Re: [Minutes] 2016-10-05

Belated apologies - jet lag got the better of me i'm afraid.

Rob

On Thu, 6 Oct 2016 at 01:05 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:

> As ever, the minutes of today's meeting are at
> https://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-sdw-minutes with a text snapshot below.
>
> Please note that:
>
> - The next plenary meeting will be on 19th October at 20:00 UTC
>
> This is *before* daylight saving time has ended in the US and EU.
>
> Therefore, check the time in your time zone at
>
> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SDWWG+Call&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1
>
> The agenda for that meeting is expected to include votes to publish the
> final version of the UCR and the next iteration of the BP doc.
>
>
>            Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
>
> 05 Oct 2016
>
>     See also: [2]IRC log
>
>        [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-sdw-irc
>
> Attendees
>
>     Present
>            kerry, phila, ByronCinNZ, DanhLePhuoc, joshlieberman,
>            MattPerry, ChrisLittle, AndreaPerego, jtandy,
>            ClausStadler, Danh
>
>     Regrets
>            rachel, simoncox, lars, Clemens, eparsons, Linda, Bill
>
>     Chair
>            kerry
>
>     Scribe
>            phila
>
> Contents
>
>       * [3]Topics
>           1. [4]Approving last week's minutes
>           2. [5]approve minutes
>              http://www.w3.org/2016/09/14-sdw-minutes.html
>           3. [6]approve day 2 tpac minutes
>              https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes.html
>           4. [7]Changing time zones: proposed next plenary and
>              following fortnights at 19th October 2016 20:00 GMT
>              i.e
>              http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?m
>              sg=SDWWG+Call&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1 (this is
>              returning to the schedule for the opposite season we
>              used at the beginning of the year. Please be prepared
>              to suggest alternatives if you wish but staying as now
>              is not an option, as this week's meeting starts at
>              midnight in eastern Australia.)
>           5. [8]Next PWD of UCR coming very soon
>           6. [9]Next PWD of BP coming very soon
>           7. [10]INSPIRE (Ed? Clemens? Andrea?)
>           8. [11]AOB
>           9. [12]https namespaces
>       * [13]Summary of Action Items
>       * [14]Summary of Resolutions
>       __________________________________________________________
>
>     <ChrisLittle> * great that JT is target driven!
>
>     <kerry> regrets billroberts, jonblower, clemensportele,
>     lindavandenbrink, frans
>
>     <ChrisLittle> * I see 8 on IRC
>
>     <joshlieberman> The OGC abstract specs are here:
>     [15]http://www.opengeospatial.org/docs/as
>
>       [15] http://www.opengeospatial.org/docs/as
>
>     [16]http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/
>
>       [16] http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/
>
>     <scribe> scribe: phila
>
>     <kerry> scribe: phila
>
>     <scribe> scribeNick: phila
>
> Approving last week's minutes
>
>     <jtandy> that's TPAC right?
>
> approve minutes [17]http://www.w3.org/2016/09/14-sdw-minutes.html
>
>       [17] http://www.w3.org/2016/09/14-sdw-minutes.html
>
>     <jtandy> yes
>
>     <ByronCinNZ> +1
>
>     <jtandy> yes the meeting was short - I remember Linda saying so
>
>     RESOLUTION: approve minutes
>
>     <ChrisLittle> +0 not present
>
>     <jtandy> +0 (not there myself)
>
>     phila: Meeting was only 15 minutes on 14/9
>     ... Shall we approve TPAC minutes
>
>     <joshlieberman> +0 not present for either
>
>     phila: Minutes of 14 Sept so trivial, not an issue
>
>     -> [18]https://www.w3.org/2016/09/19-sdw-minutes.html TPAC Day
>     1
>
>       [18] https://www.w3.org/2016/09/19-sdw-minutes.html
>
>     -> [19]https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes.html Day 2
>
>       [19] https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes.html
>
>     phila: Some of my scribing around SSN was not good.
>
>     <AndreaPerego> Same issue with mine about the joint meeting
>     with WoT IG
>
>     kerry: Anyone have an opinion?
>     ... Day 1 was approved on day 2
>
> approve day 2 tpac minutes
> [20]https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes.html
>
>       [20] https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes.html
>
>     kerry: Not appropriate to reapprove them here
>     ... Any comments on day 2
>
>     joshlieberman: Procedural issue - I'm a little disappointed
>     that the meetings were at the same time (TPAC and OGC)
>     ... So it was not possible for a number of us to attend the
>     TPAC F2F.
