12:55:33 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdw
12:55:33 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/05/27-sdw-irc
12:55:35 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
12:55:35 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdw
12:55:37 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
12:55:37 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
12:55:38 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
12:55:38 <trackbot> Date: 27 May 2015
12:55:47 <billroberts> billroberts has joined #sdw
12:55:55 <kerry> chair: kerry
12:56:17 <frans> present+ frans
12:56:30 <phila> present+ PhilA
12:56:54 <kerry> regrets+  Erich
12:56:58 <kerry> present+ kerry
12:57:07 <kerry> regrets+ eparsons
12:57:19 <kerry> regrets+ clemens
12:57:25 <kerry> regrets+ bart
13:04:46 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdw
13:04:46 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/05/27-sdw-irc
13:04:48 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:04:48 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdw
13:04:50 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
13:04:50 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
13:04:51 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
13:04:51 <trackbot> Date: 27 May 2015
13:09:42 <billroberts> billroberts has joined #sdw
13:10:51 <aharth> aharth has joined #sdw
13:10:51 <billroberts> billroberts has joined #sdw
13:10:55 <AZ> AZ has joined #sdw
13:11:05 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #sdw
13:11:05 <AZ> it works!
13:11:09 <LarsG> LarsG has joined #sdw
13:11:10 <billroberts> I am back too
13:11:22 <LarsG> present+LarsG
13:11:24 <aharth> aharth has joined #sdw
13:11:30 <AZ> present+ AZ
13:11:32 <aharth> works also from irc client
13:11:34 <phila> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:11:39 <joshlieberman> joshlieberman has joined #sdw
13:11:40 <Frans> Frans has joined #sdw
13:11:41 <AndreaPerego> AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
13:11:43 <aharth> present+ aharth
13:11:53 <Linda> Linda has joined #sdw
13:11:55 <AndreaPerego> present+ AndreaPerego
13:11:57 <billroberts> present+ billroberts
13:11:58 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #sdw
13:12:10 <Linda> present+ Linda
13:12:13 <ChrisLittle> ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
13:12:13 <Frans> present+ Frans
13:12:16 <SimonCox> Got onto IRC now
13:12:19 <trackbot> trackbot has joined #sdw
13:12:23 <phila> regrets+ Erich Bremer, Clemens Portele, Bart van Leeuwen
13:12:25 <kerry> kerry has joined #sdw
13:12:40 <phila> present+ PhilA, EdParsons
13:13:11 <kerry> present+ kerry
13:13:16 <Alejandro_Llaves> Alejandro_Llaves has joined #sdw
13:13:18 <jtandy> present+ jtandy
13:13:27 <Alejandro_Llaves> present+ Alejandro_Llaves
13:13:28 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sdw
13:13:38 <ChrisLittle> present+ ChrisLittle
13:13:56 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:13:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/27-sdw-minutes.html phila
13:13:58 <kerry> trackbot, start meeting
13:14:00 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:14:02 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
13:14:02 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
13:14:03 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
13:14:03 <trackbot> Date: 27 May 2015
13:14:14 <Frans> Those DDoS should be illegal!
13:14:24 <MattPerry> present+ MattPerry
13:14:32 <kerry> regrets+ erich
13:14:41 <kerry> regrets+ clemens
13:14:45 <SimonCox> ?present
13:14:47 <kerry> regrets+ bart
13:14:55 <Payam> Payam has joined #sdw
13:15:21 <eparsons> eparsons has joined #sdw
13:15:44 <SimonCox> zakim, who is present?
13:15:44 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, SimonCox.
13:16:03 <kerry> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
13:16:29 <jtandy> scribe: Jeremy Tandy
13:16:39 <jtandy> scribenick: jtandy
13:17:02 <jtandy> kerry: does the patent call
13:17:03 <kerry> http://www.w3.org/2015/05/20-sdw-minutes.html
13:17:05 <AndreaPerego> +1
13:17:10 <jtandy> [no issues raised]
13:17:13 <AZ> +1
13:17:15 <aharth> +1
13:17:15 <Payam> +1
13:17:16 <MattPerry> +1
13:17:17 <billroberts> +1
13:17:21 <jtandy> kerry: asks for approval of the minutes
13:17:23 <Alejandro_Llaves> +2
13:17:25 <Frans> +1
13:17:27 <phila> I did update the regrets etc.
