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

RE: SDWIG activities

From: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2019 08:16:00 +0000
To: Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org>, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
CC: "Tandy, Jeremy" <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>, "Little, Chris" <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>, "public-sdwig@w3.org" <public-sdwig@w3.org>, Simon Cox <simon.cox@csiro.au>
Message-ID: <AM0PR05MB5364A18E34B8887D5E857E8CFC850@AM0PR05MB5364.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Agreed

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Scott Simmons <ssimmons@opengeospatial.org> 
Verzonden: donderdag 10 januari 2019 17:38
Aan: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
CC: 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>
Onderwerp: Re: SDWIG activities

I strongly support no divergence. If we do not want to address the comment now, the OGC vote can proceed with the document as-is (which is the intent unless we collectively want to also proceed with a revision/erratum in W3C).

Scott

> On Jan 10, 2019, at 9:34 AM, Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> 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 Friday, 11 January 2019 08:16:26 UTC

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