- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 22:24:22 +0100
- To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
The BP Sub Group had a long extra meeting, the minutes of which are at
https://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes with a text snapshot below.
This meeting is in addition to, not instead of, the meeting on 4th May.
A text snapshot of the 3 May meeting minutes if provided below.
Spatial Data on the Web WG, BP VM
03 May 2016
[2]Agenda
[2]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Agenda_BP_VM_May_2016#Dial-in_details
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-irc
Attendees
Present
jtandy, Linda, ClemensPortele, AndreaPerego, /, -
Regrets
Chair
jtandy
Scribe
jtandy, Clemens Portele, Linda van den Brink
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Patent Call
2. [6]Check agenda
* [7]Summary of Action Items
* [8]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<jtandy> Agenda is at:
[9]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Agenda_BP_VM_May_2016#M
ain_agenda_.28DRAFT.29
[9]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Agenda_BP_VM_May_2016#Main_agenda_.28DRAFT.29
<jtandy> Looks like the Goto meeting is started ...
<jtandy> scribe: jtandy
<scribe> scribe: Clemens Portele
<scribe> scribenick: ClemensPortele
Patent Call
Check agenda
<jtandy>
[10]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Agenda_BP_VM_May_2016
[10] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Agenda_BP_VM_May_2016
jtandy: will not be able to work through all of this
... Work on spatial ontology will be spin off to a separate
activity, not this meeting
<jtandy>
[11]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2
[11] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2
<jtandy> (revised flooding scenario)
<AndreaPerego> +1
jtandy: We should go through the narrative and identify where
we have best practices, recommended practices or gaps
... a bit of a challenge to get stuff into the BP document
... ... are we writing them from an SDI user/provider
perspective, from the perspective of someone not familiar with
SDIs, etc.
... anything else for the agenda?
(silence)
<AndreaPerego> +1
<Payam> +1
The proposed agenda is approved
<BartvanLeeuwen> hi
jtandy: may stop the meeting for a while a split into subgroups
<jtandy> original narrative
<jtandy> [12]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative
[12] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative
jtandy: questions was "how do people should contribute"?
Difficult with the first narrative
... created second version of the narrative
<jtandy> who has read
[13]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2
[13] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2
<Linda> -1
-1
<BartvanLeeuwen> +1
<AndreaPerego> +1 (but partially)
<BartvanLeeuwen> I did find it rather technical
Payam: what do want to achieve today? what can make our day
productive?
jtandy: ensure that the (currently 9) steps cover everything or
do we need a different approach. Identify where we can get best
practices from and who can lead on those?
Payam: Do we go through them one-by-one or do we split?
jtandy: Not sure, need to see. Let's first go through the list
in the group
... overview of narrative 2
... ... context at the beginning (no details)
... regarding the comment on this being technical, this is
meant for a technical audience
<jtandy> question: is it right to pose this as a technical best
practice / scenario
<jtandy> +1
+1
<Linda> +1
<jtandy> I'm hoping that it addresses the needs of the BP
audience
<AndreaPerego> +1 - but shouldn't we have in mind also a
non-technical audience?
<Payam> +1
<Linda> Bart, could you explain why you found it technical?
<joshlieberman> flooded area?
Linda: maybe avoid domain expert language?
<jtandy> terminology: avoid terms like "inundation extent" in
favour of "flood extent" or "how far did the water reach"
Payam: maybe create two versions of the same story, one more
technical and one less technical?
... ... today we would work on the technical one (narrative 2)
<jtandy> payam: suggests we have a non-technical summary of the
scenario as a complement to the technical version
<BartvanLeeuwen> I had the impression that there were some very
domain specific terms in there
<Linda> I agree Bart
<jtandy> proposed: we have a non-technical overview of the
scenario to complement the technical version
Payam: Bart's comment is related to the terminology discussion
earlier
<BartvanLeeuwen> I had to lookup some specific weahter /
flooding related terms
<jtandy> +1
<Linda> +1
+1
<AndreaPerego> +1
<Payam> +1
RESOLUTION: we have a non-technical overview of the scenario to
complement the technical version
<jtandy> Linda: avoid domain specific terms in the technical
version too
<jtandy> +1
<Linda> +1
+1
<AndreaPerego> +1
<Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to make a general comment on
"flood prediction" as a sensitive subject.
