- From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 18:20:53 +0100
- To: <public-sdwig@w3.org>
Hi,
The minutes of today's F2F are available at:
https://www.w3.org/2018/02/19-sdw-minutes.html
... and copied as raw text below.
Summary of Resolutions taken during the meeting:
1. The SDW IG will regularly review the OGC trends and W3C funnel for common threads during F2F meetings with a view to tracking progress and identifying new topics of interest for the W3C funnel
2. The SDW IG will have a monthly review of the SDW tagged item in the W3C funnel (during plenary calls)
3. Pending agreement from W3C strategy team, the SDW IG will use the W3C strategy funnel to monitor relevant concepts and ideas tagged with an "geospatial" tag, to be managed by the w3c staff contact (actual tag name might need to be adjusted)
4. The SDW IG will develop and maintain a Spatial Data on the Web roadmap with initial draft ready for next F2F. Linda to act as main editor with help from François
5. The SDW IG will inform the OGC Architecture Board when it moves an item forward in the funnel
Summary of Action Items:
1. François to check with W3C strategy team whether the SDW IG can reuse the Strategy funnel
2. brinkwoman to draft 2 slides for OGC Orleans TC opening plenary
Thanks,
Francois.
--
Spatial Data on the Web IG F2F - Day 1/2
19 February 2018
[2]Agenda [3]IRC log
[2] https://www.w3.org/2017/sdwig/meetings/f2f-1.html
[3] https://www.w3.org/2018/02/19-sdw-irc
Attendees
Present
Bill Roberts, Chris Little, Clemens Portele, Francois
Daoust, Jeremy Tandy, Linda van den Brink, Michael
Gordon, Scott Simmons, Rob Smith
Regrets
Chair
Jeremy, Linda
Scribe
MichaelGordon, tidoust
Contents
* [4]Meeting Minutes
1. [5]Informal discussions
2. [6]Objectives
3. [7]Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
4. [8]Purpose and operation of SDW IG
* [9]Summary of Action Items
* [10]Summary of Resolutions
Meeting Minutes
Informal discussions
Several informal and non minuted discussions took place in the
morning. Some topics mentioned: Best practices, tiling issues
of all kinds, map representations, progressive "rendering" (à
la JPEG, not only for rendering), issues with spatial and
temporal aspects for statistical data, etc.
Goal is to stick to Web-specific problems, not to solve all the
world's problems
Objectives
Michael: I want to get to a state where we have defined
activities to encourage adoption of the best practices
Rob: I'm very focused here. I want to understand the process in
W3C to take a concept from early stages to a standard. Been
involved with CCSTS in a previous life. Worked on CFTP, sort of
FTP in space, non chatty version of FTP.
… Took 6 years of my life. Some of it was ditched away for lack
of support. Back to W3C, I wonder how to prgress my idea I'm
thinking about, get some feedback on whether that's a brilliant
idea or just something that is of no interest to others.
… Focus on implementations to make sure that features in the
spec are useful.
[similar to OGC testbed approach and W3C's standardization
process]
Linda: I like the fact that we have an impact on OGC and
improve their standards. Want to continue in that direction.
Another thing I'd like to figure out is the impact we could
have on W3C.
… I know what I want from OGC. Not sure what I want from W3C
yet.
… Still interested in Best Practices, adoption.
Jeremy: Want to make sure that we're clear on the purpose of
the group. What we want to achieve, how we're going to do that.
Do we have the right people engaged. Are we doing the right
stuff.
Francois: Same as Jeremy. Nothing to add
Bill: I want the Stats on the Web BP to move forward.
Understand the scope of the group. What we will do or not.
Clemens: Largely interested in the Best Practices. How we can
promote adoption. How the IG works, what directions we're
taking.
Chris: Getting answers to statistical use cases that I
proposed.
… Standard vocabularies to express these things.
Clemens: Also wondering how this is web-related.
Chris: I would like to have practical statisticians involved in
the process.
… Follows how the RDF Data Cube originated from SDMX,
statisticians.
… Couldn't agree on how to do aggregates, etc.
Jeremy: Scott will join the 3-5pm slot to talk about process.
We can go on beyond 5 if needed.
… Everybody's happy with the agenda?
Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
MichaelGordon: Within this subgroup, we started to look at what
activities we could be doing to maintain these best practices
and activities we could be doing to encourage the adoption of
these best practices.
