SDW WG Weekly

<phila> Kerry - hang on. We have to set up an ad hoc which i'll do nearer the top of the hour

<phila> It's because the zamim booking hasn't changed to this new time yet

<kerry> no wories

<phila> (Zakim thinks we're meeting in 12 hours' time or so)

<kerry> chhirs?

<kerry> chris?

<kerry> how would you like to scribe today?

<kerry> chrislittle -- would you like to scribe?

<kerry> ChrisLittle: would u like to scribe????

<kerry> Armin, would u like to scribe????

<kerry> *ahaller2, would u like to scribe?

<phila> kerry?

<ahaller2> hi kerry, not today, i am only on my phone (internet)

<ahaller2> will do next time

<kerry> ta, armin

<kerry> ChrisLittle: are u there?

<kerry> scribe: JoshLieberman

<kerry> scribenick: JoshLieberman

<kerry> big ugly beep?

<kerry> can anyone else still hear on the line?

<Frans> I don hear many meaningful sounds

<Frans> I have just muted myself

<billroberts> Alejandro and me joined at about same time

<billroberts> I think I was first and am IPcaller

<ebremer> zakin, 1.631.444.aacc is me

<billroberts> and Ale is .a I think?

<billroberts> not 100% sure!

<ebremer> tks

<Alejandro_Llaves> sorry phil, which one you said?

<ChrisLittle> zakim aaff is ChrisLittle

<eparsons> Yes

<billroberts> yes

<Frans> Kerry recommends following the instructions on the meeting page: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20150422

<LarsG> yes, I can here you

<kerry> minutes http://www.w3.org/2015/04/15-sdw-minutes.html

+1

<eparsons> +1

<MattPerry> +1

<Frans> +1

<ChrisLittle> +1 to minutes

<ebremer> +1

<phila> PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2015/04/15-sdw-minutes.html

<phila> RESOLVED: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2015/04/15-sdw-minutes.html

<Adila> +1

<Alejandro_Llaves> +1

<jtandy> s/laty/last/

Process call

<kerry> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

Timing, new members

<phila> Jitao: Introduces himself...

<kerry> jitao? say hello?

<LarsG> yes

<phila> kerry: Jitao is from the Chinese Academy of Sciences

jitao: from the Chinese Academy of Science

<Frans> I think an introduction by e-mail is OK too?

use case document

<Alejandro_Llaves> latest version http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html

kerry: editors will show us what the document looks like and plans to complete

<Alejandro_Llaves> +q

<Frans> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html

frans: document still in development. core is list of use cases (complete except for two complex ones) and requirements
... document introduction is fairly complete as well.
... comments invited on Chapters 1-4
... ACTION: review use cases that each submitted
... focusing now on requirements and relation to the use cases

Alejandro_Llaves: also looking to cross-reference requirements and deliverables

<SimonCox> +q

Alejandro_Llaves: mailing list discussion on filtering and refining requirements is useful

<cperey> what is link to the spreadsheet to which Chris is referring?

ChrisLittle: will send an update on requirements from their use cases. Also need to clarify some more obscure key words / phrases

<Alejandro_Llaves> link to spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PSnpJYQDgsdgZgPJEfUU0EhVfgFFYGc1WL4xUX9Dunk/edit?usp=sharing

kerry: some definitions are in my head and need to be contributed...

<jtandy> I think that all use case contributors should go through and suggest requirements that fit ... I will do so for my two UCs

<ChrisLittle> spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PSnpJYQDgsdgZgPJEfUU0EhVfgFFYGc1WL4xUX9Dunk/edit?pli=1#gid=0

<SimonCox> -q

Frans: document is still very much in process

kerry: any comments on the structure and approach of the document?

<kerry> acj jtandy

<SimonCox> +q

<Frans> A clarification: especially the requirements and linking ucs and reqs are a work in progress

jtandy: the cross-references seem to work well in the document. Requirements probably are not complete yet.

<cperey> 15 requirements is still a lot! Very rich set of things on which to work for years to come

SimonCox: more requirements coming?

Frans: probably yes, more requirements and therefore more cross-links

JoshLieberman: will the requirements include those that may not be essentially spatial but not well covered elsewhere?

<kerry> +q

Frans: some of the "non-functional" requirements may be included among these.

<Zakim> phila, you wanted to answer Josh on non-spatial Reqs

phila: "non-spatial" requirements should be documented in document, but also communicated to the Data on the Web group as well.

<ChrisLittle> +1 phil's comments

<kerry> ack

kerry: example?

<ChrisLittle> +1 non-func requirements section

<AndreaPerego> About requirements overlapping with DWBP ones, some are recorded here: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Requirements

<SimonCox> @phila: Are SSN requirements non-spatial?

<phila> No, they're in scope of this WG, SimonCox

JoshLieberman: appropriate links / identifiers may be an example of non-spatial but essential for our use cases

<SimonCox> Interesting ... arguably much 'data' is generated by sensors

ClemensPortele: may be overlap with Data on the Web requirements, but need clarification in our context

<Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask about how we will collect example datasets to support the use casess?

jtandy: real data examples can be very useful in delineating use cases. Is there a plan for collecting datasets?

kerry: definitely want them. include with use case on wiki if they are available

jtandy: some may be quite large

<cperey> very important point. Yes about Phil's point

<Frans> Can we have a wiki page listing datasets?

