- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 15:01:14 +0100
- To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
The Minutes of the Coverages Sub Group telco are at https://www.w3.org/2016/05/04-sdwcov-minutes with a text summary below. Spatial Data on the Web WG Coverages Sub Group Teleconference 04 May 2016 See also: [2]IRC log [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/04-sdwcov-irc Attendees Present ScottSimmons, billroberts, Maik, Duo, phila, Kerry Regrets jonblower, eparsons, Jeremy Chair billroberts Scribe kerry Contents * [3]Topics 1. [4]brief recap of previous meeting * [5]Summary of Action Items * [6]Summary of Resolutions __________________________________________________________ <billroberts> [7]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Coverage-Telec on20160504 [7] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Coverage-Telecon20160504 <Kerry__> scribenick: kerry <billroberts> [8]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwcov-minutes [8] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwcov-minutes <Kerry__> proposed: approve minutes [9]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwcov-minutes [9] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwcov-minutes <billroberts> +1 <Maik> +1 <ScottSimmons> +1 <sam> +1 RESOLUTION: accept minutes [10]https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwcov-minutes [10] https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwcov-minutes <billroberts> [11]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call [11] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call <Kerry__> patent call <billroberts> [12]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Coverage_Solution_Crit eria [12] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Coverage_Solution_Criteria brief recap of previous meeting <Kerry__> bill: billroberts discussed criteria and also updates wiki page <Kerry__> billroberts: also had presentation from ANU team <Kerry__> ... suggest w have update from ANU and Maik at Reading today, then plan wehat to do next <Kerry__> ... invite sam or Duo to speak <Kerry__> Duo: not much to say -- getting protoype working but not quite ready to show off <Kerry__> ...we have some data in a live application but not quite uasable or interactive yet -- will take another week or 2 <Kerry__> billroberts: anything stood out as challenging or othereise of interest to us? <Kerry__> Duo: just getting things to run and work together <Kerry__> .... how to create sparql queries that are efficient enough for coverage data -- we have identified this as significant <Kerry__> billroberts: spaql on large data or with complicated joins is more than an art than a science and can be implementation dependent <Kerry__> ...some trial and error for how to best write the query <Kerry__> which sparql? <Kerry__> billroberts: duo: jena and fuseki <Kerry__> billroberts: jena list is very helpful <Kerry__> ... please let me know when you have something to show and we will schedule it <Kerry__> billroberts: how is coveragejson going? <Kerry__> maik:spoke at egu, got good feedback <Kerry__> .. completely different to what exists now -- at first confused but then positive <Maik> [13]http://json-ld.org/playground/#startTab=tab-compacted&json- ld=https%3A%2F%2Fgist.githubusercontent.com%2Fneothemachine%2F6 c7a337c82575efc08bbf43b234c9b01%2Fraw%2F6981d315eef329439696d3f 802642b86b0ce56ba%2Fgrid-example.covjson&context=%7B%7D [13] http://json-ld.org/playground/#startTab=tab-compacted&json-ld=https%3A%2F%2Fgist.githubusercontent.com%2Fneothemachine%2F6c7a337c82575efc08bbf43b234c9b01%2Fraw%2F6981d315eef329439696d3f802642b86b0ce56ba%2Fgrid-example.covjson&context=%7B%7D <Kerry__> maik: been looking at what exactly json-ld means for coveragejson <Kerry__> ... this is a coveragejson doc with json-ld context <Kerry__> ...some perople were asking about this <Kerry__> s/perope/people/ <Kerry__> ...also how to express quesantity types, fractions, etc, pls see our issues page and cookbook we are writing <Maik> [14]https://github.com/Reading-eScience-Centre/coveragejson/iss ues/63 [14] https://github.com/Reading-eScience-Centre/coveragejson/issues/63 <Kerry__> billroberts: rdf datacube has dealt with these questions too and might help here <Kerry__> Maik: here is what we are looking at for rgb bands. <Maik> [15]https://github.com/neothemachine/xndarray [15] https://github.com/neothemachine/xndarray <Kerry__> ...am writing a javascript library for arrays called (missed it) <Kerry__> ... more lightweight than others for mutidimensional data, expecially for coveragejson multidimensional range objects <billroberts> (library called xndarray) <Kerry__> ...will have coordinates some time <Kerry__> ...that's it... <Kerry__> billroberts: collaboration with beijing re CEO-ld -- have you heard anything? <Kerry__> Maik: they have implemented coveragejson from scratch with geotiff and landsat <Kerry__> ... see how to efficiently have an api for big amounts of statellite images <Kerry__> billroberts: uses a geotiff to ccoveragejson converter <Kerry__> billroberts: how do we take our scoping work and use it? <Kerry__> .... we should aim towards producing a