13:17:27 <ChrisLittle> +1
13:17:27 <Linda> +1
13:17:30 <jtandy> kerry: no objections
13:17:37 <Alejandro_Llaves> +1, sorry!
13:17:48 <jtandy> kerry: RESOLVED minutes are approved
13:17:59 <phila> +0 (not present last week)
13:18:08 <SimonCox> present+ me
13:18:14 <jtandy> kerry: main work of today's meeting is to head towards the voting on taking UC doc to FPWD
13:18:39 <jtandy> kerry: let's work through the open issues in the tracker ...
13:18:40 <phila> +1 from Ed
13:19:06 <jtandy> kerry: to see which issues we can resolve before FPWD, and those we will leave as issues
13:19:08 <jtandy> q+
13:19:16 <SimonCox> phila - list in minutes does reflect list on the RHS of my screen
13:19:33 <kerry> q?
13:19:36 <SimonCox> s/does/does NOT/
13:19:40 <kerry> ack jtandy
13:20:04 <cory> cory has joined #sdw
13:20:24 <Payam> +q
13:20:41 <kerry> q?
13:20:45 <kerry> ack payam
13:20:53 <cory> present+ cory
13:21:32 <Payam> ack Payam
13:22:08 <kerry> .... looking for an open issue in a  bpw fpwd
13:22:27 <jtandy> http://w3c.github.io/csvw/publishing-snapshots/WD-ucr-2014-07-01/Overview.html#UC-PublicationOfNationalStatistics
13:23:16 <SimonCox> Where is the button to close an action?
13:24:45 <kerry> jtandy: show where an issue is open in a fpwd
13:24:53 <jtandy> http://w3c.github.io/csvw/publishing-snapshots/WD-syntax-2015-04/Overview.html#bidirectionality-in-csv-files
13:25:23 <kerry> jtandy: this is not a use case doc but you can see isue46 is a hyperlink that takes you through to the tracker
13:25:42 <kerry> jtandy: do it with a bit of javascript
13:25:55 <kerry> ... can point to either tracker
13:26:08 <kerry> frans: lets do this
13:26:17 <jtandy> ACTION: jtandy to identify how to link issues in UC doc to the tracker
13:26:17 <trackbot> Created ACTION-47 - Identify how to link issues in uc doc to the tracker [on Jeremy Tandy - due 2015-06-03].
13:27:45 <jtandy> kerry: Frans- can you highlight the major issues?
13:28:02 <jtandy> ... or do you want me to go through each in turn
13:28:11 <jtandy> Frans: what is our workflow to solve issues?
13:28:28 <jtandy> ... at the moment, most issues have the status "raised"
13:28:52 <jtandy> ... I've changed some Issues to "pending review"
13:29:09 <kerry> q?
13:29:25 <jtandy> ... How can we incorporate the tracker's lifecycle for Issues into the workflow
13:29:44 <jtandy> kerry: not sure- let's look at the two issues you've set for pending review
13:29:52 <jtandy> ... which shall we do first
13:30:04 <phila> Sorry for typing out of turn, I've only ever seen Open and Closed used. You don't *need* to use any of the others
13:30:08 <jtandy> Frans: let's start with multi-lingual requirement
13:30:17 <billroberts> anyone got a link?
13:30:20 <Alejandro_Llaves> http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/9
13:30:44 <jtandy> Frans: can you summarise?
13:31:26 <jtandy> Frans: you can see that this issue has been discussed on the email list
13:31:43 <jtandy> ... the discussion seemed to close out
13:31:44 <kerry> q?
