13:45:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwg
13:45:13 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-irc
13:45:28 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #dxwg
13:51:42 <mbruemmer> mbruemmer has joined #dxwg
13:52:19 <mbruemmer> mbruemmer has joined #dxwg
13:52:39 <present__ixchel> present__ixchel has joined #dxwg
13:53:27 <present__ixchel> present__ixchel has left #dxwg
13:54:18 <present_Ixchel> present_Ixchel has joined #dxwg
13:55:38 <Thomas> Thomas has joined #dxwg
13:55:44 <alejandra> alejandra has joined #dxwg
13:55:49 <Makx_Dekkers_> Makx_Dekkers_ has joined #dxwg
13:56:21 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #dxwg
13:56:29 <chile> chile has joined #dxwg
13:56:51 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwg
13:56:52 <Thomas> Present+ Thomas
13:56:53 <chile> present+ chile
13:57:04 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:57:07 <mbruemmer> present+ mbruemmer
13:57:24 <RubenVerborgh> RubenVerborgh has joined #dxwg
13:57:29 <RubenVerborgh> present+
13:57:59 <Thomas> Don't forget your nick, ruben :-)
13:58:02 <kcoyle> present+
13:58:12 <RubenVerborgh> @Thomas defaults to myself, normally
13:58:21 <phila> zakim, who is here?
13:58:21 <Zakim> Present: Thomas, chile, Jaroslav_Pullmann, mbruemmer, RubenVerborgh, kcoyle
13:58:23 <Zakim> On IRC I see RubenVerborgh, Jaroslav_Pullmann, chile, SimonCox, Makx_Dekkers_, alejandra, Thomas, present_Ixchel, mbruemmer, Zakim, RRSAgent, Colleen, kcoyle, nandana, phila,
13:58:23 <Zakim> ... rhiaro, trackbot
13:58:26 <SimonCox> present+
13:58:28 <kcoyle> Chair: Karen Coyle
13:58:34 <phila> present- rhiaro
13:58:46 <Thomas> Ok; still somewhat new to this irc t hing
13:59:12 <phila> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:59:20 <alejandra> present+ alejandra
13:59:21 <PWinstanley> PWinstanley has joined #dxwg
13:59:24 <PWinstanley> present+ PWinstanley
13:59:24 <phila> chair: Karen
13:59:44 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2017.06.05
13:59:58 <roba> roba has joined #dxwg
14:00:16 <SimonCox> Australia on holiday next monday
14:00:39 <SimonCox> but it is now tuesday here
14:00:39 <roba> present+
14:00:49 <MJ_Han> MJ_Han has joined #dxwg
14:00:57 <phila> regrets+ Lars, Andrea, Newton, Caroline
14:01:25 <phila> scribe: Alejandra
14:01:29 <phila> scribeNick: alejandra
14:01:56 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
14:01:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
14:02:04 <phila> Topic: Preliminaries
14:02:07 <alejandra> First agenda item: approve meetings from last time
14:02:14 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
14:02:20 <Thomas> No corrections
14:02:23 <alejandra> No additions / corrections
14:02:24 <annette_g> Present+ annette_g
14:02:33 <phila> RESOLUTION: Last week's minutes approved
14:03:16 <alejandra> Kcoyle: we will spend some time on discussing how we are going to organise ourselves
14:03:24 <phila> Topic: DCAT Editors
14:03:48 <MJ_Han> present+MJ_Han
14:03:53 <alejandra> kcoyle: discussing role of editors and contributors
14:04:33 <PWinstanley> I am up for editor
14:04:35 <alejandra> I'd like to be an editor
14:04:38 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/TR/dwbp/ Data on the Web Best Practices had 3 editors and *loads* of contributors
14:04:40 <RubenVerborgh> Editor of what?
14:04:49 <alejandra> DCAT editor
14:04:52 <phila> DCAT, RubenVerborgh
14:05:17 <phila> phila has changed the topic to: DXWG Weekly telco
14:05:20 <RiccardoAlbertoni> RiccardoAlbertoni has joined #DXWG
14:05:25 <Thomas> I'd be willing to paricipate also
14:05:29 <RubenVerborgh> *sorry, missed "topic", sounded more general*
14:05:33 <Thomas> As an editor
14:05:40 <SimonCox> I can help edit - have done one before
14:06:30 <Makx_Dekkers_> Can help with DCAT too.
