Re: SDW WG WS @ INSPIRE 2016

Dear all,

The video recording of the SDW Workshop is now available:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TS6pGuJR00

I've also updated the wiki page accordingly:

https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/SDW_Workshop_@_INSPIRE_2016#Presentation_.26_minutes

Cheers,

Andrea


On 30/09/2016 13:21, Ed Parsons wrote:
> Slides are here
> ...https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/14HR4tM14FsntP_1ylTn4kw1Y00v3emzRYrpWFLHMo7U/edit?usp=drive_web
>
> Ed
>
>
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, 12:42 Clemens Portele,
> <portele@interactive-instruments.de
> <mailto:portele@interactive-instruments.de>> wrote:
>
>     All,
>
>     this morning we had the 90 minutes workshop "W3C/OGC Spatial Data on
>     the Web Working Group" at the INSPIRE Conference 2016
>     (http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/events/conferences/inspire_2016). This
>     is a brief summary of the (good) discussion and feedback we got. I
>     tried to capture the main points, but for sure I will have failed,
>     so amendments and corrections are very welcome :)
>
>     Ed, is there a link to the slides that you have shown?
>
>     We had about 30 attendees. Ed gave an introduction to the working
>     group and its deliverables. The discussion focussed on the Best
>     Practice deliverable as discussed at TPAC.
>
>     TOPIC: Target audience
>     - Web developers and publishers of data, practioneers
>     - General agreement in the audience
>
>     TOPIC: SDI and the rest
>     - Need to go beyond SDIs to reach the target audience, the other 99%
>     - Robin Smith, JRC: Needs to be done responsibly to avoid that
>     something like another SDI is created.
>     - Ed: Agreed, it is important not to reinvent the wheel
>     - Markus Jobst, AT: Need the "middleware" to make it work
>     - Jandirk Bules, NL: (not recorded)
>     - Erwin Folmer, NL: need to target the data providers to make sure
>     we can serve the other 99%
>
>     TOPIC: Spatial things, features and geometry
>     - Different terminology used outside of the GI community
>     - The lighthouse example
>     - "Feature" typically understood as a capability of a software
>     - It is also more blurred whether we talk about a digital
>     abstraction or the real-world entity
>     - Joeri Robbrect, DG ENV: agrees
>     - Markus Jobst, AT: Feels a bit like reinventing the wheel
>     - Robin Smith, JRC:  Education is required, but "spatial things" is
>     good because it captures peoples attention
>     - Hugo de Groof, DG ENV: Why not just use "object"?
>     - Alex Ramage, UK: Defnition needs to be clear
>
>     TOPIC: BP7 - Use persistent HTTP identifiers
>     - Robin Smith, JRC: Context is important, requires understanding of
>     what change means, when does the thing needs a new identifier
>     - Ed: A key aspect is that there is a URI for each identifier
>     - Alex Ramage, UK: Agrees with Robin, e.g. road feature split into
>     parts will receive new identifiers
>     - Clemens: The BP is conceptually consistent with INSPIREs support
>     for persistent identifiers. It mainly is a challenge for those that
>     do not yet manage persistent identifiers and/or to run
>     the infrastructure to resolve feature URIs
>     - Joeri Robbrect, DG ENV: Key is a resolvable identifier that
>     follows the life-cycle of the object
>     - Markus Jobst, AT: When I move the lighthouse or change it to a
>     chapel, does it get a new identifier?
>     - Jandirk Bulens, NL: Different function -> new thing -> new identifier
>     - Straw poll: 50% in the room are responsible for publishing, half
>     of them working with HTTP URIs
>
>     TOPIC: BP4 - Make data indexable by search engines
>     - Is it practicable? No comment from the audience.
>     - Is it understood?
>     - Erwin Folmer, NL: More than just an HTML page is needed
>     (annotations etc)
>     - Robin Smith, JRC: Geoportals still have their place, where they
>     add value and organise the content
>     - Ed: BPs should be done/doable in addition to current practice of
>     the GI community
>     - Joeri Robbrect, DG ENV: A good approach, goes beyond the current
>     metadata approach in SDIs; need to clarify how it works with, e.g.,
>     coverages
>     - Clemens: The search engines also need to clarify how a large
>     number of features should be published so that they will make them
>     discoverable
>
>     TOPIC: BP8 - Provide geometries in a usable way
>     - Alex Ramage, UK: Support the CRS "you" need or "they" (the users)
>     need. Rather "they"?
>     - Joeri Robbrect, DG ENV: Encoding is always confusing, GeoJSON,
>     JSON-LD, CovJSON. Which encoding to use? On the CRS: ETRS89 vs Web
>     Mercator
>     - Jandirk Bulens, NL: Use what the community has already specified
>     and uses
>     - Clemens: DWBP has recommendation to support multiple encodings,
>     where feasible. CRS: WGS84 most commonly expected/assumed, but also
>     native CRS should be published, often the national CRS
>
>     TOPIC: BP10 - Spatial semantics for spatial things
>     - Robin Smith, JRC: What is the "best" vocabulary? Examples? Impact
