21:01:56 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdwssn
21:01:56 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/25-sdwssn-irc
21:01:58 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
21:01:58 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdwssn
21:02:00 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
21:02:00 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
21:02:01 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
21:02:01 <trackbot> Date: 25 April 2017
21:02:05 <ahaller2> present+
21:02:17 <SimonCox> Do we have audio?
21:02:20 <ahaller2> no
21:02:21 <DanhLePhuoc> present+ DanhLePhuoc
21:02:27 <RaulGarciaCastro> present+ RaulGarciaCastro
21:02:36 <SimonCox> Do you want me to set one up?
21:03:27 <KJanowic> present+
21:05:37 <KJanowic> I still get 'host has not joined the meeting'
21:05:38 <SimonCox> CSIRO Webex details in email
21:05:59 <ahaller2> Thanks, let's all try to switch to Simon's webex invitation
21:06:47 <RaulGarciaCastro> Haven’t received the email yet
21:06:59 <mlefranc> * neither
21:07:07 <SimonCox> https://csiro.webex.com/csiro/j.php?MTID=m0bbed3808144f04d17c3ff9671a09109
21:09:38 <KJanowic> "Your browser, browser version, or operating system is currently unsupported."
21:10:02 <SimonCox> Oh dear - sorry - what to do?
21:10:31 <ahaller2> mine only works in Safari
21:10:58 <ahaller2> you need to trust the connection, and that popup came only in safari for me, not in chrome nor firefox
21:11:31 <ahaller2> or do you want to call in via phone?
21:12:11 <KJanowic> https://appear.in/ssn
21:12:11 <SimonCox> https://conferencing.csiro.au/Call-in.php
21:12:13 <ahaller2> 1-844-267-3690
21:12:20 <ahaller2> +61-2-6246-4433 (Australia  Canberra ACT)
21:12:23 <KJanowic> should we simply use https://appear.in/ssn
21:12:27 <ahaller2> code: 571 853 648 #
21:13:06 <ahaller2> @KJanowic we are all on the webex, please try to call in, the US number is toll free
21:14:25 <mlefranc> * the appean.in other works well ?
21:14:39 <mlefranc> s/appean/appear/
21:14:47 <SimonCox> I closed the webex - I couldn't hear anyone
21:15:03 <SimonCox> Sorry
21:15:12 <DanhLePhuoc> I can create a Web from TUB
21:16:01 <DanhLePhuoc> https://meeting.tubit.tu-berlin.de/orion/joinmeeting.do?ED=etKfigG3Vw5b30P2qdO--w==
21:16:13 <ahaller2> danh, we are in the https://appear.in/ssn room
21:17:39 <ahaller2> scribe?
21:18:51 <ahaller2> @danh can you hear us?
21:19:41 <ahaller2> scirbe: KJanowic
21:19:45 <ahaller2> scribe: KJanowic
21:19:50 <ahaller2> scribenick: KJanowic
21:19:58 <ahaller2> topic: Approving last meeting's minutes https://www.w3.org/2017/04/18-sdwssn-minutes
21:20:02 <ahaller2> +1
21:20:03 <KJanowic> +1
21:20:05 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
21:20:09 <SimonCox> +1
21:20:11 <mlefranc> +1
21:20:16 <mlefranc> +1
21:20:17 <DanhLePhuoc> +1
21:20:23 <ahaller2> topic: Patent Call https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
21:20:25 <DanhLePhuoc> I can't hear anything
21:20:37 <mlefranc> mlefranc has joined #sdwssn
21:20:46 <ahaller2> topic: Issue raised by Krzysztof on oldssn:Observation equivalent/subClassOf sosa:Observation
21:21:13 <mlefranc> q+
21:21:29 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
21:21:30 <KJanowic> q+
21:22:15 <KJanowic> Maxime: for now I removed the axiom in question.
21:22:50 <KJanowic> Maxime: At least reasoning-wise nothing would break for the moment.
21:22:50 <ahaller2> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/#SSNX_Alignment
21:22:56 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:24:57 <ahaller2> q?
21:25:16 <KJanowic> Kj: we may have to state that new ssn and old ssn are not alignable
21:25:41 <KJanowic> ahaller2: subclassing?