AndreaPerego: flood prediction is a sensitive subject, eg may
have an impact on insurance rates
... ... do we need to take this into account (potential misuse
of the information)?
jtandy: everything that may have economic impact will be a
sensitive subject. The narrative is not about publishing
authoritative information, just someone who wants to help.
<AndreaPerego> +1 - agreed.
jtandy: The waterboard (for example) would validate the data
before using it. Maybe talke this into account later in the
story?
<joshlieberman> The concern may not just be whether data is
authoritative, but whether the Web application leads people to
appreciate what the term "100 year flood" means for them.
jtandy: points to the text in step 8 that touches on the
subject
<jtandy> intent (of SDW): web publishing is one in such a way
that the connections between data can be followed
<jtandy> (said joshlieberman)
joshlieberman: even if we do not use technical terms, we still
use technical concepts that need to be linked to from the data
<jtandy> joshlieberman: not so much data, but connections
between data and its meaning or implication
jtandy: better look at a certain flooding event, not the
long-term flooding prediction
Linda agrees
<AndreaPerego> +1
jtandy: the story is just a vehicle to illustrate what we are
doing
... step 1
[14]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.281.29
_Publish_flood_inundation_forecast_data_.28the_results_of_the_u
rban_flood_prediction_model.29_as_a_coverage_dataset
[14]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.281.29_Publish_flood_inundation_forecast_data_.28the_results_of_the_urban_flood_prediction_model.29_as_a_coverage_dataset
<BartvanLeeuwen> +1 to stick to a single event instead of
prediction
jtandy: coverage data suitable for use in web applications
... issues like versioning, volume, need for data extraction,
bulk download for offline analysis
... quite a common scenario
<AndreaPerego> +1
<Linda> +1
next step - turn coverage into vector features
[15]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.282.29
_Publish_information_about_administrative_areas_within_the_muni
cipality
[15]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.282.29_Publish_information_about_administrative_areas_within_the_municipality
jtandy: how do I publish the admin area information on the web?
... Geonovum testbed topic 4 is related
... support for multiple formats including those for geo
experts
... how far do we want to pursue Linked Data?
... also need to cover the feature / real-world thing subject
Linda: sounds like a large chunk (covers many BPs)
<joshlieberman> We use the term feature, but most Web
developers think that's some capability of their software. Real
world thing is more evocative for them, so we'd need to do
quite the education job to switch
<AndreaPerego> +1 to josh
jtandy: need to decide whether we recommend only one approach?
<joshlieberman> Argue that there may be two categories of tasks
with Web technology -- link to data over the Web and use the
Web to bring data together
<jtandy> ClemensPortele: "there's not a one-size fits all"
solution
<jtandy> joshlieberman: there's a set of sizes ...
<jtandy> joshlieberman: "small" = linking _to_ something and
"large" = integrate information together 'on the web' without
needing to download stuff for offline work or use some obscure
API
<Linda> +1
jtandy: agrees, some will use the SDI as a starting point,
others come from a different starting point
... ... same best practice applies, just different approaches
to the same outcome
<AndreaPerego> +1
jtandy: "small" would mean to publish resources with URIs?
joshlieberman: yes, fine-grained URIs. Or for queries to access
500 features to put them on a map. Both are needed
<jtandy> joshlieberman: "does the API let me make a single
request to get 500 Features - rather than 500 fine grained
requests, each with a URL of a Feature"
jtandy: what is the ecosystem for using spatial data on the
Web? Using the Browser as the platform for application?
<jtandy> using data on the web: (i) referencing a resource that
someone else has published via URL in _my_ data, (ii)
integrating multiple data sources using 'Web engines' as
application runtime environment
jtandy: classic process of downloading data and processing it
in a GIS is not what we are looking at
<AndreaPerego> Does the notion of "Web engine" includes
machine-to-machine use cases?
jtandy: ... our focus is more the processing on the Web
<jtandy> Yes to @AndreaPerego
<AndreaPerego> Thanks!