spec <Kerry__> ...as well we also need a primer to esxplain what we are trying to achieve <Kerry__> s...can use these solution criteria <Kerry__> ...but need to go further on exploringdetails on what that would be <Kerry__> ...thinking to continue both tracks as at present and at some point we compare these solutions to criteria and make a proposed solution <Kerry__> ... also need to test alongside existing technology such as wcs <Kerry__> ... to demonstrate we have something to offer <Zakim> phila, you wanted to answer Duo's question <Kerry__> phila: an implementation for a spec needs 2 independent implementations of every feature of the sepc, so it's a high bar! <Kerry__> ... needs to be as good as html or css... <Kerry__> ...if ANU does na REading does and they both implement everything, but we really would like a third too <Kerry__> .... and a common test suite is needed too, and exmaples <Kerry__> ... if we are going for something as solid as that then we need all this <Kerry__> billroberts: then we also need to be canvassing for people outside this meeting for implementations too <Kerry__> phila: If we say 'who wnats to do cool map overlays" etc we can get a huge amount of interest if we do this right <Kerry__> billroberts: amybe SWIRRL too <Kerry__> phila: SWIRRL as a commercial player is a plus -- working with the universities here <Kerry__> billroberts: we could do this if it works for our use cases <Kerry__> ....evidence of commercial application is extra power it seems <Kerry__> phila: yes. shows it has value <Kerry__> billroberts: is a spec that works towards a rec plus a primer as a technical note ok? <Kerry__> phila: that is one way, but not the only way. <Kerry__> phila: matbe unlike ssn, the test suite may be important itself as supplmentary material <Kerry__> ... also whatever OGC needs <Kerry__> billroberts: so... how do we get to that point/ <Kerry__> billroberts: will cjheck over which BPs need we need to take into account <Kerry__> ..we may need to move requiremnt to formal testable form <phila> [16]Activity Streams [16] https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/ <Kerry__> kerry: suggest looking at WCS too for an idea <Kerry__> Duo: testing framework -- who would develop this suite? <phila> Build the suite as you go, then rationalise into a doc <Kerry__> ... we'd like to strt building ad testing against this asap <Kerry__> billroberts: agrees... we will need volunteers <Kerry__> ScottSimmons: we can use ogc teamengine for test development as it will need one for spec anyway <Kerry__> ...ogc does note require multiple implementations but the test suite is very important <Kerry__> ...this staurday there might be a decision that will affect the standard tier wrt reference implementations <Kerry__> billroberts: "abstract test suite" <Kerry__> ScottSimmons: set out in words that exaplins what a physical test suite would look like <Kerry__> [scott looks for an abstract test suite to share] <ScottSimmons> look at Annex A in [17]http://docs.opengeospatial.org/is/14-100r2/14-100r2.html [17] http://docs.opengeospatial.org/is/14-100r2/14-100r2.html <Kerry__> billroberts: so we need our requirements formalised, a test suite, and in the meantime example implementations to carry on. then we can evaluate implementations against the requirements <Kerry__> ... implementations will also help us to understand appropriateness for requirements <Kerry__> phila: requirements are always important becuase they help you develop the test suite -- as an anchor-- but alsway leave out or cover up stuff <Kerry__> ...suc has huge assumptions <Kerry__> ...we have a good UCR <Kerry__> ..does not say "the Web has to exist' as it is assumed <Kerry__> ...but just doing what the requirements says can be silly <Kerry__> we have one verty advanced and one rapidly developing group, plus commercial interst, plus chinese group so we have time to work on this <Kerry__> ..if we can develop some of that test data too and get in place by (northern) summer break we'd be cooking with gas <Kerry__> ...i would be happy to say then that we are making progress, but if we get to september still messing around, im not so sure.. <Kerry__> billroberts: all good. <Kerry__> billroberts: will take first attempt at requirements <phila> Kerry__: Don't forget that the WG's UCR already exists :-) [18]https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/ [18] https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/ <Kerry__> billroberts: any other questions? <phila> s/sdw-ucr/TR\/sdw-ucr/ <Kerry__> Maik: how concrete or abstract would they be? <Kerry__> ... itsounds like they have to be abstract <Kerry__> billroberts: needs to be concrete while expressing what, not how <Kerry__> ...requirements doc, not design doc <Kerry__> ...not excessively prejudging the soluti0ons <Kerry__> ...will try writing something <Kerry__> billroberts: close meeting <billroberts> thanks kerry! <billroberts> thanks everyone Summary of Action Items Summary of Resolutions 1. [19]accept minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwcov-minutes [End of minutes] __________________________________________________________
Received on Wednesday, 4 May 2016 14:03:21 UTC