- From: Bill Roberts <bill@swirrl.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 13:12:50 +0100
- To: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, Rob Atkinson <rob@metalinkage.com.au>
- Cc: "SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org)" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMTVsumXSXvJDQNYxTt-5ppSgf5003XkeEqKLiGCyiew1ygQQw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Linda - regarding presenting the coverages work, I saw in another mail that Rob is planning to be at the OGC meeting and so could perhaps do it in person. Rob - would you be willing to summarise the SDW coverages work for the OGC? Bill On 14 June 2017 at 12:10, Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > > > Would you perhaps be willing to present this WG’s Coverages work at the > OGC meeting? (You could do this remotely). Otherwise, do you have > suggestions on who else could do it? > > > > Linda > > > > *Van:* Joshua Lieberman [mailto:jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com] > *Verzonden:* maandag 12 juni 2017 22:58 > *Aan:* Linda van den Brink > *CC:* Scott Simmons; Clemens Portele; SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org) > *Onderwerp:* Re: BP vote at OGC > > > > Here is my suggestion for an agenda for the Geosem session. Presenters > invited for any of the sections. > > > > –Best Practice > –OWL-Time > –SOSA-SSN > –Coverages > –Next steps > > > > --Josh > > > > On Jun 12, 2017, at 10:25 AM, Linda van den Brink < > l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl> wrote: > > > > Okay good, so I will make some slides & give a short presentation at the > opening plenary about the BP. > > > > Can someone do the same for OWL Time, or make a slide or two about it and > instruct me what to say about that? > > > > I can also do a longer presentation about the BP at the GeoSemantics DWG. > But I need someone to lead a discussion on OWL Time since I’ve not followed > it closely at all. > > > > Clemens, could you check if a presentation is welcome in the future > directions session and the Architecture DWG? > > > > *Van:* Scott Simmons [mailto:ssimmons@opengeospatial.org > <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>] > *Verzonden:* maandag 12 juni 2017 15:23 > *Aan:* Linda van den Brink > *CC:* Joshua Lieberman; Clemens Portele; SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org) > *Onderwerp:* Re: BP vote at OGC > > > > I agree - I wil give you a slot in the opening! > > On Jun 12, 2017, at 7:16 AM, Linda van den Brink < > l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl> wrote: > > > > I could do either. Perhaps, in this case the opening plenary is better > since people will then have all week to ask me questions after. > > > > *Van:* Scott Simmons [mailto:ssimmons@opengeospatial.org > <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>] > *Verzonden:* maandag 12 juni 2017 13:41 > *Aan:* Joshua Lieberman > *CC:* Clemens Portele; Linda van den Brink; SDW WG (public-sdw-wg@w3.org) > *Onderwerp:* Re: BP vote at OGC > > > > Linda, > > > > I can give you time to present briefly in the Opening or Closing Plenary. > > > > Scott > > > > On Jun 12, 2017, at 5:10 AM, Joshua Lieberman < > jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com> wrote: > > > > The Geosemantics session is specifically for SDW docs and discussion, > although I won't be able to be there in person. > > --Josh Lieberman > > > On Jun 12, 2017, at 6:39 AM, Clemens Portele <portele@interactive- > instruments.de> wrote: > > Hi Linda, all, > > > > I will also be in St John’s and could support. > > > > In my view we should focus on the ones that are on pending documents in > the OGC portal and where OGC members are voting on or formally reviewing a > document, i.e. the BP (under TC vote) and the Time Ontology (as Simon sent > a request for implementation input to the TC and an RFC is in preparation). > > > > Regarding the slots, in addition to the TC plenaries and the open OAB > session, another option could be the "future directions" session, but this > may depend on what is planned for that session (no information on the > agenda yet). The Architecture DWG (for the BP) and the GeoSemWeb DWG (for > both) may also be candidates, if we think that we should address specific > DWGs in addition to the plenaries. > > > > Clemens > > > > On 8. Jun 2017, at 14:00, Linda van den Brink <L.vandenBrink@geonovum.nl> > wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > For the OGC folks among us. > > > > The BP is currently subject of an electronic vote among OGC TC members. In > order to get enough members to vote and thus get quorum and get the BP > published as an OGC Best Practice, we should bring the BP vote to the > attention of the membership at the upcoming OGC meeting (which takes place > in two weeks’ time @ St John, New Foundland). > > > > A few questions: > > - Is it only the BP we should be lobbying about, or other products of this > WG as well? > > - Which OGC groups should we target e.g. for a short presentation? > > - Who will be in St John to help with this? (I will be there) > > > > Linda > > >
Received on Wednesday, 14 June 2017 12:13:24 UTC