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

[Minutes SSN] 2016-10-25

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 23:05:55 +0100
To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <27b8748b-940d-1fe1-dc6d-a72b0ae2da44@w3.org>
The minutes of this week's SSN sub group meeting are at 
https://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes with a text snapshot below.

These meetings are now to be held weekly, at least for the editors.

           Spatial Data on the Web SSN Subgroup Teleconference

25 Oct 2016


       [2] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:SSN-Telecon20161025

    See also: [3]IRC log

       [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-irc


           ahaller2, scribe, kerry, DanhLePhuoc, kjanowic

           SimonCox, Scott_Simmons




      * [4]Topics
          1. [5]Approval of previous minutes
          2. [6]Patent call
          3. [7]Group members' capacity for Ontology work in
          4. [8]Volunteers for collating existing implementations
          5. [9]Introducing Model Actuation in SSN (Scope,
          6. [10]Imports
      * [11]Summary of Action Items
      * [12]Summary of Resolutions

    <Roba> Just lurking without webex as i travel..

    <ahaller2> [13]https://www.w3.org/2016/10/11-sdwssn-minutes

      [13] https://www.w3.org/2016/10/11-sdwssn-minutes

    <ahaller2> approve last meeting’s minutes

      [14] https://www.w3.org/2016/10/11-sdwssn-minutes

    <kerry> +1

    <DanhLePhuoc> +1

Approval of previous minutes


    <ahaller2> +1

    <ahaller2> patent call:

      [15] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

    RESOLUTION: Minutes approved

Patent call

    ahaller2: Reads patent call

Group members' capacity for Ontology work in Nov/Dec

    <ahaller2> agenda: Group members' capacity for Ontology work in

    ahaller2: We're supposed to have produced a 2nd iteration by
    ... Need a new WD by the end of the year
    ... Need volunteers for diff parts of the doc.
    ... The new SSN Ontology is the obvious one
    ... Already have some text that is different from FPWD
    ... But questions around import, new concepts, so there are
    some open issues around forecasting, alignment to Time
    ... Need someone to volunteer to do the modelling
    ... means coordinating the work on the new SSNO
    ... Need to coordinate introduction of new terms, maybe
    loosening semantics of old terms

    kerry: I'm prepared to put some effort in. By mid-Nov I can
    work on it more intensively than I can now.

    ahaller2: OK, let's put your name down for coordination from

    phila: Is the 8th mid-Nov?

    kerry: No, more like 15th

    ahaller2: I think there are more pressing issues around other
    parts of the ontology.

    kerry: I agree and yes

    ahaller2: So the more pressing parts really are in the core.
    ... Quite a lot of work to be done to build the alignment to
    the new SSN
    ... Need to coordinate with person doing new SSN and align.
    ... I was about to volunteer for that but it would be nice of
    someone else did it.
    ... Simon has already proposed something wrt alignment.
    ... I'd also like to propose some changes to the core. Some
    things missing as identified in Lisbon.
    ... Labels for the terms still under discussion.
    ... Can't use the same label as old one referred to DULCE and
    we don't want to use the same label as that.
    ... That's something to coordinate.
    ... If I volunteer, DanhLePhuoc, what's your availabvility

    DanhLePhuoc: I have a little bit of time from 2nd week of Nov
    to 1st week of Dec to do some work

    <kerry> ACTION: kerry to coordinate adjustments to "old" ssn to
    bring to next pwd [recorded in

      [16] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-211 - Coordinate adjustments to "old"
    ssn to bring to next pwd [on Kerry Taylor - due 2016-11-01].

    ahaller2: Can you use that time to work on the doc in this
    ... I know Roba is lurking...

    <Zakim> kerry, you wanted to suggest weekly meetings? and to
    comment on dolce terms

    kerry: This might not be the time, but I have some concerns...
    the DUL alignment is just part of that. One one the
    implications is not to have DUL comments. Not sure I agree with
    that in all circumstances.
    ... They can be useful.
    ... We can add extra annotation, and change the old ones

    <Roba> Im go8ng to be pretty much maxxed out on qb4st...

    kerry: To say why DUL terms are recommended.

    ahaller2: There's agreement in the Wg that we shouldn't rely on
    the DUL import in the new SSN
    ... I agree that DUL helps to explain.
    ... Maybe in the labels, sometimes it refers to DUL but we can
    still use the label from DUL without referring to it except in
    the alignment.

    kerry: I mostly agree with you but some of the terms are pretty
    hard to explain.

    ahaller2: Maybe we discuss this when we get to the individual
    ... We don't have anything yet in terms of actuation.

