20:57:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdwssn
20:57:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/02/07-sdwssn-irc
20:57:43 <Kjanowic> Kjanowic has joined #sdwssn
20:57:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
20:57:44 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdwssn
20:57:46 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
20:57:46 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
20:57:47 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
20:57:47 <trackbot> Date: 07 February 2017
20:57:57 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn
20:58:03 <phila> s/Working/SSN Sub/
20:58:10 <Kjanowic> present+
20:58:11 <phila> RRSAgent, make logs public
20:58:16 <phila> chair: Armin
20:58:28 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:SSN-Telecon20170207
20:58:29 <Kerry> present+ Kerry
20:58:44 <DanhLePhuoc> DanhLePhuoc has joined #sdwssn
20:59:33 <ScottSimmons> ScottSimmons has joined #sdwssn
21:00:25 <rtroncy> present+
21:00:54 <ScottSimmons> present+ ScottSimmons
21:01:04 <DanhLePhuoc> present+ DanhLePhuoc
21:01:39 <phila> present+
21:01:48 <ahaller2> present+ ahaller2
21:02:02 <RaulGarciaCastro> RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdwssn
21:03:30 <Kerry> i willscribe
21:03:44 <ahaller2> scribe: Kjanowic
21:03:52 <ahaller2> topic: patent call
21:04:39 <roba> roba has joined #sdwssn
21:04:51 <ahaller2> topic: Create Options for the modelling of Actuation, Actuator and its relations (https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/91), i.e. change due date on https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/215 (create Action Item)
21:05:18 <phila> scribeNick: Kjanowic
21:05:38 <Kjanowic> q+
21:05:56 <Kerry> q+ to remark I think maxime did that yesterday
21:06:00 <ahaller2> q?
21:06:04 <Kjanowic> Is anybody willing to model actuation in SSN
21:06:05 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:06:31 <ahaller2> Kjanowic: I volunteered, but we had other conversations in between
21:06:52 <ahaller2> Kjanowic: until next telco
21:06:56 <ahaller2> ack Kerry
21:06:56 <Zakim> Kerry, you wanted to remark I think maxime did that yesterday
21:07:17 <Kjanowic> kjanowic to draft SSN axioms on Actuators and Actuation for next week
21:07:36 <Kjanowic> Kerry: can kjanowic look into the proposal of Maxime?
21:07:39 <Kjanowic> kjanowic: yes
21:07:44 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #sdwssn
21:07:52 <ahaller2> q?
21:07:55 <Kjanowic> ahaller2: yes, lets see what else is out there
21:08:02 <SimonCox> present+ SimonCox
21:08:08 <SimonCox> q?
21:08:13 <Kjanowic> yes
21:08:20 <ahaller2> q?
21:08:31 <ahaller2> topic: Create Options for the modelling of Results/Values in SOSA and SSN https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/90 (create Action Item)
21:09:12 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: a lot of discussion of how to model values and results n SOSA and SSN
21:09:15 <Kjanowic> q+
21:09:52 <ahaller2> q?
21:09:56 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:11:00 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: Danh willlook into the results/values issue and coordinate with kjanowic
21:11:41 <Kjanowic> DaDanh: Yes, I will do so and review the material and work with kjanowic. I will create a wikipage as overview.
21:11:53 <Kjanowic> s/DaDanh/Danh
21:12:23 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: In general using wikipages for all these subtasks would be good.
21:12:32 <ahaller2> action: DanhLePhuoc to create a wiki page and discuss options around the use of Results in SSN/SOSA
21:12:32 <trackbot> Error finding 'DanhLePhuoc'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.
21:12:54 <ahaller2> action: Danh to create a wiki page and discuss options around the use of Results in SSN/SOSA
21:12:55 <trackbot> Created ACTION-264 - Create a wiki page and discuss options around the use of results in ssn/sosa [on Danh Le Phuoc - due 2017-02-14].
21:12:58 <ahaller2> q?
21:13:12 <ahaller2> topic: 	3.	Create Options for the modelling of Processes/Procedures in SOSA and SSN https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/89 (create Action Item)
21:13:53 <kerry> kerry has joined #sdwssn
21:13:58 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: we changed back and forth between processes and procedures.
21:14:15 <kerry> sorry folks -- lost all power to house
21:14:27 <ahaller2> q?
