12:09:38 RRSAgent has joined #sdw 12:09:38 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/09/02-sdw-irc 12:09:40 RRSAgent, make logs world 12:09:40 Zakim has joined #sdw 12:09:42 Zakim, this will be SDW 12:09:42 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 12:09:43 Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference 12:09:43 Date: 02 September 2015 12:27:05 jonblower has joined #sdw 12:49:35 eparsons has joined #sdw 12:52:21 trackbot, start meeting 12:52:23 RRSAgent, make logs world 12:52:25 Zakim, this will be SDW 12:52:25 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 12:52:26 Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference 12:52:26 Date: 02 September 2015 12:52:41 RRSAgent, make logs public 12:52:44 kerry has joined #sdw 12:52:53 present+ eparsons 12:53:01 chair : eparsons 12:53:05 present+ kerry 12:54:39 regrets+ Rachel Heaven, Bart van Leeuwen 12:55:05 regrets+ Simon Cox, Stefan Lemme, Antoine Zimmermann 12:55:34 frans has joined #sdw 12:56:53 jtandy has joined #sdw 12:59:20 ahaller2 has joined #sdw 12:59:32 Alejandro_Llaves has joined #sdw 12:59:52 present+ Alejandro_Llaves 12:59:55 ChrisLittle has joined #sdw 13:00:36 present+ frans 13:00:53 aharth has joined #sdw 13:00:57 present+ Phil 13:01:00 present+ jtandy 13:01:30 present+ aharth 13:01:33 LarsG has joined #sdw 13:01:53 jonblower has joined #sdw 13:01:53 AndreaPerego has joined #sdw 13:01:55 MattPerry has joined #sdw 13:01:58 present+ LarsG 13:02:07 present+ MattPerry 13:02:25 semi-apologies from me today, I'll have to leave in about 30 minutes... 13:02:35 joshlieberman has joined #sdw 13:02:44 +present Jon Blower 13:03:00 +present joshlieberman 13:04:02 present+ AndreaPerego 13:04:12 Topic: Approve Minutes 13:04:16 +present ahaller2 13:04:35 http://www.w3.org/2015/08/12-sdw-minutes.html 13:04:59 +1 13:04:59 +0 (failing memory) 13:05:01 PROPOSED: Accept last meeting minutes 13:05:01 +1 13:05:15 RESOLVED: Accept last meeting minutes 13:05:16 It looks as if I was there +1 13:05:17 +1 13:05:18 +0 (wasn't there!) 13:05:23 +0 not present 13:05:24 +1 13:05:28 Topic: Patent Call 13:05:29 +0 wasn't there 13:06:00 Topic: UCR Issue 15 Discussion 13:06:07 http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/15 13:08:00 thanks for the welcomes all! 13:08:18 scribe: Kerry 13:08:19 scribe: kerry 13:08:25 scribenick: kerry 13:08:31 About the meeting minutes, I guess the correct link is http://www.w3.org/2015/08/19-sdw-minutes.html (Aug, 19th) 13:08:42 topic: issue 15 13:09:24 frans: after email discussion, is proposal for new requirement 13:09:40 Proposal for new reuquirement "It should be possible to declare that a web resource is in the past, present or future with respect to another web resource" 13:09:56 note this emal too: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2015Sep/0001.html 13:10:06 s/reuquirement/requirement/ 13:10:15 s/emal/email 13:10:20 s/reuquirement/requirement 13:10:21 This makes sense ... wrt temporal referencing, this supports Allen Calculus type stuff 13:10:24 q+ 13:10:32 ack next 13:10:37 q+ 13:10:37 frans: will be possible to indetigy predictions from real time observations 13:10:55 Does this include or leave out real world features that a Web resource may represent? 13:10:56 phila: are we talking about versions? 13:11:09 s/indetigy/indetify/ 13:11:18 frans: its about owl-time -- a temporal requirement not spatail 13:11:21 cperey has joined #sdw 13:11:22 q+ 13:11:28 q- 13:11:33 q+ 13:11:33 ..... about a fuure event or an old document in the past 13:11:47 phila: notes it will casue controversy. 