[Minutes SSN] 2016-12-20

The minutes of this week's SSN sub group call are at 
https://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-sdwssn-minutes with a snapshot below.

This was a productive meeting that resolved many issues that have arisen 
around here and there but that seem to have become compounded. All is 
well and, modulo editorial changes now under way, the document will be 
frozen by the end of the week and ready for publication as soon as the 
WG can convene to approve it in the new year.

Merry Christmas and a happy new year everyone

Phil


        Spatial Data on the Web Working Group SSN Sub Group Telco

20 Dec 2016

    [2]Agenda

       [2] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:SSN-Telecon20161220

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-sdwssn-irc

Attendees

    Present
           RaulGarciaCastro, SimonCox, ClausStadler, DanhLePhuoc,
           Armin, Kerry, Laurent, ChrisLittle, laurent_oz

    Regrets
           Krzysztof

    Chair
           Armin

    Scribe
           phila

Contents

      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Approving last meeting's minutes:
             https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes
          2. [6]Patent Call
          3. [7]Approving pending change requests on WD document
             and agree on frozen state for vote on 4th of January
          4. [8]Going forward
      * [9]Summary of Action Items
      * [10]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <scribe> scribe: phila

    <scribe> scribeNick: phila

Approving last meeting's minutes:
[11]https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes

      [11] https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes

    <SimonCox> +1

    <ahaller2> +1

    <ClausStadler1> +1

    <kerry_> +1

Patent Call

    RESOLUTION: lAst meeting's minutes approved
    [12]https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes

      [12] https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes

Approving pending change requests on WD document and agree on frozen
state for vote on 4th of January

    <SimonCox> SOrry - they are just testing the alarm - I'm still
    here

    ahaller2: In Friday's F2F we were supposed to vote on the WD
    which we didn't manage. We agreed that Danh would approve pull
    requests for the Ed Draft so that we can work towards a vote on
    4 Jan
    ... We need to find a process. Perhaps creating a new branch
    etc?
    ... But let's look at the remaining pull requests

    <ahaller2> [13]https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pulls

      [13] https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pulls

    ahaller2: These are PRs. There was an e-mail from kerry saying
    that she was still working on the alignmente section
    formatting?
    ... But there is a PR lefty from Kerry, no. 473

    <SimonCox> Should I repeat the pull request to swap the
    sequence of the SSN/SOSA sections?

    ahaller2: I've been looking at these, they look OK to me but
    Danh, you're in charge

    [NOTUC] to pulling into the merge PR 473

    <SimonCox> @phila - nah, you are just sanding behind a curtain

    ahaller2: So there are no remaining pull requests

    SimonCox: On the process, when I looked at the SSN PRs, you had
    to read the titles to detect those.
    ... It's probably helpful when creating a PR, prefix it with
    'SSN'

    ahaller2: That's a good idea

    <ahaller2> +1 for SSN prefix in pull request

    <RaulGarciaCastro> You can use labels

    kerry_: I sent an e-mail late last night. You wanted me to do
    the layout without spaces. I took another run at it as people
    can't always maintain spaces when they edit docs (which I don't
    agree with)
    ... I tried and failed, but if you'd like me to solve that
    problem then I'm happy to take another go at it.

    ahaller2: Sorry, that was too late for me to see.
    ... It's cut off a little in my browser. It's beyond the
    bounding box of the div container
    ... we can fix it.
    ... I think it's enbough if we fix it for the next version. I'd
    think it's OK as it is now.

    SimonCox: First thing I want to do is to offer my apologies for
    lack of understanding with GH and for the ensuing problem. All
    to do with me working on OWL Time and it all got into the same
    PR. Apologies.
    ... That said... the change that the PR made, I think most
    people were happy with, which was swapping the order of the
    SOSA and SSN chapters
    ... Is it appropriate to bring it up now

    ahaller2: I discussed this with Kerry. My concern was not
    around changing the order. Logically it makes sense. My concern
    is that it's such a big diff - the diff doesn't track the
    changes and just sees two new blocks
    ... I was suggesting that an editor made that change
    ... Personally, I'm happy with the change.
    ... I think Jano is too.