21:25:48 <KJanowic> kj: but they are likely disjoint
21:25:52 <KJanowic> maxime: yes, they are.
21:26:13 <ahaller2> q?
21:26:17 <DanhLePhuoc> q+
21:26:31 <KJanowic> ahaller: first step is to remove the axiom
21:26:53 <ahaller2> ack DanhLePhuoc
21:27:25 <mlefranc> skos:changeNote "The Observation class in the initial SSN  was defined to be a subclass of dul:Situation. To improve alignment with O&M and user expectations, as well as to follow a consistent modeling strategy for observations, sampling, and actuation, the new sosa:Observation class represents an activity.  While we do not provide any normative alignments to DUL, this new Observation class is more in line with dul:Event instead of dul:Situation."@en
21:28:34 <ahaller2> q+
21:28:45 <KJanowic> Danh: we may end up with an inconsistent ontology. I would suggest to remove this alignment and leave the rest.
21:28:47 <KJanowic> q+
21:29:00 <KJanowic> Danh: better to explain better what we did than to break the alignment
21:29:00 <ahaller2> ack ahaller
21:29:14 <KJanowic> I wanted to propose this was well
21:29:21 <mlefranc> q+
21:29:33 <KJanowic> ahaller: what if we remove the alignment of new ssn to dul?
21:29:38 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:29:53 <KJanowic> 5.1.2 Class Alignments
21:30:26 <ahaller2> KJanowic: remove alignment in 5.1.2, to DUL:Event
21:30:56 <ahaller2> KJanowic: but who to "punish", either breaking the old ssn or new ssn, I would rather break the old one
21:30:58 <ahaller2> q?
21:31:01 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
21:31:40 <SimonCox> the old SSN was outcome of a W3C incubator - no formal status, so I agree with KJanowic
21:31:43 <KJanowic> Maxime: even if we remove the axiom,there may still be other problems later on due to domains and ranges.
21:32:32 <KJanowic> Maxime: I tried to esure that there is no inconsistency between old and new.
21:32:41 <KJanowic> q+
21:33:26 <KJanowic> Ahaller: lets first list the 3 possible solutions we have and vote
21:33:32 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: remove equivalentclass axiom from Observation to oldssn:Observation
21:33:37 <KJanowic> +1
21:33:43 <ahaller2> +1
21:33:47 <mlefranc> 0
21:33:54 <RaulGarciaCastro> 0
21:34:09 <SimonCox> +1
21:34:18 <mlefranc> will make no difference because of the axioms. would need to propagate with inference
21:34:55 <KJanowic> ahaller: you removed the axiom already, right?
21:35:17 <KJanowic> maxime: may still propagate back
21:35:21 <ahaller2> RESOLVED:  remove equivalentclass axiom from Observation to oldssn:Observation
21:35:24 <ahaller2> q?
21:35:27 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:36:13 <SimonCox> We should not compromise the Rec going forward
21:36:30 <SimonCox> Early adopters were aware of risk
21:36:38 <mlefranc> ok to remove sosa:Observation rdfs:subClassOf dul:Event
21:36:43 <SimonCox> and could be expected to be reasonably sophisticated
21:36:56 <KJanowic> kj: early usage is going to go away
21:37:33 <KJanowic> kj: there will be minimal use of old ssn in the future. we do this for historical purpose only. we will not have old-ssn and new-ssn side by side in the future
21:38:07 <KJanowic> ahaller2: so we are left with two solutions
21:38:20 <ahaller2> 1. Option: remove ssn:Observation subclassOf dul:event
21:39:13 <ahaller2> 2. Option: have no alignment axiom from ssn:Observation to DUL and propagate properties that have Observation as domain up the property hierarchy
21:40:06 <ahaller2> 2. Option: have alignment axiom from ssn:Observation to DUL:event and propagate properties that have Observation as domain up the property hierarchy
21:40:38 <ahaller2> q?
21:40:43 <KJanowic> q+
21:40:46 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:42:33 <KJanowic> q+
21:42:35 <ahaller2> q?
21:42:38 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:44:10 <ahaller2> q?
