08:07:27 RRSAgent has joined #gld 08:07:28 logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc 08:07:29 RRSAgent, make logs world 08:07:31 Zakim, this will be GLD 08:07:31 ok, trackbot, I see T&S_(GLD)3:00AM already started 08:07:32 Meeting: Government Linked Data Working Group Teleconference 08:07:32 Date: 12 April 2013 08:08:18 zakim, who is on the phone? 08:08:18 On the phone I see no one 08:08:38 shall we disconnect and try again? 08:08:41 martinA has joined #gld 08:08:44 Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom 08:08:44 ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made 08:08:55 fadmaa has joined #gld 08:09:07 zakim, code? 08:09:07 the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), martinA 08:09:37 Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom 08:09:37 ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made 08:09:57 Success! 08:10:03 or not ... 08:10:31 I am back in and can hear you 08:11:32 zakim, who is on the call? 08:11:32 On the phone I see no one 08:11:57 cygri has joined #gld 08:12:03 zakim bye 08:12:13 zakim you're dismissed 08:12:19 :-) 08:12:26 zakim, bye 08:12:26 Zakim has left #gld 08:12:35 Zakim has joined #gld 08:12:50 zakim, who is on the call? 08:12:51 sorry, bhyland, I don't know what conference this is 08:12:51 On IRC I see cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot 08:12:57 zakim, what conferences do you see? 08:12:58 I see T&S_(GLD)3:00AM active and no others scheduled to start in the next 15 minutes 08:13:09 retrying... 08:13:12 zakim, this is GLD 08:13:12 ok, cygri; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM 08:13:23 zakim, who is on the phone? 08:13:23 On the phone I see no one 08:13:32 zakim, code? 08:13:32 the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), cygri 08:13:35 zakim, move GLD to here 08:13:35 HadleyBeeman, this was already T&S_(GLD)3:00AM 08:13:36 ok, HadleyBeeman; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM 08:13:57 http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot 08:14:01 baxk in 08:14:29 Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom 08:14:29 ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made 08:14:57 Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom 08:14:57 ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made 08:15:11 zakim, who is on the call? 08:15:11 On the phone I see no one 08:15:28 phila has arrived - we're saved! 08:15:28 calling back in... 08:16:13 here again on phone 08:16:56 disconnecting now 08:17:04 PhilA has joined #gld 08:17:12 zakim, code? 08:17:12 the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), PhilA 08:17:20 zakim, who is here? 08:17:20 On the phone I see no one 08:17:21 On IRC I see PhilA, Zakim, cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot 08:17:34 zakim, bye 08:17:34 Zakim has left #gld 08:17:36 yes that was what i used, same as yesterday 08:17:40 zakim, this gld 08:17:52 Zakim has joined #gld 08:17:56 zakim, this is gld 08:17:56 ok, PhilA; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM 08:18:05 zakim, who is here? 08:18:05 On the phone I see no one 08:18:07 On IRC I see PhilA, cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot 08:18:20 calling in... 08:18:44 rrsagent, make logs public 08:18:59 call connected 08:19:13 yes i can hear you 08:19:38 zakim, present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA 08:19:38 I don't understand you, PhilA 08:19:49 rrsagent, present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA 08:19:49 I'm logging. I don't understand 'present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA', PhilA. Try /msg RRSAgent help 08:19:55 Day 2 agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/F2F3 08:19:56 present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA 08:23:37 I am going to sign off at lunchtime today 08:24:07 Possible also delay CR exit until sandro is here, I know he has views on that 08:25:21 No thanks 08:25:36 q+ 08:25:43 q- 08:27:32 i am very slow line so won't be able to do visual 08:27:39 thanks 08:27:48 Ok, Deirdre is setting it up now ... 08:29:05 ADMS editor's draft is at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/adms/index.html 08:29:20 scribe: Richard 08:29:43 topic: ADMS 08:30:31 screen has joined #gld 08:34:47 DeirdreLee has joined #gld 08:36:47 One of the changes is the merge the advice for spatial and non-spatial objects. 08:37:05 (scribe forgot that he's supposed to scribe) 08:37:06 And SO will become information objects which affects http-range-14 08:37:18 gatemezi has joined #gld 08:37:20 PhilA: Could make ADMS a DCAT profile 08:37:36 …Yesterday's discussion is relevant to that, and it would work with what we resolved yesterday 08:38:02 … Clean and easy to say that SemanticAsset is a subclass of Dataset 08:38:03 q+ 08:38:35 … I'm not sure we need arms:distribution property, could just use dcat:distribution 08:38:43 s/arms/adms/ 08:38:50 … We have more properties than DCAT 08:39:07 … But there are very few terms that aren't either DCAT or DC Terms 08:39:22 bhyland: Then why does it look so complicated? 08:39:41 PhilA: More detail. 