<jtandy> another classification of users: can our intended user
base by classified by ‘those who are publishing information
about individual Features’ and ‘those who are publishing
information about collections of Features (e.g. as a dataset) …
the former need to rely on the platform into which they publish
to make their information discoverable [& accessible] and to
expose provenance and licensing information; e.g. Twitter
search API, search engines etc.
<jtandy> ... another Small and Large perspective
<AndreaPerego> Should we also consider the (integrated) use of
third-party / non-authoritative data here? E.g., OSM, Geonames.
joshlieberman: part of the web is others harvesting
individually published information in large amounts
... small scale = publishing tweets from the area / with
reference to the flooding
<jtandy> joshlieberman: "Small" = create a map with a pin on
for the location of each #flood geo-located tweet ... just
links
joshlieberman: large scale = merging this information with the
admin units etc and analysing this to identify discrepancies
etc
<jtandy> are we writing best practices for the people _using_
social media, or the social media platform providers to make
sure the _aggregate_ set of social media can be exposed as
spatial data?
joshlieberman: BPs should be helpful for platform providers
<jtandy> interpreting joshlieberman: we are writing best
practices for social media platform providers - and _any_
platform provider that has spatial information
<jtandy> ... implication is that that might drive collection of
particular information from users of the platform
jtandy: when thinking about crowdsourcing - we are more
focussing on the platform that is used for crowdsourcing
joshlieberman: but this will be also about what the platform
users want
Linda: agrees that the platform is the main focus
joshlieberman: but if the SDI has all the URIs for locations,
Twitter users could use them in tweets without Twitter doing
anything
<jtandy> "small" size of problem = encouraging people to use
URLs for the things they might Tweet about
Payam: sees it a bit different, it is also about how people
could send tweets (or publish data) so that it can be used
easily by others
jtandy: The Web is the platform in this case?
<jtandy> interpreting Payam's comment: crowdsourcing
information ... people will use the _web_ as the data sharing
platform- either directly as Web resources, or via an App or
some other platform
<joshlieberman> Here is a case: someone might tweet: #flooding
the water is 2 feet deep at my house. Analysis requires parsing
2 ambiguous statements. Alternately: #flooding [2 feet] @{link
to my house feature}.
<jtandy> (people might publish information about their house
flooding in a blog entry; native HTML perhaps)
Payam: cannot tell the Twitter user how to write tweets, but
apps may provide a framework to make aggregated data reusable
<jtandy> payam: we're targeting the part of the story that
enables the aggregated set of information on a platform to be
access from / published to the web in a consistent way
<jtandy> there's the special case when people write HTML
directly- but the majority of cases, people use a platform to
do that
joshlieberman: usually there are lightweight means to help
interpretation (eg the use of hashtags in tweets)
... what is the minimum that people could do to make their
contribution more usable
<jtandy> joshlieberman: "what's the minimum we could ask people
to do to make their [data] contribution more usable ... e.g.
use a URL for the thing you're talking about!"
jtandy: so a recommendation would be to use a format that
supports links
<jtandy> our BPs will include "use URLs when you talk about
things"
<jtandy> joshlieberman: so we need to make the URLs for things
easy to find
<jtandy> joshlieberman: ... e.g. small / tiny and easy to type
<jtandy> we're seeing Twitter (etc.) "just" as a Platform
Provider that has spatial data that should be on the Web ... so
our advice is targeted toward the Twitter API developers
jtandy: anything else on crowdsourcing?
<Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask if we should also
consider the (integrated) use of third-party /
non-authoritative data here? E.g., OSM, Geonames.
<Linda> example of (pretty) tiny urls for locations:
[16]http://w3w.co/pumpkin.dwarves.issuer
[16] http://w3w.co/pumpkin.dwarves.issuer
AndreaPerego: also the cases where "authoritative" data may not
be available
jtandy: so not just consider the publication of government
data, but also other data like OSM or geonames
<jtandy> AndreaPerego: suggest linking stuff to
non-authoritative URLs e.g. geonames or OSM ... non-official
information
<BartvanLeeuwen> it sounds like a discussion on 'crowd truth'
<AndreaPerego> :)
ClemensPortele: the result is the same, the important aspect is
that we can link to location using URIs
joshlieberman: Twitter API has data structure for places
<jtandy> should we use the term Feature?
jtandy: let's go back to the "feature" topic
<jtandy> joshlieberman: confusion from IoT - folks often mean a
software or IoT device capability
joshlieberman: divergence on terminology (feature = 'software
capability' for many)
jtandy: should we impose the geo terminology on the world?