21:44:11 <KJanowic> q+
21:44:14 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:45:12 <KJanowic> ahaller: maybe have an action item to present *consistent* options
21:45:31 <KJanowic> ahaller: align as well as possible but focus on not breaking new-ssn
21:45:40 <KJanowic> I can
21:45:50 <KJanowic> if maxime and you help
21:45:59 <mlefranc> I can help
21:46:31 <ahaller2> ACTION: KJanowic to start a wiki page that describes option on aligning new Observation with DUL, considering that it is an Event, not a Situation
21:46:32 <trackbot> Created ACTION-334 - Start a wiki page that describes option on aligning new observation with dul, considering that it is an event, not a situation [on Krzysztof Janowicz - due 2017-05-02].
21:46:59 <ahaller2> topic: Issues raised by Raúl in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Apr/0281.html
21:47:12 <KJanowic> ahaller: important issue but we have to move on,next topic are issues from Raul's email
21:47:46 <RaulGarciaCastro> Can you hear me?
21:48:04 <KJanowic> no
21:48:10 <RaulGarciaCastro> :S
21:48:11 <KJanowic> maybe reload your browser tab
21:48:22 <KJanowic> it should ask you for control of your mic
21:48:32 <RaulGarciaCastro> I already granted
21:48:36 <RaulGarciaCastro> Let’s reload
21:49:55 <ahaller2> topic: Proposed examples in https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/730
21:50:12 <KJanowic> Raul: click on the cam/mic button on the top (middle) of the page
21:51:20 <ahaller2> q?
21:51:23 <RaulGarciaCastro> I switched to Chrome
21:51:26 <KJanowic> maxime: the example we have is good but can one running example address all the many cases we want to capture? Maybe we can merge both, the old example and the new one.
21:52:01 <KJanowic> ahaller2: we can have multiple examples
21:52:08 <KJanowic> q+
21:52:13 <SimonCox> Also need Forecasting example
21:53:02 <ahaller2> q?
21:53:05 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:53:07 <KJanowic> ahaller: work on the examples and add them to the final document but not to the current draft
21:54:32 <ahaller2> q?
21:54:44 <KJanowic> kj: one section not within the specs
21:54:48 <KJanowic> ahaller: I agree
21:54:58 <ahaller2> q?
21:55:00 <RaulGarciaCastro> q+
21:55:04 <ahaller2> ack RaulGarciaCastro
21:55:07 <KJanowic> yes
21:55:45 <KJanowic> Raul: the idea is to have a primer, right?
21:56:22 <KJanowic> ahaller: depends on whether there will be a follow-up group
21:56:24 <KJanowic> q+
21:56:38 <RaulGarciaCastro> What I wanted to say is that producing a primer is not a trivial effort
21:56:42 <KJanowic> ahaller2: the question is more whether we should have examples in the current version
21:56:54 <KJanowic> agree with raul
21:57:06 <ahaller2> q?
21:57:09 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:57:50 <KJanowic> ahaller2: example can be a note like ssn usage
21:58:10 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Examples in the main WD
21:58:14 <KJanowic> -1
21:58:15 <ahaller2> 0
21:58:23 <SimonCox> -1
21:58:28 <mlefranc> 0
21:58:29 <RaulGarciaCastro> 0 (don’t know if we have time)
21:58:40 <DanhLePhuoc> 0
21:58:55 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Examples in a seperate Note document
21:58:59 <KJanowic> +1
21:58:59 <ahaller2> 0
21:59:06 <mlefranc> 0
21:59:09 <mlefranc> 0
21:59:14 <SimonCox> +1
21:59:22 <KJanowic> ahaller: voting -1 on this one means moving it to a potential follow-up group
21:59:25 <KJanowic> q+
21:59:29 <RaulGarciaCastro> 0 (but would be nice to have)
21:59:37 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
22:00:33 <KJanowic> kj: if we postpone, it can easily take 1-2 years
22:00:40 <ahaller2> RESOLVED: Examples in a seperate Note document
22:01:18 <KJanowic> dog: [inaudible]
22:01:28 <ahaller2> ACTION: ahaller2 remove axiom for ssn:Observation to oldssn:Observation
22:01:29 <trackbot> Created ACTION-335 - Remove axiom for ssn:observation to oldssn:observation [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-02].