13:31:55 <jtandy> ... so I summarised in the Issue itself
13:32:06 <jtandy> ... I thought this seemed an appropriate workflow
13:32:11 <jtandy> kerry: this looks good to me
13:32:28 <kerry> q?
13:32:34 <Alejandro_Llaves> +q
13:32:40 <jtandy> Frans: you can see the proposed solution in the "related notes"
13:33:02 <jtandy> kerry: [reads out the proposal] "All vocabularies that will be developed or revised should have annotation in multiple languages."
13:33:18 <ChrisLittle> q+
13:33:18 <jtandy> kerry: anyone like to speak to or against
13:33:35 <jtandy> joshlieberman: I find this ambiguous. what languages, how many?
13:33:36 <kerry> q?
13:33:46 <AndreaPerego> Is this a general requirement for all vocabularies on the Web, or it is only for ours?
13:33:58 <Alejandro_Llaves> q- wanted to say the same
13:34:02 <kerry> Andrea.. only for ours!
13:34:18 <kerry> q?
13:34:30 <jtandy> Frans: I mean that we should provide vocabs in as many languages as we can-
13:34:40 <jtandy> ... certainly more than just english
13:34:56 <jtandy> ... we could create an inventory of the languages _we_ could support
13:35:09 <kerry> q?
13:35:15 <ChrisLittle> English, French, Spanish, Russian, Arabic and Chinese are standard in WMO and other UN agencies
13:35:35 <SimonCox> ISO/TC 211 glossary of terms is multilingual English, Arabic, Chinese, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Japanese, Korean ... though highly incomplete in most of these - see http://www.isotc211.org/TC211_Multi-Lingual_Glossary-2015-02-13_Published.xls
13:35:57 <kerry> ack ale
13:36:03 <jtandy> joshlieberman: [...] we need to provide a mechanism that _allows_ multilingual annotation, rather than saying that we _should_ specify vocab in multiple languages
13:36:07 <AndreaPerego> q+ to ask what will be the procedure to add multilingual annotations
13:36:31 <jtandy> joshlieberman: also see Linda's suggestion about it being out of scope
13:36:42 <kerry> q?
13:36:44 <jtandy> Frans: [responds - missed his point]
13:36:53 <jtandy> Alejandro_Llaves: agrees with joshlieberman ...
13:37:10 <kerry> ack chris
13:37:14 <jtandy> ... we should stick more to the spatial problems and leave this to other's to define common practices
13:37:37 <jtandy> Frans: this requirement does have a bearing for improving publication of spatial data on the web
13:38:17 <jtandy> ... it we publish the spatial vocabulary in multiple languages this will improve the ability of people to publish
13:38:43 <jtandy> Alejandro_Llaves: I agree- I think we all agreed that a vocab should allow annotation in multiple languages
13:39:29 <jtandy> ChrisLittle: supports Frans ... there are vocabularies that are very spatial (e.g. gazetteers) - see "London"; to French speakers it's "Londres"
13:39:40 <Frans> q+
13:39:50 <kerry> q?
13:39:57 <jtandy> ... the ability to provide multiple names [in different locales] is important
13:40:15 <jtandy> ... also, what does "annotation" mean here ...
13:40:17 <joshlieberman> Agree with Chris -- no argument about multi-linquality, but it needs to be more precise: mechanism, placename, spatial relationship, etc.
13:40:26 <jtandy> Frans: I mean RDF, SKOS etc.
13:40:36 <kerry> +1 to frans
13:40:54 <kerry> q?
13:40:54 <jtandy> ... these all have human readable annotations, all of which have ability to support multiple languages
13:41:08 <kerry> ack andrea
13:41:08 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask what will be the procedure to add multilingual annotations
13:41:17 <jtandy> ChrisLittle: OK- I understand the concept of annotation in this context
13:41:23 <AndreaPerego> An example of what Frans means: http://www.w3.org/ns/dcat.rdf
13:41:33 <jtandy> joshlieberman: but this is not specific to Spatial Data ...