<jtandy> joshlieberman: we should have a "general feature model
for dummies section" if we're going to use the term Feature
<BartvanLeeuwen> -1 to feature its a spatial expert thing
<jtandy> ClemensPortele: try to avoid geo-jargon where possible
<AndreaPerego> +1 to Clemens & Bart
ClemensPortele: at the same time we need to mention it to be
clear to the geo experts
<AndreaPerego> BTW, "feature" was intentionally excluded from
LOCN for the same issues.
<jtandy> Proposed: use alternative term to Feature in most of
BP doc ... use the term Feature just once (to keep spatial
experts clear on what we mean)
<BartvanLeeuwen> +1
<jtandy> +1
<Linda> +1
+1
RESOLUTION: use alternative term to Feature in most of BP doc
... use the term Feature just once (to keep spatial experts
clear on what we mean)
<AndreaPerego> Quoting: "If you're a geospatial dev, AJAX is
not a domestic cleaning product. A polygon is not a dead
parrot." -@open_data #LGD14 #geospatialhumour
<AndreaPerego> :)
<jtandy> :D
<jtandy> what about SpatialThing?
<jtandy> joshlieberman: real-world Thing is quite evocative ...
but doesn't cover the non-geo cases
<jtandy> Linda: spatial object in Geosparql
<AndreaPerego> I think "spatial thing" is generic enough to be
understood by most people.
<jtandy> ClemensPortele: this is the geometry
<jtandy> ClemensPortele: SpatialResource?
<jtandy> we need a term for "a thing that has location and a
URI"
ClemensPortele: not necessarily "has location", but "related to
a location" (?)
jtandy: (cites what some of the existing vocabularies have
used)
AndreaPerego: LOCN avoids this, but using only the concrete
terms without restricting their use
<jtandy> joshlieberman: in GeoRSS we used OWL Thing > Spatial
Thing > Feature > Geometry ... but hey
<jtandy> schema.org uses "Place"
joshlieberman: for many linked to point locations, but in
general are meaningful term
<jtandy> joshlieberman: would like to use Place- very useful
for geo-humanities ... but often related to just a point
location ... but we could address this in our definition
<BartvanLeeuwen> I think not spatial people will talk about
points / places anyway
jtandy: need to keep in mind that spatial is more than geo
<AndreaPerego> +1 - e.g., geometry as the "shape" of a thing.
joshlieberman: geographers use "place" often as a synonym for
"feature", not "location"
<jtandy> Proposed: we use the term SpatialThing because it has
'provenance' of over a decade
<jtandy> joshlieberman: quite obscure
<AndreaPerego> Just "thing".
joshlieberman: "real-world thing"?
<jtandy> Proposed: we use "real-world Thing" or sometimes just
"Thing" in place of the term Feature
<AndreaPerego> +1
+1 (at least we can try if it works)
AndreaPerego: are abstract things like computer drawings
included?
<jtandy> noting that we mean 'real-world' as in the 'universe
of discourse', which should include fictional and abstract
concepts
<jtandy> AndreaPerego: need to be more than "things we can
touch" - need to cover abstract concepts too
<jtandy> ClemensPortele: like cadastral parcel
<jtandy> AndreaPerego: the notion of 'real-world' could be
confusing - so our definition needs to make sure its clear that
we also include abstract stuff
<jtandy> joshlieberman: let's use 'real-world Thing' with the
disclaimer 'imaginary', 'abstract' etc.
<AndreaPerego> +1
<jtandy> joshlieberman: as per Feature, it may not have
representation - but it always has identity
<AndreaPerego> +1!