    I'm happy to have it done. My only potential objection... it
    should be done by an editor... but I'd like it done cleanly,
    i.e. a standalone change.

    <SimonCox> Can someone make a motion to do clean swap?

    scribe: I'd have concerns if it got wrapped up in other things.

    ahaller2: Can you make that change?

    DanhLePhuoc: Yes, I'll do that and then assign it to you

    laurent_oz: About SOSA and SSN order. I'm OK too, but my
    general position, is that we should hide the division as much
    as possible, but it's a step in the right direction.

    ahaller2: What do you mean by hiding?

    laurent_oz: Making the change not so prominent as it is now.
    ... Much more about blending the SOSA and SSN
    ... It could look too complicated if we're not careful

    ahaller2: Are there any other changes?
    ... Are we ready to freeze?

    PROPOSED: That the order of the SOSA and SSN chapters be
    swapped

    <kerry_> +1

    <SimonCox> +1

    <RaulGarciaCastro> +1

    <ahaller2> +1

    <laurent_oz> +1

    RESOLUTION: That the order of the SOSA and SSN chapters be
    swapped

    <DanhLePhuoc> +1

    kerry_: Aggh!

    <SimonCox> did the mouse eat her?

    kerry_: Two other things. No fuss to be made.
    ... Backward compatibility with old SSN... not sure about what
    I proposed about this
    ... I did something that I'm happy with but I'm not sure it's
    enough.
    ... Also the change log, I wrote that. I'm not sure other
    editors have recorded their changes there. That might need
    looking at.

    <ahaller2> [14]https://www.w3.org/ns/ssn-bc

      [14] https://www.w3.org/ns/ssn-bc

    ahaller2: The 1st comment that Kerry made, was that this URI
    was used to make the alignment. But I think once these ...

    phila: Didn't undertand the 1st point

    kerry_: There are 2 new ontologies - 3 new ontologies with this
    draft.
    ... The expectation is that W3C will upload them into the right
    namespace, when the doc is published/

    phila: You're asking for 3 namespaces

    kerry_: There's SOSA, which is new in this doc

    <ahaller2>
    [15]https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/
    ssn.owl

      [15] 
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/ssn.owl

    <ahaller2>
    [16]https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa.ttl

      [16] https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa.ttl

    <ahaller2>
    [17]https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/
    ssn_equivalences.owl

      [17] 
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/ssn_equivalences.owl

    <ahaller2>
    [18]https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/
    dul-alignment.owl

      [18] 
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/dul-alignment.owl

    kerry_: There's the old SSN alignment that is new in this
    release
    ... added to this, I'm not sure that this is the right URI

    <ahaller2> these are the ontology files that are used in the
    document

    <SimonCox> Do we actually need namespaces for alignments? Are
    any new resources named??

    phila: Would rather not over-use /ns space
    ... Can we use dated space

    <ahaller2> +1 for a dated space for the alignments or use
    /ssn/ssn-bc

    kerry_: These are meant to be normative

    phila: Don't care. Are they intended to be used for 30+ years?

    kerry_: How about /ns/ssn/foo?

    phila: Better

    ahaller2: So it would be /ns/ssn/bc/

    <laurent_oz> maybe ssn-ssnx?

    kerry_: Notes that /ssn/dul is there already

    <laurent_oz> sssn being the xg X for XG

    <SimonCox> is it a namespace or is it a graph name?

    <laurent_oz> and also potentially, we will have to change the
    namespace for the old ssn to ssnx

    SimonCox: On this issue..
    ... regarding these namespaces - are any new resources defined,
    or is it a bunch of equivalent, sub classes etc?
    ... Because if it is just those, it's not so much a namespace
    as much as anamed graph.

    ahaller2: We just want to give the graph a name that is
    different from SSN. I don't think any new terms are declared
    ... It's just to avoid people loading this into a triple store
    and getting them confused

    SimonCox: Hearing that, does that affect W3C's view?
    ... It sounds to be as if it should have ssn at the beginning

    phila: How about /2017/01/ssn-alignment?

