W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdwig@w3.org > January 2018

Re: [Minutes] Spatial Data on the Web IG Call - 2018-01-03

From: Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 22:20:57 +0000
To: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>, "public-sdwig@w3.org" <public-sdwig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DCAD5282-E57A-4AEA-B951-AE5A74BDC549@anu.edu.au>
Hi,

Very late apologies from me for the call. I forgot to put it in my calendar and missed to get up that early in the year. Regarding the SSN primer, we have not made any progress on the primer document yet, but we are very close to submit a journal paper on the SSN ontology which includes some sections that can serve at least as a starting point for the primer document. I anticipate a start on the primer in early Feb.

Cheers,
Armin

On 5/1/18, 8:06 pm, "Francois Daoust" <fd@w3.org> wrote:

    Hi,
    
    The minutes of our first plenary call for 2018 on Wednesday this week are available at:
    https://www.w3.org/2018/01/03-sdw-minutes.html

    
    ... and copied as raw text below. Note the current plan to hold a F2F on 19/20 February hosted by Geonovum. More details to come.
    
    Thanks,
    Francois.
    
    --
    Spatial Data on the Web IG call
    03 January 2018
    
       [2]Agenda [3]IRC log
    
          [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdwig/2017Dec/0014.html

          [3] https://www.w3.org/2018/01/03-sdw-irc

    
    Attendees
    
       Present
              billroberts, Francois_Daoust, George_Percivall, jtandy,
              Linda, Michael_Gordon, Peter_Rushforth, ScottSimmons
    
       Regrets
    
       Chair
              Jeremy, Linda
    
       Scribe
              billroberts
    
    Contents
    
         * [4]Meeting Minutes
             1. [5]Tools and web pages for SDW-IG
             2. [6]Updates from each active workstream
             3. [7]Update from OGC TC meeting in Palmerston North
             4. [8]Face to face meetings schedule
         * [9]Summary of Action Items
    
    Meeting Minutes
    
       Approve minutes of last meeting?
    
       <billroberts> +1
    
       <MichaelGordon> +1
    
       <jtandy> +1
    
       <brinkwoman> +1
    
       <tidoust> +1
    
       Minutes approved
    
    Tools and web pages for SDW-IG
    
       <tidoust> [10]Issue #990 Updates to SDW IG home page
    
         [10] https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/990

    
       Jeremy: took an action at last meeting to update the approach
       to the web page, so we were not always dependent on Francois to
       update it
       … considered using Jekyll and Markdown but concluded that
       because the requirements are so simple (just one page) there
       was not much extra benefit from using Jekyll
       … agendas and minutes get published to a permanent URL using
       existing tools, so the home page can just link to those
    
       Jeremy: For each individual project, we can use pages within
       the repository to share information
    
       <jtandy> [11]http://w3c.github.io/sdw/sdwig-homepage.html

    
         [11] http://w3c.github.io/sdw/sdwig-homepage.html

    
       Jeremy has created a new version of the home page in github,
       more or less identical to the original one that Francois
       created and added links to current versions of the main
       documents
    
       Jeremy: would a web page like this, plus mailing list for
       agendas, plus markdown pages in the repository meet our needs?
    
       <MichaelGordon> +1
    
       <billroberts> +1
    
       <jtandy> +1
    
       <ScottSimmons> +1
    
       <brinkwoman> I only looked for a minute, but +1 I think
    
       Francois is happy with it, and will let us know if any specific
       requirements from W3C arise at a later date (there are no
       specific ones at the moment)
    
       Jeremy: Francois, can you redirect the sdwig home page URL to
       the github pages?
    
       Action: Francois to add a redirect from w3.org to the GitHub
       page
    
       <trackbot> Created ACTION-379 - Add a redirect from w3.org to
       the github page [on François Daoust - due 2018-01-10].
    
    Updates from each active workstream
    
    2.1 REC track errata
    
       Francois: no work has been done but a couple of issues have
       been raised against the time ontology and no response to those
       yet
       … it would be good for Chris and/or Simon to consider those
    
       Jeremy: Chris is not yet back to work after the holidays
       … so let's ping people via the mailing list
    
       Francois will assign those issues to Chris and Simon
    
    2.2 Statistical data on the web
    
       billroberts: Not much to report on Stats on the Web BP. Last
       call became a dial-in to the geosemantic session of NZ meeting.
       … We mostly advertized our work to OGC people
       … Apart from that, goal is to collect use cases and
       requirements.
       … I hope we'll have some new material to discuss for next call
       on January 10th.
       … Content with the progress for now.
       … We have an enthusiastic group.
       … I'll create milestones so that we can track progress.
    
    2.3 SSN Primer
    
       Armin is not on the call today.
    
       no-one else is aware of progress
    
    2.4 Describing moving objects
    
       Jano is due to lead this adn is not on the call
    
       no-one on the call knows about progress
    
    2.5 Spatial data on the web BP
    
       MichaelGordon: we had a good call before Christmas and
       discussed the range of activities the group could do
       … most of the call was around how to encourage adoption of the
       BPs and how to evangelise about them
    
       <MichaelGordon> [12]https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/

       bp/work-items-and-activities.md
    
         [12] https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/bp/work-items-and-activities.md

    
       MichaelGordon: Following that meeting I had an action to write
       up the ideas on a github page (link above)
       … The next stage is to flesh out those headings and to put
       together a 'comms plan'
       … then pick one of the gaps in the best practices, already
       identified, based on feedback and demand
    
       Jeremy: has there been much feedback so far?
    
