- 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>
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]Agenda
[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
Attendees
Present
ahaller2, scribe, kerry, DanhLePhuoc, kjanowic
Regrets
SimonCox, Scott_Simmons
Chair
Armin
Scribe
phila
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Approval of previous minutes
2. [6]Patent call
3. [7]Group members' capacity for Ontology work in
Nov/Dec
4. [8]Volunteers for collating existing implementations
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83
5. [9]Introducing Model Actuation in SSN (Scope,
Volunteers)
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
[14] https://www.w3.org/2016/10/11-sdwssn-minutes
<kerry> +1
<DanhLePhuoc> +1
Approval of previous minutes
+1
<ahaller2> +1
<ahaller2> patent call:
[15]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/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
Nov/Dec
ahaller2: We're supposed to have produced a 2nd iteration by
now
... 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
mid-Nov.
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]
[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
period?
... 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
slightly
<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
labels.
... 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]
[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
[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
document
<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]
[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>.
[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]
[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
[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
issue-83?
<trackbot> issue-83 -- collate existing implementations --
raised
<trackbot> [24]http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83
[24] http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/83
<ahaller2>
[25]https://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_Implementations.
[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
actuation.,
... 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
list?
<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
topic.
ahaller2: I think we need the weekly cycle between now and
December
... 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]
[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...
Imports
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
ontology.
... The old SSN imports DUL, so if we import that we get
everything.
... Tools will do that.
... So we don't want to import DUL or the old SSN in the new
SSN.
<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
cleaner.
ahaller2: That's a good proposal. Maybe the old to new
alignment?
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]
[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
[28]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Danh To coordinate the collection of
implementations [recorded in
[29]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: danh to work in late Nov/early Dec on pwd for ssn
[recorded in
[30]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: DanhLePhuoc To coordinate the collection of
implementations [recorded in
[31]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: kerry to coordinate adjustments to "old" ssn to
bring to next pwd [recorded in
[32]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: KJanowic to coordinate modelling of actuation in
SSN [recorded in
[33]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/25-sdwssn-minutes.html#action06]
[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