>     ... It would be helpful therefore to revisit some of the
>     decisions taken at TPAC. Not to overturn, but to reaffirm them.
>     ... Don't know what the procedure might be.
>
>     kerry: I'm sympathetic, but there are always meetings one can't
>     attend where decisions are taken. I'm often in that position
>     myself.
>     ... It's possible to re-look at a decision, but I don't think
>     we can nobble our decision making process. In last week's SSN
>     meeting, we went through those SSN decisions in Lisbon
>     ... Yes, we can't all attend al the meetings all the time
>
>     phila: Can I suggest you look at the resolutions from TPAC and
>     raise issues if you think it necessary.
>     ... Rambles on about raising issues and wanting everyone to be
>     happy.
>
>     kerry: We always ask for agenda items. Please let me know if
>     you want an issue on an agenda.
>
>     joshlieberman: So it sounds like the best thing is to raise an
>     issue?
>     ... That can then serve as an agenda item.
>
>     kerry: Yes, but please also ask for it to be put on an agenda
>     at a time that suits you.
>
>     <ChrisLittle> NOTUC
>
>     <kerry> resolve: approve minutes
>     [21]https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes.html
>
>       [21] https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes.html
>
>     joshlieberman: OGC has the concept of No Objections To
>     Unanimous Consent (NOTUC)
>
>     <kerry> patent call:
>     [22]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
>
>       [22] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
>
>     RESOLUTION: There being NOTUC, minutes of TPAC Day 2 are
>     approved.
>
> Changing time zones: proposed next plenary and following fortnights
> at 19th October 2016 20:00 GMT i.e
> [23]http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SDWWG+Ca
> ll&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1
> <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SDWWG+Call&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1>
> (this is returning to the schedule
> for the opposite season we used at the beginning of the year. Please
> be prepared to suggest alternatives if you wish but staying as now is
> not an option, as this week's meeting starts at midnight in eastern
> Australia.)
>
>       [23]
>
> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SDWWG+Call&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1
>
>     kerry: Time zones are changing for the opposite seasons. It's
>     00:24 tomorrow here in Canberra.
>
>     <ChrisLittle> +1 to new time
>
>     kerry: So my suggestion is for plenary meetings to start at
>     20:00 UTC as of 2 weeks' time.
>
>     <ByronCinNZ> Big +1 from me
>
>     +1 from me, it's what we're use to. Let's move on
>
>     <jtandy> +1
>
>     <MattPerry> +1 from me
>
>     <AndreaPerego> +1
>
>     <joshlieberman> +1
>
>     phila: Notes that it's 01:26 tomorrow for ByronCinNZ
>
>     jtandy: That's the time for plenary call. The sub groups will
>     continue at the time that makes sense to them.
>
>     kerry: Confirmed
>
>     <kerry> +1
>
>     kerry: The change *only* applies to the plenary calls
>
>     <jtandy> thank you
>
>     RESOLUTION: Changing time zones: proposed next plenary and
>     following fortnights at 19th October 2016 20:00 GMT i.e
>     [24]http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SD
>     WWG+Call&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1
>
>       [24]
>
> http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SDWWG+Call&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1
>
>     RESOLUTION: Plenary meetings (only) will move to 20:00 UTC as
>     of 19 October
>
>     RESOLUTION: Daylight savings is a terrible idea.
>
>     <ChrisLittle> * UTC rules!
>
>     phila: makes general warwning about DST not having ended on
>     19/10 in Europe and US
>
> Next PWD of UCR coming very soon
>
>     kerry: We did some final issue closing at TPAC
>     ... Frans has since actioned those changes and made some
>     cosmetic changes
>     ... He posted on the list along the lines of "we're ready to
>     go"
>     ... So we're looking for approval in 2 weeks' time to go ahead
>     and publish. We expect this to be the final version.
>     ... This is an OCG Discussion Paper/W3C Note
>
> Next PWD of BP coming very soon
>
>     phila: No process issues here. WG has 2 weeks to review.
>
>     kerry: State of gthe BP doc is that it has changed a lot since
>     the previous public WD. Not yet complete, but has progressed a
>     lot.
>     ... We propose similarly that it will be ready for a public WD
>     that we can vote on during 19/10 meeting
>     ... What's the stability, Jeremy?