… We want to get feedback on the best practices
… Working on where the most important gaps are.
… That seems like a reasonable plan to take things to the next
level.
… On the last call, we discussed encouraging adoption. We
started to come up with a rough plan of taking a domain focused
approach.
… [looking at the audience section in the Best Practices
document]
[11]Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
[11] https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-bp/
[12]Audience section in Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
[12] https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-bp/#audience
Jeremy: 14 best practices which cover specific stuff on spatial
data [going through main best practices]
… Ends with metadata, because that's scary. Now using data
description not to scare people away.
… Clemens, can you explain Web-related?
ClemensPortele: Not sure how to define it. The whole way in
which the Web is used is evolving. Looking at that is what we
should be doing.
… We all work with spatial and temporal data. Been doing that
for a long time.
… Best practices was looking at how the Web was used and trying
to improve it.
… Need to look at evolving things.
… Not only about looking at use cases.
… For instance, WPS does not have any notion of "spatial".
There is often a will to do too generic things. We need to keep
some stronger focus.
… Need to look at what other groups are doing at W3C, e.g. Web
components, etc.
Jeremy: We've all put data on the Web for some time, but "you
don't want to use the Web as a gigantic USB drive" (copyright
Phil Archer)
… One of the ways is to make sure we publish linked data
… Another way is to say that we're willing to process data in a
Web browser.
… Linked data approach is not necessarily RDF. RESTful web
services.
ChrisLittle: Having looked at cross-domain usage of data, I see
that control vocabularies and exposure of that is useful for
cross-domain usage.
billroberts: No need to have specific domain knowledge in
software to process data
Jeremy: But, first, you need to agree on a set of use cases
that are common
ChrisLittle: Not necessarily about specifying a new vocabulary,
probably more about identifying an existing vocabulary, and
possibly reducing it for usage on the Web.
MichaelGordon: From the audience section, web-related is also
around the need to understand the possible usage of your data
once published on the Web.
Linda: Is there a definition of the Web somewhere at W3C?
Francois: Architecture of the World Wide Web, volume 1. That's
basically it.
Clemens: In practice, we also see other developments than on
the Web. How do we come up with decisions on directions so that
developers can continue to use spatial data in an easy way?
MichaelGordon: What is messaging around Spatial Data on the Web
best practices and cutting edge ideas that are being explored
here and there (e.g. MapML)
Jeremy: Previously, we focused more on the architecture of the
WWW. But now, there are a bunch of APIs that obscure the URLs.
Developers need to process data at a more pragmatic level. So
we need to understand that and adjust the best practices
accordingly.
ClemensPortele: That was my point.
MichaelGordon: In the best practices document, we're looking at
people familiar with the web and people familiar with
publishing spatial data (and perhaps less so with the web)
… Plan is to look at different kinds of domains.
… Spatial Data publishers, or Web developers. Need to craft a
different messaging for different audiences.
[13]Work items and activities for SDW BP
[13] https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/bp/work-items-and-activities.md
MichaelGordon: Thought we could exchange ideas on post-it
notes. Spend a few minutes on identifying different domains.
And then dig deeper into who can be behind them.
… Example: let's take land registration / cadastral. Variety of
publishers. Land registry in the UK. Various groups of users.
People trying to build businesses around taking land
registration data and doing risk analysis. Financial
institutions.
… Some of them may have different levels of webiness.
… Some may need to know about the Best Practices to help them
approach the data.
… Example of an application that mashes registration data and
data from local authorities and give information to farmers
about how to optimize their farmland.
… Easier to focus on the publisher side than on the users.
billroberts: Tricky to divide this up. Starting point is people
publishing data, I think you're right about that. Not
exclusively government, but lots of government data.
… Chicken and egg element. Usually, the response is along the
lines of "this is going to cost money, people don't ask for it"
MichaelGordon: Approach is, when you're considering publishing
data on the Web, here are best practices that we recommend in
doing so.
… Not mandatory.
… Being aware of best practices.
… More appealing than mandating.
RobSmith: Does it not boil down to business cases? Some
entrepreneur would come up with an idea to streamline
something, making money down the line. It's a way of us helping
you to deal with your area of expertise.
… Publishers are surely looking at who their audience are,
otherwise what's the point of publishing.