<cperey> that the use of data demonstrates rigor and tests the robustness of solutions

phila: access to datasets shows a rigor that is very useful. Also, the DotW group will also be meeting in Japan.

Note: lots of support for datasets attached to usecases

<Frans> We could ask for more links to datasets in use cases?

eparsons: make sure requirements are linked back to specific use cases to keep them "grounded" and help with prioritization

<AndreaPerego> +1 to req ranking

<jtandy> +1 to eparsons

<kerry> +1

<Adila> +1 to Frans

Frans: some use cases have links to resources, even datasets. we should encourage more links to datasets.

<eparsons> +1 to frans

<jtandy> +1

<ChrisLittle> +1

<Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask about putting datasets on github repo

kerry: how to handle datasets?

<Alejandro_Llaves> +1 to Jeremy

jtandy: useful to manage datasets on GitHub and link from wiki or use case document

<ChrisLittle> +1 to github suggestion

<billroberts> +1 to github

<ebremer> +1 to github suggestion

<Frans> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Working_Use_Cases#Various_Sensor_Use_Cases_.28SSN.29

kerry: returning to complex use cases relating to SSN and IoT.

<Frans> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Working_Use_Cases#.22101.22_Smart_City_Use-cases

kerry: should probably bring SSN use cases over directly, since SSN update is a deliverable here

<Alejandro_Llaves> +q on collections of use cases

<jtandy> +1 to kerry ... the SSN use cases need to appear here ...

<Zakim> Alejandro_Llaves, you wanted to comment on collections of use cases

<SimonCox> [sorry - my battery is about to run out]

Alejandro_Llaves: Frans idea to select out the SSN / IoT use cases that suffice to tie in requirements.

kerry: selection may apply for IoT use cases, but SSN use cases are already somewhat filtered to support SSN requirements

<kerry> ACTION: payam to summaries reqs from 101 use cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-sdw-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - Summaries reqs from 101 use cases [on Payam Barnaghi - due 2015-04-29].

<kerry> ACTION: kerry to check ssn use cases and requirements [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-sdw-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Check ssn use cases and requirements [on Kerry Taylor - due 2015-04-29].

<SimonCox_> [fresh battery!]

<SimonCox_> When I get back with voice I want to ask question about implied extension of scope for SSN and Time deliverables

Frans: good practice has been for the whole use case group to evaluate each case, but IoT collection was too large to do this with. Summaries would be helpful.

<kerry> ACTION: payam to summarise 101 use cases [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-sdw-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Summarise 101 use cases [on Payam Barnaghi - due 2015-04-29].

Kerry: action-22 is to both summarize and check requirements for IoT use cases.

<billroberts> sorry all, have to leave early to catch a train. Will check minutes

kerry: IoT use cases are not connected into the requirements yet.

<Zakim> SimonCox, you wanted to ask question about implied extension of scope for SSN and Time deliverables

<kerry> +1

<Alejandro_Llaves> +q on scope of reqs

SimonCox: two deliverables are based on existing W3C docs, with potentially expanded scope. Concern to define the scope more precisely by examining requirements so time doesn't inflate indefinitely

<jtandy> I do think that it is important that we manage the scope of the deliverables going forward

kerry: should scope those two deliverables based on most important requirements
... should be able to estimate "bang for buck" in scope

<Zakim> Alejandro_Llaves, you wanted to comment on scope of reqs

<SimonCox_> For example: 'sampling features' is an important, relatively discrete extension to SSN. But may be delegated to a separate project (though in practice we have found that most observation projects require it!)

<eparsons> +1 to JoshLieberman "bang for buck"

<jtandy> +1 to SimonCox_ 's comment about SamplingFeatures

Alejandro_Llaves: work on defining requirements is leading to some being identified as more general and applicable to more use cases than originally conceived.

<kerry> aq?

ChrisLittle: not that worried about scope "creep" because scope hasn't yet been addressed and will be.

<SimonCox_> +1 ChrisLittle

<jtandy> +1 to ChrisLittle ... we manage our scope during prioritisation activity when we review the requirements list resulting from assessment of the use cases

<eparsons> sorry cut off

Frans: excluding requirements from present work is not eliminating them from importance - so requirements delineated but not addressed will still be a useful result

kerry: very much in scope to describe work for a follow-on working group
... some discussion and confusion on principles out of best practice discussion

<SimonCox_> Are principles on Wiki?

<SimonCox_> Are non-functional requirements on Wiki?

kerry: principles help describe what we are trying to do. should discuss further next week.
... putting things in the issue tracker a good way to make them visible

<eparsons> Having trouble with zakim letting me back on voice :-(

<ChrisLittle> +1 timing

<Frans> +1 for the new time

<SimonCox_> Not so good for the Australians

<cperey> thank you for the new time!

<ahaller2> +1 time

<ebremer> +1 time

<LarsG> +1 for new time

I need to depart to another call.

<SimonCox_> But I'm in Liverpool this week

<cperey> yes, we appreciate everyone's sacrifice!

<Frans> People do seem to be busier at this time

<jtandy> thanks kerry

<eparsons> bye

<cperey> bye

<AndreaPerego> Thanks. Bye!

<Alejandro_Llaves> thanks, bye!

<LarsG> bye

<ClemensPortele> bye

<kerry> rrsagen. make logs public

<Frans> Have a good day!