       MichaelGordon: not much yet, but seeing some adoption and
       references in the next WFS draft and Testbed 14
    
       MichaelGordon: so seeing early adopters in OGC and can reach
       out to them for some focused feedback
       … Some members of the group have already implemented some of
       the BPs and so can give feedback from that
    
       <MichaelGordon> WFS / FES
    
       ScottSimmons: SDWBP document was the motivation for the setting
       up of the OGC WFS/FES working group, developing the WFS3.0
       specficiation and also working with ISO TC211
    
       <brinkwoman> I'm really happy that we have had this impact
    
       Jtandy: that deserves a round of applause!
    
       <brinkwoman> we could talk to some early adopters of OGC at the
       next TC meeting
    
       <brinkwoman> organize a short session
    
       jtandy: yes that's a good idea
    
       jtandy: Michael could you please add a github issue to do as
       Linda suggests
    
       jtandy: I've been talking to Met Office colleagues about API
       patterns
       … and making them more aware of the SDWBP
       … which I hope will lead to some feedback for Michael's stream
       of work
    
       MichaelGordon: agree that examples and feedback will be a
       valuable addition to the BPs themselves
       … The next call is in 2 weeks and at that point we can
       structure these activities and agree who is leading on what
    
       jtandy: Suggest that, as with Bill's work, it would be good to
       define where the group should be in say 2 months from now
       … as we noticed in the previous working group that keeping up
       the tempo of work proved really important for getting
       engagement
    
    2.6 QB4ST
    
       Rob Atkinson is leading that and not on the call. Anyone else
       knows anything?
    
       ...no
    
    2.7 EO-QB
    
       jtandy: none of the editors of that have engaged with this
       group yet, so I'll take an action to talk to Kerry, Dimitri and
       Sam and see if they plan to do more on it
    
    Update from OGC TC meeting in Palmerston North
    
       <ScottSimmons> 1. Revise OGC TC Policies and Procedures to
       include "authoritative" SDOs (other than just ISO) for
       submittal of standards to OGC; W3C is explicitly mentioned as a
       likely example.
    
       <ScottSimmons> 2. OpenAPI: at least two SWGs (WFS and WPS) are
       now using OpenAPI to define their next generation of standards.
       TC agreed not to mandate OpenAPI as the API definition method,
       but to recommend use of OpenAPI. Still issues with version 2
       vs. 3. OGC will need to develop some guidance and likely policy
       around use of API definition methods (at a minimum, align with
       the Modular Spec).
    
       <jtandy> OpenAPI ... Swagger as was
    
       jtandy: OpenAPI is developed by a 'de facto' standards
       organisation, a vendor-led group. Has OGC talked to this group?
    
       ScottSimmons: George Percival is on the call today and we have
       discussed this, including whether OGC should join the OpenAPI
       group
       … OpenAPI may not be as open as some groups
       … OGC has good experience with Swagger
    
       gperciva: They seemed quite open to discussions, but suggested
       OGC just joins as a fee-paying member rather than a
       collaboration of SDOs
       … may be worth discussing that again with them
    
       <ScottSimmons> 3. Agreed to merge Metadata and Catalog DWGs.
       The GeoDCAT subgroup will fall under this new DWG. Scope will
       initially be that of both charters, but a new charter needs to
       be created. Looking for chairs. Expect close cooperation from
       this DWG and perhaps a GeoDCAT Community standard.
    
       jtandy: is there an action for this group to help link W3C and
       OGC activities on DCAT/GeoDCAT?
    
       ScottSimmons: it is probably a bit early for that
    
       jtandy: Andrea Perrego could be a useful person to make that
       happen
       … can we put this on the agenda of the next OGC TC in Orleans ?
    
       <ScottSimmons> 4. Security DWG working more directly with W3C
       Web Security IG (Andreas Mattheus)
    
       <ScottSimmons> 5. New technology trends being evaluated: a.
       autonomous vehicles and autonomous navigation systems (emphasis
       on ground and marine); b. "just in time" analytics - delivering
       what can be delivered in the time allowed
    
       <ScottSimmons> 6. More interest in joint OGC-W3C pilot on
       Augmented Reality: [13]http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/

       pressreleases/2697
    
         [13] http://www.opengeospatial.org/pressroom/pressreleases/2697

    
       <ScottSimmons> 7. Datacubes - is there a need for a new DWG?
       Consider CovJSON work and other webby efforts, not just
       traditional coverages
    
       <ScottSimmons> 8. Restarting Oblique Imagery DWG - emphasis
       will be on web service of imagery; likely will be renamed
       "Perspective Imagery"
    
       <ScottSimmons> 9. Statistical Data on the Web: definitely
       interest from OGC members, some continuing concern about trying
       to create a statistics DWG in the OGC as most members see
       "geostatistics" as being domain-driven. So maybe the larger
       discussions being led in W3C might be just fine.
    
