13:08:43 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #poiwg
13:08:43 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/05/12-poiwg-irc
13:08:45 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:08:45 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #poiwg
13:08:47 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be UW_POI
13:08:47 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see UW_POI(POIWG)10:00AM scheduled to start in 52 minutes
13:08:48 <trackbot> Meeting: Points of Interest Working Group Teleconference
13:08:48 <trackbot> Date: 12 May 2011
13:09:08 <matt> matt has changed the topic to: Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-poiwg/2011May/0041
13:09:13 <matt> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-poiwg/2011May/0041.html
13:09:16 <matt> Chair: Andy
13:09:39 <matt> zakim, ping me in 45 minutes
13:09:39 <Zakim> ok, matt
13:54:39 <Zakim> matt, you asked to be pinged at this time
13:55:54 <robman> robman has joined #poiwg
13:57:42 <matt> zakim, dial matt-voip
13:57:42 <Zakim> ok, matt; the call is being made
13:57:43 <Zakim> UW_POI(POIWG)10:00AM has now started
13:57:44 <Zakim> +Matt
14:00:54 <fons> fons has joined #poiwg
14:01:02 <matt> Regrets: Cperey
14:01:43 <Zakim> + +31.20.592.aaaa
14:01:45 <Zakim> -Matt
14:01:47 <Zakim> +Matt
14:01:55 <ahill2> ahill2 has joined #poiwg
14:02:09 <matt> zakim, aaaa is fons
14:02:09 <Zakim> +fons; got it
14:03:22 <Zakim> +??P25
14:03:25 <andy> andy has joined #poiwg
14:03:32 <Zakim> +??P24
14:03:40 <matt> zakim, ??P25 is andy 
14:03:40 <Zakim> +andy; got it
14:03:46 <matt> zakim, ??p24 is ahill2
14:03:46 <Zakim> +ahill2; got it
14:03:55 <Zakim> +??P26
14:04:06 <matt> zakim, ??p26 is Carl_Reed
14:04:06 <Zakim> +Carl_Reed; got it
14:04:19 <andy> i am not 25
14:04:21 <matt> zakim, who is here?
14:04:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see Matt, fons, andy, ahill2, Carl_Reed
14:04:42 <matt> zakim, andy is robman
14:04:42 <Zakim> +robman; got it
14:04:44 <andy> different and new andy?
14:04:50 <andy> ok
14:08:08 <matt> scribe: ahill2 
14:08:15 <matt> Topic: The FPWD process
14:08:54 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/2011/05/05-poiwg-minutes.html previous minutes
14:09:01 <ahill2> matt: I added 30 issues to push forward the first working draft
14:09:10 <Zakim> + +1.919.599.aabb
14:09:16 <matt> zakim, aabb is Andy
14:09:16 <Zakim> +Andy; got it
14:11:08 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/ tracker
14:11:47 <robman> thanks...i've had a good look around 8)
14:11:47 <ahill2> matt: I've made some changes to the working draft, related to four actions, that are necessary before publishing
14:12:15 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/documents/Core/POI%20Core%20Draft.html
14:12:15 <ahill2> matt: welcome to Rob Manson, new Invited Expert
14:12:33 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/documents/Core/core-20110511.html Newest draft
14:13:14 <ahill2> Matt: The previous core draft has been changed to a listing of the core drafts
14:14:19 <ahill2> Matt: I added numerous definitiions, removed the map georeference, dropped the XML syntax for address, introduced the object primitive (not mapped to XML), and tried to link things up to their issue
14:15:09 <ahill2> matt: prettied up the XML table, borke out POI and POI elements, made note about uncertaintly of container objects
14:16:08 <ahill2> matt: added change in section 4.4 reference the WGS84 coordinate system
14:16:49 <ahill2> matt: made a comment about "points" (i.e. do we want to put latitude and lognitude by order or specific elements
14:18:00 <ahill2> matt: the atom category element only allowed for one, but I tried to address this
14:18:56 <ahill2> matt: incorporated a lot of comments from Leigh into the XML examples
14:19:23 <ahill2> matt: appendix A includes the sue cases from the Wiki
14:19:39 <ahill2> use
14:20:30 <ahill2> matt: trying to use a tool that generates links to existing standards - once completed this will remove the red error boxes
14:20:53 <matt> Regrets+ Jens, Ronald
14:21:20 <ahill2> carl: in the future when I submit comments, how should I go about it?