08:40:18 … adms:Identifier is perhaps the most significant addition 08:40:33 … Is a bit like SKOS-XL but not quite 08:40:42 … Allows making statements about identifiers 08:41:09 … Useful in RegOrg as well 08:41:44 … Different from Org where classification is done via skos:notation 08:42:05 fadmaa: One of the DCAT comments was about providing a contact point 08:42:25 PhilA: ADMS has contactPoint which is a VCard 08:44:10 fadmaa: We will probably add something for this to DCAT 08:44:16 … Not yet sure what namespace 08:44:38 PhilA: If you make dcat:contactPoint, we'd use that in ADMS 08:45:12 Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom 08:45:12 ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made 08:45:25 … adms:Item is an item included in the asset 08:45:36 zakim, who is on the call 08:45:36 I don't understand 'who is on the call', bhyland 08:45:38 zakim, who is on the call? 08:45:38 On the phone I see no one 08:46:05 did the call drop? i am out, calling in again 08:46:21 yes, the phone line dropped & we dialed back in again... 08:46:49 ok back in again 08:48:13 cygri: Instead of dcterms:hasPart, would make sense to use dcat:dataset or a subproperty 08:48:57 q? 08:49:00 a+ 08:49:03 q+ 08:49:05 PhilA: We also have versioning between assets, xhv:next, prev, last 08:49:35 q+ 08:57:39 cygri: I don't see clear usecase for the includedItem property in ADMS seams to 08:58:02 ... It'd be helpful to know what usecases need this property 08:58:26 MakxDekkers: many involved stakeholders expressed their need for such a property 08:58:45 ack cygri 08:58:49 ack DaveReynolds 08:59:04 cygri: I don't understand why adms:Item is needed. The use cases mentioned can be addressed by SKOS. 08:59:07 ... I can't think of a specific usecase other than items in a codelist now 08:59:47 DaveReynolds: Looks like you want to use SemanticAsset as a container and you want to talk about the items. LDP is relevant here, it has a container notion 09:00:33 ACTION: MakxDekkers to describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container 09:00:33 Error finding 'MakxDekkers'. You can review and register nicknames at . 09:00:57 ACTION: Makx to describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container 09:00:57 Created ACTION-115 - Describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container [on Makx Dekkers - due 2013-04-19]. 09:02:03 DaveReynolds: Can't you use dcterms:hasVersion instead of the xhv properties? 09:02:49 DeirdreLee has joined #gld 09:02:55 MakxDekkers: There doesn't seem to be a standard way of doing versioning 09:03:21 … dcterms:hasVersion doesn't give you a sequence 09:03:47 … You could have a network of versions related to each other 09:04:09 … Also a way of pointing to the last version is important 09:04:21 … Didn't see anything in DC Terms that works for this 09:04:58 DaveReynolds: Two notions being mixed here. There are versions, and then there are sequences. 09:05:15 … XHV not necessarily a sequence of versions, could be a sequence of other things 09:05:59 … Using DC Terms to say there are multiple versions, and then relating them with prev/next, would make sense 09:06:15 PhilA: Would a subproperty of prev/next work? 09:06:21 DaveReynolds: Yes. 09:07:12 … With DC Terms you can say here's an abstract concept, and then there are specific versions of that 09:07:37 q+ 09:09:19 http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/ is the generic asset, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/ is a specific version 09:09:28 maybe :) 09:11:44 Gofran_Shukair has joined #gld 09:12:29 cygri: For a generic versioning mechanism, it would be good to have a way of talking about the abstract, unversioned thing 09:12:38 MakxDekkers: ADMS doesn't do that 09:13:42 … next/prev can be used for things like next chapter 09:13:53 … So not sure whether we want a subproperty 09:14:34 gatemezi has joined #gld 09:15:24 Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom 09:15:24 ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made 09:16:13 cygri: I think the use of xhv here is broken; using subproperties would be better 09:16:48 … Not sure how important the unversioned resource thing is. Having seen versioning modelled elsewhere, I expected to have it, but haven't thought about use cases here 09:17:08 PhilA: We should say that ADMS is not designed to do that 09:17:55 … So we should define subproperties of prev/next/last, and say that ADMS is not a generic versioning mechanism 09:18:24 MakxDekkers: Someone should define a generic versioning mechanism, it's needed and many people do it wrong 09:18:30 FWIW in the UK have a tiny version: vocab. Illustrated at top of https://raw.github.com/wiki/der/ukl-registry-poc/images/registry-diagram.png 09:18:38 … Uneasy about including more ADMS-specific stuff for this 09:19:08 q+ 09:19:11 r- 09:19:14 q- 09:20:31 can't realy hear 09:20:40 fadmaa: Good to have ADMS as a DCAT profile. Makes sense. 09:20:57 q+ 09:21:03 bhyland1 has joined #gld 09:21:34 … In DCAT, we specifically left open lots of ranges, to be restricted in profiles. ADMS does that in some places 09:22:24 … the PeriodOfTime modelling is in the diagram but seems to be missing from the spec 09:22:44 ack me 09:23:49 ACTION: PhilA to update ADMS to define subproperties for prev/next/last and write text around that 09:23:49 Created ACTION-116 - Update ADMS to define subproperties for prev/next/last and write text around that [on Phil Archer - due 2013-04-19]. 09:24:42 ACTION: PhilA to update ADMS to use DCAT properties instead of adms:distribution and dct:hasPart 09:24:42 Created ACTION-117 - Update ADMS to use DCAT properties instead of adms:distribution and dct:hasPart [on Phil Archer - due 2013-04-19]. 