- From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 16:16:33 +0100
- To: SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
The minutes of this week's Best Practices sub group call are at
https://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes. Text version below.
Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices Sub Group Teleconference
20 Apr 2016
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-irc
Attendees
Present
billroberts, ScottSimmons, CLausStadler, ClausStadler,
jtandy, Payam, Linda, frans, AndreaPerego, phila
Regrets
Ed, Josh, Matt, Clemens
Chair
Jeremy
Scribe
Payam
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]approve minutes
2. [5]Part1
3. [6]Part 2
4. [7]3 May
* [8]Summary of Action Items
* [9]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<phila> zakim save this description
<jtandy>
[10]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon201
60420
[10] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:BP-Telecon20160420
<joshlieberman> lurking+ joshlieberman
approve minutes
<jtandy> proposed: approve minutes of last meeting
[11]http://www.w3.org/2016/03/23-sdwbp-minutes
[11] http://www.w3.org/2016/03/23-sdwbp-minutes
<frans> +0
<Linda> +1
+1
<ScottSimmons> +0
<billroberts> +1
<jtandy> +1
<ClausStadler> +0
<joshlieberman> I need to be on another call, but mostly not to
do with me...
<jtandy> [12]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
[12] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
Part1
<jtandy> establishing an "agreed spatial ontology"
frans: has identified the issue of finding an agreed spatial
ontology- we are going to discuss this.
... this is in the charter description; we need to find a
solution for formalising things
... charter mentions that the spatial data on the web best
practices report will refer to ISO standards and other common
vocabularies
... it is difficult to choose a suitable standard while working
with the spatial data on the web; so this can be a good
opportunity
... the question is how to interpret this- do we need to extend
an existing common model? create a new model? we need to
collect ideas on what an agreed spatial ontology will look like
... what would be the concepts/content for such an ontology
jtandy: there are many ways/standards to specify spatial data
on the web; the fragmentation and variety is an issue
... we have potential to contribute to the web data community
by simplifying the data operating environment for spatial data
frans: the are many areas that have commonly accepted ways of
specifying/sharing/exchanging concepts; e.g. numbering systems;
<jtandy> email thread:
[13]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/
0056.html
[13]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/0056.html
jtandy: we need to define the scope and what we are aiming at
... discusses the email thread on this topic; link above
... are we talking about an upper-level ontology?
... are we talking about describing geometry constructs or are
we talking about describing things?
frans: what would be the concepts/content for such an ontology
tandy: there are many ways/standards to specify spatial data on
the web; the fragmentation and variety is an issue
jtandy: we have potential to contribute to the web data
community by simplifying the data operating environment for
spatial data
frans: the are many areas that have commonly accepted ways of
specifying/sharing/exchanging concepts; e.g. numbering systems;
email thread:
[14]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/
0056.html
[14]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Apr/0056.html
jtandy: we need to define the scope and what we are aiming at
... discusses the email thread on this topic; link above
... are we talking about an upper-level ontology?
... are we talking about describing geometry constructs or are
we talking about describing things?
<jtandy> geometry can't be dealt with without the coordinate
reference systems!
frans: in practice what is mostly missing is a basic agreement
about geometry; and if you address that then you need to also
consider the reference systems
Linda: geometry is already defined inISO190107
... the ISO 190107 is (probably) being defined as a web
ontology- we need to check this-
... doesn't see us as a group to define a fundamental concept
like this- this could be beyond the scope of our work-
jtandy: the ISO standard focuses on spatial geometry(?) and
other communities can be unaware of that
frans: we can work on creating more awareness; however that
standard does not make assumptions about what a geometry is; it
comes from geography domain.
frans; in geo-sparql there areno references to basic geometry
concepts
<Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask about the methodology
for this "spatial ontology" - are we defining new things, or
trying to give BPs on existing solutions?