>
>     jtandy: All the actions that we agreed on the end of the 1st
>     day *except* phila's bits
>     ... Bill is working on the glossary and hopes to have it done
>     my Monday, or it will have to wait until next iteration.
>     ... I'm incorporating Payam's changes on CRSs now
>
>     phila: I'm working on it now. Will complete immediately after
>     this meeting.
>
>     <scribe> ... Pending Bill's glossary updates.
>
>     kerry: So if you, Jeremy, can write to the list when it's
>     ready?
>
>     jtandy: I will email the list when we're good to go.
>
>     kerry: So I invite everyone to look at it as soon as Jeremy
>     sends that mail.Expcet to vote in 2 week's time.
>
> INSPIRE (Ed? Clemens? Andrea?)
>
>     <AndreaPerego> I would add an item in the agenda of the next
>     call.
>
>     kerry: So... with relevant people absent... Oh... Andrea *is*
>     here...
>
>     AndreaPerego: The problem is that I wasn't there. It was Ed and
>     Clemens
>
>     kerry: OK, we'll bring it back to another agenda.
>
> AOB
>
>     kerry: Anyone have anything (I do)
>
>     <jtandy> nothing from me
>
>     kerry: So can I talk about HTTPS?
>
> https namespaces
>
>     kerry: The issue is for the time ontology and SSN et al...
>     ... the question is about the transition to TLS and what that
>     means for an ontology.
>     ... My view was that is your namepsace is new, you may as well
>     take the opportunity to move to https
>     ... It's only been there for the lifetime of this group.
>     ... I understood the advice to be to use HTTPS if you're
>     starting anew.
>     ... It affects the group more broadly
>
>     <joshlieberman> Can a webserver not redirect http to https?
>
>     <joshlieberman> The user agent needs the root cert in order to
>     accept an https connection...
>
>     phila: Maxime raised this at
>     [25]https://github.com/perma-id/w3id.org/issues/528
>
>       [25] https://github.com/perma-id/w3id.org/issues/528
>
>     joshlieberman: There's no difference in terms of a URI in terms
>     of an id, it's when you treat it as a URL that issues arise.
>     ... Yes, https is good but there are issues around what the
>     process is, what the authentication mechanism is etc.
>     ... So I argue for http URIs, provided that the server will
>     upgrade to https if supported.
>
>     phila: That's what we say too, yes.
>     ... Stick with http and let the smarts handle it - until we
>     have https everywhere.
>
>     kerry: I'm willing to go with the flow, but it still seems more
>     rational to me to go for https as we have the opportunity to do
>     so.
>     ... The downside is, if you want a secure resolution... willing
>     to take advice. Looks like the advice is to use http for now
>
>     <ChrisLittle> +1 for HTTP
>
>     PROPOSED: That our vocabularies use HTTP URIs as namespaces
>
>     <DanhLePhuoc> +1 for HTTP
>
>     <jtandy> +1
>
>     <kerry> +1
>
>     <ByronCinNZ> +1
>
>     +1
>
>     <joshlieberman> +1
>
>     <AndreaPerego> +1
>
>     <ClausStadler> +1
>
>     RESOLUTION: That our vocabularies use HTTP URIs as namespaces
>
>     <ChrisLittle> No
>
>     <kerry> aob?
>
>     kerry: Any other other business?
>
>     <jtandy> me says thanks!
>
>     <joshlieberman> Phila - now that I've looked at your posts re:
>     HTTP, thanks for letting me parrot them
>
>     <AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye!
>
>     [Adjourned]
>
>     <joshlieberman> bye
>
>     <kerry> bye!
>
>     <ByronCinNZ> bye
>
>     <ChrisLittle> Bye
>
> Summary of Action Items
>
> Summary of Resolutions
>
>      1. [26]approve minutes
>      2. [27]There being NOTUC, minutes of TPAC Day 2 are approved.
>      3. [28]Changing time zones: proposed next plenary and
>         following fortnights at 19th October 2016 20:00 GMT i.e
>         http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=SD
>         WWG+Call&iso=20161019T20&p1=1440&ah=1
>      4. [29]Plenary meetings (only) will move to 20:00 UTC as of 19
>         October
>      5. [30]Daylight savings is a terrible idea.
>      6. [31]That our vocabularies use HTTP URIs as namespaces
>
>     [End of minutes]
>       __________________________________________________________
>
>