See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: PhilA
<eparsons> thanks
<scribe> scribeNick: phila
<AndreaPerego> Evening, everyone.
eparsons: We can get going...
<eparsons> Topic : Approve last week's minutes
<eparsons> https://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-sdw-minutes
-> https://www.w3.org/2017/01/25-sdw-minutes Minutes from 2 weeks ago
<jtandy> +1
<Linda> =1
<LarsG> +1
<Linda> +1
+1
<ScottSimmons> +0
<billroberts> 0 (wasn't there)
<DanhLePhuoc> +1
<eparsons> RESOLUTION : Approve last week's minutes
<eparsons> Topic : Patent Call
<kerry> +1
<eparsons> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
<eparsons> Topic : Best Practice: vote to publish Latest Working Draft
<eparsons> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/
eparsons: Anything else to say, Linda, Jeremy?
<jtandy> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Feb/0079.html
jtandy: The e-mail..
... Lists the changes. We've done stuff on the summary (We =
Clemens)
... BP7 updated
... The section on authoritative URLs has been pushed to
BP14
... BP 17 removed
... Understand that Byron has been overtaken by events
... Not a huge no.of change but we're keeping to the schedule
of regular releases.
... As BartvanLeeuwen is here - this time we have included his
work. Thank you Bart.
eparsons: Any questions and
issues?
... we have some positive votes from people not here
<eparsons> PROPOSED: That the editors current draft of the SSN doc at w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/ be published by W3C and OGC as the next iteration
<jtandy> +1
<AndreaPerego> +1
<Linda> +1
<LarsG> +1
<jtandy> -1
<Linda> -1
<eparsons> +1PROPOSED: That the editors current draft of the doc at w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/ be published by W3C and OGC as the next iteration
<Linda> +1
<BartvanLeeuwen> +1
<jtandy> +1
<kerry> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
<AndreaPerego> ??
<billroberts> +1
<AndreaPerego> +1
<DanhLePhuoc> +1
<eparsons> +1
<LarsG> +1
<eparsons> RESOLVED : That the editors current draft of the doc at w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/ be published by W3C and OGC as the next iteration
<AndreaPerego> \o/
<eparsons> Congratulations and Thanks to the Editors !!!
jtandy: Thanks everyone. Lots
more to do and vote on in Delft.
... Next sprint is the last one with any substantive
changes
... If we suggest that you help us with an item, please help
us.
billroberts: I've been too busy or having too much fun to help but that's all over so I should be able to offer some time now.
jtandy: Remember how you've made your choices about vocabs and splits between RDF and others - that's important
<eparsons> Kerry how is it going ?
phila: Recounted how DWBP tweeted about implementations of DWBP - which amplified the signal nicelyr
Linda: We're interested to know how well the idea of sprints works
jtandy: I'd say we were realistic
in what we could achieve in a sprint
... Realism was good.
... The F2F time in London was very valuable
... We'll be challenged to get so much done in this next
sprint
eparsons: The F2F always
helps
... And you're more focused
... Any more comments on BP?
[Nope]
eparsons: Thanks again to the
editors
... Been a while since we discussed coverages
... So where are we, Bill?
billroberts: Coverage
connoisseurs know there were 3 docs.
... QB4ST and EO-QB docs went to FPWWD in early Jan
... Both are not far off being final.
... Maybe a certain element of dependency on the BP doc
... I've not had a chance to talk to the authors of those since
I came back.
... Confident that they will reach a final version within a
suitable time frame.
... CoverageJSON we decided to delay putting into FPWD as there
is some uncertainty over whether it should be an OGC/W3C doc or
not.
... Feeling is for now it will stay on covjson.org with a CC
licence. Doc from this WG will refer to that spec.
... So there's not a huge amount to do to the doc to get it to
FPWD
... Haven't talked about imminent availability. Might be
possible to get ready for a vote in either 2 or 4 weeks.
... It's a while since we had a call. Will try and convene one
for (this time) next week.
eparsons: Comments or questions?
<Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask something related to BP
jtandy: Thanks for the update.
Sounds like progress...
... Off topic. I saw Lars comments about the references
disappearing
... I load in 2 browsers. It stopped loading the ReSpec
stuff
<Linda> It works in my browser...
<jtandy> <script class="remove" src="http://www.w3.org/Tools/respec/respec-w3c-common"></script>
<jtandy> line 7 index.html
phila: If the address of the doc is https, so should respec be
<Zakim> kerry, you wanted to suggest eo-qb could be ready for another vote in that timeframe
<kerry> wanted to say to billroberts
<kerry> that we could coordinate
<kerry> ...a fresh eo-qb as well
<kerry> in a few weeks
<kerry> over
<kerry> i am finished -- please dpont wait more!
<eparsons> thanks kerry all done ?
<billroberts> thanks kerry - will follow up by email but sounds good
<Zakim> LarsG, you wanted to talk about https everywhere
LarsG: I wanted to say that my FireFox prob might be that I have https everywhere installed.
<eparsons> phila: lots of email traffic
<eparsons> phila: Not all on the same page rather heated...
<eparsons> phila : some progress but still fundamental differences within group
<eparsons> phila: Need for 2 namespaces one such issue
<eparsons> phila: Chance of rec 50:50 only at the moment due to time constraints
Linda: Not active in Time or SSN,
but Geonovum is interested in their progress
... Maybe we can help as a neutral observer
<eparsons> phila: issues need summarising
eparsons: Concerned that there are such fundamental issues. If we can't address that then it's going to be a challenge
phila: Armin is trying hard to steer the group
eparsons: It's a specialised topic and if you're not into it, it's hard to contribute
]
Linda: Yes, it's specialised, but the question over 1 or 2 namespaces is not specialist
phila: +1 to Linda
eparsons: So let's see what we can all do. We don't want people falling out.
kerry: Lots of issues about the
integration of SSN with the core, known as SOSA
... Those are being worked through
... There's a kind of self-appointed sub group putting
solutions on the table
... Strong personalities not liking some bits and then people
fall over
... Work better with chair appointed cf. self appointed
s/string/strong/
kerry: Lots of issues in the
tracker, often interrelated, but starting to come
together
... All just about ontologies, not the spec. We're due for a
new doc.
... I wouldn't write it off.
BartvanLeeuwen: At the beginning
of the WG, we sped things up by creating sub groups.
... It sounds as if we have an obligation to bring this into
the main WG again if things are not going as well as it
could
<Zakim> kerry, you wanted to speak on barts commnets
kerry: That has been suggested,
mostly by me. It's not well received
... The times of the meeting are bad
... And it's a bit of a specialist topic
... I have no objection, but it may not work for other
people
phila: Repeats Linda's offer of help
kerry: Personally I'd like
that
... How do we do it?
<DanhLePhuoc> +q
eparsons: I suggest you identify
the issues you're struggling with
... send to the whole group and ask for help.
<jtandy> +1 to @eparsons' proposal
kerry: I'll talk to Armin
<Linda> +1 to eparsons
BartvanLeeuwen: We don't like to have non-SSN people commenting sounds like mutiny. The specs - the WG - bears all our names.
DanhLePhuoc: I'll add that the
way... I had to step back... not everyone's respecting Armin's
role, which is a pity.
... So I'm all for resolutions in the plenary.
... What I see in several meetings - the chair can't always get
through the agenda
... People jumping in all the time
... I hope that will help move things forward.
eparsons: I know it might be a hassle to others, we could think about moving the plenary to a different time
<Linda> BartvanLeeuwen has a point - SSN is a product of this WG so we're all in a way responsible
DanhLePhuoc: It doesn't have to be a lot of effort to bring things to the plenary
<DanhLePhuoc> +1 to Phil
kerry: We've had push back on the whole WG taking a role in the SSN work
phila: It's not optional - the whole WG is responsible
PROPOSED: That the SSN Sub Group bring blocking issues to the plenary where the whole WG will do their best to help. Remembering that all publications are made in the whole WG's name.
jtandy: If there has been a
discussion in the SSN, part of what's needed for the WG to
help, is that a summary needs to be made of the opposing
views.
... So that the whole WG can take a view on the specifics
eparsons: Is the proposal OK to everyone?
<Linda> +1
<BartvanLeeuwen> ++1
<kerry> +1
<eparsons> +1
<AndreaPerego> +1
<LarsG> +1
<billroberts> +1
<ScottSimmons> +1
[NOTUC]
<DanhLePhuoc> +1
<jtandy> [specific issues = blocking issues]
<jtandy> +1
<eparsons> Topic : Upcoming F2F in Delft agenda bashing
RESOLUTION: That the SSN Sub Group bring blocking issues to the plenary where the whole WG will do their best to help. Remembering that all publications are made in the whole WG's name.
eparsons: much discussion around
the timetable of this.
... The info suggests that it should be Monday and Tuesday
<eparsons> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Attending_F2F6
eparsons: It would be helpful if
everyone can update the wiki table
... Then Greg (OGC) can handle registrations.
... The Monday will focus on BP, as Jeremy can't be there
Tuesday.
<Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask if I need to register for the OGC TC?
eparsons: Registration will be done for just the SDW meeting, you don't need to register for the overall OGC event.
jtandy: That saves me doing stuff
eparsons: We can work out how to use our time
Linda: So do we miss the opening
plenary?
... I'm due to speak for 3 minutes
billroberts: What's the OGC event?
eparsons: The Technical Committee meeting
billroberts: I have something
else on that Monday
... But can be there Tuesday.
<BartvanLeeuwen> thx guys
<jtandy> bye
<AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye!
<LarsG> Bye
<billroberts> bye!
<eparsons> bye thanks phila
<kerry> bye!
phila: Can't be there Monday morning but may *fly* on that afternoon to get there ASAP.