14:06:32 <erics> erics has joined #dxwg
14:07:03 <SimonCox> 4 editors is an OK number
14:07:36 <alejandra> potential editors: alejandra, thomas, Simon, Peter
14:08:31 <alejandra> RESOLUTION: DCAT editors will be Peter, Thomas, Simon, Alejandra
14:08:38 <erics> +1
14:08:41 <Thomas> +1
14:08:49 <Makx_Dekkers_> +1
14:08:50 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
14:08:50 <annette_g> +1
14:08:52 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
14:08:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
14:08:59 <present_Ixchel> +1
14:09:02 <MJ_Han> +1
14:09:04 <alejandra> +1
14:09:04 <nandana> +1
14:09:15 <phila> meeting: DXWG Weekly Telco
14:09:19 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
14:09:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
14:09:42 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z8UVjMEPoqp69ZHXk6asY6tCHHECglk4-3Lznd5dxS0/
14:09:53 <alejandra> kcoyle: Next discussion - the proposal of use case template
14:10:23 <alejandra> kcoyle: another proposal on the reorganization of what the use cases are about and what the tasks are
14:10:26 <RiccardoAlbertoni> present+ RiccardoAlbertoni
14:10:57 <alejandra> kcoyle: many use cases and requirements that people are considering DCAT requirements but may be better as requirements for Application Profiles
14:11:11 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:11:21 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:11:48 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann:  discussing  the proposal for the use cases structures
14:12:22 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: status of use cases: new, open, stable, closed
14:12:58 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: describe the problem statement - current situation and missing aspect that should be considered and what is the motivation for an improvement
14:13:06 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: optinally, consider existing approaches
14:13:41 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: next mandatory part is 'requirements'
14:14:52 <RubenVerborgh> q+
14:15:00 <kcoyle> ack RubenVerborgh
14:15:02 <alejandra> kcoyle: continues discussing the template structure - links to related use cases
14:15:11 <alejandra> RubenVerborgh: organization might require some tweaking
14:15:16 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:15:23 <alejandra> RubenVerborgh: separation might be artificial in some cases
14:15:33 <alejandra> RubenVerborgh: as some use cases are cross-cutting
14:15:49 <RubenVerborgh> in particular: overlap between DCAT distribution and profiles / conneg
14:16:08 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> seems I am muted, give me a second
14:17:18 <alejandra> kcoyle: Now discussing re-organization
14:18:59 <Makx_Dekkers_> My only pledge was to keep URLs to use cases persistent.
14:19:06 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: did we reach an agreement on extending the template?
14:19:10 <alejandra> kcoyle: yes
14:19:35 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: it will often be the case that we will need to close duplicate use cases and continue one of the threads
14:19:39 <alejandra> q+
14:19:41 <RubenVerborgh> *ah woops, sorry for jumping ahead, thought that was settled*
14:19:54 <annette_g> +1 to having less repetition
14:20:03 <alejandra> kcoyle: moving to reorganization section
14:20:21 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: Main category are deliverables - 3 deliverables at first
14:20:30 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: DCAT 1.1. core
14:21:16 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: catalog, datasets, distributions (representations of either static or dynamic datasets) - I agree that some elements are cross-cutting
14:21:43 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: conneg and distribution may overlap
14:21:43 <erics> q+
14:21:50 <kcoyle> q?
14:21:50 <SimonCox> q+
14:21:57 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: so, we need to discuss the focus of the use case
14:22:16 <kcoyle> ack a
14:22:45 <Thomas> q+
14:22:52 <kcoyle> alejandra: if we have aspects from the use case, for a different section, should we add a new one?