21:14:40 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: what we currently have currently  is a procedure as the description of workflows, e.g. like receipt.
21:14:47 <Kjanowic> ahaller2: I can look into this
21:14:58 <ahaller2> action: Armin Create to create options for the modelling of Processes/Procedures in SOSA and SSN https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/89 (create Action Item)
21:15:02 <trackbot> Created ACTION-265 - Create to create options for the modelling of processes/procedures in sosa and ssn https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/89 (create action item) [on Armin Haller - due 2017-02-14].
21:15:04 <kerry> q+ to ask for current topic
21:15:08 <ahaller2> q?
21:15:13 <ahaller2> ack kerry
21:15:13 <Zakim> kerry, you wanted to ask for current topic
21:15:19 <Kjanowic> s/receipt/recipe
21:15:45 <ahaller2> q?
21:15:46 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: we are currently assigning action items
21:15:53 <ahaller2> Create Options for alignment on Platform class (create Action Item)
21:15:56 <ahaller2> topic: Create Options for alignment on Platform class (create Action Item)
21:16:23 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: we had many discussions around the concept of a platform.
21:16:34 <ahaller2> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Proposals_for_rewriting_SSN
21:16:36 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: one such proposal was by kerry.
21:16:49 <kerry> q+
21:17:09 <Kjanowic> kerry: that was really only an example
21:17:25 <Kjanowic> kerry: the point I was trying to make was the style, not the concrete example
21:17:52 <Kjanowic> kerry: I think we lost a bit of that original proposal made by kjanowic at the very beginning
21:17:57 <SimonCox> q+
21:18:13 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: about namespaces?
21:18:21 <Kjanowic> kerry: the example I gave works in both ways
21:18:24 <Kjanowic> q+
21:18:36 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: not sure what you mean?
21:19:01 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: Kerry, have you looked at the work we did before on that?
21:19:15 <SimonCox> q-
21:19:16 <Kjanowic> q+
21:19:21 <phila> ack ke
21:19:39 <Kjanowic> Kerry: bidirectional interoperability is lost now from kjanowic original proposal
21:20:11 <Kjanowic> Kerry: we probably gave up on horizontal by now but the proposal as such is still valid
21:20:32 <Kjanowic> q+ (needs to really jump in here)
21:21:12 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: please let us get back to ‘platform’
21:21:25 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: namespaces will be discussed next week
21:21:30 <kerry> q+ to continure
21:21:53 <Kjanowic> Kerry: not about namespaces
21:22:04 <Kjanowic> q+
21:22:19 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: we want to discuss ‘platform’ now
21:22:34 <Kjanowic> let's get back on topic guys....
21:23:22 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: we looked at architecture last week, but we got stuck at namespaces. We will discuss this next time.
21:23:23 <Kjanowic> q+
21:23:58 <Kjanowic> lets get back to the topic and also note that other people are on the call
21:24:25 <Kjanowic> Kerry talks about properties of her suggested approach
21:24:26 <Kjanowic> q+
21:25:01 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:25:19 <roba> its when restrictions change semantics, rather than axiomitize them that this gets messy
21:25:20 <Kjanowic> Kerry: I have a well worked proposal for platform
21:25:35 <kerry> no!!!!
21:25:38 <Kjanowic> ahaller2: kerry, so please tell us about your platform idea
21:25:57 <Kjanowic> kerry, please lets get less emotional
21:25:59 <ahaller2> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Proposals_for_rewriting_SSN
21:26:41 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:27:19 <ahaller2> q?
21:27:35 <Kjanowic> ahaller2: we already agreed on the fact that ssn will import sosa
21:27:57 <rtroncy> Can someone summarize what is the exact issue with the definition of a "Platform" ? (regardless where this term will be defined or refined)
21:28:40 <laurent_oz> laurent_oz has joined #sdwssn
21:28:42 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: please look at the proposal and just extract the platform part.
21:28:45 <Kjanowic> q+
21:29:00 <Kjanowic> rtroncy has a question and I believe it is important
21:29:05 <phila> q- (needs
21:29:14 <Kjanowic> there are more people on this call...
21:29:25 <phila> q+ rtroncy
21:29:30 <phila> q- kerry
21:29:33 <Kjanowic> Kerry: it is all already there
21:30:01 <Kjanowic> Kerry: should I do a change list
21:30:21 <Kjanowic> ahaller2: make a wiki/example fot platform only
21:30:27 <Kjanowic> s/fot/for
21:30:47 <ahaller2> q?
