W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdw-wg@w3.org > February 2017

Re: ISSUE-139, ISSUE-146, Methodology ? Was: alignment sosa to ssn

From: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 22:55:58 +0000
To: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>, "Kerry Taylor" <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9F0AD054-274A-4608-9120-CDD1D7645DDC@anu.edu.au>
Hi Maxime,

I am aware of your methodology document. It documents what we are trying to do. I am happy to accept the pull request for that document, but I can’t untangle it from your yet still larger Pull request. What if you create a wiki page with the content? We can then collaboratively document decisions or make changes to the methodology. It may result in more people contributing as not all members are confident at this stage to make changes in our Github repository.

Cheers,
Armin

From: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>
Date: Saturday, 11 February 2017 at 10:19 pm
To: Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Subject: ISSUE-139, ISSUE-146, Methodology ? Was: alignment sosa to ssn
Resent-From: <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Saturday, 11 February 2017 at 10:20 pm

Dear Kerry, Simon, all,

I think that Simon is keeping ssn-sosa.ttl in line with the latest discussions in this mailing list, see the comments in the related pull request that has been merged two days ago: https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/543


I also understand Kerry's point, in that the pull requests and their merging is not always discussed in this mailing list and approved by the entire subgroup.


On the other hand, the other alignments that Simon proposed are in my humble opinion very be valuable, and should be mentioned as part of a non-normative section in the REC?


Anyways, the point I want to make here is that the SSN subgroup really needs to use a strict methodology for the discussion and integration of terms one by one from the old ssn into ssnx, sosa and the new ssn.

I suggested a clear methodology in this commit:
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/536/commits/aa6dc76d0c653f5ed515b52506d64bf8184e16f5


Armin's proposal to create a wiki page for each integration issue, where we can discuss the pro and  cons of several options, and agree on a vote, is also a great way to achieve this. I will include the role of discussing the options in the wiki in this methodology.
See https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Semantic_Sensor_Network_Ontology


So I strongly encourage Armin to complete the reviewing process of https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/536 . If this pull request is merged, it could provide us with fresh new ssnx, ssn, sosa documents. We could progressively fill these documents with the definition of a new term every time the group has reached an agreement.

Kind regards,
Maxime Lefrançois

Le sam. 11 févr. 2017 à 07:06, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au<mailto:kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>> a écrit :
SSN subgroup,
Just for the record (I feel somewhat ridiculous saying this):

We, the ssn focus group have been assured on more than one occasion that we are to take no notice of ‘https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/ssn-sosa.ttl”  (nor any other of the files in  https://github.com/w3c/sdw/tree/gh-pages/ssn/rdf , with the exception of sosa.ttl) and this is only a way of documenting someone’s opinion and has no status more than that.

Therefore , we are safe to assume the fact that it is being updated very recently  does not change that status. https://github.com/w3c/sdw/commit/c52f0174ab8feca0e325cf22e487c85dfb3a096a


(Sorry folks,  just  preparing for the expected  “…but we all decided that.  Because it has been there  in public all this time , and so it’s all done ….”  type claim).

ISSUE-139
-Kerry

Received on Sunday, 12 February 2017 22:56:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:29 UTC