Jeremy: To summarize, we've identified a gap that publishers
don't do anything unless there's a large demand for it. The
technologists themselves are not going to make money directly
from it. It's chicken and egg. Need to have data flowing from
the publishers to the Web before developers can leverage it.
… We need to proxy the users in some way, for people who work
in the community. I can achieve this business goal if I can
access the data in that way.
… We have a limited number of resources. I wonder if there are
particular success stories that we could identify, or places
where we have inside knowledge
… so that we could promote success after following best
practices.
… Thinking about specific users, business value that they get
billroberts: Trying to find examples of where there are people
achieving good things with data on the Web. Identify which
aspects of the best practices helped people.
RobSmith: You could also take the opposite approach, looking at
something that failed, and identify practices that they did not
follow.
billroberts: Trickier to point out negatively at someone
though.
MichaelGordon: The spatial data available from authorities is
often not accessible (embedded in PDFs, ...)
Linda: Would be good to go to publishers and say "look, these
users need that and cannot"
MichaelGordon: Is there any potential for utilizing the use
cases that were already brought down, for helping finding some
specific examples.
… If we could identify examples of following / not following
best practices
[Some discussion on the use cases & requirements document, and
the possibility to reach out to people who submitted the use
cases in the first place to collect practical implementation
experience]
ClemensPortele: Not enough resources in this group. Need to
focus on things we implemented. One thing is promoting, the
other is collecting examples of where best practices were
implemented.
MichaelGordon: With examples, we can promote something.
ClemensPortele: Everybody will promote the best practices in
the environment he's active in, anyhow. I don't think that we
can have a big promotion campaign. We don't have a budget for
that.
… Good to have a collection of examples. Needs to be a low
effort activity.
Linda: We can start with examples that are in the document
itself. Just need to extract them.
ClemensPortele: We just need to have real examples.
RobSmith: Picking the brains of people who tried to implement
the best practices might help gather examples and possible
issues with best practices.
Jeremy: Another direction is to check with the ODI. Think about
other places where we know folks are implementing spatial data.
One is INSPIRE. Is there opportunity to engage with JRC to try
to understand what directions they are going?
… Do a case study of what they've done.
… The other one is OGC testbed. We don't have resources, but
OGC testbed is a sponsored thing. Is there an opportunity for
us to look at particular activities in testbed 14?
MichaelGordon: They are references to the best practices in
different OGC efforts.
ClemensPortele: I'll give an update
Jeremy: By hooking ourselves in the OGC innovation program, we
don't need to set up a full process.
ChrisLittle: Engineering reports show implementation issues and
gaps in standards
RobSmith: Geovation (OS innovation program) could phrase a
competition question such as: how can best practices improve a
certain service?
MichaelGordon: Will need to think about it, we tend to focus on
domain-specific issues.
… That said, there could be subchallenges more focused on that.
… Partners are usually publishers of some kind.
RobSmith: So you could promote the best practices to the
publishers too
ClemensPortele: OK, let me a short update on OGC
… What I did very early before we finished on the Best
Practices work is to start discussing alignment with WFS. We
skipped WFS 2.0 and focused on WFS/FES 3.0, focused on
following the best practices.
… Open developer progress (which is not the default in OGC).
… Some things are straight implementations of the best
practices, some more indirectly.
… For instance, we don't want to be tied to specific schemas.
… Similar to best practices where we did not mandate some of
them, merely listed some.
<ClemensPortele> [14]http://ogc.standardstracker.org/
show_request.cgi?id=488
[14] http://ogc.standardstracker.org/show_request.cgi?id=488
<ClemensPortele> [15]https://github.com/opengeospatial/WFS_FES
[15] https://github.com/opengeospatial/WFS_FES
ClemensPortele: See the change request I just pasted
… We separated the core spec from something that is more of a
guide.
… We hope to have a version ready by the end of this month, and
another one at the end of next month.
… We also get a lot of activities on some of the issues. Very
few OGC members, lots of external people. Good that we're
reaching a lot of developers that weren't following the OGC
process.
… The version that we'll have at the end of March will be the
basis for an ISO standard.
… WFS hackathon in two weeks in Colorado. We'll work with
people there during two days. The idea is to get some
developers before we get too far in this. Is it easy enough? Is
the use of Open API good?
… I would like to have people develop a client to show that it
is relatively rapid to develop something, much faster than with
previous WFS spec.
… March 6-7 in Fort Collins, Colorado.