    <kerry> ACTION: danh to work in late Nov/early Dec on pwd for
    ssn [recorded in

      [17] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action02]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-212 - Work in late nov/early dec on
    pwd for ssn [on Danh Le Phuoc - due 2016-11-01].

    ahaller2: DanhLePhuoc Was just offering to help with the doc
    ... We can ask KJ what he can contribute

Volunteers for collating existing implementations

      [18] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83

    ahaller2: We still need agreement on the alignment.
    ... We can use old implementations and use that as evidence.

    kerry: I remember someone telling me that they were doing this
    for a paper. But I can't remember who it was. Might have been
    at UPM (Raul?)

    ahaller2: I can follow up with Raul if it's him.

    <kerry> phila: you need to prove that people are using what
    your standard says

    <kerry> ...you can use old implementations iff they match the

    <kerry> ...if the implementation differe from the original ssn
    but is the same now then that's ok

    <kerry> ....but not subclass differences etc. you need impls of
    what is in the doc

    <kerry> and nothing else matters

    <kerry> armin: if the only difference is the namespace then you
    can use the old term

    <kerry> ...needs equivalence statment and it must be normative

    <kerry> ...but it can go in the alignment as long as alignment
    is normative

    <kerry> .....if put in new ssn would necessarily introduce
    dolce into new ssn and also all the equivalence axioms

    <kerry> ....would prefer to avoid it due to modularisation.

    <kerry> phila: then you need to show new implementations that
    do not use the dolce

    <kerry> .....it can be that this is simpler and more practical
    and we have implementation proof of that.

    DanhLePhuoc: If no one else is doing it, I can do a survey and
    list the implementations

    ahaller2: So preliminarily, I'll put you down for that but I'll
    aslk the list first as I also can recall someone saying they
    were doing it already.
    ... OK, we'll put you down as a coordinator

    <scribe> ACTION: DanhLePhuoc To coordinate the collection of
    implementations [recorded in

      [19] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action03]

    <trackbot> Error finding 'DanhLePhuoc'. You can review and
    register nicknames at

      [20] http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users

    <scribe> ACTION: Danh To coordinate the collection of
    implementations [recorded in

      [21] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action04]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-213 - Coordinate the collection of
    implementations [on Danh Le Phuoc - due 2016-11-01].

    kerry: If you follow that link in the action, there are links
    to style on how other people have done it.
    ... Follow the links to the issue in the tracker


      [22] http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org

    <ahaller2> [23]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83

      [23] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83


    <trackbot> issue-83 -- collate existing implementations --

    <trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83

      [24] http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83


      [25] https://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_Implementations.

Introducing Model Actuation in SSN (Scope, Volunteers)

    ahaller2: We closed the issue in the UCR talking about
    ... I think everyone agrees we need actuation in SSN.
    ... The question is whether we have examples in
    implementations. I think Maxime had one, and you, DanhLePhuoc?
    ... So again we need a volunteer to work on this.

    <Zakim> kerry, you wanted to speak on actuation

    kerry: I did some work in that area 8-10 years ago but I doubt
    it's the way we'd go. Payam/Surrey are doing something along
    that line but we'd need a review of the space

    DanhLePhuoc: Before the review, I keep asking the WoT IG for
    help with reviewing

    ahaller2: A requirement?

    DanhLePhuoc: We could involve them in the discussion.

    ahaller2: There's this req... it would be good to align with
    the generic sensor API
    ... If we can align with WoT and GSA, good
    ... We're only three people - any vols or should I write to the

    <Zakim> kerry, you wanted to suggest a sub-group meetings
    schedule for this

    kerry: I think it will go too slowly if we just meet like this
    every 2nd week. I'm tempted to make a sub sub group meeting
    with some WoT people
    ... Maybe physical meetings every week outside this cycle.

    ahaller2: Are you proposing a meeting for the editors, or this
    meeting every week.

    kerry: I think I was thinking of a set of meetings just on that

    ahaller2: I think we need the weekly cycle between now and
    ... I'd think just the editors would be enough. WDYT?

    DanhLePhuoc: OK

    <scribe> ACTION: ahaller2 to arrange meetings for SSN editors
    on weeks when there is no SSN sub group meeting [recorded in

      [26] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action05]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-214 - Arrange meetings for ssn
    editors on weeks when there is no ssn sub group meeting [on
    Armin Haller - due 2016-11-01].

    phila: Do you need special meetings with GSA and/or WoT?

    ahaller2: Tobie was agreeing to change a term to observation,
    Otherwise I think that's enough. No need for a meeting.
    ... For WoT, I think DanhLePhuoc is well linked in. So we just
    send them a proposal.