>     on interoperability?
>     - Joeri Robbrect, DG ENV: Points to the ISA Core Location Vocabulary
>     - Clemens: ISA Core Location Vocabulary identifies what is a
>     geometry, but not which vocabulary to use. Could be amended in the
>     future with recommendations, if there is a proper best practice
>     - Jandirk Bulens, NL: Topological relationships are important
>     - Clemens: Yes, current idea to agree on a list of spatial and
>     temporal relationships and register them with IANA
>     - NN: What is the value of publishing spatial data on the web? Value
>     is with publishing objects that are of interest (to the domain). It
>     is different whether you publish data or something that answers
>     a question.
>
>     TOPIC: List of BPs
>     - Can we identify priorities? Anything not on the list? Anything
>     unclear?
>     - Martin Tuchyňa, SK: There is pressure to have the link to
>     e-government, using linked data. Guidance where to start and where
>     to end is needed. The was a project providing recommendations
>     on this. maybe the BPs could describe a list of steps to be taken.
>     - Joeri Robbrect, DG ENV: Add BP to publish multiple encodings
>     - Clemens: DWBP covers this, not shown here but is referenced
>     - Roberto Lucchi, Esri: Most BP titels are not really "spatial",
>     which other communities have been successful with these practices?
>     - Erwin Folmer, NL: Two additional BPs: a) How to reuse existing
>     infrastructure, easy steps for data providers. b) Queries are
>     important, but unclear how to query distributed data holdings on
>     the web since there are different APIs (SPARQL, etc).
>     - Robin Smith, JRC: BP14 (publish links to related resources) is key
>     for creating value for the 99%
>     - Alex Ramage, UK: Data user could quickly become a data publisher
>     to someone else.
>
>     Ed closed the workshop with a call to read look at the wiki, read
>     the document and send comments!
>
>
>>     On 28 Sep 2016, at 17:04, Andrea Perego
>>     <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>> wrote:
>>
>>     Dears,
>>
>>     All going well, we'll have the video recording of the workshop,
>>     which can be used to complement possible gaps in the minutes.
>>
>>     BTW, for those who may be interested, the video recording of the
>>     SDW WG workshop at INSPIRE 2014 is available here:
>>
>>     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P02vocsKks
>>
>>     Starring (in alphabetical order):
>>     - Alex Coley
>>     - Bart De Lathouwer
>>     - Ed Parsons
>>     - Phil Archer
>>
>>
>>     Cheers,
>>
>>     Andrea
>>
>>
>>     On 28/09/2016 14:58, Tandy, Jeremy wrote:
>>>     I agree. Jeremy
>>>
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________________________________
>>>     Jeremy Tandy | Technology Fellow
>>>     *Met Office*, Fitzroy Road, Exeter, Devon, EX1 3PB, United Kingdom
>>>     email: jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk
>>>     <mailto:jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
>>>     <mailto:jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk> |
>>>     web: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/>
>>>
>>>     /See our guide to climate change
>>>     at/ http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate
>>>     change/guide/
>>>
>>>     On 28 Sep 2016, at 13:54, Clemens Portele
>>>     <portele@interactive-instruments.de
>>>     <mailto:portele@interactive-instruments.de>
>>>     <mailto:portele@interactive-instruments.de>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>     IRC makes sense during a meeting, but in this case I think capturing
>>>>     the feedback in an email to the list should be sufficient?
>>>>
>>>>     Clemens
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>     On 28 Sep 2016, at 14:49, Tandy, Jeremy
>>>>>     <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk
>>>>>     <mailto:jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
>>>>>     <mailto:jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>     Notes / IRC sound good to me. Basically - if you collect (valuable)
>>>>>     input for the BP doc, we editors need to know what that is. If the
>>>>>     input comes from a specific person / organisation it would be
>>>>>     good to
>>>>>     ask if we could follow up later to clarify ... so please get
>>>>>     contact
>>>>>     details :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>     J
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>     _______________________________________________________________________
>>>>>     Jeremy Tandy | Technology Fellow
>>>>>     *Met Office*, Fitzroy Road, Exeter, Devon, EX1 3PB, United Kingdom
>>>>>     email: jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk
>>>>>     <mailto:jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
>>>>>     <mailto:jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk> | web:
>>>>>     http://www.metoffice.gov.uk
>>>>>     <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/> <http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/>
>>>>>
>>>>>     /See our guide to climate change at/