… Another activity is the testbed.
<ClemensPortele> [16]https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/
77327#NGWFS3.0
[16] https://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/77327#NGWFS3.0
ClemensPortele: Next generation OGC Web services. Security is
involved. It explicitly references best practices that should
get tested and implemented there.
<ClemensPortele> [17]http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/
initiatives/wfs3hackathon
[17] http://www.opengeospatial.org/projects/initiatives/wfs3hackathon
ClemensPortele: That's one activity and there are several
others that are actually using the WFS.
… Another activity is complex feature handling, which is going
to the next level. Extension to the core. 3D, solids, complex
queries. That's more investigation, no implementation.
… The third thing is compliance testing for WFS 3.0. Also
useful for the whole activity.
… Implementation-wise, currently we have two. CubeWerx, and
interactive instruments.
… Government agency is hosting these things.
… [demoing Flurstück]
… Developed for a hackathon, because last time, people
complained that SDIs were too hard to use.
… Much easier to browse and use the data
… Even people who are in the geo business see it's easier to
use, if they're ready to restrict features.
… So lots of activities there, and implementations are ongoing.
ClemensPortele: Regarding INSPIRE, we wrote a document for JRC,
analysis of all the best practices (Data on the Web Best
Practices and Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices)
… and how they related to INSPIRE
<ClemensPortele> [18]https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/
mig-inspire/wiki/
MIG-T_meeting_44#INSPIRE-amp-spatial-data-on-the-Web
[18] https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/mig-inspire/wiki/MIG-T_meeting_44#INSPIRE-amp-spatial-data-on-the-Web
ClemensPortele: The next meeting for this plans a one-day
discussion on best practices
<ClemensPortele> [19]https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
attachments/download/2178/
DOC-7_ELISE_D2.1.1_Spatial_Data_on_the_Web_tools_and_guidance_f
or_data_providers_v1.0.pdf
[19] https://ies-svn.jrc.ec.europa.eu/attachments/download/2178/DOC-7_ELISE_D2.1.1_Spatial_Data_on_the_Web_tools_and_guidance_for_data_providers_v1.0.pdf
[Clemens reads through document parts that best practices
impacted]
ClemensPortele: People seem more interested at looking at the
best practices than at looking at RDF vocabularies. That's my
impression at least.
… There will be two webinars next week on spatial data and
INSPIRE. Tuesday and Thursday. The one on Tuesday is about the
document I just mentioned.
… Preparation for the April meeting, open to the public.
… The second one is focused on user feedback.
… How do we move forward with the metadata topic in INSPIRE.
<ClemensPortele> [20]http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/events/
2nd-webinar-spatial-data-web-and-inspire
[20] http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/events/2nd-webinar-spatial-data-web-and-inspire
MichaelGordon: Capturing practical examples of usage of best
practices to help with promoting them.
… I'll extract examples from the best practices document itself
… I'll have a talk internally with our Geovation people.
billroberts: I have good connections with ODI. They do these
Friday lunch talks every couple of weeks. One of use could
offer to go and give a talk about the best practices.
… I can raise that with them.
MichaelGordon: [going through list of actions to get examples]
Jeremy: When you're talking to start-ups, you might tie that to
what other web technologies they're using. Progressive Web
applications, Web Components, etc.
RobSmith: Possibly will give us some indication of what they
see coming next.
Jeremy: OK, some concrete activity going on there.
… Based on the participation in the group, we have a strong
European perspective. Through testbed 14, USGS.
… That's two different regions. We don't have anything in Asia.
We don't have something specific in Australia.
billroberts: Lots of interesting things going in New Zealand.
Quite some interest in OGC members in New Zealand.
ClemensPortele: We may need to talk to Jo about it.
MichaelGordon: Will do.
Francois: Museum on the Web CG might be a place where we could
be promote best practices. Originates from Chinese community.
… Also got contacted by the Samvera project, more US-based,
university libraries.
[short coffee break]
Purpose and operation of SDW IG
JTandy: understand the function of the group, bridge between
W3C and OGC, incubation of ideas and progression to standards
agencies
JTandy: first thing on agenda, understanding purpose of group
<tidoust> [21]SDW IG Charter
[21] https://www.w3.org/2017/sdwig/charter.html
JTandy: set up as interest group, does not make standards
… which means we need to know where to direct things to become
standards
… functions as bridge between w3c and ogc for issues around
spatial data
… from perspective w3c and ogc areas what are the key areas you
think we need to look at
Tidoust: W3C - understand what we need to do next for you, what
standards, best practices etc need to be looked at
… we see spatial data as important topic because it touches on
some many domains, and another dimension to convergence on web.