13:42:09 <jtandy> ... an example of multi-lingual issues for geospatial data are the place names (London, Londres)
13:42:35 <jtandy> ... do we need to be specific about these geospatial concerns? I would like to see these spelt out
13:43:02 <kerry> +1 to andrea -- that re-write is good!
13:43:11 <jtandy> AndreaPerego: Frans indicates that every human readable term in a vocabulary should be provided in multiple languages
13:43:24 <cperey> cperey has joined #sdw
13:43:44 <jtandy> ... we have requirements to help people who don't know English adopt the geospatial vocabulary
13:44:06 <jtandy> ... if we do this internally within our group, this is OK
13:44:21 <kerry> +1 to andrea again" we should say something like "best effort from the group"
13:44:25 <ChrisLittle> +1
13:44:27 <kerry> q?
13:44:34 <kerry> ack frans
13:44:38 <jtandy> ... but if we mandate that we provide a Chinese or Japanese translation, how do we validate the translation when we have no skills to check
13:45:04 <jtandy> Frans: suggest we keep this requirement but don't speak about _how_ to achieve this requirement.
13:45:05 <jtandy> q+
13:45:08 <kerry> q+
13:45:25 <kerry> ack jtandy
13:45:27 <jtandy> Frans: we could look to other working groups about how to achieve this
13:45:52 <kerry> ack kerry
13:46:03 <SimonCox> joshlieberman made a specific point about spatial that I don't think was captured?
13:46:19 <jtandy> jtandy: this seems to be something that the DWBP group should be providing guidance on
13:46:25 <AndreaPerego> +1
13:46:37 <jtandy> ... check with Hadley Beaman (chair)
13:46:47 <SimonCox> s/spatial/multilingual spatial terminology/
13:46:54 <jtandy> kerry: if anything travels the globe, it's spatial data
13:46:57 <AndreaPerego> BTW, the DWBP WG is working on BPs for vocabularies.
13:47:08 <jtandy> ... the technical solution is straight forward
13:47:21 <jtandy> ... I don't mind if this is general best practice
13:47:41 <cperey> to scribe: can you please add me to roll for this meeting
13:47:42 <jtandy> ... we all agree that we should provide multi-lingual vocabularies
13:47:43 <kerry> q?
13:47:56 <jtandy> kerry: therefore I would vote in favour
13:48:00 <billroberts> q+
13:48:07 <kerry> ack bill
13:48:18 <SimonCox> Can we capture Josh's point please?
13:48:22 <phila_> phila_ has joined #sdw
13:48:24 <jtandy> billroberts: suggests a phrasing ...
13:49:00 <kerry> q+
13:49:01 <jtandy> billroberts: "All vocabularies that will be developed or revised should have ability to be annotated in multiple languages."
13:49:06 <jtandy> +1
13:49:11 <Alejandro_Llaves> "allow for annotations"?
13:49:41 <jtandy> kerry: that doesn't really say anything ... you get this for free with RDF.
13:49:48 <AndreaPerego> Not sure what it means. RDF already allows this by using @xml:lang with plain literals.
13:49:51 <AZ> FWIW, the W3C Organization Ontology has multilingual labels and descriptions http://www.w3.org/ns/org#
13:49:53 <SimonCox> ... but not with JSON
13:49:56 <jtandy> ... we should actually be indicating our _intent_ to provide translations
13:50:06 <jtandy> billroberts: that's ok
13:50:27 <ChrisLittle> Some = more than 1
13:50:32 <SimonCox> http://resource.geosciml.org/classifier/ics/ischart/Cambrian
13:51:35 <Linda> test
13:51:45 <Frans> Just testing the IRC...
13:51:47 <jtandy_> jtandy_ has joined #sdw
13:51:52 <jtandy_> ..
13:52:00 <jtandy_> scribenick: jtandy_
13:52:25 <jtandy_> kerry: I'm going to propose that we vote on this based on Frans' suggested phrasing
13:52:43 <Alejandro_Llaves> but then we should define "multiple"
13:52:51 <kerry> q?