    DanhLePhuoc: OK, I can do that.

    ahaller2: So we have a method. Do we know who would coordinate
    the work around actuation.
    ... I'll write to the list
    ... So we're done with the agenda but...


    ahaller2: How do we import ontologies in general, do we always
    agree on importing the ontology?
    ... I always import ontologies that are referenced but not
    everyone does. A re we saying you must import the ontology?

    kerry: I think there might be specific cases where I thinjk
    differently, but if SSN is an exemplar, aligning with DUL was
    good, importing DUL was a bad thing. SO I'd argue against the
    import of ontologies that use external terms.
    ... It creates problems in understanding.

    DanhLePhuoc: You say importing only when we define new terms
    ... it's up to the tool chain. They normally import recursively
    which is usually a bad thing.

    ahaller2: The tools will generally import an ontology if you
    use an external term.
    ... I think you should import which is what the tools do.
    ... There's the question of what part imports what?

    kerry: A good counter example, is the references to the old SSN
    for implementation experience. Importing the old into the new
    is not a good idea.

    DanhLePhuoc: schema.org is very careful not to introduce
    anything that might lead to recursive processing.
    ... There are a lot of people using ontologies without knowing
    about importing.

    ahaller2: This is why I was in favour of putting the
    equivalence relations in the DUL alignment, not the main
    ... The old SSN imports DUL, so if we import that we get
    ... Tools will do that.
    ... So we don't want to import DUL or the old SSN in the new

    <kerry> +++++1

    <ahaller2> +1

    DanhLePhuoc: Yes, but if you don't import, that needs new
    implementation, no?

    <kerry> +1

    ahaller2: That's where my proposal comes in. If we say that the
    DUL alignment is part of the normative doc, then there's no
    need to import.

    <DanhLePhuoc> +1

    kerry: That works for me.
    ... But, can we go one step further.
    ... The DUL alignment exists and we'll have that. The
    equivalence triples could go in a third file, not necessarily
    in the DUL alignment.
    ... If we're OK with that then maybe a 3rd file might be

    ahaller2: That's a good proposal. Maybe the old to new

    kerry: Yes
    ... And if we do that, I don't think the DUL alignment has to
    be normative.

    phila: Suggests that as soon as we have docs to point to, we
    seek a view from the Director, not just me.

    ahaller2: I think it's a generic problem so the Director's view
    will be of interest beyond SSN.
    ... I think we have an agreement on what we import in the new
    SSN. If the new SSN imports the core or some other modules, we
    can discuss this at a future meeting.

    <ahaller2> KJanowic: we are just closing the meeting

    ahaller2: Recaps some of the discussion with KJanowic

    <KJanowic> Sounds great

    21: 00 UTC

    <KJanowic> perfect for me, thanks a lot (2pm)

    KJanowic: I agree with the editors having extra meetings

    <KJanowic> I would be more than happy to work on the core or
    basically any of the task that are havy on ontology engineering
    and alignment

    <KJanowic> Sure, I can do that

    <scribe> ACTION: KJanowic to coordinate modelling of actuation
    in SSN [recorded in

      [27] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action06]

    <trackbot> Created ACTION-215 - Coordinate modelling of
    actuation in ssn [on Krzysztof Janowicz - due 2016-11-01].

    <kerry> I cannot hear KJanowic

    KJanowic: DO we havea any updates on the role of SOSA/SOSA Core

    <kerry> And I am afriad I must leave

    <kerry> Bye!

    <KJanowic> bye

    s/DO we havea any updates on the role of SOSA\/SOSA Core/Do we
    have any updates on the role of SOSA\/SOSA Core

    <KJanowic> okay, thanks a lot. I am super interesting to
    continue the SOSA(core) work and hope it to be part of the
    normative work. I also have time to put work into this

    <KJanowic> Thanks a lot for the update and sorry again for
    joining late!

    <ahaller2> thanks, bye

    ahaller2: OK, we'll carry this on next week

Summary of Action Items

    [NEW] ACTION: ahaller2 to arrange meetings for SSN editors on
    weeks when there is no SSN sub group meeting [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: Danh To coordinate the collection of
    implementations [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: danh to work in late Nov/early Dec on pwd for ssn
    [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: DanhLePhuoc To coordinate the collection of
    implementations [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: kerry to coordinate adjustments to "old" ssn to
    bring to next pwd [recorded in
    [NEW] ACTION: KJanowic to coordinate modelling of actuation in
    SSN [recorded in

      [28] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action05
      [29] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action04
      [30] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action02
      [31] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action03
      [32] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01
      [33] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action06

Summary of Resolutions

     1. [34]Minutes approved

    [End of minutes]
Received on Tuesday, 25 October 2016 22:05:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:26 UTC