhilA about the terminology issue.
    One example is "feature", that is a notion difficult to
    understand without a geospatial background

    eparsons: I agree, there are more examples of confusions like
    this. So we need to make simplifications and give the minimal
    explanation necessary.

    <joshlieberman> We can assume little "prior" spatial literacy,
    but let's improve on that.

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to suggest a glossary might be

    joshlieberman: the BP could assume little prior knowledge, but
    should provide the necessary knowledge.

    phila: e.g. things like coordinate ref system should be defined
    somewhere because a lot of people do not know about this.
    ... although it is not our job to educate the world

    Frans: simplicity and complexity don't have to be exclusive.
    You could have simplicity and give the ability to drill down
    into more detail and complexity.

    kerry: In order to attain simplicity we have to give up

    eparsons: agreed. We'll have to ignore the edge cases.

    <joshlieberman> So, include spatial omelets, but maybe leave
    out souffle's

    eparsons: or is there some middle way?

    <phila> +1 to omlettes

    eparsons: I like Josh's point
    ... proposes that we recognize a mainstream, web audience
    ... not necessary of professionals

    <kerry> +1

    <Alejandro_Llaves> +1

    billroberts: if we don't aim at simplicity and mainstream
    audience the risk is that we are just addressing a community
    that already knows this.
    ... therefor simplicity is more important than completeness.

    <AndreaPerego> +1 to BillRoberts

    Frans: could we divide the audience into consumers and

    <ChrisLittle> +1 consumers versus publishers

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about the DWBP experience

    eparsons: we may well want to come back to talking about that
    division. Maybe divide the doc intos sections for those

    phila: discussed this also in data on the web group

    <joshlieberman> Somewhat uncertain about this -- everyone with
    a cellphone is a spatial data producer.

    phila: 1st audience was producers, 2nd was consumers

    <eparsons> PROPOSED: Audience is the broad web community of non

    <Frans> +1

    <phila> I would say 'an audience is...'

    <Zakim> kerry, you wanted to pseak on non-experts



    kerry: we have a use case which describes the audience

    eparsons: this is from the consumer point of view

    <phila> [14]http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/0612_phila_agile/#(17)

      [14] http://www.w3.org/2015/Talks/0612_phila_agile/#(17)

    phila: I presented this to ISO TC211 last week
    ... there must be a happy medium, in this group there is
    spatial expertise available, what we should do is bring this
    knowledge to the world

    eparsons: So in general we agree on this principle of meeting
    the needs of this broad audience

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    eparsons: this leads to the question of approach
    ... linked data is mentioned in a couple of the principles and
    underlies the W3C way of publishing data, but not very much
    adopted in OGC world

    <joshlieberman> Does the GeoJSON / Leaflet-using web developer
    need to know that leaflet is projecting the GeoJSON coordinates
    into Web Mercator to work with a basemap?

    eparsons: so do we suggest this broad audience uses a linked
    data approach?

    billroberts: it is a good basis, just starting with giving
    everything a url. But lets not restrict ourselves to linked
    ... also do things with JSON, as this is simpler than linked
    data - or is believed so.

    eparsons: requirements are discoverability and linkability.
    Historically spatial data does not score well on these.

    <kerry> but u can do rdf and json at the same time;

      [15] http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/

    eparsons: linked data is a possible solution to both but might
    not be the only one.

    billroberts: yes a good solution, but don't advocate as the
    only one if you want to reach a broad audience.

    Frans: a lot of reqs point in the direction of linked data.
    ... maybe we don't have to be explicit about linked data, it
    follows from the reqs.
    ... there's also a risk that we don't critically assess.

    ChrisLittle: linked data isused a lot in catalogs, pointing to
    the data.

    <joshlieberman> I propose that we use linked data where
    appropriate -- e.g. fine-grained data distribution and
    discovery through mereo-topological relationships. Bounding-box
    and dimensional discovery doesn't really benefit there.

    ChrisLittle: my concern is that in our community we have a lot
    of 4D data.

    AndreaPerego: billroberts made a good point highlighting that
    linked data can be difficult.
    ... important requirement is to be web-friendly.