For example AR / VR
… what's next from a standardisation perspective
ScottSimmons: From an OGC perspective, we have some fairly
fundamental changes in how we're approaching developing
standards because of this group
… critically important that BP contribute to OGC standards
… as an interest group, we can coordinate joint work items
… in past recommendations didn't progress through OGC. This
structure will alleviate that problem and help align projects
JTandy: to summarise - w3c which things need to be spun up next
and where
tidoust: which standards make sense to be developed by w3c or
ogc
JTandy: role of IG is to flush things out and act as a
gatekeeper to ensure things that are ready go to the right
place and to say that things that aren't ready need to develop
more and how
RobSmith: that's my interest, that's how / why I approached
JTandy: summarising - from ogc perspective, make sure that ogc
standards fit within the web. There's an activity to say that a
problem raised by OGC is wider. Also a focus on spatial for W3C
and contibute that
… contrasting with a working group, IG allows us to direct work
in various ways. From my perspective this group is important as
provides oppurtunity to support OGC and W3C members who want to
publish spatial data on the web
Brinkwoman: Question - suppose we do this, assess whether
topics are ready to go to a standards track - OGC, W3C or both
jointly - will OGC or W3C listen to us?
tidoust: this has been set up to allow this, and part of the
triage process is to understand whether there is enough support
for a direction, charters then would have to be drafted and
ratified by W3C or OGC which would need to be passed by
relevant governance
… lots of details which will need to be assessed by a case by
case basis but we are positive about this
ScottSimmons: OGC membership has for 20 years had ISO as
relationship but latest revision to Policies and Procedures
opens that up to other organisations including W3C, because we
understand that other communities are important and valuable
tidoust: W3C - currently 5% of membership (20/30 members) would
be required to vote yes to approve a new group etc
… usually people won't vote if it's not their domain. Only
objections if they are interested and don't like it. But 20
organisations is not that easy still.
Jtandy: How much time do we take in looking at potential
standards activity? Given we have two group represented today -
stats and BPs plus another possible.
BillRoberts: Currently stats not likely to need a working
group, non-normative note likely but possible that work like
datacube work might need to progress to standards work
ChrisLittle: another possible outocme is to provide some
possible concrete examples that could be attached to best
practices
tidoust: Not seeing either Stats or Spatial BPs needing
standards tracks - more an activity of triaging outside ideas
to see if there's enough weight behind them, if they're
developed enough, direct them as needed. So more likely that
standards activity will come from outside (other than possibly
from identified BP gaps area)
ClemensPortele: From a spatial BP perspective, will need to
have a mechanism to update the note, but an interest group can
do that - a note is good enough, no burning need to push up to
normative recommendation. Therefore spatial BP updates are a
low maintenance - mainly update to including more examples and
look at gaps as appropriate
… personally I see this group in preparing something and full
IG to approve changes
JTandy: so other than outside activity triages to rec tracks or
advise them, you (Clemens, Bill) see purpose of group as
updating / publishing BP note / discussion paper as need
BillRoberts: I see that we could make it clear to outside world
that part of our role is the triaging role - however we have
success already - Rob here and two others tomorrow so already
showing that it could be a valuable one
jidoust: Can give examples of how we could triage and tell the
world how we're doing it
JTandy: we can move to proposal for triage process now, if that
suits?