14:22:20 <ahill2> mattt: create a new thread on the public poi mailing list for each issue (i.e "here are our thoughts on time primitive")
14:22:57 <ahill2> matt: is would be nice is you can find a related issue and add something like "ISSUE-/14" in the subject line 
14:23:09 <ahill2> it would be
14:24:22 <ahill2> matt: I just found the EPG information in the sidebar, I may have to tweak the document before publishing today
14:24:34 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/blog/POI/2011/05/03/poi-core-editors-draft-released/ blog on editor's draft
14:25:02 <ahill2> matt: again, this is just the first public working draft and the bar is relatively low - see link
14:25:50 <ahill2> matt: pushing out the editors draft already has generated a lot of feedback. so we can expect this publication to build momentum and bring in other voices
14:26:53 <ahill2> matt: I wasn't able to get the object primitive that Christine pushed into the document; and understand from her this might alienate some from the AR crowd
14:27:28 <andy> +1 to moving foward
14:27:29 <robman> +1
14:27:32 <ahill2> +1
14:27:41 <fons> +1
14:27:42 <matt> RESOLUTION: WG will publish FPWD today
14:27:48 <andy> sticking on mute with phone issue for now
14:28:13 <ahill2> matt: we have resolved to publish the FPWD today
14:28:16 <andy> lets do that
14:28:17 <matt> Topic: Open Issues
14:28:34 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/
14:28:35 <ahill2> matt: ok, going with open issues
14:28:43 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/raised Raised Issues
14:29:23 <ahill2> matt: issues are first raised, then they can be opened, then a pending review, otherwised postponed
14:29:33 <andy> +1
14:29:57 <ahill2> matt: I suggest we just use raised and closed, please ignore other stateds
14:29:59 <ahill2> states
14:30:40 <matt> issue-19?
14:30:40 <trackbot> ISSUE-19 -- How should we represent points? -- raised
14:30:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/19
14:30:47 <matt> issue-20?
14:30:47 <trackbot> ISSUE-20 -- How should we represent lines? -- raised
14:30:47 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/20
14:30:52 <ahill2> does anyone on the call have an issue they want to discuss?
14:31:00 <matt> issue-21?
14:31:00 <trackbot> ISSUE-21 -- How should we specify the coordinate system used? -- raised
14:31:00 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/21
14:31:33 <ahill2> matt: these issues relate to how to represent points and polygons
14:31:38 <matt> For example: <gml:Point><gml:pos>42.360890561289295 -71.09139204025269</gml:pos></gml:Point>
14:31:56 <matt> <point latitude="42.360890561289295" longitude="-71.09139204025269"/>
14:33:13 <ahill2> don't these "paths" tend to be separate formats than a single point?
14:33:27 <matt> ISO19907
14:33:41 <ahill2> carl: the GML is grounded in ISO19907
14:34:13 <ahill2> carl: GML also uses the same base as geojson
14:34:35 <ahill2> carl: the order of latitude and longitude depends on the coordinate system being used
14:34:47 <robman> +1 to linking geo param ordering on crs
14:35:07 <matt> ISSUE-22?
14:35:07 <trackbot> ISSUE-22 -- How should we represent polygons? -- raised
14:35:07 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/22
14:35:21 <ahill2> carl: in China, legally you canot use WGS84, but their government system happens to be similar
14:36:10 <ahill2> carl: for polygon geometry, Raj submitted the GML encoding because it is consistent with ISO19907
14:36:28 <matt> ACTION: Carl to look at ISSUE-22 ISSUE-20 ISSUE-21
14:36:29 <trackbot> Created ACTION-76 - Look at ISSUE-22 ISSUE-20 ISSUE-21 [on Carl Reed - due 2011-05-19].
14:36:29 <ahill2> certainly have no investment in re-inventing this wheel
14:37:22 <ahill2> matt: while we don't want to reinvent, we do have some responsibility to making this consumable and usable by the average web developer
14:37:36 <robman> carl - does GML handle relative points or just crs defined geolocations?
14:37:42 <ahill2> matt: simple things simple, hard things possible
14:38:10 <andy> +1
14:38:23 <ahill2> carl would you repeat the standard you mentioned is getting used by developers?
14:39:12 <ahill2> carl: in the current implementation, developers could change the default coordinate system, but the default remains WGS84
14:39:53 <andy> +1
14:40:07 <andy> to only use international standards
14:40:08 <ahill2> carl: we got some suggestions for using X and Y, but since there wasn't any international standard we had to reject that
14:40:20 <ahill2> rob; doe GML support relative objects?
14:40:27 <ahill2> carl: yes, relative and moving objects
14:40:35 <ahill2> can we get a link to an example of this?
14:40:42 <matt> ISSUE-27?
14:40:43 <trackbot> ISSUE-27 -- What issues arise from using namespaces in the XML serialization? -- raised
14:40:43 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/27
14:41:15 <robman> serialisation
14:41:28 <ahill2> matt: there was some concern about using external namespaces because it doesn't map into JSON
14:42:08 <ahill2> matt: obviously there is a broader concern about breaking some use cases like JSON, etc.
14:42:36 <andy> assign me some thing
14:43:00 <matt> ACTION: manson to work on ISSUE-27
14:43:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-77 - Work on ISSUE-27 [on Rob Manson - due 2011-05-19].
14:43:17 <ahill2> matt: if you raised an issue and I created it, doesn't mean I was trying to take the credit (or blame)
14:43:21 <matt> ISSUE-32?
14:43:22 <trackbot> ISSUE-32 -- Does map georeference side definition need additional info? -- raised
14:43:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/32
14:44:36 <matt> ACTION: karl to address ISSUE-32
14:44:38 <ahill2> matt: anyone want to take this issue on?
