<trackbot> Date: 10 November 2010

<scribe> Scribe: Matt

<cperey> np

Agenda

<ggale> There's 3 open actions according to http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions

andy: Christine, thanks for editing the agenda. We'll put stuff there, try to do it two weeks out. I was thinking this might be a failed experience, but we can keep it going a little bit.

action-9?

<trackbot> ACTION-9 -- Karl Seiler to add a persona/perspective type field to use cases. -- due 2010-11-03 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/9

close ACTION-9

<trackbot> ACTION-9 Add a persona/perspective type field to use cases. closed

action-10?

<trackbot> ACTION-10 -- Gary Gale to codify on the WIki the "What is an Point of Interest" discussion -- due 2010-11-03 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/actions/10

<cperey> so Action10 is closed?

<k> am in the call

andy: As a group, we'll see what we can put there and see if we can live with it going forward. Let's look at Gary's definition here, discuss it and then give it a week and see if we can live with it.

<k> k = k seiler

<jdesmit> +1

gary: Fine.

close ACTION-10

<trackbot> ACTION-10 Codify on the WIki the "What is an Point of Interest" discussion closed

<k> karl seiler joined

andy: [Reviews agenda...]

<cperey> +1

<mliebhold> +1

andy: Agenda good, let's move forward.

Discussion framework

<jacques> +1.347.661.aajj is jacques

<cperey> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Main_Page

cperey: My suggestion because I've been watching the traffic on the list is that sometimes we change topics in the threads and it gets a little harder to follow.
... I was hoping you could take a look at the wiki page, and before Karl or someone added the definition of POI to the main page, there was only the very top and bottom portions.
... We have a lot of topics floating in and out, I would like to capture them on the wiki page appropriately.
... The topic that seems messiest is the data model one.
... I think we should try to keep the discussion on the list to one of these four topics.
... If they're not sufficient, create a new topic and page to correspond to it on the wiki page.

<ggale> +q

ggale: I agree, it would be lovely to have this a little more structured. Are we not at risk of keeping the wiki beautiful, rather than digging into the nuts and bolts.
... The email is a better medium for discussing things. Then maybe each week someone volunteers to clean up the topic areas.

cperey: I think that's fantastic and agree.
... I just wanted a discussion framework.

matt: I was thinking the front page would be more like our home page.
... if there's lots of topics, I wouldn't want it to be obstructing the rest of the info on the page.

<ggale> If the wiki gets more than 2 screenfuls on the home page then it needs tidying

cperey: Yeah, I don't like Resources as a name. And I liked upcoming events.

<ggale> We're verging on that now

cperey++

matt: I think we all like it, let's move the discussion offline.

POI data format

andy: Temporal POI was the first sub topic.
... POI associated with refugee camps moving for instance.

<k> +q

<ggale> +q

karl: Going back to ggale's definition of POI, if we can separate location from the definition... I think it'd be great for it to have a start and end.

<ggale> "POIs have the shelf life of bananas" ... quote of the day so far

karl: Then there are temporal attributes of POIs. There's ones that exist at a time and cease, and another temporal aspect of "movies are from this time to this time", the theater doesn't end.

ggale: Aren't we in a chicken/egg situation. If we're trying to decide on a data format for something that we haven't decided on a definition of what it is.

mliebhold: I have a suggestion: it's easy to make things way more complex early on and then spend months digging out from premature complexity. It's either information about a place or a thing.

<ggale> +q

mliebhold: I think for information about a place, there's only one characteristic that's critical: the degree of accuracy of the x,y,z coordinates. A POI could be an ornament on the build, which would need millimeter accuracy. For a thing, place isn't so relevant, and the only way I know how to do that is through a marker or trigger, a visual search, so a URI pointing to this. Everything else can be handled in RDF and triples handling any metadata they need.

ggale: I agree that we can make this arbitrarily complex then spend months digging ourselves out of the hole.

