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

[Minutes BP] 2017-03-29

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 18:10:45 +0200
To: "'SDW WG'" <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <064d01d2a8a7$05ce80f0$116b82d0$@w3.org>
Hi all,

The minutes of today's Best Practices call are available at:

... and copied as raw text below.


Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
29 March 2017

   [2]Agenda [3]IRC log

      [2] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon20170329
      [3] http://www.w3.org/2017/03/29-sdwbp-irc


          AndreaPerego, ChrisLittle, ClemensPortele, eparsons,
          Francois, joshlieberman, jtandy, Linda

          Byron, Lars, Scott




     * [4]Meeting Minutes
         1. [5]Approving last meeting's minutes (https://
         2. [6]Confirm end-date for Last Sprint
         3. [7]Agree schedule for "(GitHub) Issue Resolution" call
            - we agreed to set a 3-hour block to go through all
            the issues
         4. [8]Planning last sprint
         5. [9]AOB
     * [10]Summary of Resolutions

Meeting Minutes

Approving last meeting's minutes ([11]https://www.w3.org/2017/03/

     [11] https://www.w3.org/2017/03/15-sdwbp-minutes)

   <jtandy> +1


   <AndreaPerego> +1

   <Linda> +1

   <ChrisLittle> +0 not there

   <eparsons> +0 absent

   Resolved: Approving last meeting's minutes

   <eparsons> [12]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

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

   eparsons: Reads the Patent Call

Confirm end-date for Last Sprint

   tidoust: Next public working draft should be published tomorrow

   jtandy: Were you able to add a diff?

   tidoust: No, because we have not done this so far and it is not

   jtandy: Can you give us an update on the process for this

   <joshlieberman_> The timing issues are of more concern for W3C
   Rec and OGC Implementation Spec

   tidoust: Can only speak for W3C, where the requirements for a
   Note are not high as expressed in my email

   tidoust: If we want a horizontal review, this might make sense
   for the Best Practices, but it is optional

   jtandy: (Discusses Scott's email from yesterday about the
   schedule from the OGC side)

   <eparsons> what joshlieberman_ said +1

   joshlieberman_: If the vote needs to finish in June, the vote
   would need to start in mid May plus the 3-week rule

   joshlieberman_: Maybe 2 weeks are fine as expressed by Scott
   due to prior versions of the document being shared with the OGC
   members regularly

   jtandy: So we could target April 26 for the vote for release

   <eparsons> not going on holiday :-(

   jtandy: How do we feel about this?

   joshlieberman_: Let's try to get as much done as we can in the

Agree schedule for "(GitHub) Issue Resolution" call - we agreed to
set a 3-hour block to go through all the issues

   Linda: We wanted to go through an extra call to resolve the
   remaining open 44 (?) issues. Many of the can probably be
   closed without much discussion.

   Linda: When should we do it?

   <eparsons> I can do this time next week

   <eparsons> +1

   <joshlieberman_> Next week bad for me (AAG meeting)

   jtandy: Same time next week?

   <ChrisLittle> +1 to next week

   ClemensPortele: next week is also bad for me

   <eparsons> earlier in ok for me on the 5th

   <AndreaPerego> No way next week for me - at RDA from Wed to

   Linda: earlier would be better, if we need 3 hours

   jtandy: Maybe in 1 hour blocks? Start next week? Do we need 3

   eparsons: We should try to get as much done next week as

   jtandy: Let's go through the issues and close as much as we
   can. If anyone has a concern about closing an issue it may be

   <eparsons> 15:00 BST ?

   ChrisLittle: maybe 90 minutes, longer is hard in a web-meeting

   jtandy: Let's do 2 hours, starting 14:00 GMT

   jtandy: Put the tricky issues at the front

   eparsons: Will go through the public comments next Tuesday

   jtandy: Look also at Payam's list

Planning last sprint


     [13] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Detailed_planning_BP_document#Mid_March_-_end_of_April_2017:

   AndreaPerego: (on the previous topic) I will not be available
   next Wednesday, maybe have a call earlier, e.g. Friday this

   Linda: Friday does not work for me

   Linda: But I can look at the issues earlier and flag issues
   relevant for AndreaPerego, if I know what topics he is
   interested in

   jtandy: The issue resolution process should not interfere with
   the work on the BPs in general

   jtandy: We could have a direct call to discuss BP8 on Friday?

   AndreaPerego: Yes, that would be fine

   jtandy: Anyone else interested?

   <eparsons> Friday is _1 for me


   <jtandy> [14]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/

     [14] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Detailed_planning_BP_document#Mid_March_-_end_of_April_2017:

   <AndreaPerego> Yes.

   jtandy: Based on the F2F this has been rewritten

   jtandy: I will update "how to use" section

   joshlieberman_: Fine with BP1

   ClemensPortele: Fine with BP4 and BP11

   jtandy: Will check with Peter Parslow

   jtandy: And I have several BPs that I will take care of

   jtandy: (Goes through the list of BP changes)

   AndreaPerego: Asks for help from joshlieberman_ to refactor
   into 2 best practices

   joshlieberman_: OK

   jtandy: BP17, I will discuss the WKT coordinate order change
   with AndreaPerego on Friday

   jtandy: Let's wait with the conclusion section until the end of
   the sprint

   Linda: I am working on a paper on the Best Practices and we may
   be able to reuse some of that work

   jtandy: File formats and vocabularies as planned

   jtandy: The section on benefits, the requirements
   cross-reference and the glossary, too

   Linda: The reordering is a bigger task

   <Linda> [15]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/

     [15] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/index.php?title=BP_2017_reordering_proposal&action=edit&redlink=1

   Linda: Input on the proposals is required - and discussion

   Linda: available this week and next, then on holiday, back the
   week starting April 17

   <eparsons> +1

   <AndreaPerego> +1

   <jtandy> +1

   jtandy: We should target that week then

   <ChrisLittle> +1 to that week for restucturing\

   Linda: That works, but I need the input before

   jtandy: Issue resolution has already been discussed

   jtandy: BP8 and BP10 seem to be the toughest ones for this

   jtandy: Please get back, in case you need help

   <AndreaPerego> Agreed.


   jtandy: AOB?

   ChrisLittle: Was the Time Ontology discussed at F2F?

   <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask about slides for RDA

   eparsons: No, neither Chris nor Simon were there

   AndreaPerego: Simon offered to present the SDW work at RDA, but
   he needs slides. Are slides available?

   jtandy: Similar request from Armin, see list of available
   slides in that email exchange (mostly older slides)

   AndreaPerego: These are needed next week

   Linda: Will provided up-to-date 2 slides on the BP

   jtandy: I think we have a pretty clear plan for the sprint

   <Linda> have to go bye

   tidoust: I will set up the Webex for the call next Wednesday
   (April 5)

   <eparsons> Get well soon Linda xx

   <ChrisLittle> bye


   <jtandy> +1 to LvdB getting well soon

   <AndreaPerego> Bye!

   <joshlieberman_> bye

   <eparsons> bye

Summary of Resolutions

    1. [16]Approving last meeting's minutes
Received on Wednesday, 29 March 2017 16:10:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:17:05 UTC