13:47:36 RRSAgent has joined #dxwg 13:47:36 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/06/12-dxwg-irc 13:47:38 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:47:38 Zakim has joined #dxwg 13:47:40 Zakim, this will be 13:47:40 I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 13:47:41 Meeting: Dataset Exchange Working Group Teleconference 13:47:41 Date: 12 June 2017 13:47:45 agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2017.06.12 13:47:48 chair: Karen 13:48:05 regrets+ Caroline 13:50:53 colleen has joined #dxwg 13:52:17 present+colleen 13:54:09 Caroline_ has joined #DXWG 13:54:22 present+ 13:54:24 regrets- Caroline 13:54:40 Present+ Caroline_ 13:56:15 LarsG has joined #dxwg 13:56:18 mbruemmer has joined #dxwg 13:56:19 nandana has joined #dxwg 13:56:39 present+ LarsG 13:57:50 PWinstanley has joined #dxwg 13:57:58 roba has joined #dxwg 13:58:03 present+ PWinstanley 13:58:09 present+ Rob Atkinson 13:58:12 Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwg 13:58:21 Thomas has joined #dxwg 13:58:22 alejandra has joined #dxwg 13:58:23 present+ 13:58:31 +Jaroslav_Pullmann 13:58:35 present+ 13:58:53 Luiz_Bonino_DTL has joined #dxwg 13:58:53 mbruemmer has joined #dxwg 13:59:02 present+ 13:59:26 I'm trying to connect to WebEx but I don't have the meeting password 13:59:45 present+ mbruemmer 14:00:01 AndreaPerego has joined #dxwg 14:00:02 antoine has joined #dxwg 14:00:12 Thanks 14:00:23 present+ antoine 14:01:31 I can't stay the whole time, so maybe not a good idea :-( 14:01:54 DavidBrowning has joined #dxwg 14:02:30 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 14:02:30 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/12-dxwg-minutes.html phila 14:02:38 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:02:40 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 14:02:40 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/12-dxwg-minutes.html phila 14:02:47 scribe: Antoine 14:02:49 RiccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwg 14:02:51 scribeNick: antoine 14:02:51 scribenick: antoine 14:03:00 present+ AndreaPerego 14:03:03 Topic: Preliminaries 14:03:03 Topic: approve last week's minutes 14:03:11 s/Topic: Preliminaries// 14:03:12 Karen: any objections? 14:03:12 no objections here 14:03:17 no 14:03:19 +1 14:03:20 RESOLVED: approved last week minutes 14:03:21 [NOTUC] 14:03:27 present+ DavidBrowning 14:03:53 present+ RiccardoAlbertoni 14:04:26 present+ 14:04:27 present+ 14:04:29 Topic: Management 14:04:36 Luiz_Bonino_DTL has joined #dxwg 14:04:41 Karen: I've sent an email about sub-groups 14:04:48 annette_g has joined #dxwg 14:04:53 ... are there any questions? 14:04:58 fanieli has joined #dxwg 14:05:02 present+fanieli 14:05:14 q? 14:05:15 ... specialy about the public face of groups? 14:05:16 present+ annette_g 14:05:25 ... W3C requires our work to be visible. 14:05:27 q+ to say that IRC is always available, and the bots 14:05:28 jrvosse has joined #dxwg 14:05:31 [No reaction] 14:05:39 present+ jrvosse 14:05:52 Karen: we'll set up a mechanism for sub-groups to report 14:06:03 present+ nandana 14:06:16 ... in the meanwhile if you have something you want to discuss to the main group, send an email to the main group, or put yourself on the agenda. 14:06:18 regrets+ Ruben, Makx 14:06:22 q- 14:06:28 ... with an idea of how much time you might need. 14:06:33 chile has joined #dxwg 14:06:49 Karen's mail: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2017Jun/0020.html 14:07:04 chile has joined #dxwg 14:07:19 email doesnt change agenda :-) 14:07:42 Karen: if we discuss DCAT we are going to discuss AP probably 14:08:01 newton has joined #dxwg 14:08:05 ... so it would make sense to discuss these two deliverables since the beginning. 