<dmitrybrizhinev> can you hear me kerry? I can hear you

<kerry> scribe: scott

<kerry> scribenick: ScottSimmons

<kerry> proposed: Approving last meeting's minutes http://www.w3.org/2016/08/24-sdwcov-minutes

+1

<ChrisLittle> +1

<roba> +1

<kerry> respolved: Approving last meeting's minutes http://www.w3.org/2016/08/24-sdwcov-minutes

Patent call

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

2 new Notes/discussion papers http://w3c.github.io/sdw/eo-qb/ and http://w3c.github.io/sdw/coverage-json/

<ChrisLittle> S/respolved/resolved/

Dmitry has text for eo-qb discussion paper

Chris: did not see material in papers yesterday; Kerry just merged an hour ago or so for first, nothing in second

discussion of coverage JSON paper

Jon: appreciate advice (perhaps from Bill) on scope as there are already existing documents on CoverageJSON in GitHub

Jon writing a paper on general aims of CoverageJSON

Jon: should I use paper on aims as basis or should SDWGG discussion paper be something else?

Roba: would be useful to have reference back to use cases and requitements

<ChrisLittle> S/requitements/requirements/

Roba: x-ref to BP2; description of a set (metadata) - what can be used in a more general way

Jon: probably already on that mapping/path

<ChrisLittle> Scott: suggests starts as explanatory text then transmogrified to standard text

ScottSimmons: OGC typically has wide ranging text for DPs. But in this case might be best to both describe the general setting then provide the spec as it stands

Jon: does not want to maintain two versions of the spec

ScottSimmons: OGC DP is not normative, so the spec can be a snapshot and the canonocal version can continue to evolve

<ChrisLittle> +q

Jon: just want to make things clear for what people actually cite

ChrisLittle: WMO uses a manual and then a guide to the manual (normative and informative)

<kerry> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/eo-qb/

Dmitry: would like to go through in detail with Kerry, invites comments from everyone.
... does not yet have overall flow

Kerry: needs discussion of use cases and requirements

Roba: named to provide those use cases/req's, but will need more participation

Kerry: in this case there is not an existing spec, so should discuss what style of content is appropriate. Descriptive content is always valuable. Specification part should be relatively small

Roba: how close is this intended to be to the ANU (?) ontology?

Dmitry: most of the work has not gone into the ontology, rather focused on the data cube things

Roba: would be a good thing to include concepts on how we describe spatial-temporal dimensions
... can reuse some aspects of work associated with DGGS, pay attention to hierarchy of governance. Break ontologies into modules

Dmitry: restate: which are specific to this work and which are more generic

Chris: I am a FORTRAN programmer (!). Consider tiling, not reflected in ontologies and structures
... consider that the datacube comes from spreadsheet people - print a spreadsheet and you do get tiles!

Chirs: Coverage tiling group in OGC has not gone anywhere, but is still present to do work

Roba: address time

Kerry: looking for suggestions on how to handle; time perhaps makes more sense
... how do you line up with datacube

Dmitry: on my list to look at OWL-time ontology

<ChrisLittle> +1 to Ro's ideas, but perhaps not calendars

Roba: QB4ST: idea of binding a CRS to a dimension (time) and common geometries (e.g.,, DGGS)

Kerry: makes more sense to me now - how to query

Chris: concrete example: cube where one dimension is species of butterfly, how do you tie a CRS to that dimension?
... have a handle on time as a CRS, many are definitely not calendars

<jonblower> Sorry, I'm afraid I've got to run to another meeting now

<ChrisLittle> * thanks Jon

Kerry: anything from Jon for TPAC agenda?

Jon: discussion of document in Tuesday meeting. CoverageJSON has a cubey felling about it - worth discussing dimensions that cannot be attached to a CRS
... priority will be rounding-off documents

TPAC face to face meeting: see https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Aug/0193.html and https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4

fist link points to Phil's comments on getting ready for the meeting

S/Phil/Bill

Roba: add to agenda strawman on mail list

Dmitry: Roba - please add an example to assist in review

Kerry: should plan a couple of demos in Plenary meeting

Roba: planning a proof-of-concept for OGC Orlando meeting; Django work that would feed a triple-store and deal with complex inheritance tasks in a user-friendly way

Kerry: should this be added to TPAC agenda?

Roba not exactly waffling, but can provide something

Roba: this is a registration approach to publishing ontology models that exhibit hierarchical characteristics

Kerry will add to agenda for 10 - 15 mins

AOB?

Kerry says goodby - meeting adjourned