    <laurent_oz> Tried to load all these ontologies into Protege
    yesterday: need a owl:Ontology with a rdf:about finishing with
    a different name (also we should start to revert to a dated URI
    for the old SSN).

    phila: I won't object/stand in the way, but it feels to me as
    if you're looking at a transitional thing, then I prefer dated
    space

    kerry_: The doc itself will need to be changed to adapt to
    that.
    ... I also liked Lauren't alternative name for the doc
    ... Changing from bc to...

    ahaller2: So we have 2 proposals for ...
    ... for the alignment with the old namespace, we use the dated
    space

    laurent_oz: In Protege, the conflict is between the old and new
    SSN

    In Protege, you see the last make after the last slash

    SimonCox: That's a tool problem

    laurent_oz: Yes, but we know about it so perhaps we can avoid
    it.

    kerry_: It's painful, but I don't think there's a better
    option.
    ... Neither imports the other. You put yourself in that
    position if you want to.

    SimonCox: You may have noticed that I've been working on an
    alignment with SOSA and O&M
    ... I hadn't gone as far as imagining the w3 URI to be used for
    that
    ... The lists and lists of alignment axioms - will we see those
    in the end or will we be referring out to an RDF alignment
    graph?

    <Zakim> kerry_, you wanted to comment on the previous topic to
    conside the name laurent proposed for ssn-bc and to remind on
    changes section

    kerry_: We discussed that last week. There were suggestions
    made - not able to do it before now.
    ... I'll certainly havea another go.

    SimonCox: So should I do something similar for O&M alignment in
    a future release?

    ahaller2: I think kerry_ you were adressing he formatting
    preoblem?

    kerry_: No...

    ahaller2: Do we want the alignment in the file as they appear
    now?

    SimonCox: It's just an alignment of all the axioms?

    ahaller2: We need a formal semantics section

    <laurent_oz> And a figure!

    SimonCox: I remember some discussion about the formal semantics

    laurent_oz: That's what we'll need to discuss.

    <scribe> ACTION: laurent to prepare a graphical representation
    of the alignment [recorded in
    [19]http://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01]

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-246 - Prepare a graphical
    representation of the alignment [on Laurent Lefort - due
    2016-12-27].

    SimonCox: That shoud be a plural?

    laurent_oz: Yes.

    ahaller2: So we have a proposal to change the alignment
    namespace URI to a dated space

    <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Dated URI for the SSN-SSSNX alignment and
    change name to SSN-SSSNX

    <laurent_oz> 2 s

    <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Dated URI for the SSN-SSSNX alignment and
    change name to SSN-SSNX

    <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Dated URI for the SSN-SSNX alignment and
    change name to SSN-SSNX

    <kerry_> +1

    <ahaller2> +1

    <laurent_oz> +1

    <RaulGarciaCastro> +1

    kerry_: Noting that that requires changes in the doc before
    publication

    ahaller2: You can only do that after DanhLePhuoc has swapped
    SOSA and SSN sections

    DanhLePhuoc: I'm doing it now
    ... So give it a few hours

    ahaller2: I'll look at it right after the meeting

    <SimonCox> ANd don't forget
    [20]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table !

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

    RESOLUTION: Dated URI for the SSN-SSNX alignment and change
    name to SSN-SSNX

    <ahaller2> The namespace for SSN terms is
    [21]http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/

      [21] http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/

    <ahaller2> The suggested prefix for the SSN namespace is ssn

    <ahaller2> The SSN ontology itself is available here.

    ahaller2: We need something similar at the beginning of the
    SOAS section. Simon mentioned it a while back.
    ... I propose making that cnage in the doc

    laurent_oz: In terms of reaching to the user, showing them
    these namespaces. It makes sense to have the O&M alignment
    prominent

    ahaller2: So the alignment with O&M should be more prominent
    than with SOSA

    laurent_oz: (off mike)

    ahaller2: Can that be in the next version, not this version

    <laurent_oz> Phil asks if everything can go in a single graph
    name.

