See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 28 March 2013
<bhyland> Scribe: Fadi
<fadmaa> Scribe: fadmaa
<HadleyBeeman> Last week's minutes: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/meeting/2013-03-21
<bhyland> Proposal to accept minutes from last week: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/meeting/2013-03-21
bhyland: PROPOSAL: accept last
week minutes
... we discussed attribution during last week telco
<bhyland> +1
<BartvanLeeuwen> +1
<HadleyBeeman> +1
<DaveReynolds> +1
<gatemezi> +1
<PhilA> +1
bhyland: RESOLUTION: accept the
minutes
... I thank you all for the great outreach last week with
regards to the vocabularies
<HadleyBeeman> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-comments/2013Mar/
bhyland: there was a great discussion particularly about DCAT and thanks to cygri for addressing most of them
RESOLUTION: accept last week minutes
<bhyland> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/F2F3
bhyland: we have 10 confirmed
people
... any thoughts regarding remote joining?
DaveReynolds: normally there is always a remote option in the W3C F2F meeting
<olyerickson> yes I am...
<olyerickson> not going to Dublin
sandro: It'd help if we get a good Web cam for people joining remotely
bhyland: we need someone to operate it though
<MakxDekkers> I can bring my MiFi, but don't have an Irish SIM
bhyland: we have no meal
sponsor... you are encouraged to do so
... otherwise, we have to pay for our meals
cygri: the most important thing
is to have time for discussing comments related to last
call
... we have an hour slot reserved for each of the
vocabulary
<bhyland> +1
<HadleyBeeman> +1 to being flexible about the agenda.
cygri: I'd encourage being flexible with the agenda to accomodate for potential comments we might get
<HadleyBeeman> Especially because we don't know how many last call comments we will have, who will be able to participate.
<olyerickson> I can dial-in to the DCAT discussion
bhyland: totally agree
<olyerickson> I did not realize I was on the agenda (looking at URI section)
<gatemezi> +1 to cygri point related to agenda flexibility and have more time for vocabs discussions
bhyland: we might cancel the
session dedicated to discussing licenses
... PhilA will be our W3C contact during the meeting
<PhilA> http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/agenda
PhilA: regarding F2F agenda,
there is an hour dedicated to the open data on the web
workshop
... all people on this call is welcomed to join even if he/she
has no paper there
<HadleyBeeman> PhilA, would you rather put a different title on the F2F session?
bhyland: we might use this slot to also discuss the potential of a follow-up of this group
<BartvanLeeuwen> Sorry PhilA ;)
Biplav: a possible agenda topic, reserving a slot to reach-out for people other than the attendants
<bhyland> Biplav: Suggested we have a considered, thoughtful outreach effort post-GLD WG ...
Biplav: I mean people working on open government catalogues
<bhyland> … .e.g, Greece, Kenya, etc.
Biplav: a half-time slot that people from outside the working group might join remotely (online)
<bhyland> +1 to Biplav's idea but not sure how we'd do it logistically
HadleyBeeman: very good idea I am
a bit concerned that we might don't have time for that
... also we need their comments to arrive before the F2F
<gatemezi> For the comments, we can also try to send them a mail via their public address
<gatemezi> from their portal
<HadleyBeeman> +1 to bhyland to explore this… and possibly wrap into EDF presentation?
<bhyland> Biplav: There are risks, but there there benefits to present a polished presentation on the deliverables, to promote usage.
bhyland: we have a speaking slot at EDF I can use a couple of minutes of the slot there
<HadleyBeeman> Should we find some way to include the eGov IG in this outreach?
BartvanLeeuwen: Biplav idea
sounds good to me. I'd suggest to have some ready presentation
that we can use to reach-out about the working group activities
and products
... we might work on that during the F2F meeting
<bhyland> +1 to Bart's idea for a short deck that all members could use for future presentations.
<bhyland> Does anyone want to take this as an action item? We have lots of content …. anyone feeling their inner marketing creativity?
cygri: outreach is definitely
important. I am, though, concerned about taking time out of the
F2F meeting for this
... The F2F meeting is not necessarily the best time to work on
preparing a presentation... using the time for discussing and
planning outreach activities sound better to me
bhyland: I updated the agenda and dedicated a skot for the outreach
bhyland: we have a short name
approved.
... we seeked the feedback of a number of relevant
experts
... we are ready to getting it published as a note
<olyerickson> Yes, jahendler is out for Passover
PhilA: we need to keep the upcoming holidays in mind with regards to the publication dates
<bhyland> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/DCAT_Timetable
<olyerickson> How are we tracking and vetting these DCAT issues?
<sandro> http://www.w3.org/TR has a much more strict process than http://www.w3.org/ns (at the moment)
<bhyland> http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/
<olyerickson> Wait: are "we" editing the LCWD?
<olyerickson> ie making changes during LC?
olyerickson: are we editing the
last call working draft as we are getting the comments?
... that might confuse people as they are asked to review the
specification
<olyerickson> ack
<sandro> olyerickson, the WORKING DRAFT is NOT being changed. I imagine the EDITORS DRAFT is being changed.
bhyland: we need to respond to all the comments we are getting
<olyerickson> sandro: okay...
bhyland: and we need to edit the document when we have corrections to make
sandro: the editor draft can be edited but not the working draft
<sandro> PhilA: The changes made need to be within a very limited bound. Substantial changes will require another Last Call.
sandro: editing the working draft needs group agreement
<sandro> PhilA: The changes can be editorial, no more.
