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

RE: BP sub-group call, Wed 1 March @ 16:00utc

From: <andrea.perego@ec.europa.eu>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 10:11:58 +0000
To: <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>, <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
CC: <phila@w3.org>, <fd@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EDFF15E839F79242AA55B1468C63DDA95E436F@S-DC-ESTC02-J.net1.cec.eu.int>
Thanks, Jeremy.

Just a short summary on BP8 (I'll provide the details during the call):

A completed a first revision of BP8, which now include:
- Revision proposals for sections "Why", "Intended Outcome", and "Possible Approach to Implementation".
- Notes
- Examples

You can check it here:


I kept all the text, whereas the new one is in yellow.

In the revision, I tried as much as possible to take into account the feedback got so far, and re-use the original content. When the original content was not re-used in the running text it has been added in the notes.

Looking forward for your comments!


PS: An editorial issue. It would be nice to be able to have a way to crossref example as done for section, without the need of adding "Example 1", etc. In my fork I added a small JavaScript snippet doing the job, but I wonder whether ReSpec supports this feature.

@Phil, @François, can you help here?

Andrea Perego, Ph.D.
Scientific / Technical Project Officer
European Commission DG JRC
Directorate B - Growth and Innovation
Unit B6 - Digital Economy
Via E. Fermi, 2749 - TP 262
21027 Ispra VA, Italy


The views expressed are purely those of the writer and may
not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official
position of the European Commission.

From: Jeremy Tandy [jeremy.tandy@gmail.com]
Sent: 28 February 2017 12:42
To: SDW WG Public List
Subject: BP sub-group call, Wed 1 March @ 16:00utc


Agenda for tomorrow's call at 16:00utc is here [1]

Main talking points are:

  *   Quick look at the detailed plan for the sprint leading up to Delft F2F backlog and sprint plan<https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Detailed_planning_BP_document>
  *   Decision: are non-geographic CRS out of scope? (see ISSUE 392<https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/392>) ... none of our material covers this topic although we have non-geo use cases
  *   (Andrea<https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/User:Aperego>) Review progress on BP8<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#describe-geometry> (geometry serialisation)
  *   (@clemens and @lars) Discussion: refinement of recommendations for use of sitemaps in BP4<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#indexable-by-search-engines> (see [https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0242.html email) item (2) and responses
  *   Decision: shall we recommend samePlaceAs property? (see discussion thread<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0532.html>)
  *   Decision: shall we remove BP2 Provide context required to interpret data values<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#provide-context>? (see discussion thread<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0531.html>)

... and if we have time:

  *   Discussion: how to represent bounding boxes (see discussion thread<https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0418.html>)
  *   (@clemens) Review progress on BP11: Expose spatial data through 'convenience APIs'<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#convenience-apis>
  *   Review proposals for CRS materials - §8 CRS Intro<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#CRS-background>, BP3<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#ref-crs> and BP17<http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bp-crs>


Regrets already received from Bill.

Speak to you all tomorrow. Cheerio!


[1]: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon20170301
Received on Wednesday, 1 March 2017 10:13:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:17:04 UTC