<jtandy> proposed: we use "real-world Thing" or sometimes just
"Thing" in place of the term Feature; with caveat that it
includes abstract / imaginary / fictional entities ... as per
Feature, it may not have representation - but it always has
identity
<AndreaPerego> +1
<jtandy> +1
<jtandy> (representation implies geometry etc. ... not the
wider Web term)
+1
<Linda> +1
<AndreaPerego> "embodiment" (equally obscure)
<jtandy> Linda: geometry or a link to a location
<Payam> +1
<joshlieberman> +1
RESOLUTION: we use "real-world Thing" or sometimes just "Thing"
in place of the term Feature; with caveat that it includes
abstract / imaginary / fictional entities ... as per Feature,
it may not have representation - but it always has identity
(short break)
<jtandy> [returning to the meeting at 13:30 utc]
(starting again)
jtandy: let's get back to the narrative
step 3
[17]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.283.29
_Publish_flood_inundation_forecast_data_as_vector_dataset_and_i
dentify_the_administrative_areas_.28.3F.29_that_each_inundation
_area_is_predicted_to_impact
[17]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.283.29_Publish_flood_inundation_forecast_data_as_vector_dataset_and_identify_the_administrative_areas_.28.3F.29_that_each_inundation_area_is_predicted_to_impact
jtandy: take SDI data and do something useful with it
... covers spatial analysis, identifiers to features, linking
... do we need to discuss spatial analysis or just assume
he/she is using some library
<jtandy> do we need to talk about the spatial analysis? or just
say that our developer is "using a library"
<jtandy> Linda: the latter
joshlieberman: different persons would use different
terminology (eg the spatial analyst may use "spatial join")
<jtandy> joshlieberman: an spatial analyst calls this "a
spatial join"; a web developer might says they are "integrating
datasets" or combining two sources of data ...
<jtandy> ClemensPortele: a 'mashup'
<jtandy> joshlieberman: use both terms in our doc to appeal to
both types of users
<jtandy> question: is there a specific javascript library we
can cite?
jtandy: (walks through step 3 and the BPs referenced)
Linda: Are there overlaps between the steps?
jtandy: not yet a proper analysis, but there is overlap
Linda: Should we assign work for these steps?
jtandy: good idea. What we are looking for is how to figure out
you would do it with a real-life implementation
Linda: ... point to existing implementation(s)
jtandy: Yes, but those may not exactly fit the flooding
scenario
<jtandy> two tasks then: (i) point to existing implementations,
(ii) frame those implementation patterns in the flooding
scenario
<jtandy> payam likes the idea of creating a full example - e.g.
for publication in GitHub ... and then taking code snippets for
the BP doc
<jtandy> ... but always being able to reference a full example
... and hopefully, the original source implementation that our
example apes
<jtandy> "this example is derived from what they did over
there"
<Payam>
[18]http://environment.data.gov.uk/flood-monitoring/doc/referen
ce
[18] http://environment.data.gov.uk/flood-monitoring/doc/reference
<Payam> Environment Agency Real Time flood-monitoring API:
Environment Agency Real Time flood-monitoring API
<jtandy> unlikely to find implementation examples all in
flooding domain- need to see the implementation patterns we
want people to use and convert the subject to flooding ...
joshlieberman: often it may be difficult to point to existing
JavaScript code that implements a best practice
jtandy: some examples will exist (see the coverage work eg in
step 7), often from a different domain
<jtandy> joshlieberman: key issue for river gauge datastream is
about pulling together information from the sensor and the
location data in the SDI (linked geometries) and 'mash' those
up in an application
<jtandy> (this is the "Large" type of usage)
<jtandy> scribe: Linda van den Brink
<jtandy> scribenick: Linda
Payam: does Metoffice do something like the environmental
agencies ie publishing their data as API?
jtandy: no
<joshlieberman> The US has some "services" but mostly graphical
-- [19]http://water.weather.gov/ahps/about/about.php
[19] http://water.weather.gov/ahps/about/about.php
jtandy: in terms of work on the first 3 narrative parts...
... do we want to give clemens nr 2?
Linda: makes sense
<joshlieberman> e.g. the API's may only be as far as RSS:
[20]http://water.weather.gov/ahps/rss/forecasts.php
[20] http://water.weather.gov/ahps/rss/forecasts.php
<scribe> ACTION: Linda to ask Clemens to provide an example for
narrative item 2 [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[21] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-163 - Ask clemens to provide an
example for narrative item 2 [on Linda van den Brink - due
2016-05-10].