<tidoust> [22]Strategy funnel description
https://github.com/w3c/strategy#strategy
+1s from everyone
tidoust: strategy team at w3c are trying to follow funnel
approach - assess where they are on way to standardisation
tidoust: first stage is exploration - an idea. 2) investigation
- who is interested, has it been shared, do we need to incubate
it somewhere 3) incubate - spec and use cases to identify gaps
and refine
… do we have a technical solution that could work
… 4) evaluation does this have everything it needs 5) charter -
draft charter and which body it should go to
… ideas we will evaluate will be at different levels of
maturity and we don't need to push it to charter right away
… evaluation will look at things like (from w3c side) - do we
have the right participants, do we have an ecosystem around it,
will it add value to the web etc
<tidoust> [23]Strategy funnel
[23] https://github.com/w3c/strategy/projects/2
tidoust: that's the process I had in mind for IG - currently
w3c use the project view in github, internally it works but
externally it might not make sense
… tried many ways for groups to advertise what they're working
on or their vision (vision docs), use cases and requirements
(good for concrete work but takes a lot of time, updates etc)
<tidoust> [24]Mobile roadmaps
[24] https://w3c.github.io/web-roadmaps/mobile/
tidoust: so trying to balance it we're trying roadmaps
… visual doc, not a spec, trying to list different technologies
and where there are standards, working groups, inncubated
somewhere or technical gaps
… first one shows set of roadmaps for areas, then each area
shows these different techs
… maintenance is quite easy as you can work on each area and
show groups of technologies and timeline
… tidoust happy to help
… good document to advertise the vision that the IG is
considering to the outside world
<tidoust> [25]WG Charter template
[25] https://w3c.github.io/charter-drafts/charter-template.html
tidoust: final document that IG might have to deal with from
w3c perspective is charters for new working groups if one topic
is mature enough to go to standardisation
… so from w3c side these are tools IG has, can be as simple of
github issues and tracking as project, roadmap or indeed
drafting charter at end (but unlikely to be main work)
jtandy: so essentially roadmap and funnel / project view,
provide a visible mechanism to show people what we are working
on
… question - talked about work from bp notes etc - how does
that work fit into funnel?
tidoust: wouldn't really fit into funnel - ideas only on way to
standards track - bps have already gone through this so don't
really fit in the funnel, Stats BP could appear in there as
don't exist yet
BillRoberts: whole IG went through funnel
tidoust: funnel is mainly for new ideas, roadmap however is
there for ideas already done and underway so could fit in
existing WG / IG deliverables
jtandy: so we would not expect to see all work on funnel but
would on roadmap
brinkwoman: would it make sense to make our own funnel?
tidoust: it's a way to organise some items - works for some but
not for others
brinkwoman: could see it helping us, but perhaps things we're
discussing should go to w3c strategy funnel?
tidoust: existing question for strategy funnel - do we take
ideas from all groups or select them? Don't know but could as
IG could decide to utilise strategy funnel though might be
messy as ideas mixed with other groups
brinkwoman: could just tag them. If we just create our own then
it would be less visible than strategy funnel
tidoust: one of problems is maintaining that strategy funnel so
it would actually help
… strategy team maintain funnel so could theorectically drop
items from it
brinkwoman: we might need to decide it's ogc
tidoust: at which point it could be dropped off
<ScottSimmons> [26]https://github.com/opengeospatial/
OGC-Technology-Trends
[26] https://github.com/opengeospatial/OGC-Technology-Trends
ScottSimmons: if you show me your funnel, i'll show you
mine....maintained by George Percivall. Might be a good action
for group to take to review both funnel and tech trends from
w3c and ogc and identify common areas of interest
tidoust: one of the hardest things is maintaining the funnel
RobSmith: what happens to things that drop out of the funnel?
tidoust: these are issues that are closed in github so can be
tracked
jtandy: also a parking lot area - where ideas go to die?
robsmith: groups could come back with an idea that was looked
at several years ago
tidoust: and that's why all the ideas are tracked even whilst
closed
jtandy: can see where roadmap is useful for showing work that
already exists and work underway. In terms of a funnel, can see
value in IG maintaining it's own funnel - as work might go to
w3c or ogc...also might have less phases
tidoust: can investigate internally whether strategy team are
happy with IG using strategy funnel and filter it on issues
robsmith: allows ideas to exist in multiple streams and groups
tidoust: likes idea of reusing strategy funnel as other groups
would then see SDW IG ideas
robsmith: also saves duplication of effort
tidoust: should I look into this or should it be seperate?
jtandy: can see it both ways, now have seen tags and bring out
only those, that is useful and benefit of not having ideas in
multiple places. It might be a bit complicated but it's just a
ticket being moved. Scott - if we put things on the w3c
strategy funnel and we move things to the ogc space, we could
put them in the strategy work concluded and put an ogc tag on
that?
... liked idea to have regular action to look at w3c funnel and
ogc tech trends, what's your (scott) thoughts on using w3c
infrastructure for this?