<jdesmit> +q

ggale: Maybe I can ask if we're happy with the three tier model I put on the wiki, and if so, have others flesh each out on the wiki.
... Then let's see if we can use existing codifications/standards.
... See if we can merge them back into a single entity.
... Then check the use cases, see if we can cover those.

karl: I haven't had a chance to look at the wiki yet.
... I'm working on the terminology page. Then we'll try to make the vocabulary consistent. This goes back to defining a model that's grounded in existing standards and definitions. If you think I'm introducing complexity let me know.

jdesmit: I like your approach, and I like Mike's comment about a 'thing'.
... ?? place definition on the wiki ??

karl: Let's write up the place definition on the mailing list and get people to make edits on the wiki.

<cperey> good proposal

Karl: Have three or four people drive the definition down.

ggale: I'd rather have the debate on the mailing list.

<k> matt that last was Karl S

ggale: rather than the wiki

<jdesmit> +1

<ahill2> +1 on mail over wiki

+1!!

<k> so what is the w3c method to form work teams

<cperey> thing (cute name)

<cperey> an object?

<k> i volunteer to be on the POI detailed definition work team

<scribe> ACTION: mliebhold to put out a definition of a 'thing' to the mailing list. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/10-poiwg-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-13 - Put out a definition of a 'thing' to the mailing list. [on Mike Liebhold - due 2010-11-17].

<cperey> another action was proposed: to break up into teams

andy: I heard a suggestion that we work in smaller teams.

Carl: I think we should get the definition framework, then break up into teams to further refine the definitions, then work on the standards.

<jdesmit> +1

Andy: Sounds like a good approach to me.

+1

Raj: I have a comment on the data model discussion before we leave it.
... Looking at the use cases, they seem to be largely around search and imply a services framework, yet we're only defining in our discussion an information model. How do we see this information model being used? Are services harvesting around the internet and then we do our own queries or...?

<k> lost him?

ggale: Sounds like the question Raj was asking was: are we defining the reference model or defining the services that expose the reference model? Or are we building the reference model.

karl: I think the root of it all, the value, is for information exchange between systems.
... That is fundamental.

<ahill2> +1 looking for a data exchange model

ggale: I see us looking at how this is exchange rather than building stuff.

<jdesmit> agreed. services are what we use eventually, but I think data exchange format should be the focus

<ahill2> +q

andy: We don't want to be in the business of building services. We're looking at building something that exists today. What use cases do we need to satisfy? But I don't think we need to be in the business of defining how the sevices work.

<k> +1

<cperey> services development are how companies differentiate themselves

ahill2: Those of you with more experience building services around data models, can anyone comment on, if what we want to do is build a data exchange model, is there advice on what to look out for? Or can we just ignore services when we're constructing a data model?

Carl: If we wrap ourselves around the services that make the data model sing, we'll be wrapped around the axel.

ahill2: That sounds like a reasonable suggestion.

<jdesmit> +1

<k> Karl seiler will intro himself as "seiler"

jacques: Services will be useful to test the data model, but ??noise??
... I want to make a list of triples in XML or RDF that could be useful, they're on the mailing list.

<ahill2> +1 for jacques action item

<cperey> jacques volunteered Action Item to write up some triples according to suggestion on the mialing list

<jacques> ok

<scribe> ACTION: jacques to collect triples on the mailing list [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/11/10-poiwg-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-14 - Collect triples on the mailing list [on Jacques Lemordant - due 2010-11-17].

Carl: It's a worthy effort, perhaps cart before the horse. There's a lot of standards in this area.

<cperey> a new thread in discussion framework

http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Related_Specifications

<ahill2> +q

ahill2: As we're fleshing this out, could we have examples

+1

<k> seiler - good idea

<jdesmit> +1

<cperey> +1 to Alex suggestion to have examples

Carl: Seems to me that until we have a data model or agreed definition of POI, then evaluating specific encodings is premature.

<jacques> +1 to examples

matt: Maybe we do this after we have data model and use cases in place.

ahill2: When it does happen, I'd vote for having things inline, rather than separated out.
... There's a tendency to have definitions that lead other places.

jdesmit: As we try to agree or converge on a data model then let's introduce examples.

ahill2: What we really want to do is hash out the data model first and get ourselves happy with that before we move on.

Karl: Isn't the data model work bounded by the definitions work?

ahill2: I maybe meant definitions. Definition of POI and the four tiers that have been mentioned.
... The three original ones and 'thing' that has been suggested.

<cperey> +1 on the discussion of order of focus but, isn't this going to be an iterative process?

matt: So, we'll work on definition of POI, data model, then use cases, then standards.

rsingh2: I'd like to make a radical proposal that a POI is just a location and time. We're not going to be able to agree on the other things for now.
... I can see people having databases of a few thousand POIs in these use cases. And then most of the sophisticated stuff could be done in the client.
... A definition that has more than location, geography and a start and end time is going to have us going in circles.

Carl: I just added a third definition of POI that the IETF uses.
... So, it comes down to location and time, everything else are optional properties.

<mliebhold> +Q

<ahill2> -q

<jacques> location, time and content

<cperey> I'm going to drop off, will dial back in

<ahill2> +q

ahill2: When we say UUID, are we talking about the location, or the event?
... Is it the place or the location?

karl: I think it's a POI. I think the definition of places, which are often bounded by polygons, can be prescriptively defined. There's a lot of standards we can comply with or meld.
... Same thing with addresses.
... I think we can define location, there's a lot of definitions for that, places, polygon structures, then... our definition of POI should be simple, very open ended. I like the IETF definition.

<mliebhold> +q

<ahill2> -q

mliebhold: I sent mail, we can start with them associated only with location, but you can frankly have a POI attached to a physical object. We might postpone that discussion, but we'll have to get to it.

<jdesmit> +1 to mike

<ahill2> +1 4 dimensions + POI

Use Cases

http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/wiki/Use_Cases

<mliebhold> +Q

ahill2: Whenever the subject of visual recognition and temporal moving objects comes up, I would make the initial suggest that I'm not sure the data model needs to necessarily... location can be transient... moving objects, or things, be folded into location, so that we don't have to keep track of whether something is a moving object or distinguish it from a fixed place

<jacques> + for tracker information in the data model

mliebhold: That would require every object to disclose it's location. That's probably a burden that isn't appropriate for everything. A POI as a loaf of bread.

ahill2: I think we should take this to email.'

rsingh2: I don't think it's an edge case. There's things like lunch trucks that serve every day or hour serving different people.

ahill2: Not an edge case necessarily, but from a practical standpoint how to fold it into the definition.

<ahill2> -q

<ggale> I need to sign off ... next meeting in the day job calls

matt: On use cases, any volunteers for this? Particularly checkin games.

<jacques> yes

<k> thx

<cperey> can I make announcement (re: upcoming meetings)?

karl: I've been doing the bulk of the use cases, don't want to dominate them.

matt: I'll send out a call for more use cases.

AOB

cperey: I've got a meeting for AR standards -- not just POI -- at MWC. The AR standards community members will be 17 Feb starting in the afternoon and all day 18 Feb and ending at noon on the 19th.
... We have a host, and I wanted to make sure you have the details. Those who are interested should join us.
... Another meeting proposed at UPC, the campus used for W3C AR. I won't be using that space, but it's also available during mid Feb timeframe.
... And there are OGC meetings happening world wide, and they want to post meeting announcements as well.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/??/Karl/
Found Scribe: Matt
Inferring ScribeNick: matt
Default Present: +3539149aaaa, +39.011.228.aabb, marengo, +31.30.230.aacc, jdesmit, JonathanJ, Matt, +1.650.464.aadd, vinod, Mike_Liebhold, +1.919.599.aaee, Andy, +44.750.800.aaff, Gary, +1.617.848.aagg, cperey, +1.617.764.aahh, +1.773.575.aaii, Alex, Raj, +1.347.661.aajj, Carl, +1.312.894.aakk, k, +1.617.642.aall
Present: +3539149aaaa +39.011.228.aabb marengo +31.30.230.aacc jdesmit JonathanJ Matt +1.650.464.aadd vinod Mike_Liebhold +1.919.599.aaee Andy +44.750.800.aaff Gary +1.617.848.aagg cperey +1.617.764.aahh +1.773.575.aaii Alex Raj +1.347.661.aajj Carl +1.312.894.aakk k +1.617.642.aall Marco_Marengo
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-poiwg/2010Nov/0009

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 10 Nov 2010
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/11/10-poiwg-minutes.html
People with action items: jacques mliebhold

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.