W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdwig@w3.org > January 2019

RE: SDWIG activities

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 17:34:44 +0100
To: "'Tandy, Jeremy'" <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>, "'Little, Chris'" <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>, "'Linda van den Brink'" <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, <public-sdwig@w3.org>, "'Simon Cox'" <simon.cox@csiro.au>
Message-ID: <01a901d4a902$6526d720$2f748560$@w3.org>
Actually, Scott created a GitHub issue with Roger's feedback:
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1114
... which I have now added to the Time Ontology Amendments project.

Looking at it from a W3C perspective, if the update is deemed needed and editorial in essence, the group can publish an erratum. Following that publication, the IG may also request publication of a revised Recommendation that incorporates the erratum. If the update is considered normative, things will be a bit more complex, but nothing's impossible... I favor avoiding divergence between the OGC and W3C versions in any case.

Francois.


> From: Tandy, Jeremy <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2019 3:49 PM
> 
> Hi Chris -
> 
> I don't think there's a W3C/SDW GitHub issue open for this yet?
> 
> Please could you open an issue, referencing the emails from Roger Lott et al
> so that all the information is in one place? Add this issue to the Time
> Ontology Amendments project (https://github.com/w3c/sdw/projects/5).
> 
> Thanks, Jeremy
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Little, Chris <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>
> Sent: 10 January 2019 13:28
> To: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>; 'public-
> sdwig@w3.org' <public-sdwig@w3.org>; Tandy, Jeremy
> <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>; Simon Cox (simon.cox@csiro.au)
> <simon.cox@csiro.au>
> Cc: Francois Daoust (fd@w3.org) <fd@w3.org>; 'Jeremy Tandy'
> <jtandy@wmo.int>; Rushforth, Peter (NRCan/RNCan)
> <peter.rushforth@canada.ca>; sa-takagi@kddi.com
> Subject: RE: SDWIG activities
> 
> Linda, Jeremy, SDWIG Members,
> 
> The W3C OWL-time ontology was issued for public comment as an OGC
> standard, and there have been some suggestions for changes to the OGC
> document. I would like a short discussion on the way forward. E.g. whether
> to accept informative changes or normative, appetite for a corrigendum,
> divergence or not of OGC and W3C documents, etc?
> 
> Chris
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rushforth, Peter (NRCan/RNCan) <peter.rushforth@canada.ca>
> Sent: 09 January 2019 15:14
> To: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>; sa-takagi@kddi.com;
> 'public-sdwig@w3.org' <public-sdwig@w3.org>
> Cc: Francois Daoust (fd@w3.org) <fd@w3.org>; 'Jeremy Tandy'
> <jtandy@wmo.int>
> Subject: RE: SDWIG activities
> 
> Hi Linda and Satoru,
> 
> In the coming months I plan to evaluate if the composite quadtree tiling
> scheme invented by Satoru will integrate well with the MapML approach
> (which is based on 'regular' tiling / coordinate systems). I am optimistic that if
> we approach it in the spirit of intending to make it work, it will work and very
> well. This (composite quadtree tiling in SVG) being a geospatial concept
> developed by a W3C member using W3C technology, I think represents an
> excellent opportunity to prove the value of collaboration between the W3C
> and OGC membership.
> 
> Thanks,
> Peter
> 
> 
> Peter Rushforth
> 
> Technology Advisor
> Canada Centre for Mapping and Earth Observation Natural Resources Canada
> / Government of Canada peter.rushforth@canada.ca / Tel: 613-759-7915
> 
> Conseiller technique
> Centre canadien de cartographie et d’observation de la Terre Ressources
> naturelles Canada / Gouvernement du Canada peter.rushforth@canada.ca /
> Tél: 613-759-7915
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
> > Sent: January 9, 2019 2:33 AM
> > To: sa-takagi@kddi.com; 'public-sdwig@w3.org' <public-sdwig@w3.org>
> > Cc: Francois Daoust (fd@w3.org) <fd@w3.org>; 'Jeremy Tandy'
> > <jtandy@wmo.int>
> > Subject: RE: SDWIG activities
> >
> > Thank you Satoru, I had missed that issue you posted in the
> > web-roadmaps repo. It sounds relevant!
> >
> > @SDWIG members, is anyone in this group willing to check this out and
> > see if it should be added to the SDW roadmap?
> >
> > Linda
> >
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: sa-takagi@kddi.com <sa-takagi@kddi.com>
> > Verzonden: woensdag 9 januari 2019 02:27
> > Aan: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>; 'public-
> > sdwig@w3.org' <public-sdwig@w3.org>
> > CC: Francois Daoust (fd@w3.org) <fd@w3.org>; 'Jeremy Tandy'
> > <jtandy@wmo.int>
> > Onderwerp: RE: SDWIG activities
> >
> > Hi,
> > I posted an issue to OGC-Web-API-Guidelines about term of tiling
> > https://github.com/opengeospatial/OGC-Web-API-Guidelines/issues/32
> >
> > And related posts are
> > https://discourse.wicg.io/t/vector-tiling-on-svgmap/3135
> > https://github.com/w3c/web-roadmaps/issues/322
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Satoru
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 8, 2019 7:52 PM
> > To: 'public-sdwig@w3.org' <public-sdwig@w3.org>
> > Cc: Francois Daoust (fd@w3.org) <fd@w3.org>; 'Jeremy Tandy'
> > <jtandy@wmo.int>
> > Subject: SDWIG activities
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> >
> > I wish every member of this group a very happy 2019! Both
> > standards-wise and in your personal lives, of course.
> >
> >
> >
> > We have not singled this week out as a ‘focus week’, but we might as
> > well use it as such – at least I’m using it as an excuse to look at
> > the group’s activities.
> >
> >
> >
> > First of all I’d like to suggest we have a group telecon some time in January.
> > I’ll coordinate with Jeremy and François to come up with a time slot. Topics:
> >
> > *	To solicit feedback on some work I’ve done on the SDW roadmap in
> > December
> > *	To coordinate work on a formal response on CityGML v3 raising
> > technical concerns to be sent to the tc-discuss OGC list (issue 1069)
> > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1069
> > *	To settle on dates + locations for the f2f meetings in 2019. Basically
> > the choice is between:
> >
> > 	*	Last week of February at OGC meeting in Singapore + 16-20
> > September at W3C TPAC in Fukuoka, Japan
> > 	*	24-28 June at OGC meeting in Leuven, Belgium + 16-20
> > September at W3C TPAC in Fukuoka, Japan
> >
> > *	To coordinate review of the OGC Architecture Board’s API Guidelines
> > https://github.com/opengeospatial/OGC-Web-API-Guidelines
> > *	To coordinate what to do with comments received on eo-qb doc (see
> > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdwig/2018Nov/0094.html)
> > *	To discuss OWL Space idea (should we move this one to the strategy
> > funnel? Move discussion to OGC GeoSemantics DWG?)
> > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1095
> > *	Short updates on SDWIG projects
> > https://github.com/w3c/sdw/projects
> > <https://github.com/w3c/sdw/projects>
> >
> > Maybe not all of these can fit in one telecon, but that also depends
> > on how much we let the discussion drift into details. It’s my
> > intention to avoid that when we can.
> >
> > Please respond if you have other topics you want to discuss!
> >
> >
> >
> > Here’s an overview of what I have observed to be going on in SDWIG lately:
> >
> > *	Rob has continued work on WebVMT; this is progressing.
> > *	Nicholas Car (CSIRO, also active in DXWG) has posted some
> > suggestions for a new GeoSPARQL version.
> > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdwig/2019Jan/0007.html
> > *	Ingo Simonis is asking the SDWIG group if we think someone from
> > OGC staff should attend the Workshop on Web Standardization for Graph
> > Data (the one Dave Raggett is organising this March)
> > *	People are apparently working with EO-QB because some issues
> have
> > popped up. We have no active group members who were involved in this
> > document, however we should discuss what to do with these issues.
> >
> > 	*	https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1110
> > 	*	https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1108
> > 	*	Also a comment + PR about use of the SWEET ontology in this
> > document https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1103
> >
> > *	The DXWG asks our review and feedback on the Profiles ontology:
> > https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdwig/2019Jan/0000.html
> > *	We have new members (both invited experts, via OGC, Natural
> > Resources Canada):
> >
> > 	*	Joost van Ulden
> > 	*	Tom Kradalis - interested in helping on items relevant to
> > weather services implementation, dataset search discovery, and CovJSON.
> >
> > *	Nothing to report on our other work items as far as I know.
> >
> > Linda
Received on Thursday, 10 January 2019 16:34:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:17:52 UTC