>>>>>     http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate change/guide/
>>>>>
>>>>>     On 28 Sep 2016, at 13:47, Andrea Perego
>>>>>     <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>     ' Thanks, Ed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     I think that notes would be perfectly fine - and maybe they can be
>>>>>>     logged in the IRC (wifi permitting).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     But maybe Linda and Jeremy have different preferences.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Andrea
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     On 28/09/2016 11:27, Ed Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>>     Thanks Guys,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Looks Good, how would you like the feedback collected ?
>>>>>>>     Should we just
>>>>>>>     take notes or would you like something more structured ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Clemens, I'm happy to MC the session if you want to collect the
>>>>>>>     feedback ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Ed
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     On Wed, 28 Sep 2016 at 09:58 Andrea Perego
>>>>>>>     <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>>
>>>>>>>     wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Dear Ed, all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       As agreed in Lisbon, we drafted a programme for the SDW
>>>>>>>     Workshop
>>>>>>>     at the
>>>>>>>       INSPIRE 2016 conference, which is now available on the WG wiki:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/SDW_Workshop_@_INSPIRE_2016#Background_.26_purpose_of_workshop
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Because of time constraints (1.5h), the idea is to focus the
>>>>>>>     discussion
>>>>>>>       on the BP deliverable, in particular on those BPs we see as
>>>>>>>     most
>>>>>>>       relevant to the audience (these are listed in the wiki page).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       We think it would be relevant to get feedback both from the
>>>>>>>     people
>>>>>>>       already doing "spatial data on the Web" (do the BPs provide
>>>>>>>     a good
>>>>>>>       enough coverage of the issues they had to face and the
>>>>>>>     solutions
>>>>>>>     they
>>>>>>>       adopted?), and those who plan to do them (do the BPs
>>>>>>>     provide clear
>>>>>>>       enough guidance on how to do that?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       The idea is also to explain that we're trying to "crack
>>>>>>>     open" their
>>>>>>>       datasets, so that each individual "data item" (spatial
>>>>>>>     thing) is
>>>>>>>       addressable in the Web's information space.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Do you think this make sense?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       The wiki page includes also a tentative agenda. Probably,
>>>>>>>     to get
>>>>>>>       feedback in a more effective way, it would good to have
>>>>>>>     break out
>>>>>>>       sessions on the selected BPs, but I don't know if this is
>>>>>>>     feasible, and
>>>>>>>       it probably depends on how many people will join the workshop.
>>>>>>>     When we
>>>>>>>       had the SDW workshop at INSPIRE 2014 in Aalborg, we had
>>>>>>>     around 150
>>>>>>>       people attending, and this year we have around 1,000
>>>>>>>     participants at the
>>>>>>>       INSPIRE conference (more than in 2014). However, since the
>>>>>>>     workshop is
>>>>>>>       on Friday, we may have a smaller audience.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Thanks!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       Linda, Jeremy and Andrea
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       On 05/08/2016 15:07, Andrea Perego wrote:
>>>>>>>>     Dear colleagues,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     This is to let you know that the SDW workshop proposal for
>>>>>>>>     INSPIRE
>>>>>>>       2016
>>>>>>>>     has been accepted, and it is scheduled on Friday, Sep, 30th,
>>>>>>>>     at 9AM:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/events/conferences/inspire_2016/page/wsl
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     Andrea
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     On 10/06/2016 15:58, Andrea Perego wrote:
>>>>>>>>>     Thanks, Clemens.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     This being the situation, probably we should consider
>>>>>>>>>     having an oral
>>>>>>>>>     presentation, in case it won't be actually possible to run a
>>>>>>>       workshop.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     Meanwhile, I submitted a draft proposal. I include below
>>>>>>>>>     the relevant
>>>>>>>>>     parts for you to review. Please change it as you see fit.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     Thanks
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     Andrea
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     ----
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     WORKSHOP PROPOSAL
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     TITLE: W3C/OGC Spatial Data on the Web Working Group