    <kerry> note from our charter: The scope of the Spatial Data on
    the Web Working Group, SDWWG, is Web technologies as they may
    be applied to location. Where relevant, it will promote Linked
    Data using the 5 Stars of Linked Data paradigm, but this will
    not be to the exclusion of other technologies.

    eparsons: kerry can you remind us what to do to get 5 stars?

    kerry: not difficult: use linked data standards, and use urls.

    <Frans> 5 star Open Data: [16]http://5stardata.info/

      [16] http://5stardata.info/

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about URIs and USB sticks

    kerry: we aren't constrained to do linked data but I hope we
    can promote it.

    phila: fundamentals: URIs and HTTP
    ... don't use the web as a glorified USB stick
    ... or only publish metadata, not the data on the web

    <Frans> We should get those fundamentals in the BP principles.

    <joshlieberman> Increasingly clear that the path from linked
    data to Web-friendliness is URI dereferencing practice.

    billroberts: also help people from the broad community to find
    the right tools

    eparsons: we've got some level of agreement to use or inspire
    to use linked data

    <AndreaPerego> +1 to BillRoberts. Which also includes the
    availability of data in mainstream formats, whenever possible /

    <Frans> Who will be in charge of t-shirts?

    eparsons: we should print some tshirts with phila and josh
    quotes about usb sticks and souffles.
    ... time to move on to the next topic

Proposed timeline

    eparsons: which is the timeline.
    ... we should discuss reorganising the time frame.
    ... the bp is the next major piece of work.

    <phila> End October

    eparsons: we hope to get a first pwd at the time of the TPAC,
    end of october.

    <phila> Mon-Tue 26-27 October

    eparsons: although during the summer work will slow down a bit
    ... the other deliverables, the SSN work, coverages, we could
    potentially start in september and work parallel.
    ... so the BP document doesn't have to be complete before
    starting on the rest. What is your opinion?

    Frans: in the original planning bp deliverable had the same
    deadline as Time ontology. What was the original thinking about
    dependencies between deliverables?

    eparsons: wasn't involved in the timeframe. Phil?

    <lewismc> Where is the original timeline/rodmap for the WG? Can
    someone provide a URL?

    phila: we were trying to get this done in two years. We didn't
    think so much about dependencies as about priorities.

    <kerry> timeline is on charter

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/charter

    phila: driving force was deadline end of 2016.

    <lewismc> thnx kerry

    eparsons: other thoughs?

    kerry: I support this, but I'm not keen on parallel meetings.
    ... try to keep the meetings in a single track, maybe alternate
    every 2 weeks.

    <AndreaPerego> +1 to Kerry

    eparsons: I'm not getting the impression that our proposed
    timeframe doesn't make sense, so we'll work some more on it.

TPAC Registration

    <phila> [18]TPAC

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2015/10/TPAC/

    phila: W3C big annual get together, the W3C equivalent of the
    OGC TC meeting.
    ... a lot of working groups meet there for 2 full days. E.g.
    the geolocation working group and the Web of Things interest
    ... everyone's welcome to come
    ... the wednesday is plenary day.
    ... this year it's in Sapporo, Japan. Our group is meeting
    monday and tuesday of that week.
    ... there is a charge for attending, you can register now,
    please do so.
    ... wednesday is recommended!

    eparsons: will be there monday till wednesday

    <joshlieberman> Would be lovely to afford it...

    fee is about 85 dollars per day

    phila: second 'holiday' is OGC TC meeting in the week of the
    14th of september
    ... the idea is not to have a formal f2f there, but to have
    this wednesday call take place from the TC.

    ChrisLittle: OGC is using gotomeeting instead of webex.

    <billroberts> sorry got to go - thanks, bye

    phila: doesn't matter


    eparsons: any other business?

    <AndreaPerego> I won't be in Sapporo, but I might be able to be
    in Nottingham for the OGC TC.

    kerry: we also have the idea to do the call from the OGC TC
    meeting in Sidney in december.

    <lewismc> Thanks folks

    eparsons: that's it for this week

    <lewismc> bb

    <AndreaPerego> Thanks, bye

    Bye all!

    <LarsG> Thanks

    <Alejandro_Llaves> thanks, bye!

    <kerry> bye!

    <MattPerry> quit
Received on Wednesday, 17 June 2015 14:03:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:17 UTC