Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference

<eparsons> ClemensPortele you should be able to get the code now

<billroberts> yep

<scribe> scribe: ClemensPortele

<jtandy> PROPOSED: approve last week's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/03/09-sdwbp-minutes

<jtandy> +1

<eparsons> +1

<MattPerry> +1

<billroberts> +1

<ClausStadler> +0 (missed the meeting)

<Linda> +1

RESOLVED

<phila> +1

RESOLUTION: approve last week's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/03/09-sdwbp-minutes

<joshlieberman> +1

Patent Call

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

Linda: wants to discuss meeting time when DST starts in Europe
... Would be 5-6pm and 1-2 hours earlier would be better

<joshlieberman> UTC?

<jtandy> PROPOSED: new meeting time @ Wed 13:00 UTC

<jtandy> +1

<eparsons> +1

+1

<joshlieberman> +1

<MattPerry> +1

<Linda> +1

<ClausStadler> +1

<billroberts> 0 - can do either time equally

<AndreaPerego> +1

<joshlieberman> Any potential West Coasters?

RESOLUTION: new meeting time @ Wed 13:00 UTC

<joshlieberman> (of US)

Work through flooding scenario from an actor perspective

<jtandy> For each of the actors, work through the flooding scenario (see BP Narrative) to determine how they interact with spatial information - as a publisher or consumer - in order to flesh out the scenario further and [begin to] define the examples we will need

<phila> agenda: www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon20160323

<joshlieberman> My sense from the last meeting minutes is that use of the Web in the scenario has not been sufficiently explicit.

jtandy: at the previous call, there was general agreement to use the scenario to restructure the best practices
... ... potentially merging some of the best practices

<Linda> +1

jtandy: do we all agree about this approach?

eparsons: not completely convinced about the merging
... ... narrative and the best practices could also be read separately in isolation

jtandy: so the primer may tell a story from a perspective that links bps

(seems to be agreed)

jtandy: we probably do not need to make a decision now

<phila> joshlieberman: I agree that merging doesn't necessarily make sense. We can work on the narrative and make reference to the BPs as we go along.

joshlieberman: agrees that the idea of merging does not make sense, but working on the narrative with links to the bp will provide context to a bp to see if it works (going from the narrative to the practice)

jtandy: ok, so we may end up with two different sections in the document

joshlieberman: another quibble is that the Web is not really part of the narrative

jtandy: agrees about this, the narrative is currently lightweight
... ... with more text the Web aspect should be included, too

Linda: Bart could not join today

jtandy: Let's follow up with Bart

joshlieberman: time and uncertainty aspects related to predictions should be added
... also proximity to the predicted flood extent

<jtandy> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative

<jtandy> ACTION: joshlieberman to add thoughts about flood prediction to the narrative at https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/03/23-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-151 - Add thoughts about flood prediction to the narrative at https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/bp_narrative [on Joshua Lieberman - due 2016-03-30].

<jtandy> ACTORS:

<jtandy> professional spatial data publisher

<jtandy> other professionals using this data

<jtandy> citizens using social media

<jtandy> web/app developers

<jtandy> journalists

<jtandy> emergecny responders

<jtandy> citizens who are in danger of being flooded

jtandy: look at the narrative from the actor's perspective

<jtandy> 7 actors

jtandy: 7 actors, eparsons and Rachel offered to take one role

<eparsons> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yVvmwK7kcT9PN7ai2unhvQH_hINGaQBIst4P9WTe4UM/edit?usp=sharing

eparsons: is this the right approach to take?

jtandy: keep it snappy and do not make a long story, just to provide context so readers can emphasize

<jtandy> in terms of level of detail: "does the narrative provide enough information to see if my problem is the same as the one described in the BP"

<jtandy> "can you recognise these problems as your problems"

jtandy: question is whether the connection between the narrative, the problem and the bp is understandable

Linda: looking at eparsons's text, maybe take some parts out and rather put it in the bp text
... ... examples are good, looks good in general

jtandy: any other thoughts?

<jtandy> [eparsons also said that we need to have the narrative and best practices grounded in reality]

<Linda> Some info could fit into the 'why' section of one of the BP's. But as editor I don't mind cutting and pasting.

eparsons: this will be more complicated for some of the other actors

jtandy: what is described how information could be found via search engines - in contrast how it works today in sdis
... ... or in unstructured text only
... in one of the last meetings we discussed how do we talk about "less than 5 star data"
... ... this is probably two star

eparsons: yes, and we should not require everyone to jump to 5 stars directly
... ... eg without the need to develop an ontology first

billroberts: likes the idea of web pages, but a lot of the time the location of all of the schools may be needed
... ... so different ways are useful for different types of use cases
... ... support multiple ways to support multiple use cases

jtandy: one bp is to support (multiple) formats for multiple user communities

<AndreaPerego> +1

joshlieberman: but it does not go far enough
... ... format does not differentiate the different representations and service interfaces
... ... eg an image from a WMS vs data from a SOS or SensorThings API

eparsons: agrees with joshlieberman and billroberts. Another actor: the data integrator which does heavy lifting.
... ... this should not be the task of the data publisher so the we do not overload them and need to take the motivation into account

jtandy: do you think there are sets of best practices for data integrators or "power data publishers"?

eparsons: yes, but focus on the narrative now and see who is missing

joshlieberman: need to work out from the narrative that something on the map image is the same thing as some JSON-LD object
... in WMS: GetFeatureInfo makes the link

jtandy: currently nothing in the narrative that ties things together?
... joshlieberman, could you add something about this in the narrative?
... billroberts, would you be able to add something about spatial analysis (ie another professional user) into the narrative?

<billroberts> sure, will do

jtandy: to clarify joshlieberman's ACTION: professional user to reconcile information in a map with some crowd-sourced data

Linda: will provide an update on the Geonovum testbed with recommended practices

<Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk briefly about http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#MultipleFormats

<phila> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#MultipleFormats

Linda: ... and content negotiation is not always the answer

phila: the dwbp covers the general topic (see the link above)
... I have another topic for the next call [which the scribe has missed ;)]

<phila> Draft subsetting BP

billroberts: subsetting will discussed in the coverage call
... metadata in a web page will work for certain use cases (like a school director), but may work less good for others eg the director of a railway company that wants to publish all their railway stations

jtandy: two types of professional users - one with single entities and one with many entities

eparsons: and the answer is never a spreadsheet

<eparsons> thanks all

<eparsons> bye

<AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye!

jtandy: please indicate on the wiki if you can take the role of an actor

<billroberts> bye

<joshlieberman> bye

<ClausStadler> thanks, bye

<Linda> bye