14:08:08 present+ chile 14:08:09 present+ newton 14:08:10 q+ 14:08:17 q? 14:08:20 ack r 14:08:28 ... is there anyone who would take responsiblikty for AP? 14:08:41 roba: I'm interested in the architecture aspects 14:08:49 ... DCAT as a use case for the patterns. 14:08:56 q+ 14:09:01 ack p 14:09:05 s/responsiblikty/responsibility/ 14:09:06 s/responsiblikty/responsibility 14:09:16 phila: which deliverable? 14:09:18 q+ 14:09:19 -> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/charter#profile Guidance 14:09:25 karen: the guidance one. 14:09:45 phila: it's about the definition of what is meant by AP, and how to share them. 14:09:48 q? 14:10:06 ... if you want to publish an AP of everything, here's what you should do. 14:10:09 q+ 14:10:15 ... it's the least technical of the three 14:10:19 q+ 14:10:48 karen: would it contain things that complete DCAT? 14:10:58 phila: charter says that we will not create AP. 14:10:59 q+ to talk about profile in the context of conneg 14:11:40 phila: in terms of DCAT work, it's about deciding what is in DCAT and what is in an AP. 14:11:55 q+ 14:12:04 q? 14:12:07 ... the doc may refer to examples of APs published by members of the group. 14:12:10 ack r 14:12:21 roba: I agree with the scope in the charter 14:12:33 ... not sure conneg of AP and doc can be divorced 14:12:53 The WG is free to merge those 2 docs if it feels it makes sense to do so 14:13:02 ... versioning may not go into the core 14:13:03 RRSAgent, pointer 14:13:03 See http://www.w3.org/2017/06/12-dxwg-irc#T14-13-03 14:13:26 I'd rather consider them modules/extensions, rather than profiles. 14:13:42 q? 14:13:58 phila: if the WG decided that the two docs are merged, it's ok. 14:13:58 q+ 14:13:58 ack J 14:14:23 yes will try 14:14:46 yes plesase 14:14:54 ack antoine 14:15:01 I'll try to fix the audio 14:15:11 antoine: I may be interested in helping but it depends on the timing? 14:15:35 q+ 14:16:09 ack LarsG 14:16:09 LarsG, you wanted to talk about profile in the context of conneg 14:16:11 FPWD is due Q1 2018 14:16:31 karen: no timing for the start but we know when it needs to be finished. 14:16:43 +1 14:16:55 ... what is important is to have someone taking care of noting the principles 14:17:11 LarsG: +1 for not divorcing 14:17:24 ... we need to have a definition in order to start the work on conneg. 14:17:35 karen: are you taking care? 14:17:43 LarsG: ruben and myself 14:17:52 karen: sounds good 14:17:58 ack Andre 14:18:17 AndreaPerego: I agree we need to agree on what we mean by AP 14:18:24 achille_zappa has joined #dxwg 14:18:51 q+ to check folks here 14:18:57 ... DCAT could provide a means for versioning and some other extensions could exist 14:19:05 ack annette_g 14:19:34 present+ achille_zappa 14:19:35 annette_g: I am interested in working on AP 14:19:51 ... is the implementation meant to be for browser developer or publishers of data? 14:19:58 +1 kcoyle 14:19:58 karen: publishers of data I think 14:20:00 q+ 14:20:02 q? 14:20:04 q- later 14:20:21 ack Jaroslav_Pullmann 14:20:25 q+ to answer annette_g 's question about implementation 14:20:34 Jaroslav_Pullmann: need to understand what an AP is 14:21:08 ... to me so far an AP was a sort of extension. 14:21:18 q+ 14:21:42 ack roba 14:21:56 q- later 14:22:04 roba: hopefuly AP define content rules 14:22:14 q+ 14:22:15 ... what to be in data 14:22:35 ... and it's not only about publishing 14:23:02 ... schema is one aspect, content is another 14:23:16 q- 14:23:17 ack Lars 14:23:18 LarsG, you wanted to answer annette_g 's question about implementation 14:23:19 ... we shouldn't make a decision about the scope too early 14:23:31 ... we need to look at the use cases 14:23:44 q+ 14:24:09 LarsG: what ODRL do is rather a profile, not a schema. [??] 14:24:36 ... to answer the quesiton on publishers vs browsers. It's not so mcuh for browsers 14:24:43 ack antoine 14:24:53 s/mcuh/much/ 14:25:22 antoine: It may not only be be for browsers, 14:25:46 ... I'm a little puzzled when Jaroslav says profiles aren't extensions - I think that's what they are 14:25:48 ack phila 14:25:48 phila, you wanted to check folks here 14:26:03 phila: we need to be careful about the word 'browser' 14:26:17 ... we should use 'client' or 'user agent'. 14:26:26 ... cleints requesting info from a server. 14:26:34 s/cleints/clients 14:26:43 q? 14:26:51 ... we should be disciplined 14:27:06 ... about this 14:27:06 sure 14:27:20 Markus Freudenberg 14:27:39 q+ 14:27:47 ack An 14:28:10 AndreaPerego: in DCAT-AP we wanted to provide guidance on how to use DCAT. 14:28:24 ... identify the classes and properties that are mandatory optional etc. 14:28:40 q+ to talk about additional docs 14:28:40 ... done by involving parties, asking how they are using DCAT and what is missing. 14:28:54 .... for ensuring interoperability 14:29:17 ... to be sure we include a minimal set of metadata elements for sharing and discovery 14:29:32 ack Jaroslav_Pullmann 14:29:41 ... we need to consider the practical purpose of what an AP is built 14:29:52 Jaroslav_Pullmann: there was a misunderstanding about extensions 14:30:01 ... my point is that there's more than this 14:30:21 ... e.g. ODRL profiles 14:30:22 schema qualifiers (cardinality and allowed sub types), extensions and content bindings/rules all seem to be necessary to achieve interoperability 14:30:34 ... [gives examples of potential candidates for profiles] 14:30:45 Can profiles also be used to validate metadata entries in registries during submission? 14:30:51 ... we shoudl have a shared understnanding of granularity/scope 14:30:52 q? 14:30:57 ack ph 14:30:57 phila, you wanted to talk about additional docs 14:31:00 A use case and requirement document 14:31:01 A test suite for content negotiation by application profile 14:31:01 A primer (subject to the WG’s capacity) 14:31:01 Subject to its capacity, the working group may choose to develop additional relevant vocabularies in response to community demand. 14:31:01 Jaroslav_Pullmann I got you now! 14:31:12 s/shoudl/should/ 14:31:21 Jaroslav_Pullmann sorry for the misunderstanding 14:31:47 s/understnanding/understanding/ 14:31:59 phila: we're going to need to prove that we have people ready to publish and consume APs 14:32:10 ... if we are to develop APs. 14:32:33 ... We can create a Primer distinct from the DCAT spec 14:32:57 ... If someone wants to create an AP, this can be done in a community group 14:32:59 q+ 14:33:14 ack j 14:33:19 Jaroslav_Pullmann: is somebody tracking the development of all profiles? 14:33:21 q+ 14:34:06 karen: as far as I know, no. We could have a task in the WG 14:34:10 q? 14:34:14 ack a 14:34:36 antoine: The LOV tool may be useful 14:34:45 q+ to talk about LOV and profiles 14:34:51 ... It shows vocabs being used and many of these cases are in fact profiles 14:34:57 ack l 14:34:57 LarsG, you wanted to talk about LOV and profiles 14:35:00 ack LarsG 14:35:03 q? 14:35:13 LarsG: I'm surprised 14:35:44 antoine: Extensions may be mini vocabs, hints etc 14:35:58 LarsG: Then maybe we could do some work on LOD stats 14:36:01 LarsG: maybe LODstats 14:36:18 karen: I'll post an email about interesting things I have learnt based on Stats 14:36:32 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 14:36:32 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/12-dxwg-minutes.html phila 14:36:53 karen: development of profile shows how we can connect things together 14:37:13 ... it's going to be difficult to have the discussion at a meeting 14:37:24 Topic: Use Cases 14:37:25 Sorry; have to leave now (interesting discussion though). See/hear you later. I'll check the meetings later this week. 14:37:25 ... it would be great if people with ideas could post them on the list 14:37:47 karen: we should get requirements from our use cases 14:37:53 ... I believe our set is not complete yet 14:37:57 +1 to decide requirements without thinking to much about the deliverables divisions 14:38:06 q+ 14:38:30 karen: I've put 3 fairly concrete cases on agenda 14:39:02 karen: first case: ID6 - DCAT Distribution to describe web services 14:39:06 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#DCAT_Distribution_to_describe_web_services 14:39:50 karen: [reads case] 14:39:59 q+ 14:40:25 phila has changed the topic to: Dataset Exchange Weekly Call 14:40:27 ack J 14:40:39 q+ 14:41:00 q+ 14:41:07 ack ph 14:41:27 phila: this UC came at the workshop. 14:41:36 -> https://www.openapis.org/ Open APIs 14:41:37 ... it doesn't talk about API 14:41:55 ... Open APIs is the way people talk about APIs 14:42:18 ... Web Services apply to anything now, but it used to have a specific tech definition 14:42:33 ... we should be disciplined about using it when we mean 'API' 14:42:41 q+ 14:42:42 ... this UC is about API 14:42:57 q+ 14:42:59 ... this UC is something we have to address 14:43:04 ack rob 14:43:06 +1 to phila 14:43:07 karen: the editors could make the change 14:43:14 roba: agree 14:43:20 +1 to phila 14:43:29 +1 to phila 14:43:31 ... other aspect: generally speaking, you need to answer the structure of a dataset 14:43:42 ... it overlaps with other UCs 14:43:52 q+ 14:43:52 ... using void and datacube 14:43:55 This use case seems to be a duplicate (or at least it overlaps) with: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#Modeling_service-based_data_access 14:44:25 This is what I reported to the mailing list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2017Jun/0023.html 14:44:44 Yes, AndreaPerego - I was going to mention that now :-) 14:44:55 ... we can't put much in DCAT core about the description of this 14:45:00 ack chile 14:45:01 +1 to roba 14:45:15 @roba: have I captured right what you meant? 14:45:29 chile: we should have a specific look at the class Distribution 14:45:45 ... there are 2-3 properties that are relevant, we could increase it 14:46:01 q+ to ask if relation between DCAT and VoID is in scope 14:46:13 s/using void and datacube/experiments using void and datacube suggest that reuse of vocabularies is indicated/ 14:46:15 karen: can you create new UC or add info to this one? 14:46:16 ack Andrea 14:46:44 AndreaPerego: there are several UC that cover the same topic 14:46:56 ... we should look at whether they can be merged. 14:47:19 ... people expect to find data at the Distribution URL but they find an API 14:47:25 ... they can't do anything about this 14:47:35 ... We split the requirements in separate issues 14:47:57 ... we realized we need a way to say that a Distribution is not linked to a download, but to an API 14:48:10 ... and we need to describe the info about the parameters of the API. 14:48:20 ... some of this could be included in DCAT 14:48:24 q+ 14:48:34 ... it used to have things about this, which were dropped when it became a standard 14:48:51 ... This is an issue for user agents not only for humans 14:49:09 ... DCAT core could have some of it, while details about APIs could end in an AP 14:49:16 karen: could you add this to the UCs? 14:49:20 q? 14:49:31 AndreaPerego: they are there 14:49:31 -> https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-vocab-dcat-20120405/ 5 April 2012 version of DCAT included dcat:WebService 14:49:39 ... but I can seek integration 14:49:39 ID7, ID18, ID21, ID22 at least in part 14:49:44 ack fanieli 14:50:00 fanieli: we need relation between UCs 14:50:15 ... can we also be more specific when we talk about 'users'? 14:50:20 karen: good point 14:50:38 q? 14:51:03 karen: data consumers could also be a program 14:51:20 fanieli: about the template people could add more information 14:51:29 q+ to make a suggestion to fanieli 14:51:32 +1 fanieli 14:51:35 karn: can you post this request on the list? 14:51:48 s/karn/karen 14:51:50 ack Jaroslav_Pullmann 14:51:51 fanieli: ok! 14:51:54 s/karn/karen/ 14:52:02 sorry my audio has died 14:52:11 I'll try later on 14:52:22 ack Lars 14:52:22 LarsG, you wanted to ask if relation between DCAT and VoID is in scope 14:52:41 LarsG: relation between DCAT and VoID? 14:52:50 ... especially wrt what is a dataset in the two 14:52:54 ... is it in scope? 14:52:57 phila: yes 14:53:08 ack luiz 14:53:27 we should also make clear the relation to concepts of DataCube/Prov-O and others 14:53:53 +1 key guidance issue - stop people getting confused .e.g thinking they need to choose ... 14:54:02 Luiz_Bonino_DTL: I agree with Andrea 14:54:11 ... this is the same meta UC we had with tagging 14:54:30 ... suggestion for editors: have a generic UC covering dynamic aspect to distribution for datasets 14:54:48 s/Luiz_Bonino_DTL/Jaroslav/ 14:54:49 ... and then have a more detailed look at how datasets are distributed 14:55:03 ... [gives examples of APIs] 14:55:34 ... and then we could have a profile about the specifics of dynamic distribution 14:55:41 karen: we could have a UC that explains this 14:55:51 q? 14:55:52 q? 14:55:56 ack p 14:55:56 phila, you wanted to make a suggestion to fanieli 14:56:26 karen: are we ready to vote on this UC? 14:56:33 +1 14:56:36 ... even though it may need some revision? 14:56:40 can we vote on the Use Case, but asking UC editors to propose a generalisation? 14:56:43 ... or does it need revision first? 14:56:59 ... I'm going to propose that the group accepts ID6 14:57:17 PROPOSED: accept ID6 14:57:23 +1 14:57:25 +1 14:57:27 +1 14:57:28 +1 14:57:30 +1 14:57:33 +1 14:57:34 +1 14:57:34 +1 14:57:35 +1, rrequires further editing 14:57:35 +1 14:57:36 +1 14:57:38 +1 14:57:38 +1 14:57:40 0 14:57:44 +1 14:57:46 +1 14:57:47 +1 modulo re-wording to avoid term 'web servce' 14:57:55 I agree it requires editing and merging, but it is important as a use case 14:58:02 +1 phila 14:58:24 roba: we all agree we want that scope 14:58:40 ... but the proposal should be that the content is in scope, but we ask a generalization 14:58:56 karen: see comments on votes 14:59:06 ... this is a vote on the concept not exact words 14:59:28 PROPOSED: That the concepts expressed in ID6 are included in the UCR as seen fit by the editors 14:59:53 I think the comment was for a gneeralization 15:00:07 +1 15:00:12 +1 15:00:16 PROPOSED: That the concepts expressed in ID6 are included in the UCR with minor editing by the editors 15:00:17 karen: we can discuss the revision on the list 15:00:18 +1 15:00:18 +1 15:00:22 -1 15:00:40 q+ 15:00:45