    <SimonCox> PROPOSED: Insert a NS block at top of SOSA section

    [No, we need separate graph names]

    <SimonCox> +1

    <kerry_> +1

    ahaller2: Do we all agree?

    <ahaller2> +1

    <laurent_oz> +1

    <roba> +1

    RESOLUTION: Insert a NS block at top of SOSA section

    ahaller2: That change to be made after the SOSA and SSN section
    order swap

    kerry_: The changes section...
    ... It's good enough but it's not that good. Can it be
    improved?

    ahaller2: From what we proposed omn Monday evening, I think
    we've only made editorial changes. Are there other changes that
    need to be highlighted. There were som esignificant changes
    ... There are 2 new chapters which aren't mentioned. The
    vertical integration isn't in the change log

    SimonCox: Adding sections is more than just editorial, I agree

    ahaller2: Are you volunteering to made those additions, Kerry?
    ... Talks about changes before and after the freeze

    <laurent_oz> Phil The change log have to reflect the changes
    between the published versions

    phila: Points out that change log needs to reflect changes
    between previous and this published version.

    kerry_: I did it for the changes I was aware of, which I'm not
    sure is all of them.

    SimonCox: I'll review that if you have a go Armin.
    ... But I don't feel able to make actual changes

    ahaller2: If you have a couple of spare minutes in the morning

    SimonCox: I'll do it right after the end of this call, but
    after the current PRs have been accepted.

    <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Adding changes to change history in
    document in section B

    <ahaller2> +1

    <SimonCox> +1 - I will work on it this afternoon

    <kerry_> +1

    <laurent_oz> +1 - Simon can you cc me with your original list
    of changes (to help me to catch up)?

    +1

    <DanhLePhuoc> +1

    phila: (it's essential)

    RESOLUTION: Adding changes to change history in document in
    section B

    <RaulGarciaCastro> +1

    ahaller2: So can we freeze the doc after these changes, no more
    after that

    <kerry_> +1 subject to consistency /typo check

    <SimonCox> +1

    <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Freeze document after approved proposed
    changes from this meeting are made

    <roba> +0

    <SimonCox> +1

    <RaulGarciaCastro> +1

    <ahaller2> +1

    <kerry_> +1 subject to consiusteny/typo check

    RESOLUTION: Freeze document after approved proposed changes
    from this meeting are made

    <laurent_oz> +1

Going forward

    ahaller2: We'll have to take this topic on the mailing list as
    we're out of time
    ... We may want to open a new doc or a new branch

    <laurent_oz> * Simon, I'll need the O&M ontology you want to
    align with (if not available)

    ahaller2: AOB? If not, we have a frozen doc before Christmas

    <SimonCox> Thanks for very productive meeting all.

    <SimonCox> Happy Holidays

    SimonCox: I was just reminding people that the diagram existed
    which might be helpful

    <RaulGarciaCastro> Bye! Enjoy these days!

    [Adjourned]

    phila: Use [22]http://www.w3.org/2017/01/ssn-ssnx

      [22] http://www.w3.org/2017/01/ssn-ssnx

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: laurent to prepare a graphical representation of
    the alignment [recorded in
    [23]http://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01]

      [23] http://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [24]lAst meeting's minutes approved
        https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes
     2. [25]That the order of the SOSA and SSN chapters be swapped
     3. [26]Dated URI for the SSN-SSNX alignment and change name to
        SSN-SSNX
     4. [27]Insert a NS block at top of SOSA section
     5. [28]Adding changes to change history in document in section
        B
     6. [29]Freeze document after approved proposed changes from
        this meeting are made

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________

Received on Tuesday, 20 December 2016 22:08:17 UTC