RE: [Minutes-BP] 2016-04-20

Hi all, 

The ISO 19107 and other ISO19xxx are available as OWL ontologies here: 
https://github.com/ISO-TC211/GOM/tree/master/isotc211_GOM_harmonizedOntology


This is what I was referring to yesterday. As far as I know these are work in progress. Certainly relevant to look at in the context of defining a spatial ontology. 

Linda


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org] 
Verzonden: woensdag 20 april 2016 17:17
Aan: SDW WG Public List
Onderwerp: [Minutes-BP] 2016-04-20

The minutes of this week's Best Practices sub group call are at https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes. Text version below.


     Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices Sub Group Teleconference

20 Apr 2016

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-irc


Attendees

    Present
           billroberts, ScottSimmons, CLausStadler, ClausStadler,
           jtandy, Payam, Linda, frans, AndreaPerego, phila

    Regrets
           Ed, Josh, Matt, Clemens

    Chair
           Jeremy

    Scribe
           Payam

Contents

      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]approve minutes
          2. [5]Part1
          3. [6]Part 2
          4. [7]3 May
      * [8]Summary of Action Items
      * [9]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <phila> zakim save this description

    <jtandy>
    [10]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon201

    60420

      [10] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon20160420


    <joshlieberman> lurking+ joshlieberman

approve minutes

    <jtandy> proposed: approve minutes of last meeting
    [11]http://www.w3.org/2016/03/23-sdwbp-minutes


      [11] http://www.w3.org/2016/03/23-sdwbp-minutes


    <frans> +0

    <Linda> +1

    +1

    <ScottSimmons> +0

    <billroberts> +1

    <jtandy> +1

    <ClausStadler> +0

    <joshlieberman> I need to be on another call, but mostly not to
    do with me...

    <jtandy> [12]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call


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


Part1

    <jtandy> establishing an "agreed spatial ontology"

    frans: has identified the issue of finding an agreed spatial
    ontology- we are going to discuss this.
    ... this is in the charter description; we need to find a
    solution for formalising things
    ... charter mentions that the spatial data on the web best
    practices report will refer to ISO standards and other common
    vocabularies
    ... it is difficult to choose a suitable standard while working
    with the spatial data on the web; so this can be a good
    opportunity
    ... the question is how to interpret this- do we need to extend
    an existing common model? create a new model? we need to
    collect ideas on what an agreed spatial ontology will look like
    ... what would be the concepts/content for such an ontology

    jtandy: there are many ways/standards to specify spatial data
    on the web; the fragmentation and variety is an issue
    ... we have potential to contribute to the web data community
    by simplifying the data operating environment for spatial data

    frans: the are many areas that have commonly accepted ways of
    specifying/sharing/exchanging concepts; e.g. numbering systems;

    <jtandy> email thread:
    [13]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/

    0056.html

      [13] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/0056.html


    jtandy: we need to define the scope and what we are aiming at
    ... discusses the email thread on this topic; link above
    ... are we talking about an upper-level ontology?
    ... are we talking about describing geometry constructs or are
    we talking about describing things?

    frans: what would be the concepts/content for such an ontology

    tandy: there are many ways/standards to specify spatial data on
    the web; the fragmentation and variety is an issue

    jtandy: we have potential to contribute to the web data
    community by simplifying the data operating environment for
    spatial data

    frans: the are many areas that have commonly accepted ways of
    specifying/sharing/exchanging concepts; e.g. numbering systems;

    email thread:
    [14]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/

    0056.html

      [14] 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/0056.html


    jtandy: we need to define the scope and what we are aiming at
    ... discusses the email thread on this topic; link above
    ... are we talking about an upper-level ontology?
    ... are we talking about describing geometry constructs or are
    we talking about describing things?

    <jtandy> geometry can't be dealt with without the coordinate
    reference systems!

    frans: in practice what is mostly missing is a basic agreement
    about geometry; and if you address that then you need to also
    consider the reference systems

    Linda: geometry is already defined inISO190107
    ... the ISO 190107 is (probably) being defined as a web
    ontology- we need to check this-
    ... doesn't see us as a group to define a fundamental concept
    like this- this could be beyond the scope of our work-

    jtandy: the ISO standard focuses on spatial geometry(?) and
    other communities can be unaware of that

    frans: we can work on creating more awareness; however that
    standard does not make assumptions about what a geometry is; it
    comes from geography domain.

    frans; in geo-sparql there areno references to basic geometry
    concepts

    <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask about the methodology
    for this "spatial ontology" - are we defining new things, or
    trying to give BPs on existing solutions?

