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

Re: Resolving UCR issues

From: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:15:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFVDz414mMQFksiWFByMfErh=dzd7HoLLkMAcCtQMkzNooQ9Ew@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>
Cc: Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@acm.org>
Hello Ed,

Yes, it was a valuable discussion. It was good and insightful to have it. I
did feel sorry for the other agenda item. Perhaps it is sufficient to have
a strict time limit for trying to resolve an issue next time.

If we want to have a fresh issue next week I can suggest ISSUE-22
<http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/22>. It is about best
practices and has a proposed solution. But I have to tell you that I can't
join next week's meeting because of being in another meeting.

Greetings,
Frans



2015-06-24 16:52 GMT+02:00 Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>:

> Hi Frans,
>
> Maybe this issue was a more complex one ? I feel the conversation today
> was really valuable,  but we did not reach an agreed position - That's OK !
>
> I actually think we might have reached the same point via the email thread
> and perhaps it might have taken even longer...
>
> We can try to resolve this issue again next week or try a different one,
> and let's see how we get on.  Could I suggest you nominate an issue for
> next week, we can discuss via the list over the next week and we give
> ourselves a strict 30 minutes to discuss and agree/or not on next weeks
> call.
>
> Ed
>
> On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 at 15:35 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote:
>
>> Hello Ed, Kerry,
>>
>> Today's meeting showed that it is difficult to resolve an issue with a
>> vote in a meeting. It's a pity we did not have time for the second item on
>> the agenda. But still we need to have a way of resolving issues. Could
>> there be other ways of having the group members critically assess a
>> proposed solution at more or less the same time?
>>
>> It seems to me that much of the discussion we have had today could have
>> taken place in the e-mail thread. Maybe there is a way to encourage
>> discussion on a particular issue on the list in a particular time window?
>> Or should there be extra teleconferences?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Frans
>>
>> 2015-06-23 11:56 GMT+02:00 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>:
>>
>>> Hi Frans,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reminder - I have sent the relevant request to the
>>> systems team to set up the automatic e-mail notification when new issues
>>> and actions are raised.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> On 23/06/2015 10:13, Frans Knibbe wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2015-06-23 10:32 GMT+02:00 Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>:
>>>>
>>>>  Yes, this is a good idea. There are also "raised" (pending) issues
>>>>> related
>>>>> to the UCR document and to me it is not clear which is the right
>>>>> procedure
>>>>> to fix them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I don't think there is an official procedure. What I would like to
>>>> suggest
>>>> (and have been doing) is:
>>>>
>>>>     1. Raise an issue.
>>>>     2. Make sure there is at least one associated e-mail thread (Phil
>>>>     mentioned that should happen automatically but so far that has not
>>>> happened
>>>>     in our case).
>>>>     3. Debate the issue in the e-mail list.
>>>>     4. Once the debate seems to be finished propose a solution and
>>>> change
>>>>     the status of the issue to 'pending review'.
>>>>     5. Make a final decision. For instance, accept the proposed
>>>> solution in
>>>>     a meeting.
>>>>
>>>> If we could keep up a rate of resolving one issue each week we should
>>>> have
>>>> an issue-free document this year :-)
>>>>
>>>> Saludos,
>>>> Frans
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  Cheers,
>>>>> Alejandro
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22 June 2015 at 21:46, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  Hello Ed,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At the moment three UCR issues have the status 'pending review'. Of
>>>>>> those, I think ISSUE-10 <
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/10>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> seems a good one to try to resolve.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know how long it will take to reach agreement. Perhaps it will
>>>>>> help if resolving a particular issue is a separate agenda item. That
>>>>>> should
>>>>>> allow people to read up on the subject beforehand and to raise any
>>>>>> problems
>>>>>> with the proposed solution in the e-mail list. Ideally there will be
>>>>>> no
>>>>>> need for further discussion in the meeting and we can just have the
>>>>>> vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Greetings,
>>>>>> Frans
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2015-06-22 20:38 GMT+02:00 Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Hello Frans,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you have a specific issue in mind, and some idea as to how long we
>>>>>>> will need to discuss. Kerry is putting this weeks agenda together
>>>>>>> tomorrow..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ed
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 at 17:43 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Hello Ed, Kerry,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We still have some unresolved UCR issues. I believe it was Kerry who
>>>>>>>> suggested that we might  use the weekly teleconference to try to
>>>>>>>> resolve
>>>>>>>> one selected issue. Do you think there is time for that in the next
>>>>>>>> meetings? If so, then I suggest we start with issues that relate to
>>>>>>>> Best
>>>>>>>> Practices because that is our next deliverable. Or we could have
>>>>>>>> one of the
>>>>>>>> UCR editors suggest an issue, and perhaps also do a bit of
>>>>>>>> preparation of
>>>>>>>> the issue to facilitate decision making.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Frans
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Frans Knibbe
>>>>>>>> Geodan
>>>>>>>> President Kennedylaan 1
>>>>>>>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347
>>>>>>>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl
>>>>>>>> www.geodan.nl
>>>>>>>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ed Parsons
>>>>>>> Geospatial Technologist, Google
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mobile +44 (0)7825 382263
>>>>>>> www.edparsons.com @edparsons
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Frans Knibbe
>>>>>> Geodan
>>>>>> President Kennedylaan 1
>>>>>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347
>>>>>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl
>>>>>> www.geodan.nl
>>>>>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alejandro Llaves
>>>>>
>>>>> Ontology Engineering Group (OEG)
>>>>>
>>>>> Artificial Intelligence Department
>>>>>
>>>>> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
>>>>>
>>>>> Avda. Montepríncipe s/n
>>>>>
>>>>> Boadilla del Monte, 28660 Madrid, Spain
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.oeg-upm.net/index.php/phd/325-allaves
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> allaves@fi.upm.es
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Phil Archer
>>> W3C Data Activity Lead
>>> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/
>>>
>>> http://philarcher.org
>>> +44 (0)7887 767755
>>> @philarcher1
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Frans Knibbe
>> Geodan
>> President Kennedylaan 1
>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)
>>
>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347
>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl
>> www.geodan.nl
>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
>>
>>  --
>
> Ed Parsons
> Geospatial Technologist, Google
>
> Mobile +44 (0)7825 382263
> www.edparsons.com @edparsons
>



-- 
Frans Knibbe
Geodan
President Kennedylaan 1
1079 MB Amsterdam (NL)

T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347
E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl
www.geodan.nl
disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2015 15:16:22 UTC

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