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     ABSTRACT:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     The Spatial Data on the Web Working Group (SDW WG) is a joint
>>>>>>>       initiative
>>>>>>>>>     of the
>>>>>>>>>     World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) and the Open Geospatial
>>>>>>>       Consortium (OGC)
>>>>>>>>>     aiming
>>>>>>>>>     to bridge the geospatial technologies and the Web, thus
>>>>>>>       facilitating the
>>>>>>>>>     publication and use of spatial data across platforms and
>>>>>>>>>     communities.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     In order to achieve this, the SDW WG is working on a set of
>>>>>>>>>     deliverables, described in the WG Charter
>>>>>>>>>     (https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/charter), covering best
>>>>>>>       practices for
>>>>>>>>>     the publication of spatial data on the Web, based on
>>>>>>>>>     identified use
>>>>>>>>>     cases and requirements, plus the standardisation of a set of
>>>>>>>       ontologies
>>>>>>>>>     (Time Ontology, Semantic Sensor Network Vocabulary,
>>>>>>>>>     Coverages in
>>>>>>>>>     Linked Data).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     The workshop is meant to illustrate the work done so far, by
>>>>>>>       providing
>>>>>>>>>     an overview of the current version of the deliverables, and to
>>>>>>>       collect
>>>>>>>>>     feedback from participants on the proposed solutions and
>>>>>>>>>     open issues.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     AGENDA:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     - Introduction & purpose of the workshop
>>>>>>>>>     - Background and objectives of the SDW WG
>>>>>>>>>     - Overview of SDW WG deliverables
>>>>>>>>>     - Breakout sessions
>>>>>>>>>     - Summary from breakout sessions & conclusions
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     ----
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     On 09/06/2016 19:09, Clemens Portele wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>     Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>     while I will likely be in Barcelona on Tuesday and Friday
>>>>>>>       morning, do
>>>>>>>>>>     not make the planning dependent on me. There are other
>>>>>>>       submissions that
>>>>>>>>>>     I am involved in and I expect to be already quite busy during
>>>>>>>       the week.
>>>>>>>>>>     If I do not have a session conflict I will attend the
>>>>>>>>>>     workshop and
>>>>>>>>>>     contribute to the discussion as good as possible, but
>>>>>>>>>>     right now
>>>>>>>       I cannot
>>>>>>>>>>     commit to a more active role.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>     Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>     Clemens
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>     On 9 June 2016 at 15:24:41, Andrea Perego
>>>>>>>>>>     (andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>>>>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>       <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>       <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>>>>>>>       <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>>)
>>>>>>>>>>     wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Jon, Clemens, Ed,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Thanks for your mails!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     So, the preference for the workshop would be:
>>>>>>>>>>>     - 1st choice: Friday (morning?), 1.5 hours
>>>>>>>>>>>     - 2nd choice: Tuesday morning, 1.5 hours
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     @Jon, @Clemens, would both dates suit you well?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     About the agenda, I wonder what you think should be included.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Just trying a possible outline:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     - Introduction to SDW WG & purpose of the workshop
>>>>>>>>>>>     - Overview of deliverables
>>>>>>>>>>>     - Breakout sessions on selected topics from BP / UCR & SDW
>>>>>>>       ontologies
>>>>>>>>>>>     - Summary of breakout sessions & conclusions
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Covering all the deliverables in 1.5 hours is probably too
>>>>>>>       much, but
>>>>>>>>>>>     the
>>>>>>>>>>>     agenda & the discussion topics could be refined based on the
>>>>>>>>>>>     outcomes of
>>>>>>>>>>>     the f2f at the TPAC.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Does this make sense to you?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     Andrea
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     On 09/06/2016 10:17, Ed Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>     HI Andrea,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     I can be there with a probability of 1.0 on the 30th,
>>>>>>>>>>>>     0.7 on the
>>>>>>>>>>>     27th,
>>>>>>>>>>>>     0.1 on the 26th !
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     Ed
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 at 21:57 Jon Blower
>>>>>>>       <j.d.blower@reading.ac.uk