21:30:51 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:31:44 <ahaller2> Kjanowic: if we look at the mapping, the SSN definition for Platform is more generic
21:31:55 <ahaller2> Kjanowic: SOSA should be more generic in its annotation
21:32:06 <ahaller2> Kjanowic: axiomatically they are equivalent
21:32:12 <ahaller2> q?
21:32:22 <ahaller2> ack rtroncy
21:32:35 <Kjanowic> rtroncy: kjanowic answered the question [difficult to understand...]
21:32:59 <kerry> issue-88?
21:32:59 <trackbot> issue-88 -- Why is a sosa-core platofrm completely different to an ssn:platform? -- open
21:32:59 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/88
21:32:59 <ahaller2> q?
21:33:08 <Kjanowic> kjanowic was tring to answer rtroncy question
21:33:23 <rtroncy> I also asked whether the problem was not described in issue-88?
21:33:36 <rtroncy> It seems so ...
21:33:50 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: can you make one wikipage just for ssn and sosa platform without the general architecture, just the platform.
21:34:30 <ahaller2> action: Kerry to Create change list for alignment on Platform class in a seperate wiki page
21:34:30 <trackbot> Created ACTION-266 - Create change list for alignment on platform class in a seperate wiki page [on Kerry Taylor - due 2017-02-14].
21:34:44 <ahaller2> q?
21:34:54 <rtroncy2> rtroncy2 has joined #sdwssn
21:35:21 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: next topic o&m alignment
21:35:39 <ahaller2> topic: Vote on how to use annotation properties for examples in SOSA/SSN
21:36:04 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: let us briefly talk about annotation properties for examples in SOSA/SSN
21:36:18 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: idea was to split definition and example.
21:36:38 <ahaller2> Option 1: Use skos:example in SOSA/SSN and declare it an owl annotation property
21:36:45 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: this is especially important for sosa due to less axioms
21:36:53 <ahaller2> Option 2: Define our own annotation property -- e.g. sosa/ssn:example
21:37:25 <Kjanowic> ahaller: please vote on option 1
21:37:29 <ahaller2> Proposed: Use skos:example in SOSA/SSN and declare it an owl annotation property
21:37:33 <rtroncy2> +1
21:37:34 <DanhLePhuoc> +1
21:37:35 <SimonCox> +1
21:37:35 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
21:37:35 <Kjanowic> +1
21:37:39 <laurent_oz> 0
21:37:41 <ahaller2> +1
21:37:45 <kerry> +1 subject to not importing skos
21:37:50 <roba> +1
21:37:53 <ScottSimmons> +1
21:38:13 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: do we want to import skos?
21:38:14 <Kjanowic> q+
21:38:25 <rtroncy2> There is no need to import
21:38:31 <ahaller2> Option: Import or not import SKOS?
21:38:34 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:38:35 <SimonCox> -1 no import of skos
21:38:46 <RaulGarciaCastro> -1
21:39:03 <Kjanowic> kjanowic: if we only use skos:example there is not need to import
21:39:16 <ahaller2> PROPOSE: If skos:example is the only class/property in either SSN or SOSA we do not import SKOS
21:39:23 <Kjanowic> +1
21:39:26 <phila> +1
21:39:27 <kerry> +1
21:39:28 <rtroncy2> +1
21:39:28 <ahaller2> +1
21:39:30 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
21:39:33 <roba> +1
21:39:35 <DanhLePhuoc> +1
21:39:36 <Kjanowic> q+
21:39:37 <ahaller2> q?
21:39:41 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:39:41 <ScottSimmons> +1
21:39:51 <phila> I see no reason to import SKOS
21:39:52 <laurent_oz> no import (but more general concern about the compatibility of reuse of schema.org meta-model and use of skos (e.g. like in RDF data cube)
21:39:52 <SimonCox> +1 - I would extend to any SKOS annotation property
21:40:10 <ahaller2> Kjanowic: what about multiple examples?
21:40:23 <SimonCox> i.e. I would say would could use any SKOS annotation property without importing SKOS
21:40:31 <ScottSimmons> I must leave the meeting, if things come down to close votes, SimonCox has my proxy
21:40:39 <phila> +1 SimonCox
21:40:48 <ahaller2> q?