13:52:54 <jtandy_> PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE 9 with text "All vocabularies that will be developed or revised should have annotation in multiple languages."
13:53:01 <Alejandro_Llaves> which languages? who is assuring correction?
13:53:02 <ChrisLittle> suggest 'should be cqapable of '
13:53:06 <kerry> ack alle
13:53:30 <cperey> +1 to which languages
13:53:47 <jtandy_> Alejandro_Llaves: I am fine with this in general, but we need to know who is doing this, which languages, who will validate ...
13:53:54 <Frans> q+
13:54:04 <jtandy_> kerry: ok- so you want to define the mechanism
13:54:19 <jtandy_> ... but right now we're just defining the requirement
13:54:21 <kerry> q?
13:54:26 <kerry> ack
13:54:29 <kerry> q?
13:54:35 <jtandy_> kerry: not an issue right now
13:54:49 <jtandy_> Frans: yes- let's not be too specific right now ...
13:55:18 <jtandy_> ... if we're saying "more than just english" then it's obvious that more languages can be added later
13:55:41 <jtandy_> ... perhaps we can clarify that this is based on best effort from the WG
13:55:43 <kerry> q?
13:55:57 <kerry> q?
13:56:08 <jtandy_> ... each vocabulary (geo, time, ssn etc.)  could have different languages
13:56:19 <jtandy_> kerry: [let's vote!!!]
13:56:44 <jtandy_> PROPOSED: Resolve ISSUE 9 with text "All vocabularies that will be developed or revised should have annotation in multiple languages."
13:56:51 <kerry> +1
13:56:51 <billroberts> +1
13:56:54 <Frans> +1
13:56:55 <ChrisLittle> +1
13:56:55 <jtandy_> kerry: based on definition for a requirement
13:56:55 <AZ> +1
13:56:57 <cperey> +1
13:56:58 <AndreaPerego> +1
13:57:01 <MattPerry> +1
13:57:03 <jtandy_> +1 (I can live with this)
13:57:04 <Linda> +1
13:57:04 <Alejandro_Llaves> +1
13:57:05 <cory> +1
13:57:18 <LarsG> +1
13:57:18 <aharth> +1
13:57:24 <AZ> and +1 to not specifying the languages yet
13:57:37 <jtandy_> RESOLVED: Resolve ISSUE 9 with text "All vocabularies that will be developed or revised should have annotation in multiple languages."
13:58:01 <jtandy_> kerry: the other issues are continuing ... see the CRS one [link?]
13:58:22 <jtandy_> .... this was getting close to resolution on the email list.
13:58:38 <jtandy_> ... let's try to agree during the week
13:58:44 <Alejandro_Llaves> +q
13:58:47 <jtandy_> ... and approve at next week's meeting
13:59:24 <jtandy_> kerry: we don't need the document to be "shiny" but it needs to be good enough to share in public
13:59:45 <kerry> q?
13:59:46 <jtandy_> kerry: we will make sure that this work is visible through the OGC Geosemantics DWG
13:59:51 <kerry> ack frans
13:59:52 <jtandy_> kerry: comments/questions?
13:59:56 <ChrisLittle> q+
13:59:57 <AndreaPerego> q+ to ask if we could add an issue on the support to multiple formats
14:00:07 <SimonCox> Kerry - can we have a briefing at OGC meeting next week?
14:00:15 <jtandy_> Frans: getting back to how we close issues; is this is a good method?
14:00:33 <jtandy_> ... I set issue to "pending review" then we discuss in the meeting
14:00:58 <joshlieberman> joshlieberman has left #sdw
14:01:03 <jtandy_> kerry: we should be able to close the issue from the meeting minutes
14:01:26 <billroberts> (sorry got to go for other appointment - bye all)
14:01:45 <kerry> close issue-9
14:01:45 <trackbot> Closed issue-9.
14:01:52 <jtandy_> Frans: my issue is how to notify people that things have changed
14:02:01 <kerry> q?