19:56:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdwssn
19:56:02 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/05/16-sdwssn-irc
19:56:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
19:56:04 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdwssn
19:56:06 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
19:56:06 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
19:56:07 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
19:56:07 <trackbot> Date: 16 May 2017
19:57:03 <mlefranc> mlefranc has joined #sdwssn
20:00:30 <ahaller2> present+ ahaller2
20:02:58 <KJanowic> KJanowic has joined #sdwssn
20:05:55 <KJanowic> present+
20:06:38 <mlefranc> present+
20:07:52 <ahaller2> KJanowic: you are having troubles?
20:09:18 <KJanowic> BAck
20:09:44 <ChrisLittle> ChrisLittle has joined #sdwssn
20:10:00 <KJanowic> present+
20:10:10 <ChrisLittle> present+ ChrisLittle
20:10:32 <ahaller2> topic: Approving last meeting's minutes https://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-sdwssn-minutes
20:10:46 <KJanowic> +1
20:10:49 <ahaller2> 0
20:11:13 <ChrisLittle> +0 not there
20:11:15 <mlefranc> +1
20:12:46 <ahaller2> scribe: KJanowic
20:12:50 <ahaller2> scribenick: KJanowic
20:12:52 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #sdwssn
20:13:15 <mlefranc> https://www.w3.org/2017/05/09-sdwssn-minutes.html#ActionSummary
20:13:39 <ahaller2> https://www.w3.org/2017/05/09-sdwssn-minutes
20:13:41 <ahaller2> +1
20:13:43 <ahaller2> 0
20:13:46 <KJanowic> ahaller also votes  +1 on moving the capabilities to a horizontal module.
20:13:47 <mlefranc> +1
20:13:49 <KJanowic> +!
20:13:52 <SimonCox> SOrry guys - a few things going on here this morning. Will have to duck out twice to take my wife and daughter to trains.
20:13:53 <KJanowic> +1
20:14:03 <SimonCox> +1
20:14:13 <ahaller2> topic: patent call https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
20:14:14 <KJanowic> [I also can only make the fist hour today]
20:14:43 <ahaller2> topic: Discuss further invitations and new responses to https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Wide_Review
20:15:47 <KJanowic> Markus Stocker and others emailed feedback for wide review
20:16:02 <KJanowic> also another comment on actuation
20:16:23 <ahaller2> q?
20:16:36 <ClausStadler_> ClausStadler_ has joined #sdwssn
20:16:51 <KJanowic> Simon: some  more feedback directly on the ontology
20:17:03 <KJanowic> we should ask Nick (?) to send an email
20:17:11 <ClausStadler_> present+ ClausStadler
20:17:21 <KJanowic> mlefranc: also some more feedback from colleagues
20:18:02 <SimonCox> I will mute while I procure some breakfast ...
20:18:44 <KJanowic> feedback about relation to QUDT
20:19:57 <KJanowic> ahaller: the question we need to figure out is how much longer the review period is
20:20:34 <mlefranc> got some review here: https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/892
20:21:19 <ahaller2> topic: Decision on Pull request https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/792 for moving ssn:hasProperty and ssn:isPropertyOf to SOSA
20:21:45 <ahaller2> q?
20:21:49 <KJanowic> no, we decided not to discuss it
20:21:53 <mlefranc> q+
20:21:59 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
20:22:24 <KJanowic> Yes,first decide what a property is
20:22:40 <KJanowic> ahaller: maybe these are two issues. One is a modelling issue, the other a change to the ontology
20:22:42 <KJanowic> q+
20:22:46 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
20:23:55 <mlefranc> q+
20:24:18 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
20:24:20 <KJanowic> ahaller, maybe discuss examples first?
20:24:27 <SimonCox> q+
20:24:42 <KJanowic> I had to leave after 90min, yes
20:24:58 <KJanowic> mlefranc: maybe we can avoid subclassing nontheless
20:25:07 <KJanowic> q+
20:25:12 <ahaller2> ack SimonCox
20:26:57 <KJanowic> SimonCox,technically possible to include those properties. The issue however is the conception of what the role of sosa is. Is it a collection of lightweight concepts/properties or is it a complete or consistent ontology core.