22:02:02 <KJanowic> ahaller2: we can get a WD next week
22:02:16 <ahaller2> topic: Editor/Contributor list for last WD of http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/, https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/331, https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/332
22:02:19 <KJanowic> kj: imho, we need to discuss the figures as well
22:03:08 <ahaller2> Contributor: (ordered alphabetically) Rob Atkinson, Raul Garcia Castro, Josh Liebermann, Chris Little, Sefki Kolozali, Scott Simmons, Claus Stadler
22:03:09 <KJanowic> ahaller: we should have a contributor section in the document
22:03:22 <KJanowic> q+
22:03:27 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
22:04:40 <SimonCox> Chris Little made a few comments on forecasts, but I doubt he will push
22:05:34 <SimonCox> q+
22:05:54 <ahaller2> ack SimonCox
22:06:52 <ahaller2> q+
22:06:53 <KJanowic> q+
22:07:03 <ahaller2> ack ahaller
22:08:04 <KJanowic> -1 to statistics
22:08:18 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
22:09:20 <ahaller2> q?
22:09:30 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Contributor: (ordered alphabetically) Rob Atkinson, Raul Garcia Castro, Josh Liebermann, Claus Stadler
22:09:33 <ahaller2> +1
22:09:46 <mlefranc> 0
22:09:48 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
22:10:00 <KJanowic> 0 (dislike alphabetic order)
22:10:14 <SimonCox> +1
22:11:10 <KJanowic> Okay, so I change my vote to +1
22:11:25 <ahaller2> RESOLVED: Contributor: (ordered alphabetically) Rob Atkinson, Raul Garcia Castro, Josh Liebermann, Claus Stadler
22:11:26 <KJanowic> ahaller: we can revisit this for the papers
22:11:48 <ahaller2> ACTION: ahaller to update the WD with contributor list
22:11:48 <trackbot> Error finding 'ahaller'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.
22:11:57 <ahaller2> ACTION: ahaller2 to update the WD with contributor list
22:11:58 <trackbot> Created ACTION-336 - Update the wd with contributor list [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-02].
22:12:35 <KJanowic> ahaller: editor list will be decided offline; we are out of time
22:13:06 <KJanowic> ahaller: editor's draft out for review, move to WD
22:13:09 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Editors draft with changes from today to become our final WD prior to rec track
22:13:17 <KJanowic> q+
22:13:41 <SimonCox> +1
22:13:43 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1 (but I would try to implement some of the trivial issues I spotted)
22:13:51 <KJanowic> Simon: next step would be rfc in ogc
22:13:59 <ahaller2> +1
22:14:04 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
22:14:05 <SimonCox> WD == OGC Discussion Paper
22:14:06 <mlefranc> +1
22:14:09 <SimonCox> Candidate Rec = RFC
22:14:42 <KJanowic> s/rfc/Candidate Rec
22:14:44 <RaulGarciaCastro> I can
22:15:18 <RaulGarciaCastro> I’m sorry!
22:15:19 <ahaller2> topic: Issues raised by Raúl in https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2017Apr/0281.html
22:16:03 <KJanowic> Simon: can you scribe, I can barely hear raul
22:16:13 <ahaller2> I cannot hear Raul at all
22:16:24 <RaulGarciaCastro> Sorry
22:17:12 <ahaller2> http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/OperatingProperty
22:17:46 <KJanowic> ahaller2: we can remove the first one -- as raul proposed
22:17:51 <ahaller2> q?
22:17:51 <RaulGarciaCastro> I propose merging both
22:17:57 <KJanowic> ahaller2: we have many cases like this
22:18:41 <KJanowic> maxime: For now, the only redundant issue are related to cardinalities.
22:18:49 <KJanowic> q+
22:19:35 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
22:20:50 <RaulGarciaCastro> As an example for Observation:
22:20:54 <RaulGarciaCastro> Taking as an example the Observation class, the documentation states:
22:20:55 <RaulGarciaCastro>    sosa:madeBySensor must be exactly 1 sosa:Sensor
22:20:56 <RaulGarciaCastro>    sosa:madeBySensor must be sosa:Sensor
22:20:58 <RaulGarciaCastro> However, this is not a direct translation of the implementation, because
22:21:01 <RaulGarciaCastro> the cardinality axiom is not qualified:
22:21:03 <RaulGarciaCastro>    rdfs:subClassOf [ a owl:Restriction ; owl:onProperty
22:21:03 <RaulGarciaCastro> sosa:madeBySensor ; owl:cardinality "1"^^xsd:nonNegativeInteger ] ;
22:21:04 <RaulGarciaCastro>    rdfs:subClassOf [ a owl:Restriction ; owl:onProperty
22:21:05 <RaulGarciaCastro> sosa:madeBySensor ; owl:allValuesFrom sosa:Sensor ] ;
22:22:42 <ahaller2> q?
22:22:50 <DanhLePhuoc> q+
22:23:04 <KJanowic> kj: fine with me
22:23:18 <RaulGarciaCastro> My issue is related on how to document the axioms; not in the axioms themselves
22:26:06 <DanhLePhuoc> q-
22:26:19 <KJanowic> ahaller: leave two sentences or condense to 1
22:26:23 <KJanowic> kj: use 2
22:26:35 <ahaller2> q?
22:26:40 <KJanowic> ahaller2: or rephrase
22:26:55 <KJanowic> q+
22:27:14 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
22:27:19 <KJanowic> simon: not Manchester syntax
22:28:17 <KJanowic> maxime: not exactly what we stated in the axioms
22:28:23 <SimonCox> "sosa:madeBySensor exactly 1 sosa:Sensor" is Manchester syntax
22:28:32 <KJanowic> q+
22:28:42 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
22:28:44 <SimonCox> it translates to two Restrictions
22:29:55 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Remove Range Class from unquantified restrictions
22:30:18 <KJanowic> remove fully quantified cardinality restrictions if we do not have them in the ontology
22:30:42 <mlefranc> remove the name of the class in the cardinality restriction sentences in the documentation
22:30:50 <RaulGarciaCastro> in other words: the axioms documentation should directly align with the axioms in the ontology
22:31:12 <KJanowic> turn  fully quantified cardinality restrictions  into unquantified cardinality restrictions
22:31:33 <mlefranc> * kj : qualified, not quantified
22:31:34 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: the axioms documentation should directly align with the axioms in the ontology
22:31:39 <ahaller2> +1
22:31:39 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
22:31:50 <mlefranc> +1
22:32:05 <RaulGarciaCastro> But they have the documentation two lines above
22:32:10 <KJanowic> +1
22:32:13 <SimonCox> +1
22:32:24 <ahaller2> RESOLVED: the axioms documentation should directly align with the axioms in the ontology
22:32:45 <ahaller2> ACTION: mlefranc to implement "the axioms documentation should directly align with the axioms in the ontology"
22:32:46 <trackbot> Created ACTION-337 - Implement "the axioms documentation should directly align with the axioms in the ontology" [on Maxime Lefrançois - due 2017-05-02].
22:33:25 <KJanowic> [I have to leave in ~2min]
22:34:55 <mlefranc> q+
22:35:25 <ahaller2> q?
22:35:29 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
22:35:35 <KJanowic> ahaller2: We can deprecate terms later
22:35:43 <RaulGarciaCastro> KJanowic: if you have any comment of the figures, send me an email (or to the list)
22:35:47 <KJanowic> maxime: it is a feature at risk
22:36:10 <KJanowic> simon: doing the same for owl-time
22:36:47 <KJanowic> simon: we need to mark them as 'at risk' now to avoid delays later
22:37:07 <KJanowic> can even be in the Candidate Rec
22:37:51 <ahaller2> action: ahaller2 to include agenda item next week on properties/classes at risk
22:37:51 <trackbot> Created ACTION-338 - Include agenda item next week on properties/classes at risk [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-02].
22:38:19 <mlefranc> action on someone to propose a list of features at risk ?
22:38:19 <trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.
22:39:01 <ahaller2> q?
22:39:05 <KJanowic> [ I have to leave now]
22:39:15 <KJanowic> yes
22:39:51 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Issue Editor's draft as WD pending changes from todays' meeting
22:39:54 <KJanowic> +1
22:39:57 <ahaller2> +1
22:39:58 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
22:40:01 <mlefranc> +1
22:40:14 <SimonCox> +1
22:40:18 <DanhLePhuoc> +1
22:40:27 <ahaller2> RESOLVED: Issue Editor's draft as WD pending changes from todays' meeting
22:41:25 <mlefranc> scribe: mlefranc
22:41:54 <ahaller2> ACTION: ahaller2 update documentation to align documentation of ssn:hasProperty
22:41:55 <trackbot> Created ACTION-339 - Update documentation to align documentation of ssn:hasproperty [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-02].
22:42:23 <mlefranc> topic: ssn:hasProperty and ssn:isPropertyOf moved to sosa ?
22:42:40 <ahaller2> q?
22:42:43 <RaulGarciaCastro> If you see the figure, it fits well there: http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/images/SSN-Observation.png
22:43:03 <ahaller2> q?
22:43:10 <mlefranc> ahaller2: significant change, can discuss this one now ?
22:43:14 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1 to move them to sosa
22:43:40 <mlefranc> mlefranc: +1 to move them to sosa
22:43:41 <RaulGarciaCastro> No, only the properties, not Property
22:44:03 <RaulGarciaCastro> We are making something similar with Systems
22:44:14 <mlefranc> SimonCox: would that force us to introduce ssn:Property to sosa ?
22:44:24 <mlefranc> q+
22:44:26 <ahaller2> q?
22:44:49 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
22:45:53 <RaulGarciaCastro> But we are doing the same thing with System
22:46:02 <mlefranc> SimonCox: domainIncludes and rangeIncludes could be used to avoid importing ssn:Property to sosa
22:46:54 <ahaller2> ACTION: ahaller2 to add agenda item on moving of ssn:hasProperty and ssn:isPropertyOf for our next meeting
22:46:54 <trackbot> Created ACTION-340 - Add agenda item on moving of ssn:hasproperty and ssn:ispropertyof for our next meeting [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-02].
22:46:55 <SimonCox> multiple domainIncludes rangeIncludes imply a superclass (in this case ssn:Property)
22:47:24 <mlefranc> topic: remove isResultingSampleOf  ?
22:47:49 <RaulGarciaCastro> Yes
22:47:59 <RaulGarciaCastro> (to Maxime)
22:48:40 <mlefranc> SimonCox: the history is that they were not in sosa in the first place
22:49:40 <SimonCox> hasResult rangeIncludes Sample
22:49:51 <mlefranc> ... domainIncudes and rangeIncludes will be used to link from hasResult and  isResultOf to Sample
22:49:53 <SimonCox> isResultOf domainIncludes Sample
22:50:38 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: to move hasResultingSample/isSamplingResultOf from SOSA to SSN and update the schema:domainRange and schema:domainIncludes
22:50:38 <SimonCox> in SSN: Sample subclassof Result
22:51:02 <SimonCox> Sampling hasResult only Sample
22:51:50 <mlefranc> SimonCox: and add  some axioms to hasResult in ssn
22:51:54 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: Remove hasResultingSample/isSamplingResultOf in SOSA, update the schema:domainRange and schema:domainIncludes and add axioms to hasResult
22:52:00 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
22:52:01 <mlefranc> +1
22:52:02 <ahaller2> +1
22:52:06 <SimonCox> +1
22:52:17 <ahaller2> RESOLVED: Remove hasResultingSample/isSamplingResultOf in SOSA, update the schema:domainRange and schema:domainIncludes and add axioms to hasResult
22:53:49 <ahaller2> ACTION: SimonCox to make changes according to hasResultingSample in the WD and the SSN and SOSA ontologies
22:53:50 <trackbot> Created ACTION-341 - Make changes according to hasresultingsample in the wd and the ssn and sosa ontologies [on Simon Cox - due 2017-05-02].
22:54:47 <RaulGarciaCastro> The last one is important
22:56:26 <ahaller2> ACTION: mlefranc harmonise name for isActuatedBy to madeByActuator
22:56:27 <trackbot> Created ACTION-342 - Harmonise name for isactuatedby to madebyactuator [on Maxime Lefrançois - due 2017-05-02].
22:56:33 <RaulGarciaCastro> The one regarding the “Results section” is maybe something one editor can make
22:56:44 <RaulGarciaCastro> No discussion needed
22:57:42 <RaulGarciaCastro> OK
22:57:49 <RaulGarciaCastro> Bye!
22:58:07 <ahaller2> RRSAgent, make logs public
22:58:15 <ahaller2> RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:58:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/25-sdwssn-minutes.html ahaller2
23:28:32 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn
23:46:08 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn
23:46:19 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn