[Minutes] 2016-08-31

Predictably enough, the minutes of today's meeting are at 
https://www.w3.org/2016/08/31-sdw-minutes with a snapshot below.

           Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference

31 Aug 2016

    [2]Agenda

       [2] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160831

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/08/31-sdw-irc

Attendees

    Present
           roba, DanhLePhuoc, ScottSimmons, BartvanLeeuwen,
           ByronCinNZ, phila, kerry, frans, ChrisLittle, jtandy,
           RaulGarciaCastro

    Regrets
           Rachel, Lars, SimonCox, Andrea, edparsons, Ed

    Chair
           Kerry, Jeremy

    Scribe
           kerry, Jeremy Tandy, phila

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]approve last meetings minutes
          2. [6]patent call
          3. [7]f2f
             https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4
          4. [8]Tuesday
          5. [9]Updates on the UCR doc
          6. [10]BP update
          7. [11]Best Practices
          8. [12]SSN
      * [13]Summary of Action Items
      * [14]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <jtandy> [15]http://www.w3.org/2016/08/17-sdw-minutes.html

      [15] http://www.w3.org/2016/08/17-sdw-minutes.html

    <ChrisLittle> +1

    propose: approve minutes
    [16]http://www.w3.org/2016/08/17-sdw-minutes.html

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2016/08/17-sdw-minutes.html

approve last meetings minutes

    <jtandy> +1

    +1

    <frans> +1

    RESOLUTION: approve minutes
    [17]http://www.w3.org/2016/08/17-sdw-minutes.html

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2016/08/17-sdw-minutes.html

patent call

    <roba> i ma missing from present list again - maybe i beat bot
    to it, otherwise +1

    <jtandy> scribe: Jeremy Tandy

    <jtandy> scribenick: jtandy

    <ChrisLittle> S/am/am/

f2f [18]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4

      [18] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4

    <ChrisLittle> S/ma/am

    kerry: goal to bring people's attention to the upcoming f2f
    ... there is a draft agenda
    ... best so far, [but by no means finished!]
    ... 8:30 am to 6pm

    <BartvanLeeuwen> +1

    kerry: is this OK?

    <frans> 8:30 is doable

    <phila> There is usually more coffee than you can drink

    <ChrisLittle> * back in a few minutes

    kerry: registration is open from 8am
    ... summarises ... 8:30 to start
    ... first thing on the agenda is UCR doc
    ... this should be the last time we look at this
    ... is that OK frans ?

    frans: there are still things coming on the plate. will there
    be new versions of the documents before TPAC?

    kerry: yes - there was a preference for this - a week before
    TPAC for stable review.

    <phila> scribe: phila

    frans: We can have a new version of the UCR before TPAC but it
    may not be final.

    kerry: OK, let's leave it on the agenda
    ... And that will ..

    jtandy: Can I just ask Frans..
    ... One of the things on the list recently is whether or not we
    have a req for units of measure and precision and accuracy.
    ... This is necessary as a minimum for CRS
    ... from a BP doc perspective, we're not putting anything in
    until there's a req for it.

    <ChrisLittle> * back

    jtandy: So are you trying to synthesise those reqs before TPAC.

    kerry: Should we move the UCR to after the BP discusssion?

    jtandy: I think the BP discussion will take up as much time as
    it can and more

    kerry: If there's anything concrete to add to the agenda, let
    me know.

    <jtandy>
    [19]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4-best-pra
    ctice-agenda-scratch-pad

      [19] 
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4-best-practice-agenda-scratch-pad

    jtandy: I've created a wiki page ^^ trying to get individuals
    to talk about issues that interest them most.

    kerry: If you can work in that time frame, please edit the wiki

    jtandy: I notice that you included a vote to release a new
    version of the BP doc in the agenda...

    kerry: How would you like to end?

    jtandy: We have a draft doc, we have a list of outstanding
    changes to make, all allocated to individuals to complete by a
    given date. Then after TPAC we can do what we need to do and
    then release after that.

    [More jtandy - kerry discussion]

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to ask kerry which agenda we're
    looking at as
    [20]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4 seems
    different

      [20] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4

    -> [21]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4

      [21] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4

    phila: Confused

    kerry: Updating the agenda again...

    frans: To be clear, there won't be a new PWD of the BP doc
    before TPAC, but will there be a stable version to review
    before then

    jtandy: of the BP doc? There should be a reasonably stable
    version in the week up to TPAC.
    ... We'll highlight where there are gaps.
    ... Linda is now away for a week and a bit
    ... I'm overlapping... so we may be a little uncoordinated up
    to TPAC.

Tuesday

    kerry: Bill has asked for time on coverages. we'll start first
    thing
    ... Up until morning tea. And then the rest of the day is SSN.
    The SSN people need some plenary time.
    ... There will be sub topics
    ... Important for us to come back to the main group
    ... And then the plan fort the last 2 hours - we've been
    approached by the Web of Things WG
    ... They're spawning a new group who want to talk to us about a
    vocab for a Web of Things
    ... We were aiming for a session on Wednesday but they're not
    available.
    ... So I think that WoT session will be interesting beyind the
    SSN people. Lots of spatial data things to think about.

    -> www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/5751 Sensor API stuff

    <ChrisLittle> +q

    <kerry> phil asks for review that paper

    phila: Plugs the generic sensor API seeking review

    kerry: Danh - could you take a look at that, please?

    <joshlieberman> It would be helpful for those of us conflicted
    in Orlando to make sure the TPAC session notes are fairly
    complete and promptly available.

    DanhLePhuoc_: OK, I can take a look

    ChrisLittle: Can DanhLePhuoc_ please let me know about his
    review directly? So I can report back to OGC?
    ... Lots of relevant stuff at OGC on this

    <ScottSimmons> +1 to Chris

    DanhLePhuoc_: I see several things in common. So yes.
    ... I'll look at that.

    kerry: I have to say - Chris, your suggestion is very sincere -
    everyone would agree with you but it's a very big space.
    ... OneM2M is based on SSN I believe.
    ... There are lots^n of groups working in that space.
    ... There was a big workshop in Europe last year that mapped
    that.

    ChrisLittle: Then maybe we should be in the business of mapping
    the landscape.

    <joshlieberman> Perhaps the best we can hope for is to try to
    keep up on how all of these API's may be related to each other.
    OGC are still dealing with the overlap between STA and SOS...

    ChrisLittle: Can we look at common approaches

    ScottSimmons: I agree

    <frans> It seems to me that the sooner convergence attempts are
    started, the better.

    ScottSimmons: That was news to me too. We should try and get
    the groups talking
    ... I have a rough idea where the differences anda similarities
    lie

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to make a suggestion to Denise

    kerry: We have Robin ? who is working with Steve Liang who was
    coming to SSN meetings. He's never said much

    phila: He's never spoken at all as far as I know

    kerry: And the API people - Linda and I went to their meeting
    in Japan last year
    ... Didn't feel it was on target for us

    phila: They're only concerned with browser APIs, not what's
    behind it

    <kerry> q/

    phila: We should check that we should or shouldn't be talking

    DanhLePhuoc_: DO they see spatial data as relevant to sensor
    data? Even within W3C we had ?? context
    ... then we... [very faint]
    ... I don't know how we can collaborate

    <kerry> danh: spatial data also relevant to sensors, also
    [something] and snesor api and web of things and other iot
    consortiums... I don't know how we can collaborate

    <ChrisLittle> S/sensor/sensor/

    <ChrisLittle> S/snesor/sensor/

    kerry: So we're waiting for a bit of filling in from SSN and BP
    for the TPAC agenda.

    <DanhLePhuoc_> how to position ourselfs and collaborate with
    other groups, Device Context, Sensor API, WoT, ETSI M2M, oneM2M
    which have relevant APIs and data model

    <ScottSimmons> ScottSimmons has just sent a message to the OGC
    SensorThings email reflector to request participation/support
    for engagement with generic sensor API group

Updates on the UCR doc

BP update

    frans: I haven't prepared anything. There are many different
    topics. I'd like to ask people to pay attention to the mailing
    list ...

Best Practices

    jtandy: Linda and I have been busy trying to press on with the
    doc. I think she's done great work in boiling it down. We used
    to have 30, now we have 15.
    ... Quality not quantity.
    ... Linda has also been working to align them with DWBP
    ... Some of the things that are left over... we think we want a
    section on CRS which Payam is leading.
    ... We anticipate a section in the intro on CRS and a BP around
    how to choose it. That will need to apply to non-geographic CRS
    ones.
    ... We need a decision tree on choosing your vocabs and formats
    ... How to we channel people to the simplest format that does
    the job.
    ... we have the Newhaven flooding scenario.
    ... My job is to clarify what my actors are doing when
    publishing admin boundaries, flood extent, using social
    media...
    ... And then I need real world examples.
    ... This won't be done before TPAC
    ... Really want to have some real world examples and data
    ... Maybe that not all the examples will relate to flooding.
    ... Not all our data will be geolocated.
    ... the data examples won't all be in the same place.

    <BartvanLeeuwen> looking for unmute button

    jtandy: I think Bart is offering some geolocated examples in a
    test bed?

    BartvanLeeuwen: We're not talking about a test bed but we are
    pursuing the stuff I demod earlier.
    ... We'll be presenting that the day after I've been to TPAC.
    ... We want to say it's easy to add this, to expose data etc.

    jtandy: The examples being geographically distributed is
    probably correct then

    <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk i18n

    -> [22]https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/#LocaleParametersMetadata
    DWBP CR

      [22] https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/#LocaleParametersMetadata

    phila: Talked about the slight change to locale neutral advice
    in DWBP

    kerry: When we were doing SSN the first time, we were working
    with people doing stuff on the other side of the channel -
    Southampton/Solent
    ... I think that was public and had lots of data

    <ChrisLittle> +q

    jtandy: There will be limited time between now and TPAC to get
    the data into the doc, but I do want to create place holders
    ... If you can find some references, so much the better.

    ChrisLittle: I admit I haven't read you scenario. Does it say
    anything about tides?
    ... So it's the excessive rainfall AND the tides that matter.
    ... It's a flourishing coastal city in NL... We don't go into
    causes of the rising water.

    jtandy: There are some e-mails that ask for input on nspecific
    BPs
    ... 5, 6, 9, 16, 17
    ... I need help please.
    ... One of those, 6, is about the use of identifiers. I'm
    looking for people to indicate support indirect identification.
    It talks about using the identifier of a mailbox to identify
    the person whose mailbox it is.
    ... I'm looking for consensus to emerge.
    ... The sooner I can get those issues solved, the sooner I can
    get the doc into shape.

    <joshlieberman> Jeremy, was my response clear?

    joshlieberman: There is this question, do we have this HTTP
    Range 14 problem?
    ... The assertion is that it doesn't because we're talking
    about feature data since if were clear that we're talking about
    feature data, then that's clear
    ... There is some legitimate ambiguity that not everyone cares
    about.
    ... It's an inherent property of feature data.
    ... If we need to disambiguate which real world feature we're
    talking about. This feature representation may not be the same
    as that, although they may be referring to the same real world
    featuyre
    ... In many cases, people are referring to the same real world
    thing, so there are occasions where we may need to
    disambiguate. Otherwise I think the indoirect ids worl well for
    spatial data.

    jtandy: I'll re-read what you said and then come back to you if
    needs be

    <ChrisLittle> S/work/work/

    roba: I won't touch that topic. My concern... I see a degree of
    inconsistency between subgroups around whether a requirement
    must be in the UCR before it can be dealt with.

    <ChrisLittle> S/indoirect/indirect/

    roba: Can anyone clear state what the relationship is?

    frans: The way you said it is the way the UCR is set up. It
    specifies reqs for Spatial Data in the Web. Sub groups can work
    with other sources thayt have additional requirements.
    ... Some topics go beyond spatial data on the web, such as
    time.
    ... So I think it makes sense to have some exceptions.
    ... If a requirement just comes from generally doing things
    right then I don't think we need to include it.

    roba: So it's not 100% consistent with the idea that a req must
    be in the UCR

    kerry: I've not heard that about Time or SSN

    roba: For example, the SSN group asked me to see if the UCR was
    complete

SSN

    kerry: We wanted to make sure that SSN was meeting its reqs
    ... we resolved that in our last SSN meeting

    <frans> I am behind on a few topics, I have to admit.

    kerry: I don't think SSN needs to be entirely constrained by
    the UCR, but we'd be mad not to cover all the reqs in the UCR

    <roba> ok - happy that we are saying that we must have UCR ref
    for every requirement...

    frans: Two new requirements are coming, so we're still
    accepting new ones.

    roba: OK, I;m happy if everyone accepts that we don't *have* to
    have a UCR Req

    <jtandy> agree with rob's assessment

    kerry: Nor do we have to deliver all the reqs, but we have to
    do a mapping and if we don't cover it, say why.

    <roba> thanks phil

    kerry: On Coverages... we have the first template for a doc
    around data cube...

    <BartvanLeeuwen> thx bye

    <ChrisLittle> Bye

    <RaulGarciaCastro> Bye!

    <jtandy> bye

    <kerry> chair: kerry

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [23]approve minutes
        http://www.w3.org/2016/08/17-sdw-minutes.html

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________

Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2016 14:11:41 UTC