>>>>>>>     <mailto:j.d.blower@reading.ac.uk> <mailto:j.d.blower@reading.ac.uk>
>>>>>>>     <mailto:j.d.blower@reading.ac.uk>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <mailto:j.d.blower@reading.ac.uk
>>>>>>>       <mailto:j.d.blower@reading.ac.uk>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     I will probably be there (75% confidence level), but not all
>>>>>>>       week.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>     Jon
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     On 8 Jun 2016, at 20:50, Andrea Perego
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>       <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu
>>>>>>>       <mailto:andrea.perego@jrc.ec.europa.eu>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Dear all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     During today's call [1], we briefly discussed the option of
>>>>>>>>>>>>     submitting a workshop proposal to INSPIRE 2016,
>>>>>>>>>>>>     considering also
>>>>>>>>>>>>     that this would be an opportunity to get feedback on the new
>>>>>>>>>>>>     versions of the deliverables.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     May I ask you who from the WG plans to be at the INSPIRE
>>>>>>>>>>>>     conference? According to the draft programme [2], time slots
>>>>>>>       for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>     workshops are 1.5 hour, and are scheduled on Monday (26th),
>>>>>>>       Tuesday
>>>>>>>>>>>>     morning (27th), and Friday (30th).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     NB: I kindly ask you to let me know ASAP, since the
>>>>>>>       deadline for
>>>>>>>>>>>>     submission if this Friday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Andrea
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     ----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     [1]https://www.w3.org/2016/06/08-sdw-minutes#item04
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       [2]http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/events/conferences/inspire_2016/page/ovw
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     On 08/06/2016 10:37, Andrea Perego wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Thanks, Kerry.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     I would like to add another item to the agenda, following
>>>>>>>       up from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     https://www.w3.org/2016/05/11-sdw-minutes#item02
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     As you know, the INSPIRE conference this year will be in
>>>>>>>>>>>     Barcelona,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     right after the W3C TPAC:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/events/conferences/inspire_2016/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     We (JRC) think it would be good to present the work done
>>>>>>>       by the
>>>>>>>>>>>>     SDW WG,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     and collect feedback.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     So, I wonder whether we can devote 5 minutes to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     discuss the
>>>>>>>>>>>>     possibility
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     of proposing a workshop during today's call.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     The deadline for submission is quite close (June, 10th),
>>>>>>>       but we
>>>>>>>>>>>     just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     need a short abstract (max 400 words) and filling in a
>>>>>>>       template
>>>>>>>>>>>     [1].
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Thanks in advance
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Andrea
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     ----
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       [1]http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/events/conferences/inspire_2016/Workshop_template_2016.doc
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     On 07/06/2016 14:20, Kerry Taylor wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     G’day,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     The full SDW meeting this week will be held at the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     usual time
>>>>>>>>>>>>     and place:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     *8 June 2016 13:00 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SDWWG+Call&iso=20160608T13&p1=1440&ah=1>*
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Agenda:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     1. ISSUE-18 model reuse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/18> and
>>>>>>>       ISSUE-19
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Multiple types of coverage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/19> and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Related
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     actions (ACTION-114 and ACTION-115)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     2. ISSUE-32 Independence of reference systems