14:22:54 <annette_g> q+
14:23:16 <kcoyle> ack erics
14:23:18 <alejandra> kcoyle: Editors will be able to decide this after they have a look at the document
14:23:23 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:24:12 <alejandra> erics: I had a similar question - in DWBP there were cross-cutting use cases, so perhaps consider a section with these cross-cutting use cases across the major focus areas
14:24:14 <kcoyle> ack SimonCox
14:24:29 <roba> roba has joined #dxwg
14:24:35 <alejandra> SimonCox: I'd like to pull us back to the Use cases - the status flags are unclear to me
14:24:52 <alejandra> SimonCox: the use cases should yield requirements
14:24:53 <roba> q+
14:25:07 <alejandra> SimonCox: does the status mean that the requirement has been satisfied?
14:25:41 <kcoyle> q?
14:25:51 <alejandra> roba: we need to decide if we put up the use cases and then the WG decides if they are in scope
14:26:06 <alejandra> roba: we also need to deal with the duplication
14:26:17 <alejandra> roba: stable means that those are the ones that we pay attention to
14:26:39 <alejandra> roba:I suggest we put cross-cutting use cases first
14:26:47 <SimonCox> The easiest way to detect duplication is through the requirments
14:26:47 <alejandra> roba: and then we deal with the others later
14:26:52 <kcoyle> ack Thomas
14:27:17 <RiccardoAlbertoni> +q to say not sure that duplication should be avoided at this stage
14:27:40 <alejandra> SimonCox: to identify the duplications we need to look at the requirements level, which is what it needs to be carried through
14:27:46 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwg
14:27:54 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:28:05 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> sorry I was offline for a moment
14:28:15 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:28:16 <alejandra> roba: we need to work out how much the group expects the editor to identify the duplication or we go through each use case one by one and the group decides
14:28:22 <Makx_Dekkers_> I'd also prefer to gather use cases without considering duplication, and deal with de-duplication later. The requirements are what matter.
14:28:33 <phila> q?
14:28:50 <alejandra> Thomas: I was wondering if we are not focusing too much now on the use cases
14:29:05 <alejandra> Thomas: but we need to make sure in the future that the requirements are described through the use cases
14:29:28 <kcoyle> q?
14:29:35 <kcoyle> ack annette_g
14:29:56 <Makx_Dekkers_> I am seeing use cases that are similar to what I want to contribute, but I still would want to describe my use case. Otherwise, would I need to negotiate with the author of the similar use case to merge?
14:30:01 <alejandra> annette_g: we've got the use cases divided into 3 deliverables, but it seems to me that Profile/Conneg use cases might be a single group
14:30:29 <RubenVerborgh> +1 to tags (to an extent, they are already present now)
14:30:32 <kcoyle> q?
14:30:35 <RubenVerborgh> this would address my concerns on cross-cutting
14:30:45 <RubenVerborgh> we cannot pretend that conneg is entirely separate from the rest
14:30:46 <alejandra> annette_g: but maybe grouping is not the way to do it - I tend to maximise the use cases that are considered for a single deliverable
14:30:50 <roba> q-
14:30:52 <phila> +1 to grouping/tagging requirements cf. grouping UCs
14:30:56 <kcoyle> q?
14:31:01 <Thomas> q+
14:31:10 <phila> ack r
14:31:10 <Zakim> RiccardoAlbertoni, you wanted to say not sure that duplication should be avoided at this stage
14:31:25 <alejandra> RiccardoAlbertoni: I am not sure why we are focusing so much at duplication at this stage, as it can be very good now and it can be solved later one
14:31:30 <alejandra> RiccardoAlbertoni: later on
14:31:41 <alejandra> RiccardoAlbertoni: if we have more use cases, we have better ground for the requirements
14:31:46 <Makx_Dekkers_> +1 to riccardo
14:31:49 <kcoyle> q?
14:31:51 <PWinstanley> +1 to RiccardoAlbertoni  comment about multiple forms of use cases
14:31:52 <alejandra> +1
14:32:05 <Makx_Dekkers_> we can do de-duplication on the requirements
14:32:14 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we are not worried about duplication at the moment
14:32:22 <alejandra> phila: tx
14:32:39 <alejandra> s/later one/later on/
14:33:00 <phila> q+ to talk about assumptions not in UCs
14:33:05 <kcoyle> q?
