W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdwig@w3.org > April 2020

Re: Review: New charter

From: Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 19:50:49 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFWXLWXK=2JtQ+it+qEPoNCQP6mE5tL=Vthrn+6p28ygNtUpeQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton)" <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
Cc: "ted@w3.org" <ted@w3.org>, "Little, Chris" <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>, Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, "public-sdwig@w3.org" <public-sdwig@w3.org>, "Tandy, Jeremy" <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
In addition, is/will CoverageJSON continue to be on the table as per [1]?

...Tom

[1] https://www.w3.org/2017/sdwig/

On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 7:43 PM Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton)
<Simon.Cox@csiro.au> wrote:
>
> Is a GeoSPARQL refresh on the agenda?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
> Sent: Thursday, 2 April, 2020 01:32
> To: Little, Chris <chris.little@metoffice.gov.uk>; Linda van den Brink <l..vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>; public-sdwig@w3.org
> Cc: Tandy, Jeremy <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
> Subject: Re: Review: New charter
>
> On Wed, 2020-04-01 at 10:12 +0000, Little, Chris wrote:
> > Linda, Ted,
> >
> > Would a global change,  'Interest' -> 'Working', plus a few grammar
> > tweaks, do it?
>
> Mostly, I think some of the wording is too exploratory and Interest Group like whereas Working Groups are more focused on set of deliverables.
>
> We have a six month extension for the Interest Group. We may be working with OGC and others on a routing ontology and would like to see if that gets going and should be included in Working Group charter as a concrete spec for W3C Recommendations Track. Also I hope in May AC meeting we will have a clear answer on Ever-teal (evergreen) specifications at W3C that demonstrate maturity but are expected to receive ongoing modifications as that makes sense for ontology work.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> > From: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
> > Sent: 01 April 2020 09:13
> > To: ted@w3.org; public-sdwig@w3.org
> > Cc: Tandy, Jeremy <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
> > Subject: RE: Review: New charter
> >
> > I would prefer that!
> >
> > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > Van: Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
> > Verzonden: dinsdag 31 maart 2020 14:36
> > Aan: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>;
> > public-sdwig@w3.org
> > CC: Jeremy Tandy (jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk) <
> > jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
> > Onderwerp: Re: Review: New charter
> >
> > It can pursue other interests and recharter if those mature for formal
> > standards development.
> >
> > On Tue, 2020-03-31 at 06:39 +0000, Linda van den Brink wrote:
> > > I think it does make sense. The SSN and OWL-Time errata and
> > > extensions are better at home in a WG, at least.
> > >
> > > I'm hesitant to have an IG as well, running two groups might mean
> > > more overhead... Couldn't the WG be scoped to manage the other
> > > interests as well, besides the concrete deliverables?
> > >
> > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > > Van: Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
> > > Verzonden: maandag 30 maart 2020 17:15
> > > Aan: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>;
> > > public-sdwig@w3.org
> > > CC: Jeremy Tandy (jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk) <
> > > jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
> > > Onderwerp: Re: Review: New charter
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > W3C Management is encouraging us to draft a charter for a Working
> > > Group given the amount of work on REC track. A question is whether
> > > to also have an Interest Group given the number of well, interests
> > > besides what we can presently list as deliverables.
> > >
> > > What are others' thoughts?
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2020-03-12 at 12:59 +0000, Linda van den Brink wrote:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I updated the charter today (finally…) and resolved all the
> > > > comments.
> > > >
> > > > I believe the charter as it is now formulated at
> > > > https://w3c.github.io/sdw/roadmap/charter-2020.html can go ahead
> > > > through the W3C approval process. @ted@w3.org, what’s the next
> > > > step for that?
> > > >
> > > > I confirmed with Scott Simmons that at the OGC side, nothing needs
> > > > to be done in this case.
> > > >
> > > > Linda
> > > >
> > > > Van: Rob Smith <rob.smith@awayteam.co.uk>
> > > > Verzonden: donderdag 27 februari 2020 14:01
> > > > Aan: Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>
> > > > CC: public-sdwig@w3.org; ted@w3.org; Jeremy Tandy (
> > > > jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk) <jeremy.tandy@metoffice.gov.uk>
> > > > Onderwerp: Re: Review: New charter
> > > >
> > > > Linda,
> > > >
> > > > Apologies the delay in replying.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I think it would be beneficial to include a WebVMT Note
> > > > deliverable in the new charter. There are a number of items
> > > > currently incubating for inclusion in the Editor’s Draft, and
> > > > publishing a Note subsequently would be a good aim.
> > > >
> > > > The groups for WebVMT coordination at W3C are the Media Timed
> > > > Events Task Force [1], which is part of the Media & Entertainment
> > > > IG, and WICG DataCue [2] for video metadata. I’m unsure of MTE TF
> > > > charter status, but will confirm with Chris Needham and let you
> > > > know. I can also confirm that the relevant OGC groups are ARML for
> > > > camera, Moving Features for interpolation and Sensor Things for
> > > > data sync, which are already included in the current charter. The
> > > > other possible connection is OGC Geopose [3], again for camera.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your help, and please let me know if you need any
> > > > further details.
> > > >
> > > > Rob Smith
> > > >
> > > > Away Team
> > > > www.awayteam.co.uk
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Media_Timed_Events_TF
> > > > [2] https://github.com/WICG/datacue/ [3]
> > > > https://www.ogc.org/projects/groups/geoposeswg
> > > >
> > > > > On 18 Feb 2020, at 10:54, Linda van den Brink <
> > > > > l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear SDWIG members,
> > > > >
> > > > > Ted and I have been working on the charter renewal for our
> > > > > group.
> > > > > We would like the charter’s start date to be 1 April 2020 (which
> > > > > is a bit ambitious, but let’s go for it). Please send in your
> > > > > comments within two weeks as a reply to this email. We will also
> > > > > consider pull requests.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a specific question for @Rob Smith;
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you want the charter to mention a Note about WebVMT as a
> > > > > specific work item, and/or to add the web media text tracks
> > > > > community group to the list of W3C groups to coordinate with?
> > > > >
> > > > > @all: Please let us know if any other work item should be
> > > > > mentioned explicitly.
> > > > >
> > > > > The draft charter is at:
> > > > > https://w3c.github.io/sdw/roadmap/charter-2020.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Linda
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Away Team
> > > > www.awayteam.co.uk
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
> > > W3C Automotive Lead
> > > https://www.w3.org/auto
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
> > W3C Automotive Lead
> > https://www.w3.org/auto
> >
> --
> Ted Guild <ted@w3.org>
> W3C Automotive Lead
> https://www.w3.org/auto
>
Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2020 23:52:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 1 April 2020 23:52:09 UTC