13:11:49 ack next 13:11:52 s/fuure/future/ 13:11:54 s/fuure/future/ 13:12:07 jeremy: this is a subset of the allen calculus 13:12:23 ... equiv to spatail reasoning 13:12:23 That helps, thank you, Jeremy 13:12:32 q+ 13:12:34 s/casue/cause/ 13:12:38 yes 13:12:45 jeremy ... should go on the full range of allen calculus 13:12:45 allen calculus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen%27s_interval_algebra 13:12:46 ack next 13:13:20 s/spatail/spatial/ 13:13:47 jon: clarify if about relationship between time doc is published and when it is about (that moves into the past). like valid time and observation time 13:13:50 q+ 13:13:51 +q 13:14:02 frans: can be used for any web resource 13:14:15 Jon: have to worry about what the time refers to 13:14:16 ack next 13:14:27 foaf:primaryTopic Jon? 13:14:48 phila; looks sensible, is there a dct: term too? 13:14:48 chris: we did dicuss all this in the email. this issue in data onthe web is not really explicit 13:15:01 ... is buried in versioning, etc 13:15:09 ack next 13:15:23 s/onthe/on the/ 13:15:24 ed: is it more of a data issue or a spatail issue? 13:15:33 s/spatail/spatial/ 13:15:53 josh: an importnat requirement but only a part of it. we need realtionship between resources 13:16:07 ... and between a web resource and its real world concept 13:16:09 s/importnat/important/ 13:16:17 ... am hapy with former but not latter 13:16:26 s/hapy/happy 13:16:31 s/hapy/happy 13:16:46 frans: wonders whther its alreadt there in owl time 13:16:59 s/alreadt/already/ 13:17:00 s/alreadt/already 13:17:26 josh: owl-time does not say anthing about the temporal relation between real world resource and the web resource 13:17:29 s/whther/whether/ 13:17:34 s/anthing/anything 13:17:34 ack next 13:18:00 q+ to note our discussion from two weeks ago about interaction with DWBP group 13:18:10 http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/14 13:18:17 alejandro: is happy with the wording of the requirement. could be extended to say there is a need for ...? 13:18:36 In the meeting of 2015-08-12 (see http://www.w3.org/2015/08/12-sdw-minutes) this issue was resolved, with the decision to add a new requirement for the OWL Time deliverable: "OWL Time should be updated to align with the 2012 update of OWL datatypes and 2012 update of xsd datatypes" Temporal reasoning and relations are already in OWL Time, so there is no reason for such a requirement. 13:18:37 ... issue 14 has some relation to this about temporal reasoning relations. 13:19:03 ... so is this current issue already covered in oel-time? 13:19:10 s/oel/owl 13:19:26 Frans: yes do we need this requirement? 13:19:30 ack next 13:19:31 jtandy, you wanted to note our discussion from two weeks ago about interaction with DWBP group 13:20:00 jeremy: irrespectively, we have a requirement we can keep anyway. 13:20:13 http://www.w3.org/2015/08/19-sdw-minutes 13:20:41 ... about whther spatail or not wnat to talk with dotw working group -- see those minutes 13:20:51 s/spatail/spatial 13:20:58 s/wnat/want 13:20:59 ... we propose that if it is not in the DWWG and it is important we can hand over to them. 13:21:14 s/dotw/DOTW 13:21:29 Ed agrees 13:21:34 +1 even if something is not explicitly spatial, it may be needed for our work and not a priority for Data on the Web 13:21:37 q+ 13:21:45 ack next 13:21:48 "It should be possible to declare that a web resource is in the past, present or future with respect to another web resource" 13:21:57 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2015Sep/0001.html 13:22:47 kerry draws attention to this email, all those different types of times (valid, transaction, etc) not in Allen calculus 13:23:29 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2015Sep/0001.html 13:24:03 -> http://www.ics.uci.edu/~alspaugh/cls/shr/allen.html Allen's Interval Algebra 13:24:33 s/DOTW/DWBP/ 13:24:40 frans: owl-time does not say anything about how those statements might be used 13:24:45 To me, Antoine's req. is more about the need to model predictions, and specify they are different to things happening in the future. 13:24:58 Can we consider that Allen calculus / OWL-time is adequate as long as we can define and represent in Web resources events such as predictions? 13:25:18 ed: how we solve it is not important 13:25:31 q+ 13:25:37 ack next 13:26:05 q+ 13:26:09 q+ to note that the BP doc includes a need to express spatial _and_ temporal information 13:26:14 regrets+ Rachel, Antoine, Bart, Simon, Bill, Simon, Stefan, 13:26:58 ack next 13:26:58 +q 13:27:04 I have to leave now, sorry 13:27:07 +q 13:27:27 chris: the requirement we have is not covered by DWBP which only does versioning etc 13:27:36 ack next 13:27:37 jtandy, you wanted to note that the BP doc includes a need to express spatial _and_ temporal information 13:27:49 ... eg replacing data by some from a differnt source... is a real requirement 13:28:05 q+ to say Agreed, DWBP are talking about versioning (of datasets), not temporal relationships 13:28:06 jeremy: lots of requirements for spatail and teporal information 13:28:08 ack next 13:28:54 allejandro: antoine's is not covered by issue-15 which covers historians saying that some even happend in the future wrt some other event. 13:29:14 ... antoin'es is about tagging something as a prediction that is differnet. 13:29:48 ack next 13:29:55 s/antoin'es/antoine's 13:29:57 ... if we put i n the issue-15 requirement we ... we need temporal relations between web resources in the use cases that drove this. 13:30:06 q+ 13:30:21 frans: thanks for discussion -- needs a bit more research now. 13:30:26 ack next 13:30:27 phila, you wanted to say Agreed, DWBP are talking about versioning (of datasets), not temporal relationships 13:30:29 s/even/event 13:30:47 ack next 13:30:50 ACTION to Frans to work on issue-15 13:30:50 Error finding 'to'. You can review and register nicknames at . 13:30:58 s/happend/happened 13:31:04 Phila: keep on this. Do not rely on DWBP 13:31:07 http://data.gov.uk/library/designing-uri-sets-for-location 13:31:27 action: knibbe to work on Issue-15 13:31:27 Created ACTION-70 - Work on issue-15 [on Frans Knibbe - due 2015-09-09]. 13:31:54 Andra: some more examples would help -- we have some from the UK -- denoting spatial objects at a given point in time. How do we do this in the data? 13:32:21 .... is this too theoretical? we need to see how people address this in practice. 13:32:22 Topic: Best Practice Progress to date 13:33:25 jetemy: set some homework -- some has been done but not all 13:33:37 s/jetemy/jeremy 13:33:49 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives 13:33:55 s/Andra/Andrea/ 13:34:03 .... could go thru that cross referencing or could do out of band 13:34:41 jeremy... consolidated those 50+ use cases to 7 common themes 13:35:06 ... e.g. linkin things to each other, publishing with clear semantics, exposing datasets thru apis, 13:35:41 .... enabling discovery, assignment of identifiers, expressing geospatial and temporal information 13:36:02 ... sensor data, and also other stuff that could be stuffed in somewhere 13:36:14 ... yet to allocate requirements to these themes 13:36:51 ... why are we doing this? if DWBP is already doing it we should not do it again 13:37:23 ... also the web architecture doc -- we need to support that 2004 architecture. 13:37:32 see http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html 13:37:41 ... dont use the web as a glorified usb stick 13:37:43 I throw myself on the mercy of the court. I offer the excuse of it being August and having a family. Now that August is temporally past, I will endeavour to complete Action-61 13:37:54 jon: thks for intro 13:38:30 jon: is 50 use case doc still live? 13:38:42 phil: one was added today 13:39:03 allejandro: ok to add still if frans ok too 13:39:17 Topic: Cross - referencing homework 13:39:21 Current use cases and requirements doc: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/UseCases/SDWUseCasesAndRequirements.html 13:39:27 jon cloning, changing and adding pull request 13:39:35 s/allejandro/Alejandro/ 13:40:00 topic: Cross - referencing homework 13:40:13 grazie, Andrea! ;) 13:40:59 kerry: found surprising little relevant advice from DWBP 13:41:01 q? 13:41:12 jeremy: yep, we need to create that 13:41:14 q+ 13:41:27 publishing clear semantics 13:42:04 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives#Cross-ref_with_data_on_the_web_BP_.28Kerry.29 13:42:30 thanks! 13:42:31 yes 13:42:43 +1 13:44:07 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives#exposing_datasets_through_APIs 13:44:28 jeremy: exposing datasets thu apis 13:44:49 ed: only 30% thru, yet to complete, finish this time next week 13:44:59 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives#Crossreferencing_.28Linda.29 13:45:03 jermey: enabling discovery 13:45:25 ... see minutes from 2 weeks ago. Linda has written it up here. 13:45:31 s/jermey/Jeremy/ 13:45:42 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives#assignment_of_identifiers_to_.E2.80.98real-world_things.E2.80.99_.26_information_resources 13:46:02 phil on identifiers... 13:46:26 .... had a lot of email about url or uri or iri -- this is a big issue 13:46:33 q+ 13:46:53 phila, promises to deliver 13:47:08 ack next 13:47:22 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Requirements#Requirements_not_specific_to_spatial_data 13:47:44 andrea: drafted some preliminary requirements for best practice from barcelo meeting 13:48:02 ack next 13:48:07 ... included pointer s to ddwbp. will update the wiki with this. 13:49:37 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives#expressing_.28geo.29spatial_information_.26_temporal_information 13:49:55 jeremy: expressing geospatail and temporal info, chris? 13:50:44 chirs: am on it, but not written up yet. There are some such as descriptve metadata, standard formats etc. 13:50:47 s/geospatail/geospatial/ 13:50:55 chris: very little overlap 13:50:56 q+ to talk about DWBP in general, expectations, audiences etc. 13:50:56 q+ to ask about GeoDCAT-AP 13:51:03 s/chirs/chris/ 13:51:13 ... if you are going to have some descriptive metadata beware of xxxx 13:51:21 ack next 13:51:22 phila, you wanted to talk about DWBP in general, expectations, audiences etc. 13:51:27 chris: will do before next weeking 13:51:34 s/ing// 13:52:18 phil: dwbp is very different to this group, with a different brief. they are writing the basic so that it is there 13:53:05 phila: will propose to them that they change their name to keep separate from discussion about hypermedia for example. the topic is too vast. expect them to do the basics. 13:53:49 jeremy: when chris said spatial metadata i thought of geodcat-ap. Should alsp be cross-referened here. 13:54:02 s/alsp/also/ 13:55:11 Andrea: yes, we have temproal and spatail reference system open issues too. thinking of dublin core but might not be good enough 13:56:01 Anread: we have problem specifying spatial coverage and how to represent geometry. Many overlaps iwth this group that have been documented. 13:56:23 s/Anread/Andrea/ 13:56:34 ... will be revised for final version september of october. We could consider this is a possible candidate to reference from our bp. 13:56:45 s/of/or/ 13:57:06 jeremy: could be "here is a body of work that we think is good" in our doc 13:57:08 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives#sensor_data 13:57:20 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Consolidated_Narratives#crossref_to_Data_on_the_web_BP_.28Kerry.29 13:57:24 bye bye everyone! 13:58:07 s/iwth/with/ 13:58:35 s/spatail/spatial/ 13:58:57 etopic: nottingham 13:59:05 topic: nottingham 13:59:23 q+ 13:59:27 q- 13:59:27 ed: f2f for 2 hours, 13:59:31 ack next 13:59:37 q+ 13:59:48 Unfortunately, I'm not likely to be in Nottingham. 14:00:02 +1 14:00:08 q+ 14:00:28 phil meeting to start one hour earlier 14:00:40 +1 14:00:53 Thanks, bye! 14:00:54 ed: we can do gotmeeting and webex for this meeting? probably gotomeeting 14:00:55 thanks, bye! 14:00:56 bye 14:00:58 bye 14:00:59 bye! 14:01:04 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:01:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/09/02-sdw-minutes.html eparsons 14:01:04 meeting closed 11:59 pm 14:01:05 bye all! (Andrea, phila, see you in Brussels next weeks!) 14:01:08 bye 14:01:09 bye 14:01:12 bye 14:01:13 bye! 14:01:14 joshlieberman has left #sdw 14:01:15 RRSAgent, draft minutes 14:01:15 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/09/02-sdw-minutes.html phila 15:27:54 jtandy has joined #sdw 16:08:12 Zakim has left #sdw