20:27:23 <KJanowic> SimonCox: adding more and more (and very late) is not required if you see sosa as a lightweight vocab
20:27:32 <KJanowic> simoncox: worried about lateness
20:27:46 <ahaller2> q?
20:27:49 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
20:29:23 <ahaller2> KJanowic: same concern as SimonCox, we are not supposed to make changes to the ontologies at this stage. ObservableProperties should become type of Properties, but I would need to think about this.
20:29:36 <ahaller2> q?
20:29:39 <ahaller2> q+
20:29:44 <ahaller2> ack ahaller
20:30:15 <KJanowic> ahaller: is there strong support from use cases that require SOSA compared to SSN
20:31:11 <mlefranc> q+
20:31:14 <SimonCox> Unfortunately content/technical discussions should have taken place 6 months ago.
20:31:29 <ahaller2> q?
20:31:31 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
20:31:37 <KJanowic> ahaller: the change may be problematic in terms of timing
20:32:03 <KJanowic> mlefranc should come from outside the group
20:32:04 <KJanowic> q+
20:32:25 <ahaller2> q?
20:32:49 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
20:32:50 <KJanowic> mlefranc the two issues are difficult to untangle
20:33:52 <mlefranc> q+
20:35:42 <ahaller2> KJanowic: moving both ontologies close together is diminishing the advantage of having a lightweight ontology
20:35:45 <ahaller2> q?
20:35:47 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
20:36:39 <ahaller2> q+
20:36:52 <KJanowic> mlefranc: agree with kj that we need clearly distinguishable solutions BUT sosa is also part of ssn so they can’t be told apart so easily
20:37:05 <KJanowic> q+
20:37:35 <KJanowic> mlefranc: some decisions about instances versus collections need to be distinguished
20:37:52 <KJanowic> utilize owl-punning
20:37:54 <SimonCox> Ah - the subjunctive!
20:38:06 <SimonCox> 'it would have been good'
20:38:28 <ahaller2> q?
20:38:29 <KJanowic> sosa is fully  part in ssn, valid sosa data is valid ssn data
20:38:39 <KJanowic> are we facing a paradox here?
20:38:54 <KJanowic> YES!
20:38:54 <ahaller2> q?
20:39:01 <ahaller2> ack ahaller
20:39:45 <KJanowic> ahaller: a schema.org user will only create instances
20:39:54 <KJanowic> ahaller: you would not create collectioms
20:40:49 <KJanowic> s/collectioms/collections
20:40:50 <KJanowic> q+
20:41:02 <ahaller2> q?
20:41:05 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
20:42:52 <mlefranc> q+
20:43:19 <ahaller2> KJanowic: our DULCE alignment makes punning difficult, because a sensor is an entity and not an abstract thing.
20:43:34 <ahaller2> KJanowic: it is more important for the properties
20:43:39 <ahaller2> q?
20:43:43 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
20:44:13 <KJanowic> in short, we take a  more  o7M view on sensors, not a sensorML view
20:44:24 <KJanowic> s/o7M/O&M
20:44:30 <ahaller2> q?
20:44:53 <KJanowic> we can use typecasting to get around that problems
20:44:53 <KJanowic> http://cgi.csc.liv.ac.uk/~valli/OWLED2015/OWLED_2015_paper_15.pdf
20:45:18 <ahaller2> q+
20:45:23 <KJanowic> mlefranc, we need to please both sides. in our case we dont want to take some important decisions to constraint users
20:45:28 <KJanowic> q+
20:45:48 <ahaller2> ack ahaller
20:45:48 <KJanowic> ahaller: I agree
20:46:04 <KJanowic> we should not constraint modelling
20:46:34 <KJanowic> we are fine as long as we are axiomatically ok
20:46:56 <KJanowic> we need to make sure that if we have an alignment, it makes sense in both cases (collections versus individuals)
20:47:28 <SimonCox> We can't keep it unresolved ...
20:47:28 <ahaller2> q?