<joshlieberman> I'll need to depart as well. Apologies. I can
do some work on #7
<joshlieberman> bye
<AndreaPerego> +1
jtandy: the way examples are used in the narrative_2 these are
technical tasks that allow us to illustrate the best practices,
yes?
+1
<AndreaPerego> +1
<jtandy> +1
<scribe> ACTION: joshlieberman to work on narrative item 7
[recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]
[22] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-164 - Work on narrative item 7 [on
Joshua Lieberman - due 2016-05-10].
<AndreaPerego> yep
jtandy: AndreaPerego, do you want to discuss anything before
you leave?
AndreaPerego: no, it was quite productive
... Am looking how I can contribute. Maybe something about
metadata?
jtandy: it's not explicit because metadata is embedded in all
of these things
AndreaPerego: it's mostly about the data
jtandy: but we have to publish the metadata anyway. It's
necessary for us to publish some geodcat-ap stuff and a landing
page with schema.org
AndreaPerego: it's part of number 1 I think
Linda: yes, I think it should be somewhere in the beginning
jtandy: let's add it to item 4
AndreaPerego: agrees
<scribe> ACTION: AndreaPerego to add a section about publishing
metadata to item nr 4 [recorded in
[23]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]
[23] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-165 - Add a section about publishing
metadata to item nr 4 [on Andrea Perego - due 2016-05-10].
AndreaPerego: the opensearch and geo extension are more about
data?
jtandy: yes, about searching through the data
... also keen to pick up on making info available for search
engines to index.
... also look at the work done within Geonovum testbed topics 3
and 4 on this.
AndreaPerego: also we are now working on mapping geodcat-ap to
schema.org
jtandy: should we have the biweekly SDW BP subgroup call
tomorrow?
Payam: we could continue this discussion
<AndreaPerego> +1
+1
jtandy: so tomorrow we'll continue to work on these narrative
parts and try to allocate them to people
... about Bruce Bannerman's email: should we try to also
include some usage? My concern is this could mean we could
never finish the work.
... if we try to describe in our BP how people should use
spatial data
<jtandy> see email response to Bruce here:
[24]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/
0104.html
[24]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/0104.html
<jtandy> potential data usage examples:
<jtandy> * web developer uses inundation coverage data to build
a web app that
<jtandy> returns discrete (vector) Features for inundation
areas
<jtandy> * web developer determines which administrative areas
'touch' inundation
<jtandy> areas
<jtandy> * emergency teams prioritise critical infrastructure
to protect by
<jtandy> identifying categories of assets that are 'within'
inundation areas - or
<jtandy> care-homes to assist with evacuation
<jtandy> * emergency teams determine hazard exposure by
requesting water depth at
<jtandy> coordinates of critical infrastructure
<jtandy> * section (5) illustrates combining census data that
is geocoded by
<jtandy> administrative areas with the administrative areas
that are affected by
<jtandy> inundation
<jtandy> * emergency teams create the evacuation plans; refuges
and safe transit
<jtandy> routes- no doubt a complex piece of GI analysis
<jtandy> * media and news agencies use the evacuation plans to
build simple web
<jtandy> applications- e.g. using reverse geocoding from the
geo-location provided
<jtandy> by a user agent to find the administrative area they
are within; then
<jtandy> finding the associated evac plan ... and displaying
the refuges / transit
<jtandy> routes on [web] maps
<jtandy> * emergency teams (for example) using social media
reports of flood extent
<jtandy> observations to track the flood impact in real time
jtandy: in my response I made a list of potential usage
... lots of things we could do but worried it could be too much
work.
<jtandy> worried that including usage examples will be too much
work
AndreaPerego: agrees
... getting spatial data on the web is the first step to
tackle. This would be a second step.
jtandy: we could prioritize: data publication first, add usage
examples after.
<AndreaPerego> +1
+1
<jtandy> +1
<jtandy>
[25]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/
0104.html
[25]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/0104.html
<scribe> ACTION: jtandy to prioritize data publication over
adding usage examples and include list of potential usage
examples from email [recorded in
[26]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action04]
[26] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-166 - Prioritize data publication
over adding usage examples and include list of potential usage
examples from email [on Jeremy Tandy - due 2016-05-10].