    AndreaPerego: we already have models to specify geometry; it is
    not clear what we are aiming at; is it going to be a new
    definition? people already use existing concepts; maybe this
    can be a good practice on how to use what exists

    <billroberts> [15]https://xkcd.com/927/


      [15] https://xkcd.com/927/


    billroberts: we need to understand who the target group is
    ... who is it for and under what circumstance this can be used?

    jtandy: do we think there is already a reasonably well
    understood conceptual model in use?

    <AndreaPerego> There are many!

    do we feel ISO190107 provides an exhaustive basis for geometry
    model?

    <AndreaPerego> My concern is its re-use by non-specialists.

    Linda: thinks the ISO standard is a good basis-

    <jtandy> proposed: ISO 19107 provides an exhaustive basis for
    geometry conceptual model

    <jtandy> +1

    <Linda> +1

    0

    <ScottSimmons> +1

    <AndreaPerego> 0

    <billroberts> 0 - sorry I don't know it well enough

    <frans> I would not know, I would have to look at it better
    first

    <ClausStadler> 0 - have to look at it first

    <Linda> I see some homework coming up

    <jtandy> proposed: new work item to assess whether ISO 19107
    provides an exhaustive basis for geometry conceptual model and
    ISO 19111 for spatial reference systems

    <jtandy> +1

    0

    <ScottSimmons> +1

    <billroberts> +1

    <frans> Does this include availabilty as a web ontology?

    <Linda> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1, but we need to decide about which
    requirements it should be tested against.

    <ClausStadler> +1

    jtandy: frans: not yet

    <frans> +1

    Linda: answers frans's question (Does this include availability
    as a web ontology?) - there seem to be some work related to
    this.

    s/some work /some existing work

    RESOLUTION: new work item to assess whether ISO 19107 provides
    an exhaustive basis for geometry conceptual model and ISO 19111
    for spatial reference systems

    <frans> We could collect thoughts and requirements on a wiki
    page

    <frans> Making the model digestible could be done step by step

    SctottSimmons: we need to understand how to define something
    that is usable by a large community; we probably need to be
    less ambitious and find the key areas that we need to address;

    s/AndreaPerego/AndreaPerego

    AndreasPerego: thinks it is good to create a separate wiki page
    to add information relatedto this topic

    sorry Andrea

    <AndreaPerego> No problem :)

    jtandy: what should be the next step?

    frans: to collect different thoughts on a wiki page; with
    clearly defined actions; reviewing the ISO standards and
    geometry models that are in use

    <jtandy> ACTION: frans to set up a wiki page and coordinate the
    collection of ideas about validity of ISO 19107 and ISO 19111
    in meeting the needs of SDW - including non-geographical
    standards like SVG [recorded in
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-160 - Set up a wiki page and
    coordinate the collection of ideas about validity of iso 19107
    and iso 19111 in meeting the needs of sdw - including
    non-geographical standards like svg [on Frans Knibbe - due
    2016-04-27].

    jtandy: asking frans to set up a wiki page

    <AndreaPerego> Maybe we can also start by including the
    relevant BPs...

Part 2

    Best Practice Flooding Scenario

    [17]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative


      [17] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative


    we have tried to extend the narrative and link it to all the
    BPs

    <Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask if best practices might occur
    more than once in the scenario

    <phila> Payam: We tried to keep it concise. WE could write it
    from different perspectives

    <phila> ... We wanted it to be a story that people could read
    and that would link to the BPs as a narrative

    <phila> ... could be written from a developer's POV, an env
    Agency's POV etc.

    <phila> Payam: An example, BP 6 and 7 highlight the narrative
    for different groups of people

    <phila> jtandy: people who have not updated the narrative so
    far - are you able to understand it in sufficient detail in
    order to further develop examples of BP being followed?

    <phila> ... Need input from people on the call.

    <billroberts> seems clear to me

    <phila> Payam: I think we may need a quick intro, or have
    people read it before

    <phila> jtandy: If you haven't read it, you really should,
    please.