20:47:34 <KJanowic> should we vote on the property issue or discuss examples first
20:47:37 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
20:47:43 <KJanowic> mlefranc would vote 0
20:48:07 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: move isPropertyOf and hasProperty from SSN to SOSA
20:48:15 <SimonCox> -1
20:48:18 <mlefranc> 0
20:48:32 <KJanowic> -0.5
20:48:36 <ClausStadler_> 0
20:48:39 <ahaller2> -0
20:49:11 <ahaller2> RESOLVED: NOT move isPropertyOf and hasProperty from SSN to SOSA
20:49:12 <KJanowic> Let us leave enough space for SSN
20:49:20 <ahaller2> topic: Discuss Pull request https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/891 which relates to Action-355 to add examples to the ED
20:49:35 <mlefranc> online version here: http://ci.emse.fr/ssn/
20:50:05 <mlefranc> see appendix A
20:50:40 <ahaller2> q?
20:50:54 <mlefranc> q+
20:50:57 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
20:52:09 <KJanowic> Move examples to non-normative section
20:52:14 <KJanowic> also change the function of the buttons
20:52:29 <KJanowic> and it DOES! thanks!
20:53:21 <KJanowic> the examples are my way to understand sosa/ssn and we need to align this understanding to the rest of the group
20:54:04 <KJanowic> The quest is whether we can discuss the family of DHT22 as such
20:54:51 <KJanowic> q+
20:55:11 <KJanowic> maxime alsoimplemented moving the conditions etc to the horizontal module
20:55:20 <ahaller2> q?
20:55:26 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
20:58:34 <ahaller2> q+
20:58:45 <KJanowic> mlefranc agree with 1:1 AND 1:n property use
20:59:17 <KJanowic> q+
20:59:20 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
20:59:33 <KJanowic> mlefranc accept pull request and then add more examples
20:59:55 <KJanowic> ahaller: do we need a 5th level toc?
21:00:01 <KJanowic> kj: agree with ahaller
21:00:23 <KJanowic> ahaller: right now it looks unbalanced
21:00:42 <KJanowic> q+
21:01:01 <KJanowic> maxime: yes to only having 4 levels
21:01:05 <ahaller2> q?
21:01:22 <SimonCox> I have to leave for 10 minutes
21:01:38 <ahaller2> ack ahaller
21:02:05 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:02:05 <KJanowic> lets accept and then augment
21:02:41 <ahaller2> KJanowic: we need to change the language, i.e. MUST BE
21:03:17 <mlefranc> q+
21:03:45 <ahaller2> KJanowic: we need to make decision on the modelling for the respective ontology
21:04:04 <KJanowic> ducking the decision is not good. We can introduce both but we need to explain why they are possible and which one  we believe is the best (without restricting modelling)
21:04:09 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
21:04:25 <KJanowic> maxime: I agree but it is not doable
21:04:27 <KJanowic> q+
21:04:56 <KJanowic> for property and sensor it woould be good to have both examples
21:05:35 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:05:35 <KJanowic> ahaller: doing it for a subset may be okay
21:06:29 <ahaller2> KJanowic: we don't want to force users of SOSA and SSN in one direction, but we can make a decision on how we show it in the document
21:07:00 <ahaller2> KJanowic: give a canonical way and then show punning example, or express it differently and introduce subclasses
21:07:09 <mlefranc> q+
21:08:13 <SimonCox> SImon back
21:08:58 <ahaller2> KJanowic: examples are important for the SOSA people, the SSN users may just use the ttl files directly
21:09:21 <ahaller2> q?
21:09:23 <mlefranc> http://www.heppnetz.de/ontologies/goodrelations/goodrelations-UML.png
21:09:40 <KJanowic> somebody else to scribe?
21:09:44 <SimonCox> Sorry - I won't be here the whole hour
21:10:25 <ahaller2> scribe: ClausStadler_
21:10:33 <ahaller2> scribenick: ClausStadler_
21:11:52 <KJanowic> q+
21:11:58 <ahaller2> +1 to the example mlefranc just presented, goodrelations is not restricting the users, we should do the same!