ScottSimmons: its the better tool for this
tidoust: there may be practical issues that stop this -
assignment issues - but could just assign them to tidoust to
track
jtandy: as staff contact that does make sense
… looking at one at random, the level of info is relatively low
and easy to work with
tidoust: main difficulty is maintentance, and occasionally
topics can be sensitive
jtandy: three proposals so vote
<tidoust> PROPOSED: The SDW IG will regularly the OGC trends
and W3C funnel for common threads
ChrisLittle: how frequent?
ClemensPortele: Every face to face? a bit more time to discuss
Billrobe_: and what do we do with it then? recommend additions
to funnel? progressing and assessing?
RobSmith: would there be actions then?
jtandy: identify something that's common, there's a piece of
work that's out there?
… looking at work coming through ogc and w3c - w3c side tagging
the ticket then saying why it's of interest to us, if it's ogc
then adding a new ticket?
ScottSimmons: +1 ideally cross reference organisation lists, on
ogc side, george would listen to group, appropriately reference
and ensure dialoge
<tidoust> PROPOSED: The SDW IG will regularly review the OGC
trends and W3C funnel for common threads during F2F meetings
with a view to tracking progress and identifying new topics of
interest for the W3C funnel
jtandy: outcome is that we've flagged that we're tracking the
item
<jtandy> +1
<ClemensPortele> +1
<MichaelGordon> +1
<ChrisLittle> +1
<brinkwoman> +1
<tidoust> +1
<billrobe_> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
<RobSmith> +1
<jtandy> +0
<jtandy> +1
Resolved: The SDW IG will regularly review the OGC trends and
W3C funnel for common threads during F2F meetings with a view
to tracking progress and identifying new topics of interest for
the W3C funnel
<tidoust> PROPOSED: The SDW IG will have a monthly review of
the SDW tagged item in the W3C funnel (during plenary calls)
<jtandy> +1
<tidoust> +1
<brinkwoman> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
<MichaelGordon> +1
<RobSmith> +1
<ClemensPortele> +1
<billrobe_> +1
<ChrisLittle> +1
Resolved: The SDW IG will have a monthly review of the SDW
tagged item in the W3C funnel (during plenary calls)
<tidoust> PROPOSED: Pending agreement from W3C strategy team,
the SDW IG will use the W3C strategy funnel to monitor relevant
concepts and ideas tagged with an "sdw" tag, to be managed by
the w3c staff contact
<brinkwoman> +1
<jtandy> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
<RobSmith> +1
<tidoust> +1
<MichaelGordon> +1
<billrobe_> +1
<ClemensPortele> +1
<ChrisLittle> +1
<tidoust> PROPOSED: Pending agreement from W3C strategy team,
the SDW IG will use the W3C strategy funnel to monitor relevant
concepts and ideas tagged with an "geospatial" tag, to be
managed by the w3c staff contact (actual tag name might need to
be adjusted)
<MichaelGordon> +1
<jtandy> +1
<tidoust> +1
<ClemensPortele> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
<billrobe_> +1
<brinkwoman> +1
Resolved: Pending agreement from W3C strategy team, the SDW IG
will use the W3C strategy funnel to monitor relevant concepts
and ideas tagged with an "geospatial" tag, to be managed by the
w3c staff contact (actual tag name might need to be adjusted)
<ChrisLittle> +1
Action: François to check with W3C strategy team whether the
SDW IG can reuse the Strategy funnel
<trackbot> Created ACTION-381 - Check with w3c strategy team
whether the sdw ig can reuse the strategy funnel [on François
Daoust - due 2018-02-26].
<tidoust> PROPOSED: The SDW IG will develop and maintain a
Spatial Data on the Web roadmap with initial draft ready for
next F2F. Linda to act as main editor with help from François
<jtandy> +1
<billrobe_> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
<brinkwoman> +1
<MichaelGordon> +1
<RobSmith> +1
<ClemensPortele> +1
<tidoust> +1
<ChrisLittle> +1
Resolved: The SDW IG will develop and maintain a Spatial Data
on the Web roadmap with initial draft ready for next F2F. Linda
to act as main editor with help from François
jtandy: How will we decide whether something goes to w3c or
ogc?
tidoust: membership is one criteria, expertise might be another
… and where we think the work should happen data exchange might
be a example
ChrisLittle: what if we think the work should go to another
organisation? OASIS for example
RobSmith: would it not just be that we've tagged the work and
can then direct any questions there?
jtandy: so if it was in the work concluded column and then
tagged "ietf" etc.
