- From: Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>
- Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 15:31:44 -0700
- To: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Cc: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
My apologies for missing the meeting - it was still on my calendar at an incorrect time. Scott > On Dec 20, 2016, at 3:08 PM, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote: > > 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 22:32:16 UTC