PhilA: we can only make editorial changes to the last call working draft. major changes require re-going through the process
<sandro> PhilA: A subtantive change is something that would break an implementation. A substantive change would require a second last call.
<bhyland> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Data_Cube_Timetable
<sandro> fadmaa, where/how are comments being tracked?
<sandro> fadmaa, (if they are)
cygri: we are waiting for last call feedback
<bhyland> They should be tracked via public comments mailing list
cygri: so far there has been no comments received
bhyland: how are we tracking the comments we get?
<bhyland> Sandro: Disposition of comments
sandro: we need to create a page that list the coments we get and how we address them
<HadleyBeeman> Example disposition of comments http://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/42538/ElementTraversal/doc/
<bhyland> Sandro: Some groups use a simple wiki or LC tracker.
sandro: groups can use a Wiki page or the LC comments tracker
bhyland: editors should be responsible of maintaining this?
<bhyland> … Advise doing it along the way.
sandro: either editors or the chairs can do this
<DaveReynolds> For example see http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_LC_comments for ORG. That will need cleaning up and checking before asking for a CR transition.
<bhyland> @Dave, thank you, good example.
cygri: we have a number of spec
in the last call currently. Creating a list from the mailing
archive we have is some manual work that needs to be done but I
don't think it will be a lot of work
... if we do it per spec.
<sandro> Here's a pretty wiki page: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Turtle_Candidate_Recommendation_Comments or another http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/Comments
cygri: I think having the editors keeping track of that is a good idea
<sandro> "disposition of comments"
HadleyBeeman: I will add a column "disposition of comments" to the summary table we have
sandro: will we use WIKI or LC tracker?
bhyland: ... let's leave it to the decision of the editors
<gatemezi> @hadleyBeeman: with a link to each comment section per spec?
bhyland: this is only for the recommendation track
<HadleyBeeman> @gatemezi: yes, a with a link to each comment. I'll create a holding page for comment tracking of each spec.
<bhyland> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_Timetable
DaveReynolds: we have only one
comment which is not specifically related to ORG
... I responded to it but don't consider that a direct comment
to ORG
PhilA: we need to respond to comments until the commentor is happy
<bhyland> Definition of what goes on the Disposition wiki page or tracker = Proof that comments were received, evaluated and replied to. Replies don't always have to be in the affirmative.
PhilA: or we get no response.
still good to send a reminder
... in case of no response
DaveReynolds: we have to respond to any comment that is clearly addressed at some last call draft
<bhyland> -Topic: Community Directory
<sandro> yay!
<HadleyBeeman> :)
DaveReynolds: the provenance group informed us that they are happy with the reply we provided
<sandro> DaveReynolds: PROV WG is happy with our responses with their reviews.
<bhyland> Issue-55, issue-56, issue-57 can all be closed.
<sandro> issue-55?
<trackbot> ISSUE-55 -- Use of prov:wasDerivedFrom -- pending review
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/55
<sandro> issue-56?
<trackbot> ISSUE-56 -- Check PROV semantic constraints -- pending review
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/56
<sandro> issue-57?
<trackbot> ISSUE-57 -- PROV use of invalidation -- pending review
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/issues/57
DaveReynolds: we can now close the issues 55, 56 and 57
<bhyland> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/File:W3C_Community_Directory_Workflow-status_update_20130328.pdf
bhyland: we worked on
streamlining the workflow re. community directory
... have a look at the updated document
... creating an entry now is an asynchronous process
... in response to registering an entry we provide RDF (we used
the ORG ontology also)
... the web master can then paste the resulting RDF
... after that, the location of the published RDF needs to be
provided to our system
<sandro> I wonder about using a .well-known location, so one just needs the domain name? Or about embedding it in the / document
bhyland: the user interface of the directory has been significantly improved
<sandro> +1 willing to try
bhyland: people on this call are
encouraged to test it
... they need to be able to put a turtle file one the Web
<PhilA> I can give it a whirl although I don't think I'm really the target for the Dir but yes, I have write access to philarcher.org
<sandro> Is it okay too put the w3c one at http://www.w3.org/People/Sandro/ ... ?
<bhyland> Sandro: The dir.ttl Turtle file can be put in your staff or personal area.
<sandro> bhyland: yes
<HadleyBeeman> If we have personal information, might there be Data Protection issues in moving data from one databases to another?
<gatemezi> I guess we have info that are public
<BartvanLeeuwen> cya
<gatemezi> office tel, address, etc..
RRSAgent: make minutes public
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137 of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/no/always a/ Succeeded: s/governemtn/government/ Found Scribe: Fadi Found Scribe: fadmaa Inferring ScribeNick: fadmaa Scribes: Fadi, fadmaa WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: BartvanLeeuwen Biplav DaveReynolds HadleyBeeman IPcaller LC MHausenblas MakxDekkers MariosMeimaris Mike_Pendleton P1 PhilA Sandro TallTed Wait aabb bhyland cygri danbri davidwood fadmaa gatemezi gld james joined olyerickson tinagheen trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20130328 Found Date: 28 Mar 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/03/28-gld-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]