… so criterion - 1) membership 2) do we think this is specially
spatial therefore OGC thing, noting what ScottSimmons said
earlier that this group helps focus spatial into the wider web
and OGC curates that work. Scott do you have any thoughts?
ScottSimmons: not sure about curate...
… maybe this group is best suited to recommend possible or best
homes..curate might be strong word
… also think that we should focus on items that would likely go
to w3c, ogc or both
jtandy: think that what you're saying is obvious criterion is
that support coming from ogc or w3c then obvious where it goes.
If not then we'd debate with TC at OGC and on w3c....
tidoust: w3c management first for review
… criteria will be reviewed on case by case basis and
organisations scope might affect this as well, however not sure
of objective criteria to decide that
robsmith: could also be something that neither want
<ScottSimmons> looks like the room hung up the phone
<brinkwoman> sorry we got cut off
<brinkwoman> re-dialing
jtandy: so tidoust internal review goes through w3m internally
first
tidoust: correct and evaluate whether it makes sense and share
it wider with advisory committee
jtandy: triggers thought that on ogc side we said TC but that
is wider group. Would it be OAB or PC or something else?
ScottSimmons: best for joint new work then best to go to whole
TC, updating pipeline and moving stuff through funnel then OAB
jtandy: candidate work item fits in OGC - TC, within W3C then
W3M for review and only charter for membership?
tidoust: normally would draft charter that would go to W3M
tidoust: for joint work would expect that Scott and I would
review it before taking it to relevant groups
jtandy: for W3C then membership at the end, but case by case to
decide where it should go, some internal review and then take
it to relevant groups
<ChrisLittle> +1 to blah blah
tidoust: forgot a step - we do send a notice to AC to say we
are thinking about doing something - working on this draft
charter etc
… before W3M approval
… then go back to W3M and then AC when draft charter is ready
tidoust: not sure the process needs to be resolved - when you
are going to work on a W3C WG draft charter you will send a
notice anyway, likely to be on a case by case basis and the
process question will not really be a major one to solve
jtandy: ok lets not tie ourselves in knots on process
jtandy: moving items through pipeline will be reviewed by OGC
OAB
<tidoust> PROPOSED: The SDW IG will inform the OGC Architecture
Board when it moves an item forward in the funnel
brinkwoman: is informed a better word?
ScottSimmons: yes
<jtandy> +1
<brinkwoman> +1
<MichaelGordon> +1
<RobSmith> +1
<tidoust> +1
<ClemensPortele> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
<ChrisLittle> +1
Resolved: The SDW IG will inform the OGC Architecture Board
when it moves an item forward in the funnel
jtandy: so the only area we haven't discussed is community
engagement? But happy that the areas being worked on are doing
this themselves
brinkwoman: and that this would be a criteria for new work
tidoust: and we can discuss who is missing from this table for
any new work to make this more applicable to the wider world
robsmith: which is why I was keen to get involved here, would
be hard pressed to miss someone once you've got that community
jtandy: think what I think I'm hearing is that this group is
set up with mandate from w3c and ogc to recommend when
something should move forward? If people want to bring that
forward they can get involved and as more stuff gets involved
then this will be a self generating process
robsmith: and if someone complains about not being included
they can be invited in
brinkwoman: so should be arrange some time at next OGC TC to
tell members we are working this way?
jtandy: yes absolutely
brinkwoman: feel like it should be action for someone to
arrange some time at OGC TC
ScottSimmons: 4 weeks from today
jtandy: are we then asking for some time to speak in the TC
plenary to inform people on how we are progressing
jtandy: scott, can we ask for 5 mins in opening plenary?
ScottSimmons: already got this on the list
jtandy: drafting some slides
Action: brinkwoman to draft 2 slides for OGC Orleans TC opening
plenary
<trackbot> Created ACTION-382 - Draft 2 slides for ogc orleans
tc opening plenary [on Linda van den Brink - due 2018-02-26].
jtandy: AOB?
ScottSimmons: nothing from me, dialing in tomorrow
ChrisLittle: thanks to brinkwoman for hosting
<brinkwoman> [27]Stroopwafel
[27] https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroopwafel
<ChrisLittle> bye
Received on Monday, 19 February 2018 17:21:24 UTC