       Peter Rushforth: are there compatibility issues when moving
       from existing services?
    
       ...the MappingML activity has been document focused
    
       ...APIs are not always consistent with the way that browsers
       work. Is there a document based approach already in
       consideration?
    
       ScottSimmons: the OpenAPI efforts are around making the
       services more 'RESTful'. These have built on the existing OGC
       standards
       … so relatively straightforward to adapt existing definitions
       to make them more developer friendly
       … There's nothing to stop us taking a document based approach
       where that seems the best way
    
       <gperciva> Useful to think about "document oriented maps" to
       motivate and charcterize MapML
    
       <gperciva> Use of the SSN Ontology and Jano’s work on Moving
       objects in the ESIP Drone community. Developing ontology for
       science data acquisition by airborne drones. Issues about
       provenance and data collection management. VOCamp session in
       November; Discussion at AGU in December; and ESIP Winter
       meeting next week: "Joint session between the Semantic Web
       cluster and Drone Cluster: Applying semantic tech to sUAS data”
       [14]http://sched.co/D6DQ

    
         [14] http://sched.co/D6DQ

    
       ESIP: Earth Science Information Partnership
    
       Next plenary call: will discuss dates on the mailing list
    
       <MichaelGordon> +1
    
       <ScottSimmons> +1
    
       <brinkwoman> ok
    
    Face to face meetings schedule
    
       Jeremy, Scott, Francois and I have come up with two options:
    
       1)
    
       - One f2f in jan/feb, location tbd (I could host again at
       Geonovum, other offers welcome)
    
       - One at OGC TC 4-8 June at Fort Collins, Colorado
    
       - One at TPAC in Lyon in October.
    
       The advantage of this scenario is that not all f2f meetings are
       in Europe in this option. We add a meeting in Jan/Feb because
       otherwise we have to wait until June for our first f2f, which
       may slow our momentum.
    
       2)
    
       - One at OGC TC in 19-23 March in Orleans
    
       - One at TPAC in Lyon in October
    
       The advantage is that we only have to travel two times for f2f
       meetings, and they're nicely distributed over the year.
       However, both are in Europe.
    
       <jtandy> Option 1 votes?
    
       <billroberts> +1 (because I think it's good to have a first
       meeting soonish if poss)
    
       <brinkwoman> +0
    
       <ScottSimmons> +1
    
       <tidoust> +1
    
       <jtandy> Option 2 votes?
    
       <brinkwoman> +0
    
       <ScottSimmons> +0
    
       <tidoust> +1 (works for me as well)
    
       <billroberts> +0
    
       <MichaelGordon> +1 (works for me as well)
    
       <ScottSimmons> * I just want to buy the beer at the one in Fort
       Collins
    
       <MichaelGordon> No one is going to stop you
    
       <MichaelGordon> :)
    
       jtandy: seems a small preference for Option 1. Anyone not
       happy?
       … no objections, so let's go with that
    
       <brinkwoman> found possible dates:
    
       <brinkwoman> feb 1 and 2
    
       <brinkwoman> feb 6 and 7
    
       <brinkwoman> feb 19 and 20
    
       <MichaelGordon> 19/20 +1
    
       <jtandy> 19/20 +1
    
       <brinkwoman> fine with 3rd option
    
       <tidoust> 19/20 +1
    
       <billroberts> 19/20 +1
    
       <ScottSimmons> I'm likely only remote on the Feb meeting
    
       <ScottSimmons> 19/20 better
    
       <brinkwoman> great!
    
       jtandy: Linda and I will take some actions to plan a meeting in
       Amersfoort on 19/20 Feb
    
       <brinkwoman> yep will take the lead
    
       jtandy: one more item on the agenda, but we're over time
    
       tidoust: Michael Collins from the W3C accessibility group
       commented on work on accessibility in maps and for directions
       … i.e. how to get from point A to point B
       … I'm happy to investigate ideas around accessibility of maps
       with teh accessibility team
    
       <brinkwoman> I think it would be great if you can do that
       Francois
    
       PeterRushforth: Google has done a lot of work on making their
       maps accessible so would be great to have some involvement of
       their map people
    
       jtandy: notes that Ed Parsons is a member of this group. Would
       be interesting also to connect to other map vendors
    
       jtandy: Francois can make an initial outline of what would be
       relevant and then we can see how that fits in the schedule
       … let's raise it in the public list
       … and we will add it (tentatively) to the work plan
    
       AOB?
    
       None
    
       <MichaelGordon> Issue I was to raise is raised here:
       [15]https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/991

    
         [15] https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/991

    
       <brinkwoman> Thank you all, next time I'll try to have sound
       again!
    
    Summary of Action Items
    
        1. [16]Francois to add a redirect from w3.org to the GitHub
           page
    
    
    
    

Received on Friday, 5 January 2018 22:21:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 5 January 2018 22:21:37 UTC