AndreaPerego: we already have models to specify geometry; it is
not clear what we are aiming at; is it going to be a new
definition? people already use existing concepts; maybe this
can be a good practice on how to use what exists
<billroberts> [15]https://xkcd.com/927/
[15] https://xkcd.com/927/
billroberts: we need to understand who the target group is
... who is it for and under what circumstance this can be used?
jtandy: do we think there is already a reasonably well
understood conceptual model in use?
<AndreaPerego> There are many!
do we feel ISO190107 provides an exhaustive basis for geometry
model?
<AndreaPerego> My concern is its re-use by non-specialists.
Linda: thinks the ISO standard is a good basis-
<jtandy> proposed: ISO 19107 provides an exhaustive basis for
geometry conceptual model
<jtandy> +1
<Linda> +1
0
<ScottSimmons> +1
<AndreaPerego> 0
<billroberts> 0 - sorry I don't know it well enough
<frans> I would not know, I would have to look at it better
first
<ClausStadler> 0 - have to look at it first
<Linda> I see some homework coming up
<jtandy> proposed: new work item to assess whether ISO 19107
provides an exhaustive basis for geometry conceptual model and
ISO 19111 for spatial reference systems
<jtandy> +1
0
<ScottSimmons> +1
<billroberts> +1
<frans> Does this include availabilty as a web ontology?
<Linda> +1
<AndreaPerego> +1, but we need to decide about which
requirements it should be tested against.
<ClausStadler> +1
jtandy: frans: not yet
<frans> +1
Linda: answers frans's question (Does this include availability
as a web ontology?) - there seem to be some work related to
this.
s/some work /some existing work
RESOLUTION: new work item to assess whether ISO 19107 provides
an exhaustive basis for geometry conceptual model and ISO 19111
for spatial reference systems
<frans> We could collect thoughts and requirements on a wiki
page
<frans> Making the model digestible could be done step by step
SctottSimmons: we need to understand how to define something
that is usable by a large community; we probably need to be
less ambitious and find the key areas that we need to address;
s/AndreaPerego/AndreaPerego
AndreasPerego: thinks it is good to create a separate wiki page
to add information relatedto this topic
sorry Andrea
<AndreaPerego> No problem :)
jtandy: what should be the next step?
frans: to collect different thoughts on a wiki page; with
clearly defined actions; reviewing the ISO standards and
geometry models that are in use
<jtandy> ACTION: frans to set up a wiki page and coordinate the
collection of ideas about validity of ISO 19107 and ISO 19111
in meeting the needs of SDW - including non-geographical
standards like SVG [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-160 - Set up a wiki page and
coordinate the collection of ideas about validity of iso 19107
and iso 19111 in meeting the needs of sdw - including
non-geographical standards like svg [on Frans Knibbe - due
2016-04-27].
jtandy: asking frans to set up a wiki page
<AndreaPerego> Maybe we can also start by including the
relevant BPs...
Part 2
Best Practice Flooding Scenario
[17]https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative
[17] https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/BP_Narrative
we have tried to extend the narrative and link it to all the
BPs
<Zakim> jtandy, you wanted to ask if best practices might occur
more than once in the scenario
<phila> Payam: We tried to keep it concise. WE could write it
from different perspectives
<phila> ... We wanted it to be a story that people could read
and that would link to the BPs as a narrative
<phila> ... could be written from a developer's POV, an env
Agency's POV etc.
<phila> Payam: An example, BP 6 and 7 highlight the narrative
for different groups of people
<phila> jtandy: people who have not updated the narrative so
far - are you able to understand it in sufficient detail in
order to further develop examples of BP being followed?
<phila> ... Need input from people on the call.
<billroberts> seems clear to me
<phila> Payam: I think we may need a quick intro, or have
people read it before
<phila> jtandy: If you haven't read it, you really should,
please.
<AndreaPerego> +1
<phila> jtandy: What I'd like people to do... if you want to
participate in this group and you can't follow the scenario,
please say what is missing and what we need to add.
<phila> Payam: We don't want to make it too complex. We want a
one page example that capturesd as much as we can
<phila> jtandy: We need different audiences to be able to
relate to the doc
<phila> frans: Do you accept that there could be BPs that don't
play a role in the narrative?
+q Payam
<phila> jtandy: If we find that there are missing BPs, then I'd
like to bend the narrative to make it fit. That might take us
away fron reality a little but we need to harness them.
<phila> Payam: All the BPs are included in the scenario at the
moment
<Linda> no
<phila> jtandy: Can you, Payam, give us an overview of what
you've been doing to map our flooding example onto your group's
work on smart cities
<phila> Payam: It's about who is involved. Could be citizens,
developers, historians
<phila> ... Then write from different perspectives, what they
need, the right granularity, etc.
<phila> ... How can people react, they might publish on social
media etc.
<phila> ... Linked to BPs on publishing data about each of
these.
<phila> ... data should be usable for machines and humans
<phila> ... May be for actuation as well as reporting.
<phila> ... As we explained the storty we could see how
different BPs come into play.
<phila> jtandy: Links?
<phila> Payam: This is a project funded by Innovate UK but
there's nothing online about it
<jtandy> ACTION: Payam to share links to work on Smart Cities
that is relevant to our flooding scenario [recorded in
[18]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]
[18] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-161 - Share links to work on smart
cities that is relevant to our flooding scenario [on Payam
Barnaghi - due 2016-04-27].
<phila> billroberts: To clarify - what help are you asking for
around spelling out how a BP applies in Bart's narrative.
<phila> ... Do you want people to pick a BP and work through
it?
<phila> jtandy: In my mind I would pick something ... take
Payam's example of pumps and actuators, or water height sensor
<phila> ... That's a section in the narrative. I'd like people
to be able to take a part of the story and write down examples
of how you would go about implementing that particular
activity.
<phila> ... So for a sensor you might want the OGC's sensor
things API to publish data on the Web.
<phila> phila: W3C has a generic sensor API as well, hmm,
wonder if they're compatible.
<phila> billroberts: Style guidelines?
<phila> jtandy: No style guidelines so far. I'll set up a wiki
page that breaks the narrative into sections so we can put
names next to them
<jtandy> ACTION: jtandy to break the narrative into discrete
elements and create a wiki page of who is developing each part
[recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]
[19] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-162 - Break the narrative into
discrete elements and create a wiki page of who is developing
each part [on Jeremy Tandy - due 2016-04-27].
<ScottSimmons> sorry have to leave~
3 May
+1
<jtandy> +1
<billroberts> +1
<AndreaPerego> +1
<phila> jtandy: We'll try a virtual meeting - I want a bulk of
a few hours when we can work as a group to push outsleves
forward rather than just an hour every 2 weeks.
<frans> +0.5
We can host
<jtandy> colocate for a the virtual meeting?
<AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye - good job, Jeremy!
thanks, bye
<billroberts> bye
<frans> Thanks & bye
<phila> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices Sub
Group
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: frans to set up a wiki page and coordinate the
collection of ideas about validity of ISO 19107 and ISO 19111
in meeting the needs of SDW - including non-geographical
standards like SVG [recorded in
[20]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: jtandy to break the narrative into discrete
elements and create a wiki page of who is developing each part
[recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: Payam to share links to work on Smart Cities that
is relevant to our flooding scenario [recorded in
[22]http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02]
[20] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action01
[21] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action03
[22] http://www.w3.org/2016/04/20-sdwbp-minutes.html#action02
Summary of Resolutions
1. [23]new work item to assess whether ISO 19107 provides an
exhaustive basis for geometry conceptual model and ISO
19111 for spatial reference systems
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [24]scribe.perl version
1.144 ([25]CVS log)
$Date: 2016/04/20 15:08:59 $
__________________________________________________________
[24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2016 15:16:35 UTC