W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > May 2016

Re: Progress on Time deliverable - was RE: [Minutes] 2016-05-25

From: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2016 11:27:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFVDz40k34szZh1gqawUYuH3TU5_wzrpePtk2yhgOyUjErLSuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Simon Cox <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Cc: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Hello Simon,

Do you think it is possible to add a bit about how the new ontology
addresses the requirements from the UCR document
<https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-ucr/#arTimeOntologyInOWL> before the FPWD? That
would show how the document is grounded in previous work, and give the
reader some extra insight in the new capabilities of the ontology. Or do
you think all UCR requirements are already addressed by the added ontology
elements and the issues marked red?

Anyway, I think the document will be a very good FPWD as it is. I love the
added examples! I hope many people working with temporal data will be aware
of the document and their opportunity to comment.

Regards,
Frans



2016-05-26 0:30 GMT+02:00 <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>:

> >    jtandy: I believe Simon is taking his previous work and putting it
> into shape. Chris is providing wider context
>
> Yes. This is now essentially complete, in the draft
> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/time/ .
> There are a number of ISSUEs highlighted in the text, most linked to
> issues in the tracker https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/open
>
> I've also put the draft revised ontology in the github repo, and linked it
> in the document following the same style as in the SSN document, as well as
> two documents containing the examples I added - see
> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/tree/gh-pages/time/rdf .
>
> Chris has much deeper knowledge about temporal reference systems, so I put
> a hook in there for him to respond to -
> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/time/#time:TRS but no bite yet.
>
> The document may be suitable to be issued as FPWD, but, as Ed notes, so
> far I've been the sole contributor.
> I have consensus with myself, but that's probably not good enough ...
>
> Simon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Archer [mailto:phila@w3.org]
> Sent: Thursday, 26 May 2016 12:31 AM
> To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
> Subject: [Minutes] 2016-05-25
>
> The minutes of today's meeting are at
> https://www.w3.org/2016/05/25-sdw-minutes with a text snapshot below.
>
> [...]
>
> Time Progress
>
>     <eparsons> [13]http://w3c.github.io/sdw/time/
>
>       [13] http://w3c.github.io/sdw/time/
>
>     eparsons: this is stuff that Simon has been getting on and
>     doing
>
>     <frans> Does the SDW BP reference DW best practices by URI?
>
>     eparsons: Pretty much on his own.
>     ... He has difficulty joining these calls due to time zone
>     issues.
>     ... I guess this is a call for us to look at it and then
>     socialise it/.
>     ... But note that there is a lot of good work going on.
>
>     jtandy: Chris is still involved and working with Simon. I've
>     been in Geneva so a bit out of the loop.
>
>     eparsons: I just want to make sure it's not just Simon working
>     in isolation.
>
>     jtandy: I believe Simon is taking his previous work and putting
>     it into shape. Chris is providing wider context
>
>
> [...]
>
>     [End of minutes]
>       __________________________________________________________
>
>
Received on Friday, 27 May 2016 09:28:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:21 UTC