<AndreaPerego> Need to leave, sorry.
Jeremy and Linda looking through narrative 4 through 9.
<jtandy> example (4)
[[27]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.284.2
9_Publish_details_of_fixed_assets_.28e.g._dikes_.26_dams.2C_bui
ldings.2C_roads.2C_critical_infrastructure_etc..29_and_topograp
hical_features_.28e.g._water_bodies.29]
[27]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative_2#.284.29_Publish_details_of_fixed_assets_.28e.g._dikes_.26_dams.2C_buildings.2C_roads.2C_critical_infrastructure_etc..29_and_topographical_features_.28e.g._water_bodies.29]
<jtandy> ... this is a good example where we can use an
alternative implementation approach to achieve the same best
practice as in (2)
<jtandy> ... e.g. exposing data residing in ElasticSearch as
RESTful API rather than proxying an SDI
<jtandy> spatial and textual filter: "find all electricity
sub-stations within this flood polygon"
<jtandy> (filter for search)
example (5) maybe we can also add linked data fragments ref
here.
<jtandy> for API usage: "the 5-minute rule" = the maximum time
developers will try to make a first successful call to a data
API - or leave and find something else
I came across some nice belgian examples today, see this blog
[28]http://blog.pieter.pm/2016/04/i-do-not-want-your-open-data-
api-id-rather-scrape-your-website/
[28]
http://blog.pieter.pm/2016/04/i-do-not-want-your-open-data-api-id-rather-scrape-your-website/
example 8 needs to be changed based on the discussion we had
about targeting the platform provider more than the social
media user.
jtandy: does example 9 add any value?
Linda: lets ask the group tomorrow
<scribe> ACTION: Linda to work on narrative example 3.
[recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action05]
[29] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-167 - Work on narrative example 3.
[on Linda van den Brink - due 2016-05-10].
<scribe> ACTION: jtandy to crossref the narrative_2 with the
DWBP [recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action06]
[30] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-168 - Crossref the narrative_2 with
the dwbp [on Jeremy Tandy - due 2016-05-10].
<jtandy> delete action 6
<jtandy> close action-168
<trackbot> Closed action-168.
<scribe> ACTION: jtandy to crossref the SWBBP with the DWBP to
make it a true extension and eliminate duplication [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action07]
[31] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-169 - Crossref the swbbp with the
dwbp to make it a true extension and eliminate duplication [on
Jeremy Tandy - due 2016-05-10].
<jtandy> DWBP is a great piece of work; currently we're
repeating much of what they say - would it be better simply to
extend those BPs that need extra 'spatial' context?
+1\
<jtandy> +1
bye
<jtandy> meeting is now closed!
<jtandy> trackbot, help
<trackbot> Please see
<[32]http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
[32] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc
<jtandy> trackbot, end meeting
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: AndreaPerego to add a section about publishing
metadata to item nr 4 [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: joshlieberman to work on narrative item 7
[recorded in
[34]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: jtandy to crossref the narrative_2 with the DWBP
[recorded in
[35]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action06]
[NEW] ACTION: jtandy to crossref the SWBBP with the DWBP to
make it a true extension and eliminate duplication [recorded in
[36]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action07]
[NEW] ACTION: jtandy to prioritize data publication over adding
usage examples and include list of potential usage examples
from email [recorded in
[37]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Linda to ask Clemens to provide an example for
narrative item 2 [recorded in
[38]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: Linda to work on narrative example 3. [recorded
in
[39]http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action05]
[33] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03
[34] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02
[35] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action06
[36] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action07
[37] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action04
[38] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01
[39] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/03-sdwbp-minutes.html#action05
Summary of Resolutions
1. [40]we have a non-technical overview of the scenario to
complement the technical version
2. [41]use alternative term to Feature in most of BP doc ...
use the term Feature just once (to keep spatial experts
clear on what we mean)
3. [42]we use "real-world Thing" or sometimes just "Thing" in
place of the term Feature; with caveat that it includes
abstract / imaginary / fictional entities ... as per
Feature, it may not have representation - but it always has
identity
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2016 21:24:30 UTC