RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

As I understand, it would be an entirely separate, fresh, deliverable for our group - and although it is not technically a challenge for our group, I am not at all certain we have the resources either. Definitely scope creep!

Would this be a joint W3C/OGC standard (I think that is what you are saying) or an ISO TC 211 one, where SDW just offers the expertise and finds the labour?  If the latter, then they do not need our Group (and if members from our group have the will and resources to participate there, good on them).

Sorry, Phil, I'm just trying to understand the opportunity and the cost.
Kerry


From: Linda van den Brink [mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl]
Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016 7:21 PM
To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au; Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>; phila@w3.org; public-sdw-wg@w3.org
Subject: RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

It would be useful, however, I have concerns (from glancing at it) that the content of this glossary is mostly oriented towards the geospatial community. We might still need to explain some of the terms in this glossary for non-spatial-experts. And a lot of the terms would never come up in our best practice or other deliverables.

Van: Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au> [mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au]
Verzonden: donderdag 11 februari 2016 00:30
Aan: kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au<mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>; phila@w3.org<mailto:phila@w3.org>; Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>; Linda van den Brink
Onderwerp: RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

... because they don't have the skills, or resources. They focus more on the content than delivery. But the content does reflect the outcome of a pretty rigorous process.

I have a student looking at it, as of yesterday, but not sure how fast that will move.

Simon J D Cox

Research Scientist

Environmental Information Infrastructures

Land and Water

CSIRO



E simon.cox@csiro.au<mailto:simon.cox@csiro.au> T +61 3 9545 2365 M +61 403 302 672

   Physical: Reception Central, Bayview Avenue, Clayton, Vic 3168

   Deliveries: Gate 3, Normanby Road, Clayton, Vic 3168

   Postal: Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Vic 3169

people.csiro.au/Simon-Cox

orcid.org/0000-0002-3884-3420

researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Cox3



________________________________
From: Kerry Taylor
Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2016 11:22:01 PM
To: Phil Archer; Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton); public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>; Linda van den Brink
Subject: RE: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2
Phil,
Why would TC211 not do it themselves?  Why us?
Although I cannot see it being very difficult.

Kerry

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org]
Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2016 6:51 AM
To: Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au>; public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>; Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl<mailto:l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>>
Subject: Re: Glossary/Definitions - RE: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2

+ Linda

Simon,

Geonovum's Paul Janssen approached me this evening to talk about this very topic. I ended up saying that *if* this WG so desired, we could go through some cycles of liaison with TC211 to make sure everyone was happy and, if so, publish their glossary as a SKOS concept scheme in w3.org space (full credit, their doc is normative, all mistakes are ours yada yada). (All good concept schemes come with human readable HTML versions of course).

WDYT?

Phil.

On 09/02/2016 23:25, Simon.Cox@csiro.au<mailto:Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
>>        [42] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Glossary_of_terms
>
> The ISO/TC 211 Glossary is also publicly available.
> http://www.isotc211.org/Terminology.htm
> Why not just use that?
> It is currently a spreadsheet, but it has been suggested to convert into linked data resources.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, 10 February 2016 1:57 AM
> To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org<mailto:public-sdw-wg@w3.org>>
> Subject: [Minutes] 2016-02-09 F2F Day 2
>
> Minutes from today's F2F meeting are, of course, at
> https://www.w3.org/2016/02/09-sdw-minutes.
>
> The text version is pasted below.
>

--


Phil Archer
W3C Data Activity Lead
http://www.w3.org/2013/data/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1