14:44:39 <trackbot> Created ACTION-78 - Address ISSUE-32 [on Karl Seiler - due 2011-05-19].
14:44:53 <matt> ISSUE-37?
14:45:10 <matt> ISSUE-37?
14:45:22 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 -- Should we use geo URIs? -- raised
14:45:24 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/37
14:45:27 <ahill2> matt: don't think we understand geo uri's are
14:45:28 <trackbot> ISSUE-37 -- Should we use geo URIs? -- raised
14:45:29 <matt> -> http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc5870 GeoURIs RFC
14:45:30 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/37
14:45:34 <andy> ok
14:45:56 <andy> sure
14:46:08 <matt> ACTION: Andy to review RFC 5870 for ISSUE-37
14:46:12 <trackbot> Created ACTION-79 - Review RFC 5870 for ISSUE-37 [on Andrew Braun - due 2011-05-19].
14:46:19 <ahill2> matt: the document is unfriendly and it suggests an alternate way to reference latitude and longitude
14:46:32 <ahill2> the RTF document
14:46:51 <matt> ISSUE-41?
14:46:52 <trackbot> ISSUE-41 -- Which language codes should we use? -- raised
14:46:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2010/POI/track/issues/41
14:47:12 <ahill2> matt: agenda item language codes
14:47:46 <ahill2> matt: I wasn't comfortable bringing a lot of XML specific things up into the data model
14:48:31 <ahill2> matt: the the ISO Mark III language specs has much to do with transactions systems
14:48:57 <matt> ACTION: matt to look at ISSUE-41 and report back on which we should use: xml:lang and ISO MARC Alpha 3 
14:49:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-80 - Look at ISSUE-41 and report back on which we should use: xml:lang and ISO MARC Alpha 3  [on Matt Womer - due 2011-05-19].
14:49:51 <ahill2> +q
14:50:21 <robman> yes pls
14:50:22 <robman> 8)
14:50:43 <ahill2> matt: let's talk a little bit about actions and issues
14:50:58 <ahill2> matt: actions are specific goals (i.e. do xy and z)
14:51:19 <ahill2> matt: issues are broader and you can break an issue up into a number of actions
14:51:44 <ahill2> matt: the mechanics are that we have this web-based tracker
14:52:23 <ahill2> matt: it looks for content like "ACTION-\14" and inserts links into the mailing list and irc when possible
14:52:32 <ahill2> I'm escaping to avoid confusion
14:53:59 <robman> is there any specific deliverable format for actions? or at least types
14:54:17 <ahill2> alex: do we need a conference call to "resolve" and issue?
14:54:48 <ahill2> matt: some other groups use extra fields in the issues to handle contentious issues
14:55:11 <ahill2> matt: we can trust individuals to close their own action items
14:55:16 <robman> cool
14:55:29 <robman> what you said was good
14:55:37 <ahill2> matt: people should send a mail to the group saying " hey I've completed this action #"
14:56:01 <ahill2> last longer when you are scribing
14:56:56 <ahill2> matt: we are having trouble getting Budapest meeting space with the OMA meeting
14:57:18 <ahill2> matt: Andy is leaning towards the Denver OGS meeting in September
14:57:35 <ahill2> +q
14:57:42 <matt> ack ahill2 
14:57:46 <matt> ack ahill2 
14:57:49 <matt> ack ahill
14:58:36 <ahill2> when is OMA?
14:58:44 <matt> -> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/45386/POI-F2F-2011-2-choices/results poll results
14:59:19 <robman> sorry but i have to leave - talk to you all next time and see some of you at ARE
14:59:46 <robman> works for me...bye
14:59:57 <matt> [[Budapest, Hungary, before, during, or after OMA's member meeting June 27-July 1]]
14:59:58 <Zakim> -robman
15:00:15 <matt> ahill2: We need to resolve this soon.
15:00:17 <matt> ACTION: Andy to resolve whether we are going to Budapest or not
15:00:24 <trackbot> Created ACTION-81 - Resolve whether we are going to Budapest or not [on Andrew Braun - due 2011-05-19].
15:00:33 <Zakim> -Carl_Reed
15:00:43 <Zakim> -Matt
15:00:52 <Zakim> -Andy
15:00:53 <Zakim> -ahill2
15:01:15 <fons> I will not attend next weeks telco, being on a return trip from Bilbao
15:01:31 <robman> robman has left #poiwg
15:02:01 <fons> fons has left #poiwg
15:05:04 <Zakim> -fons
15:05:05 <Zakim> UW_POI(POIWG)10:00AM has ended
15:05:07 <Zakim> Attendees were Matt, +31.20.592.aaaa, fons, ahill2, Carl_Reed, robman, +1.919.599.aabb, Andy
15:55:51 <matt> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:55:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/05/12-poiwg-minutes.html matt
15:56:03 <matt> rrsagent, make logs world
17:00:46 <Zakim> Zakim has left #poiwg