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <phila> jtandy: What I'd like people to do... if you want to
    participate in this group and you can't follow the scenario,
    please say what is missing and what we need to add.

    <phila> Payam: We don't want to make it too complex. We want a
    one page example that capturesd as much as we can

    <phila> jtandy: We need different audiences to be able to
    relate to the doc

    <phila> frans: Do you accept that there could be BPs that don't
    play a role in the narrative?

    +q Payam

    <phila> jtandy: If we find that there are missing BPs, then I'd
    like to bend the narrative to make it fit. That might take us
    away fron reality a little but we need to harness them.

    <phila> Payam: All the BPs are included in the scenario at the
    moment

    <Linda> no

    <phila> jtandy: Can you, Payam, give us an overview of what
    you've been doing to map our flooding example onto your group's
    work on smart cities

    <phila> Payam: It's about who is involved. Could be citizens,
    developers, historians

    <phila> ... Then write from different perspectives, what they
    need, the right granularity, etc.

    <phila> ... How can people react, they might publish on social
    media etc.

    <phila> ... Linked to BPs on publishing data about each of
    these.

    <phila> ... data should be usable for machines and humans

    <phila> ... May be for actuation as well as reporting.

    <phila> ... As we explained the storty we could see how
    different BPs come into play.

    <phila> jtandy: Links?

    <phila> Payam: This is a project funded by Innovate UK but
    there's nothing online about it

    <jtandy> ACTION: Payam to share links to work on Smart Cities
    that is relevant to our flooding scenario [recorded in
    [18]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]

      [18] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-161 - Share links to work on smart
    cities that is relevant to our flooding scenario [on Payam
    Barnaghi - due 2016-04-27].

    <phila> billroberts: To clarify - what help are you asking for
    around spelling out how a BP applies in Bart's narrative.

    <phila> ... Do you want people to pick a BP and work through
    it?

    <phila> jtandy: In my mind I would pick something ... take
    Payam's example of pumps and actuators, or water height sensor

    <phila> ... That's a section in the narrative. I'd like people
    to be able to take a part of the story and write down examples
    of how you would go about implementing that particular
    activity.

    <phila> ... So for a sensor you might want the OGC's sensor
    things API to publish data on the Web.

    <phila> phila: W3C has a generic sensor API as well, hmm,
    wonder if they're compatible.

    <phila> billroberts: Style guidelines?

    <phila> jtandy: No style guidelines so far. I'll set up a wiki
    page that breaks the narrative into sections so we can put
    names next to them

    <jtandy> ACTION: jtandy to break the narrative into discrete
    elements and create a wiki page of who is developing each part
    [recorded in
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-162 - Break the narrative into
    discrete elements and create a wiki page of who is developing
    each part [on Jeremy Tandy - due 2016-04-27].

    <ScottSimmons> sorry have to leave~

3 May

    +1

    <jtandy> +1

    <billroberts> +1

    <AndreaPerego> +1

    <phila> jtandy: We'll try a virtual meeting - I want a bulk of
    a few hours when we can work as a group to push outsleves
    forward rather than just an hour every 2 weeks.

    <frans> +0.5

    We can host

    <jtandy> colocate for a the virtual meeting?

    <AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye - good job, Jeremy!

    thanks, bye

    <billroberts> bye

    <frans> Thanks & bye

    <phila> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices Sub
    Group

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: frans to set up a wiki page and coordinate the
    collection of ideas about validity of ISO 19107 and ISO 19111
    in meeting the needs of SDW - including non-geographical
    standards like SVG [recorded in
    [20]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]
    [NEW] ACTION: jtandy to break the narrative into discrete
    elements and create a wiki page of who is developing each part
    [recorded in
    [21]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]
    [NEW] ACTION: Payam to share links to work on Smart Cities that
    is relevant to our flooding scenario [recorded in
    [22]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01

      [21] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03

      [22] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02


Summary of Resolutions

     1. [23]new work item to assess whether ISO 19107 provides an
        exhaustive basis for geometry conceptual model and ISO
        19111 for spatial reference systems

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [24]scribe.perl version
     1.144 ([25]CVS log)
     $Date: 2016/04/20 15:08:59 $
      __________________________________________________________

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

      [25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Thursday, 21 April 2016 08:52:02 UTC