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/32>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     3. F2F meeting plan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       <https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings#TPAC_2015.2C_Lisbon>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     4. UCR completion
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     5. Spatial ontology: next steps
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     More details and dial-in instructions:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160608
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     --Kerry & Ed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Scientific / Technical Project Officer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     European Commission DG JRC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Institute for Environment & Sustainability
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     --
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     *Ed Parsons *FRGS
>>>>>>>>>>>>     Geospatial Technologist, Google
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501 <tel:020%207881%204501>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <tel:020%207881%204501>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     www.edparsons.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <http://www.edparsons.com/> <http://www.edparsons.com/>
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <http://www.edparsons.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>     <http://www.edparsons.com/> <http://www.edparsons.com/>>
>>>>>>>       <http://www.edparsons.com
>>>>>>>     <http://www.edparsons.com/> <http://www.edparsons.com/>>
>>>>>>>     @edparsons
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     --
>>>>>>>>>>>     Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
>>>>>>>>>>>     Scientific / Technical Project Officer
>>>>>>>>>>>     European Commission DG JRC
>>>>>>>>>>>     Institute for Environment & Sustainability
>>>>>>>>>>>     Unit H06 - Digital Earth & Reference Data
>>>>>>>>>>>     Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
>>>>>>>>>>>     21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>     https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       --
>>>>>>>       Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
>>>>>>>       Scientific / Technical Project Officer
>>>>>>>       European Commission DG JRC
>>>>>>>       Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
>>>>>>>       Unit B6 - Digital Economy
>>>>>>>       Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
>>>>>>>       21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>       ----
>>>>>>>       The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
>>>>>>>       not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
>>>>>>>       position of the European Commission.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     *Ed Parsons *FRGS
>>>>>>>     Geospatial Technologist, Google
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501 <tel:020%207881%204501>
>>>>>>>     <tel:%2B44%20%280%2920%207881%204501>
>>>>>>>     www.edparsons.com
>>>>>>>     <http://www.edparsons.com/> <http://www.edparsons.com/>
>>>>>>>     <http://www.edparsons.com/> @edparsons
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     --
>>>>>>     Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
>>>>>>     Scientific / Technical Project Officer
>>>>>>     European Commission DG JRC
>>>>>>     Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
>>>>>>     Unit B6 - Digital Economy
>>>>>>     Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
>>>>>>     21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     ----
>>>>>>     The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
>>>>>>     not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
>>>>>>     position of the European Commission.
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>     --
>>     Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
>>     Scientific / Technical Project Officer
>>     European Commission DG JRC
>>     Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
>>     Unit B6 - Digital Economy
>>     Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
>>     21027 Ispra VA, Italy
>>
>>     https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/
>>
>>     ----
>>     The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
>>     not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
>>     position of the European Commission.
>
> --
>
> *Ed Parsons *FRGS
> Geospatial Technologist, Google
>
> Google Voice +44 (0)20 7881 4501 <tel:%2B44%20%280%2920%207881%204501>
> www.edparsons.com <http://www.edparsons.com/> @edparsons
>

-- 
Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
Scientific / Technical Project Officer
European Commission DG JRC
Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
Unit B6 - Digital Economy
Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
21027 Ispra VA, Italy

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/

----
The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
position of the European Commission.

Received on Monday, 7 November 2016 14:21:40 UTC