14:33:08 <alejandra> s/optinally/optionally/
14:33:11 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:33:26 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we want to have focus deliverables
14:33:38 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: cross-referencing is done via text
14:33:55 <kcoyle> ack Thomas
14:34:14 <alejandra> Thomas: we shouldn't shift the problem to text managing
14:34:15 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:34:39 <kcoyle> ack phila
14:34:39 <Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about assumptions not in UCs
14:35:21 <alejandra> phila: UCs documents usually forget to say 'we are assuming X, etc' - we don't need to make explicit all assumptions
14:35:40 <SimonCox> I agree - need some pragmatism. But remember that the main purpose of UC is to generate requirements. It is the requirements which must be satisfied by the technology
14:35:40 <Thomas> +1 for Phil
14:35:44 <kcoyle> q?
14:35:47 <alejandra> ... it allows to keep the number of UCs manageable
14:35:49 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:35:53 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> example on using tags: https://www.europeandataportal.eu/de/content/show-license
14:35:54 <Thomas> +1 to Simon
14:35:57 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:36:08 <phila> ack j
14:36:08 <Makx_Dekkers_> +1 to Simon
14:36:10 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:36:33 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: the use cases will always have multiple dimensions
14:36:46 <alejandra> ... refers to the example of using tags
14:37:08 <alejandra> ... allowing a selective view of particular use cases
14:37:09 <alejandra>  https://www.europeandataportal.eu/de/content/show-license
14:37:24 <alejandra> ... we can switch on and switch off relevant use cases
14:37:59 <annette_g> nope
14:38:01 <alejandra> kcoyle: has anyone contributed their use cases?
14:38:02 <chile> no
14:38:03 <erics> No
14:38:11 <SimonCox> I have another!
14:38:14 <chile> will do
14:38:15 <alejandra> kcoyle: can we get all the use cases contributed as soon as possible?
14:38:20 <alejandra> I have more to add too
14:38:23 <annette_g> didn't we set a one month deadline last week?
14:38:30 <Thomas> I have some more to add
14:38:31 <Makx_Dekkers_> I am sitting on five to ten of them
14:38:39 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: do we have a resolution on the reorganization proposal?
14:38:45 <Makx_Dekkers_> Need to find time to write them up
14:39:13 <alejandra> PROPOSAL: the group will consider this reorganization of use cases
14:39:27 <Thomas> +1
14:39:30 <alejandra> +1
14:39:32 <annette_g> +?
14:39:35 <roba> +1
14:39:36 <MJ_Han> +1
14:39:37 <phila> -> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z8UVjMEPoqp69ZHXk6asY6tCHHECglk4-3Lznd5dxS0/edit#heading=h.xs8j1li7rrbq 'This reorganization'
14:39:39 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
14:39:42 <Colleen> +1
14:39:43 <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1
14:39:43 <present_Ixchel> +1
14:39:56 <erics> +1
14:40:06 <mbruemmer> +1
14:40:07 <Makx_Dekkers_> waht does 'consider' mean?
14:40:33 <Makx_Dekkers_> 'we'' think about it and decide later'?
14:40:36 <annette_g> q+
14:40:36 <alejandra> PROPOSAL: the group will accept the reorganization
14:40:54 <Thomas> +1
14:40:55 <Colleen> +1
14:40:58 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
14:41:08 <annette_g> -!
14:41:13 <annette_g> -1
14:41:15 <roba> i guess we can look at the results and then change our minds via a new proposal :-)
14:41:17 <roba> +1
14:41:25 <present_Ixchel> +1
14:41:32 <kcoyle> ack annette_g
14:42:00 <alejandra> annette_g: we discussed about doing it a little different
14:42:27 <alejandra> annette_g: one suggestion was combining those UCs that are to do with APs
14:42:29 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:42:49 <alejandra> annette_g: another option is to use the tags for grouping
14:43:09 <alejandra> annette_g: the last grouping from the document is looking rather small
14:43:21 <alejandra> annette_g: it seems to me that they cross-cut those too
14:43:29 <alejandra> q+
14:43:51 <alejandra> annette_g: I think that tags would be better
14:44:07 <phila> ack j
14:44:10 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: both approaches are proposed to be applied in parallel
14:44:11 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:44:42 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we have both: tags and the grouping
14:44:46 <SimonCox> {Jaroslav_Pullmann breaking up too much?}
14:44:56 <alejandra> alejandra: why don't consider the 3 deliverables as other tags?
14:45:20 <kcoyle> q?
14:45:37 <roba> one reason for reordering is to deduplicate easier - we shouldnt worry too much about final order perhaps.
14:45:58 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we want to harmonize UCs
14:46:02 <kcoyle> ack alejandra
14:46:02 <Thomas> @alejandra : isn't that the same in the end?
14:46:08 <phila> ack a
14:46:24 <phila> alejandra: The separation in the 3 deliverables is in the tags
14:46:32 <kcoyle> alejandra: one use case could be tagged with multiple tags
14:46:42 <phila> ... We can tag each UC/Req with the relevant deliverable(s)
14:46:56 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
14:46:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
14:47:33 <Makx_Dekkers_> @roba: I don't think we should try to deduplicate use cases; we can deduplicate requirements
14:47:37 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we were using the google doc for discussion, then we move this reorganization will be more apparent
14:47:52 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: reorganizing this in the wiki page
14:48:03 <phila> q+
14:48:06 <alejandra> kcoyle: I understood that we should use tags rather than reorganization
14:48:07 <alejandra> yes
14:48:08 <PWinstanley> +1 to tagging
14:48:10 <kcoyle> ack phila
14:48:11 <alejandra> annette_g: yes
14:48:18 <Makx_Dekkers_> +1 to tagging
14:48:21 <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1 to tagging
14:48:31 <PWinstanley> we should have a dynamic document
14:48:40 <alejandra> phila: there are bits where the javascript will take the requirements and generate a list of the use cases that yielded them
14:48:40 <roba> q+
14:48:41 <PWinstanley> +1 to phila
14:48:51 <alejandra> phila: there are tables that are autogenerated
14:48:57 <Thomas> +1 to phila
14:49:22 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:49:23 <annette_g> +1 to phila
14:49:25 <alejandra> phila: it is a web document
14:50:02 <kcoyle> q?
14:50:06 <kcoyle> ack roba
14:50:12 <PWinstanley> tagging can help with curation
14:50:17 <alejandra> roba: I think we may be getting ahead of ourselves, we have a list of candidate use cases with duplication in them - group them to facilitate discussion is the first step
14:50:46 <alejandra> roba: if we had a technology where we could tag them and get dynamic grouping, then we could do it
14:50:50 <MJ_Han> like this? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EmojqR3nQo3ioj-qG_C0UeGJ0prcNZFom9th0AzaN0c/edit?usp=sharing
14:50:52 <phila> +1 to Rob
14:51:19 <alejandra> roba: but to organize the document to coherently look at them to reduce the number of use cases, it is the first step
14:51:26 <alejandra> +1 to Rob
14:51:28 <Thomas> +1 rob - keep it manageable and proceed for now
14:51:48 <MJ_Han>  +1 to Rob
14:52:11 <alejandra> kcoyle: we should get all the use cases and continue the work, maybe we leave it to the UC editors to organize them
14:52:13 <SimonCox> I'm still concerned about focus on UCs as the end point. The UCs are there to expose requirements.
14:52:50 <phila> q?
14:52:57 <alejandra> kcoyle: yes, requirements are at the core of what will define our work in the future
14:52:59 <Makx_Dekkers_> +1 to Simon; requirements is what we're looking for
14:53:08 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:53:12 <erics> I thought we voted last time that we were given a month?
14:53:22 <alejandra> kcoyle: can we stop here with the discussion then?
14:53:35 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: I'm convinced that we will end up with some grouping
14:53:50 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: so we need some simple structure, we can go on with our work and we'll see
14:53:55 <Makx_Dekkers_> Deadline for use cases is still end of June, correct?
14:53:55 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#Dataset_Versioning_Information
14:54:28 <Makx_Dekkers_> Can I reiterate request for persistent URLs for use cases?
14:54:38 <alejandra> kcoyle: deadline for providing the use cases is end of June
14:55:11 <alejandra> Before we finish, reminder for everyone to indicate their intention to attend the F2F meeting please
14:55:31 <kcoyle> q?
14:55:33 <alejandra> kcoyle: discussing use case on dataset versioning
14:55:37 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:55:37 <phila> q+
14:55:41 <roba> q+
14:55:47 <kcoyle> ack phila
14:55:54 <annette_g> +1 to the use case
14:56:14 <alejandra> phila: definitely support the use case, this brings me to mention that if the UC Editors find it helpful, they can look at the report of the workshop we had last year
14:56:27 <erics> +1 to the use case that covers dataset and distributions
14:56:31 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:56:46 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/2016/11/sdsvoc/report SDSVoc Workshop report
14:56:51 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: I support the versioning, but there is much discussion about what a dataset is
14:57:03 <kcoyle> q?
14:57:11 <kcoyle> ack roba
14:57:11 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: discussion on the notion of dataset, as it clarifies what is going to be versioned
14:57:25 <alejandra> roba: I support the use case, I have some issues on how the requirement is expressed
14:57:37 <alejandra> roba: I personally think that the requirement is not an extension to DCAT
14:58:03 <phila> +1 to Rob - Reqs shouldn't include solutions
14:58:04 <Makx_Dekkers_> Versioning is much more complicated than in this use case. I have one on my list that identifies at least four types of versioning.
14:58:09 <alejandra> roba: it sounds to me as putting the solution forward too early on
14:58:17 <kcoyle> q?
14:58:40 <alejandra> kcoyle: can we accept the use case with the caveat that the requirements need to be reworded?
14:58:43 <erics> +1 to accepting a use case topic but not necessarily the content
14:58:48 <annette_g> q+
14:58:54 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
14:58:55 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we could put it in the Open state with a comment on it
14:59:03 <kcoyle> ack annette_g
14:59:34 <kcoyle> PROPOSED: accept UC ID4, with possible rewording of requirements
14:59:36 <alejandra> annette_g: just looking at the description, I didn't get the sense that we needed to do it in a specific way, but pointing out that there is some ways of dealing with it somewhere else
14:59:40 <phila> PROPOSED: Accept the versioning Use Case, modulo rewording the requirements not to include the solution https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#Dataset_Versioning_Information
14:59:51 <alejandra> roba: the requirement says 'an extension to DCAT'
15:00:09 <alejandra> +1
15:00:13 <erics> +1
15:00:14 <annette_g> +1
15:00:17 <roba> +1
15:00:18 <Thomas> +1
15:00:19 <mbruemmer> +1
15:00:20 <PWinstanley> +1
15:00:21 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
15:00:24 <MJ_Han> +1
15:00:26 <RiccardoAlbertoni> +1
15:00:28 <present_Ixchel> +1
15:00:28 <SimonCox> +1
15:00:37 <Colleen> +1
15:00:48 <phila> RESOLUTION: Accept the versioning Use Case, modulo rewording the requirements not to include the solution https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#Dataset_Versioning_Information
15:00:53 <alejandra> q+
15:01:28 <SimonCox> (though still not fully clear what 'Accept' means in relation to a UC)
15:01:43 <Makx_Dekkers_> apologies, I do not agree with the versioning use case
15:01:43 <phila> -> https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/ Skeleton DCAT doc alejandra SimonCox Thomas PWinstanley
15:02:01 <Thomas> Thx phil
15:02:06 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
15:02:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
15:02:11 <RiccardoAlbertoni> thanks and bye
15:02:14 <erics> take care everyone
15:02:18 <Colleen> Colleen has left #dxwg
15:02:22 <PWinstanley> bye
15:02:29 <annette_g> bye!
15:02:37 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
15:02:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
15:02:38 <Makx_Dekkers_> bye
15:02:41 <Thomas> Bye
15:02:48 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
15:02:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
15:03:27 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> -Jaroslav_Pullmann
15:03:56 <phila> zakim, bye
15:03:56 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been Thomas, chile, Jaroslav_Pullmann, mbruemmer, RubenVerborgh, kcoyle, SimonCox, alejandra, PWinstanley, roba, annette_g, MJ_Han,
15:03:56 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dxwg
15:03:59 <Zakim> ... RiccardoAlbertoni, ?
15:04:03 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
15:04:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila
15:04:27 <phila> present+ Ixchel
15:04:31 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
15:04:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/05-dxwg-minutes.html phila