21:12:08 <ClausStadler_> good relations does not constrain the user what the instance of product of service should be - could be category of galaxy S4, on other sites its _my_ S4
21:12:09 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
21:12:39 <SimonCox> q+
21:13:30 <ClausStadler_> "let ssn leave the room for more research", and carry that proposal over to sosa
21:13:37 <KJanowic> They have no clue what this means
21:13:37 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:14:07 <ClausStadler_> s/product of service/product or service
21:14:27 <ahaller2> q?
21:15:16 <ahaller2> +1 for a default usage for SOSA users
21:15:28 <ahaller2> SOSA users need guidance
21:16:20 <ahaller2> q?
21:16:20 <mlefranc> q+
21:16:26 <ahaller2> ack SimonCox
21:16:39 <ClausStadler_> kjanowic: lets show intended use, then show alternatives. Especially for the sosa audience, show what the core idea is, and explain why. Don't say: "everything go" right away. For SSN: explain you can use punning, subclassing, one final paragraph for alternative modeling approaches.
21:19:33 <KJanowic> imho, if we end up with a linked data cloud in which half the users do one and the others do it the other way, we failed
21:19:37 <KJanowic> q+
21:19:58 <ahaller2> q+
21:20:20 <KJanowic> they are possible anyway
21:21:00 <KJanowic> and they are and shared across all of the geo sciences and other domains
21:21:04 <ClausStadler_> SimonCox: presented 4 options for modeling properties (unfortunately i didn't get all): 1 subclasses of rdf:property, 2 instances of rdf:property, 3 subclasses sosa observable property, 4 ?
21:21:13 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
21:22:32 <SimonCox> 4 possibilities for defining 'properties': 1. subclass rdf:Property; 2. individual rdf:Property; 3. subclass ssn:Property; 4. individual ssn:Property or sosa:ObservableProperty.
21:22:42 <KJanowic> btw we are confusing the classes vs individuals discussion with the underlying modeling problem
21:23:35 <SimonCox> Punning can be used to equivalence. Nothing is disallowed in applications. But re-use is likely to be easiest if modelled as individuals from the class ssn:Property or sosa:ObservableProperty
21:23:54 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: canonical use of examples for SOSA and then use this canonical example in the SSN extension and then have alternative patterns for punning or for modelling subclasses of Sensors and Properties
21:23:58 <KJanowic> q+
21:24:01 <SimonCox> SO that is the one we shoudl show in examples
21:24:15 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:24:15 <KJanowic> + 0.5
21:25:46 <mlefranc> 1 to n then is very important ---> remove some of the existing axioms, starting from ssn:isPropertyOf rdf:type owl:FunctionalProperty
21:26:45 <ahaller2> q?
21:27:27 <ClausStadler_> KJanowic: presents an example: DBpedia: classes for cities, populated  - but appartement does not exist. please use punning, we only have the individual. It works for Semantic Web folks, but writing a SPARQL query for "show me all man-made features" requires enumerating all different models. Two user groups: schema.org and the Industry 4.0 - more reasoning is happening on the sensor and needs automatically inferred and guaranteed results.
21:27:43 <ahaller2> q?
21:27:44 <ClausStadler_> s/populated/populated place
21:27:45 <mlefranc> q+
21:27:48 <ahaller2> ack ahaller
21:28:01 <ahaller2> https://www.w3.org/TR/microdata/
21:28:51 <ClausStadler_> ahaller2: you can't even create types in microdata, you can only create instances
21:29:20 <ahaller2> q?
21:29:23 <ahaller2> ack mlefranc
21:29:37 <ClausStadler_> so it could / should be similar to the naive sosa user
21:29:57 <KJanowic> q+
21:30:21 <KJanowic> Btw,I agree with Maxime
21:32:02 <ahaller2> q?
21:32:09 <KJanowic> IMHO, the observation part is where this all breaks down
21:33:14 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:34:06 <ClausStadler_> mlefranc: as proposed, have a canonical example. Observations right now are made by exactly one sensor. But there may be instances of sosa:Sensor or users that use punning [...] the point of the example: we may end up with an obsersvation: (1) with that specific galaxy s4 sensor or (2) the class of galaxy S4 temperature sensors linked to the observation. the cardinalities would have to be changed to minCardinality.
21:35:34 <SimonCox> For example: http://environment.data.gov.au/def/property
21:35:39 <ahaller2> q?
21:36:21 <SimonCox> these are individual SKOS Concepts and also qudt:QuantityKinds
21:36:42 <ahaller2> PROPOSED: canonical use of examples for SOSA and then use this canonical example in the SSN extension and then have two alternative patterns for punning and for modelling subclasses of Sensors and Properties and outline consequences
21:36:46 <SimonCox> This is the kind of list the earth science community expects to share
21:36:47 <KJanowic> +1 to Simon
21:37:06 <KJanowic> +1
21:37:19 <KJanowic> Can do
21:37:26 <KJanowic> see Simon's link
21:37:39 <mlefranc> +1
21:37:41 <KJanowic> Simon can confirm that this is how it works in earth science
21:37:55 <SimonCox> +1
21:37:58 <ClausStadler_> +1
21:38:01 <KJanowic> +1
21:38:01 <ahaller2> +1
21:38:12 <ahaller2> RESOLVED: canonical use of examples for SOSA and then use this canonical example in the SSN extension and then have two alternative patterns for punning and for modelling subclasses of Sensors and Properties and outline consequences
21:39:01 <ahaller2> q?
21:39:19 <ClausStadler_> mlefranc: offered to do the punning and subclassing examples
21:39:28 <KJanowic> ok
21:39:30 <KJanowic> Can do
21:39:53 <KJanowic> +1
21:40:50 <KJanowic> I would make a template, not all examples
21:41:04 <ahaller2> ACTION: KJanowic to extend canonical examples with coastal water body example using rdfs:Subclassing and punning
21:41:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-362 - Extend canonical examples with coastal water body example using rdfs:subclassing and punning [on Krzysztof Janowicz - due 2017-05-23].
21:41:10 <ahaller2> q?
21:41:41 <ahaller2> ACTION: mlefranc to fix hierarchy in PULL request around measurement capabilities
21:41:41 <trackbot> Created ACTION-363 - Fix hierarchy in pull request around measurement capabilities [on Maxime Lefrançois - due 2017-05-23].
21:41:47 <ahaller2> q?
21:42:22 <ahaller2> topic: Progress on Action-356 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/356 to create a list of axioms that do not need implementation evidence
21:42:47 <KJanowic> Btw, can somebody turn down the background music
21:43:03 <ahaller2> topic: Progress on Action-357 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/357 and decision on Pull request 850 for Features at Risk
21:43:18 <KJanowic> q+
21:43:44 <ahaller2> ack KJanowic
21:44:25 <SimonCox> [Sorry - that's my daughter practising violin]
21:44:37 <ahaller2> q?
21:45:11 <KJanowic> "6.1 System capabilities, operating ranges, and survival ranges  The terms defined in this section are marked at risk."
21:45:18 <SimonCox> [but now I have to take her to school]
21:45:55 <ClausStadler_> mlefranc: not sure if there are other terms that should be marked as risk
21:48:12 <ClausStadler_> ahaller2: use div class="note" on the html to make features at risk more visible
21:48:15 <ahaller2> topic: Implementation of proposal for alignment as of https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Events_and_Situations for ssn:Observation
21:48:22 <KJanowic> Park it
21:48:22 <ahaller2> q?
21:48:36 <ClausStadler_> mlefranc: all terms are used to a separate document and namespace, although cumbersome to developers its consistent
21:48:44 <ahaller2> q?
21:48:47 <SimonCox> bye
21:48:50 <ClausStadler_> s/terms are used/terms are moved
21:48:54 <KJanowic> imho that was pretty productive
21:49:10 <KJanowic> park it
21:49:35 <ahaller2> q?
21:49:40 <KJanowic> yes
21:49:45 <KJanowic> bye bye
21:49:47 <ahaller2> bye
21:49:48 <ClausStadler_> bye
21:49:55 <mlefranc> bye
21:50:00 <ahaller2> RRSAgent, make logs public
21:50:05 <ChrisLittle> bye
21:50:07 <ahaller2> type RRSAgent, draft minutes
23:20:17 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn