Re: ISSUE-139, ISSUE-146, Methodology ? Was: alignment sosa to ssn

Hi Armin, all,

I created the following wiki page for discussing the methodology:
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/OldSSN/SOSA/SSN_Integration_Methodology

Then closed the old pull request: https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/536
And issued a fresh new one with a lot less material:
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/554

I think it's still a good idea to keep track of the methodology on github,
I'll update it according to the chosen methodology in the wiki.

Kind regards,
Maxime



Le dim. 12 févr. 2017 à 23:55, Armin Haller <armin.haller@anu.edu.au> a
écrit :

> Hi Maxime,
>
>
>
> I am aware of your methodology document. It documents what we are trying
> to do. I am happy to accept the pull request for that document, but I can’t
> untangle it from your yet still larger Pull request. What if you create a
> wiki page with the content? We can then collaboratively document decisions
> or make changes to the methodology. It may result in more people
> contributing as not all members are confident at this stage to make changes
> in our Github repository.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Armin
>
>
>
> *From: *Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@emse.fr>
> *Date: *Saturday, 11 February 2017 at 10:19 pm
> *To: *Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, "public-sdw-wg@w3.org" <
> public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
>
>
> *Subject: *ISSUE-139, ISSUE-146, Methodology ? Was: alignment sosa to ssn
>
> *Resent-From: *<public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Saturday, 11 February 2017 at 10:20 pm
>
>
>
> Dear Kerry, Simon, all,
>
>
>
> I think that Simon is keeping ssn-sosa.ttl in line with the latest
> discussions in this mailing list, see the comments in the related pull
> request that has been merged two days ago:
> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/543
>
>
>
> I also understand Kerry's point, in that the pull requests and their
> merging is not always discussed in this mailing list and approved by the
> entire subgroup.
>
>
>
>
>
> On the other hand, the other alignments that Simon proposed are in my
> humble opinion very be valuable, and should be mentioned as part of a
> non-normative section in the REC?
>
>
>
>
>
> Anyways, the point I want to make here is that the SSN subgroup really
> needs to use a strict methodology for the discussion and integration of
> terms one by one from the old ssn into ssnx, sosa and the new ssn.
>
>
>
> I suggested a clear methodology in this commit:
>
>
> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/536/commits/aa6dc76d0c653f5ed515b52506d64bf8184e16f5
>
>
>
>
> Armin's proposal to create a wiki page for each integration issue, where
> we can discuss the pro and  cons of several options, and agree on a vote,
> is also a great way to achieve this. I will include the role of discussing
> the options in the wiki in this methodology.
>
> See https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Semantic_Sensor_Network_Ontology
>
>
>
> So I strongly encourage Armin to complete the reviewing process of
> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/536 . If this pull request is merged, it
> could provide us with fresh new ssnx, ssn, sosa documents. We could
> progressively fill these documents with the definition of a new term every
> time the group has reached an agreement.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Maxime Lefrançois
>
>
>
> Le sam. 11 févr. 2017 à 07:06, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au> a
> écrit :
>
> SSN subgroup,
>
> Just for the record (I feel somewhat ridiculous saying this):
>
>
>
> We, the ssn focus group have been assured on more than one occasion that
> we are to take no notice of ‘
> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/ssn-sosa.ttl”  (nor any
> other of the files in  https://github.com/w3c/sdw/tree/gh-pages/ssn/rdf ,
> with the exception of sosa.ttl) and this is only a way of documenting
> someone’s opinion and has no status more than that.
>
>
>
> Therefore , we are safe to assume the fact that it is being updated very
> recently  does not change that status.
> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/commit/c52f0174ab8feca0e325cf22e487c85dfb3a096a
>
>
>
> (Sorry folks,  just  preparing for the expected  “…but we all decided
> that.  Because it has been there  in public all this time , and so it’s all
> done ….”  type claim).
>
>
>
> ISSUE-139
>
> -Kerry
>
>
>
>