21:40:53 <Kjanowic> +1 SimonCox
21:41:18 <Kjanowic> laurent_oz: [too much noise]
21:41:21 <ahaller2> q?
21:41:46 <ahaller2> q?
21:41:49 <SimonCox> q+
21:41:59 <ahaller2> q?
21:42:01 <kerry> q+
21:42:53 <ahaller2> ack SimonCox
21:42:53 <rtroncy2> Raphael: yes, we could make multiple occurrences of skos:example but I would like to remind that they are just annotation properties and as such, there could be redundancy in the information.
21:43:03 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: the way you posed the issue was limited to only skos:example. If we talk about annotation properties, we have no problem anyway. We can use any of the skos annotation properties withou the need to import.
21:43:19 <ahaller2> q?
21:43:20 <rtroncy2> Raphael: I would therefore just use one occurrence of the property even if it gathers multiple examples in the literal
21:43:22 <ahaller2> ack kerry
21:43:27 <Kjanowic> ahaller2: let us make this another agenda item
21:43:59 <Kjanowic> Kerry: we should have multiple skos:example triples when needed
21:44:08 <ahaller2> PROPOSE: use multiple skos:example annotation properties where necessary
21:44:19 <Kjanowic> I am also in favor of multiple examples being possible
21:44:22 <roba> +1 for all annotations : i think its consistency requirement  - we need to follow the same pattern - so i think the vote implies the default position is we should treat all skos annotations the same way
21:44:26 <SimonCox> +1
21:44:26 <ahaller2> +1
21:44:29 <Kjanowic> +1
21:44:30 <DanhLePhuoc> +1
21:44:39 <rtroncy2> 0
21:44:39 <kerry> +1
21:44:43 <laurent_oz> +1 to multiple examples (but also keen on having other resources to learn from outside the ontology)
21:44:45 <ahaller2> q?
21:44:49 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
21:44:58 <roba> +1
21:45:03 <ahaller2> q?
21:45:10 <ahaller2> topic: O&M alignment options as of Simon's email in response to ACTION-255 (and proposal to invite Simon as editor to solve this and other issues)
21:45:12 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: let us move to O&M alignment
21:46:12 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: I did this on github but just posted the text in an email so that you can all look at it.
21:46:24 <ahaller2> SimonCox: email to the list Tue, 7 Feb 2017 21:36:29 +0000
21:46:46 <kerry> q+ to coment on what an O&M alignment looks like
21:46:49 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: there is an officially endorsed version of how to convert from UML to URLs (by ISO)
21:47:23 <SimonCox> https://github.com/ISO-TC211/GOM/tree/master/isotc211_GOM_harmonizedOntology/19156/2011
21:47:58 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: my proposal is to use those URIs for the alignment
21:48:17 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: this enables us to express the alignment in a pretty compact way and not just text
21:48:28 <kerry> simon, did you mean alignment from sos to ssn as you said?
21:48:35 <kerry> s/sos/sosa/
21:48:53 <roba> q+
21:49:02 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: the question really is whether the official ISO URIs are suitable to denote the UML classes and properties.
21:49:20 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: would this become normative or not.
21:49:36 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: om-lite could also be added as note
21:49:45 <ahaller2> ack kerry
21:49:45 <Zakim> kerry, you wanted to coment on what an O&M alignment looks like
21:49:50 <DanhLePhuoc> +q
21:50:13 <Kjanowic> SimonCox both SOSA and SSN
21:50:50 <Kjanowic> Kerry: I get the URL idea but this is really ugly.
21:51:02 <ahaller2> q?
21:51:29 <Kjanowic> Kerry: Alternative is to use the OGC O&M specs and do any alignment to O&M by text
21:51:30 <Kjanowic> q+
21:53:19 <kerry> q+ to cjeck thatthose uris are resolvable
21:53:23 <DanhLePhuoc> q-
21:53:28 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: the OWL you get from the automatic conversion is ugly but I am not suggesting that. I am focusing on the nice side effect of minting URLs and those are defined in a standard and are canonical.
21:53:37 <laurent_oz> 1: tried to derive graphics out of the ISO .ttl (result not very good) 2. am now looking at the published UML - found that here was also "implementation" packages in it 3. questions to Simon: are there plan to publish O&M in this branch of HMMG (this could be the best source to derive OWL from).
21:53:39 <ahaller2> q?
21:53:43 <ahaller2> ack roba
21:54:12 <laurent_oz> Also: they are official URIs but very badly defined (need some tidying)
21:54:30 <Kjanowic> Roba: the alignment is a separate document. It is my understanding that it does not effect SSN or SOSA axioms
21:54:35 <Kjanowic> simoncox: no, same document
21:54:42 <ahaller2> q?
21:54:48 <Kjanowic> simoncox: but yes, this does not change sosa/ssn
21:54:51 <ahaller2> ahaller2
21:55:09 <Kjanowic> Roba: the intention is just to use the URIs?
21:55:10 <Kjanowic> q+
21:55:14 <ahaller2> ahaller2: it is not a vote yet on if it is normative or non-normative
21:55:17 <laurent_oz> ... e.g. when I say tidying, I mean tracking the official prefixes and removing the ones which have number at the end.
21:55:19 <Kjanowic> simonCox: yes, that is the idea
21:55:26 <ahaller2> q?
21:55:29 <laurent_oz> q+
21:55:35 <Kjanowic> Roba: last comment. Skos notations could be used here.
21:55:44 <mlefranc> mlefranc has joined #sdwssn
21:56:08 <ahaller2> q?
21:56:31 <Kjanowic> Roba: SKOS notation not annotation.
21:56:46 <Kjanowic> Roba: I am just saying that this is an option.
21:56:50 <SimonCox> laurent_oz: don't intend to do anything with the prefixes. Use the official ISO URIs
21:56:59 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
21:57:54 <ahaller2> ack kerry
21:57:54 <Zakim> kerry, you wanted to cjeck thatthose uris are resolvable
21:58:04 <Kjanowic> kjanowic: simon's proposal is to establish formal relations between the URIs and classes and properties in SOSA/SSN
21:58:28 <Kjanowic> Kerry: These URIs are not resolvable.
21:58:53 <laurent_oz> Simon, sometimes a nice prefix is used in some places and a different one is used elsewhere: my idea is to use the most recognisable one (so that in the future if we have a better OWL version it will use the same prefixes (likely) and so our work will not be lost.
21:59:05 <ahaller2> Q?
21:59:08 <ahaller2> ack laurent_oz
21:59:11 <Kjanowic> kerry: fine with me but may be a problem for ssn
21:59:59 <Kjanowic> laurent_oz: I tried to look into this and visualize it but that was not easy. Do we know what is on the horizon for O&M?
22:00:22 <Kjanowic> SimonCox: this is a persistent standard in its own right.
22:00:46 <ahaller2> kerry: was pointing out the non-resolving of URIs may be an issue for W3C, check with Phila
22:01:02 <Kjanowic> q+
22:01:40 <Kjanowic> laurent_oz: not all of them are easily readable URLs
22:01:47 <ahaller2> URIs are restricted to https://github.com/ISO-TC211/GOM/tree/master/isotc211_GOM_harmonizedOntology/19156/2011, is this correct, Simon?
22:02:01 <roba> Agree with Simon regarding the appropriateness of the URI, and there is a bigger question about OGC/ISO definitions space- alignment with specref may provide a good solution here IMHO
22:02:21 <ahaller2> q?
22:02:39 <Kjanowic> q-
22:02:45 <ahaller2> topic: Proposed time slots for extended phone conference mid-February
22:03:06 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: last topic for having longer meetings, e.g., some time in Feb.
22:03:18 <ahaller2> ack Kjanowic
22:03:28 <Kjanowic> Ahaller2: I will prepare a doodle.
22:04:01 <Kjanowic> ahaller2: this is just about mappings, i.e., alignment. nothing more
22:04:03 <Kjanowic> bye bye
22:04:07 <kerry> bye!
22:04:07 <RaulGarciaCastro> Bye
22:04:14 <DanhLePhuoc> bye bye
22:04:52 <ahaller2> RRSAgent, make logs public
22:05:00 <ahaller2> RRSAgent, draft minutes \
22:05:00 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft minutes \', ahaller2.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
22:05:02 <ahaller2> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:05:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/07-sdwssn-minutes.html ahaller2
22:06:30 <laurent_oz> laurent_oz has left #sdwssn
22:36:54 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn