DWBP 2nd meeting -- 31 Jan 2014

<PhilA> ah, no, you wouldn't zakim, as I didn't book it. Ah well. We'll do an ad hoc shortly

<Ig_Bittencourt> Hi, what is the conference code?

<PhilA> I'll get the conference code shortly, Ig_Bittencourt

<MTCarrasco> zaki, conference code

<Ig_Bittencourt> Thanks.

<PhilA> There is no conference code yet MTCarrasco

<PhilA> (but there soon will be)

<Caroline_> The conference code should be 3927

<Ig_Bittencourt> This conf code does not work, Caroline_

<MTCarrasco> what is the conference code?

<PhilA> Look at the screen MTCarrasco!

<yaso> Ig_bittencourt, try Dial details: 1.617.761.6200 or sip:zakim@voip.w3.org code 3927

<Caroline_> Does it work now, Ig?

<Ig_Bittencourt> It works Caroline_

<Ig_Bittencourt> Thanks

<Ig_Bittencourt> zapim, ??p3 is Ig_Bittencourt

<Seiji_Isoani> +??P5

<yaso> Sorry, Phil. Dialing Augusto Hermann from here

<yaso> We need volunteers for scribing

<scribe> scribe: deirdrelee

<Bernadette> Im here calling from skype

<Nitai> I can hear

<PhilA> scribe: deirdrelee

yaso: Start by looking at agenda, see who will lead the task forces, we need names

<PhilA> scribeNick: deirdrelee

yaso: and also how to describe deliverables
... we have to decide if we will use github to track deliverables
... a task force is a separate group that will work on one deliverable

<HadleyBeeman> +1 to that. It may get too confusing to have those conversations all together.

yaso: I suggest that we have three task forces, one for each of the deliverables: bps, and each of the vocabs
... what does everyone think?

MTCarrasco: we could chop the big document into smaller documents, so that one chapter doesn't stand in the way of the whole document
... it's also easier to divide the work
... suggests to start writing straight away
... and that wiki should be enough, no need for github

CarlosIglesias: it is better to focus the overall group on the best practices, as it looks like the most complex.
... and create taskforces for the other vocabularies
... if there is a taskforce for everything, what is the need for the group as a whole? this is another reason to keep the BP doc as a group doc

HadleyBeeman: last week lots of people nominated themselves for different aspects of the BP doc

<yaso> ace deirdrelee

HadleyBeeman: why not split the BP into the components that people nominated themselves for

<yaso> q

<PhilA> deirdrelee: Looking through the charter, can the chairs explain how technical is the BP doc expected to be?

<HadleyBeeman> for reference: http://www.w3.org/2013/05/odbp-charter.html

<PhilA> ... GLD was tech focussed but is that the case in this group?

<PhilA> ... where do we stand for tech suggestions?

<PhilA> HadleyBeeman: Thyat depends on the editors I think and what the appetitie is within the group

<PhilA> ... it needs to be as useful as possible. The more we can tie the work to independent use cases the better

<PhilA> ... but I don't thinkw e can define that this second

Yaso: need to balance tech & non-tech

PhilA: use-case is the magic word
... deirdrelee offered to work on use-cases last week

<MTCarrasco> Document must be technical, though explained in a tutorial-like style

PhilA: it would be great if someone could help
... we are a technical standards body, we shouldn't be afraid of it
... but as yaso says we are not defining new technology, but we are offering guidelines on technical details
... strongly urge group to work on use-cases before anything else

<yaso> Use Cases and Requirements

yaso: we could describe use-cases as a tutorial style, this is a good reason to use github

MTCarrasco: we must be technical, in a tutorial style, for example the html standard
... a demo would also be useful. I need a web server that everyone can have access to

<MTCarrasco> I will work in a demo in local server. In addition, I will be looking for a public one.

<MTCarrasco> Demo to illustrate and verify.

yaso: should we do a demo? a project? a real case, as opposed to a use-case that would just describe

PhilA: this group is more focused on use-cases and best practices, as opposed to implementing something

<MTCarrasco> Not a lot of coding: parametrization of Apache and a few CGIs

HadleyBeeman: use-cases are key

<yaso> Nitai,

yaso: we could work with data.gov.br team
... for a use-case

<yaso> Nitai and herrmann_ I was just suggesting that you and Nitai can help with data.gov.br

Augusto: we could make an implementation of the vocabularies
... we could not only help with the BP guide, but follow through as part of our data.gov.br open data initiative
... we still haven't got authorisation to give time to WG, so can't commit to anything specific yet

<Zakim> PhilA, you wanted to talk about implementations for vocabs

PhilA: There are two kinds of documents that this group can produce, recommendations (also known as standards)
... important part of recommendation is that there are at least two implementations
... but a BP guide is like advice, so how to 'implement' that? what we need is for specific groups to refer to our BP doc
... so evidence of the BP doc would be other groups pointing to our BP doc, for example, from the European Commission or national governemtns
... we have JohnGoodwin on call, expert on Linked Data & geo spatial. As an example of evidence, he could point to his organisation's work with linked geodata in the UK. ??
... in relation to the vocabularies, they are WG Notes, not recommendations, so the bar is lower
... we don't have to have proven implementation. But if we do have implementations, then great, because they WG Notes could then be pushed through as recommendations
... which are more reputable and carry more weight

<yaso> \o/

Bernadette: In Recife we have an Open Data portal, perhaps we can ues this as a use-case. They are very motivated

<Bernadette> Recife

<Bernadette> In Recife

<HadleyBeeman> For ref: JohnGoodwin is referring to http://data.ordancesurvey.org.uk

JohnGoodwin: happy to provide usecases

<EricStephan> +q

<HadleyBeeman> s/http://data.ordancesurvey.org.uk/http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk

<nathalia> Correcting the link: http://data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/

MTCarrasco: BP is a simplification, so we should only have most common use-cases
... demo is just to illustrate the recommendation, not a system/product for usage

EricStephan: I'm on the csv on the web WG, and there is potential to collaborate, as they are starting to identify use-cases as well
... there is potential for collaboration

<herrmann> Bernadette was talking about http://dados.recife.pe.gov.br/

yaso: what comes first, the use-cases, the description of technologies, the requirements, etc.

PhilA: it's normal to produce use-cases and requirements first

<MTCarrasco> mute me

<Zakim> PhilA, you wanted to talk about CSV WG f2f meeting

PhilA: use the wiki to gather use-cases; editors will then take care of that,

<Zakim> HadleyBeeman, you wanted to talk about Use Cases

PhilA: the UCs and requirements could be a stand-alone WG Note
... which feeds into BP document

<HadleyBeeman> Example from Data Cube vocabularies Gov Linked Data Working Group: Use case doc http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/NOTE-vocab-data-cube-use-cases-20130801/

<HadleyBeeman> Implementation: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Data_Cube_Implementations

HadleyBeeman: To give an example of previous groups, here are a couple of examples for use-case documents from the GLD WG

<Caroline_> these are great examples!

HadleyBeeman: it's good to have a page to gather evidence from the field
... easy to create and for people to add to

yaso: we should create this page and gather volunteers to create the work, and editors?

HadleyBeeman: editors will drive this work

PhilA: we have made a decision!

<Bernadette> yes

<PhilA> Proposed Resolution: That the WG collects use cases on the wiki and then creates a UCR doc from that as a WG NOTE

<EricStephan> +1

<PhilA> s/sued/use/

<martin> +1

<yaso> +1

<HadleyBeeman> +1

<Seiji_Isoani> +1

<CarlosIglesias> +1

<Ig_Bittencourt> +1

<Bernadette> +1

<JohnGoodwin> +1

<Caroline_> +1

<yaso> \o

<nathalia> +1

<PhilA> Resolution: That the WG collects use cases on the wiki and then creates a UCR doc from that as a WG NOTE

<Bernadette> o/

<MTCarrasco> +1

<Vagner_Br> +1

<HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-01-24

HadleyBeeman: there were some volunteers from last week, recorded in the minutes

<yaso> akc deirdrelee

<PhilA> deirdrelee: I wanted to ask what we mean by use cases?

<PhilA> ... is a data portal a use case? What do we mean by use case?

<PhilA> HadleyBeeman: I think that does need to be defined by the editors

<MTCarrasco> zakimm unmuted me

yaso: volunteers for editors were Tomas, Bernadette and ??

<yaso> Antoine

<PhilA> s/manual/Tomas/

<yaso> sorry bernadette

Bernadette: I would like to contribute to BP document, but would like to be an contributor for the Quality and Granularity Description Vocabulary

<yaso> Thank you, PhilA

<MTCarrasco> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_on_the_Web_URI_Best_Practices

MTCarrasco: has already started contributing to BP doc, this is his main interest
... intention is to write some code to illustrate what he means with the document

PhilA: need to decide on editors of use-case documents

<yaso> Antoine Isaac

<HadleyBeeman> Deirdrelee: I'm willing to be co-editor of the Best Practices document

deirdrelee: will be co-editor of use-case doc

Bernadette: will also be co-editor of use-case document

<HadleyBeeman> Yaso: Antoine said last week that he would like to be co-editor

<PhilA> So Deirdre, Bernadette and Antoine will be co-editors on the UCR

<Caroline_> +1

<nathalia> +1

<Seiji_Isoani> +1

PhilA: Let's decide the regular time for this meeting

<EricStephan> +1

<Vagner_Br> +1

<yaso> +1

<JohnGoodwin> +1

<Ig_Bittencourt> +1

<Bernadette> +1

HadleyBeeman: task forces may need their own meetings too

<yaso> 12 GMT

<PhilA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: That the WG's regular meeting time is the same as this one was today. Noon GMT, Fridays

<HadleyBeeman> +1

<martin> +1

<MTCarrasco> +1

<yaso> +1

<Seiji_Isoani> +1

<Vagner_Br> +1

<EricStephan> As long as my alarm clocks works :-)

<Caroline_> +1

<EricStephan> +1

<herrmann> +1

<nathalia> +1

<Ig_Bittencourt> +1

<EricStephan> No prob

<MTCarrasco> We should really take into account the people in other time zone: West USA, Korea

PhilA: we're only getting the +1s from those present, it is very early for some participants, and some participants have other committments, e.g. classes

<PhilA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: That the WG's regular meeting time is the same as this one was today. 13:00 GMT, Fridays

<yaso> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: That the WG's regular meeting time is the same as this one was today. 13 GMT, Fridays

<JohnGoodwin> +1

<nathalia> +1

<EricStephan> +1

<yaso> +1

<MTCarrasco> +1

<HadleyBeeman> +1

<Vagner_Br> +1

<Nitai> +1

<Caroline_> +1

<Ig_Bittencourt> +1

<EricStephan> :-)

<Bernadette> +1

<CarlosIglesias> +1

<Seiji_Isoani> +1

<herrmann> +1

<martin> +1

<Zakim> HadleyBeeman, you wanted to talk about editors

<PhilA> RESOLUTION: That the WG's regular meeting time is the same as this one was today. 13:00 GMT, Fridays

<EricStephan> +q

PhilA: GMT is not the official W3C time zone, it's ETS

HadleyBeeman: overviewing last week's minutes, Antoine's put himself forward for vocab group, not BP

<herrmann> PhilA: this one today wasn't 13 GMT

HadleyBeeman: that ok with deirdrelee and Bernadette?

<PhilA> no, herrmann, it was 12:00. We'll be an hour later next week

HadleyBeeman: we will need separate use-case documents for each of the deliverables, at least three separate sections

<yaso> Bernadette and Dreirdree are the BP editors, and MTCarrasco is the editor of the URI BP document, Antoine should work on the vocal

PhilA: The two vocabularies are two-halves of the same thing

<herrmann> PhilA: so, s/the same as this one was today./:/

PhilA: use-cases might overlap

<EricStephan> Yes I am interested in being an editor

<HadleyBeeman> PROPOSED: approve last week's meeting minutes: http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-01-24

<PhilA> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-01-24

<yaso> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: EricStephan Bernadette and Dreirdree are the BP editors, and MTCarrasco is the editor of the URI BP document

<EricStephan> +1

<Caroline_> +1

<CarlosIglesias> +1

<Bernadette> +q

<Vagner_Br> +1

<nathalia> +1

<EricStephan> +1 for minutes

<Seiji_Isoani> +1

<yaso> +1 for minutes

<Bernadette> I'd like to be a co-editor just for the use cases document

<HadleyBeeman> +1 for minutes

<PhilA> RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-01-24

<JohnGoodwin> +1

<Ig_Bittencourt> +1 for minutes

EricStephan: proposed himself for one of the vocabularies

<herrmann> +1 for minutes

<Caroline_> +1 for minutes

<nathalia> +1 for minutes

<yaso> sorry

<PhilA> me we hear you deirdrelee

<yaso> mute deirdreelee

<PhilA> Bernadette: I'd like to be the co-editor for the Use Case doc, not the BP doc

<PhilA> deirdrelee: I'm OK as editor of the UCR with Bernadette. I'm not (yet) volunteering for the BP doc

<EricStephan> Thank you all!

<MTCarrasco> bye

<Bernadette> Have a nice weekend!

<Bernadette> -Bernadette

- DRAFT -

DWBP 2nd meeting

31 Jan 2014

Attendees

Contents

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output