09:27:15 I am back to the call again 09:27:31 (discussion on whether DCAT catalog->dataset is hasPart or not) 09:27:42 fadmaa: (going through ADMS comments) 09:28:36 I have addressed 1. All typos reported were fixed 2. Clarifying the first part of the introduction that defines semantic asset 3. Move the description of the original development of ADMS to a new acknowledgments section 09:28:37 … James suggested to use foaf:page instead of adms:relatedWebPage 09:29:55 … James suggested to rename representationTechnique, although no proposal 09:30:13 PhilA: It's horrible, but already implemented, and if no one can think of anything better we should just leave it 09:31:31 Presumably could publish as an updated WD even if not ready to go to Note. 09:31:48 PhilA: We have to wait for a couple of issues on DCAT to be resolved before being able to come to the group with a ready version of the ADMS as a note 09:32:25 cygri: Few issues on DCAT that could affect ADMS might take some time to be resolved 09:32:31 better to wait and publishe a note that is consistent with final DCAT 09:33:15 ... ADMS can wait till DCAT is ready but I think it is better to publish it as it is now and then update it when DCAT is ready 09:33:28 as long as it is versioned ;-) 09:33:53 Sandro yesterday recommended for BP that if there's going to be multple versions then publish as WD (with status saying it would be a note) 09:34:36 agree with Dave WD until DCAT is ready 09:34:38 PhilA: Could either publish ADMS Note now, and update it when DCAT is ready; or wait until DCAT is done and only publish ADMS then 09:35:19 HadleyBeeman: My preference is to get something out now 09:35:26 cygri: Agree with HadleyBeeman 09:36:01 +1 09:38:06 Is you want a WG vote for a Note, as opposed to WD, then we'll need adequate time to review. That's not likely to be possible for next Thursday. 09:38:07 ACTION: cygri to raise issue on adms:includedAssed vs adms:includedItem 09:38:07 Created ACTION-118 - Raise issue on adms:includedAssed vs adms:includedItem [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2013-04-19]. 09:38:30 PhilA: Reasonable to take this comment back to ISA 09:38:51 q+ 09:38:58 ack me 09:40:05 DaveReynolds: A draft should be available ahead of date where vote will be taken so that WG members can review it 09:40:48 PhilA: Notice had been given 09:41:06 … And things that will still be updated have been discussed today 09:41:23 I have to le 09:41:32 I have to leave now sorry 09:41:45 talk to you later 09:42:00 bye 09:42:15 thanks to you Phil 09:42:25 topic: Organization Vocabulary 09:43:34 http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_LC_comments 09:43:37 scribe: hadleybeeman 09:44:15 DaveReynolds: From original last call for ORG, we had a number of comments which we've addressed. 09:44:42 … Since then, we've had this accidentally extended period for last call, we've had 2 more comments. 09:45:09 … Resolved Bill Roberts's comment, he is satisfied. 09:45:28 … All comments have been addressed, we have evidence of that. 09:45:40 DaveReynolds, our call dropped 09:45:42 Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom 09:45:42 ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made 09:46:58 DaveReynolds: Question: whether the changes we made after the first last call were substantive, and should we have done another last call? The document was edited, but the second last call pointed to the original document without those changes in. 09:47:47 … The changes we made, I would argue, wouldn't have invalidated existing implementations. 09:47:59 … Assuming we're happy with that, and the transition meeting will be happy with that, we're fine. 09:49:09 … One more comment from Joao-Paulo says that the diagram isn't normative, doesn't cover all features of ORG; he'd prefer it to be complete and in proper UML style. I prefer the current diagram, but I won't object if someone wants to provide that. No response. This is purely an editorial thing, but we need to decide to have one or decide we don't need one. 09:49:18 q+ 09:49:27 q- 09:49:30 … Next step: put things together for a transition meeting. 09:50:22 q+ 09:50:40 Cygri: Comment on the diagram (general comment on all our vocabulary documents). IT would be terrific if in those diagrams, I could click on things and go to the definition of the thing that was clicked. I understand this is difficult to do. Do we as a working group want to do this for all our specs? 09:51:00 PhilA: clickable schema leading to an SVG diagram? that would be great. 09:51:30 Bartvanleeuwen: All the vocabularies have different types of diagrams. I agree, but I'm not sure we should take our time right now. 09:51:46 cygri: It is purely an editorial comment. Could be updated in the future. 09:51:51 ack me 09:52:29 ack me 09:53:10 davereynolds: It would be great. It would just take time to do it. 09:53:55 yes I 09:54:09 Hadleybeeman: How is this not addressed by other working groups? 09:54:14 sorry slip of keyboard 09:54:44 cygri: This is something we could raise on the mailing list. 09:55:50 davereynolds: there was a version of RDF Gravity that could visualise our ontologies. But the clickable diagram and low cost requirements are challenging. 09:57:58 http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_Timetable 09:59:15 DaveReynolds: If we're happy that we don't need another Last Call, then we just need to packing things up for transition to CR. Should take a few weeks to pull together that documentation (I'm guessing). I'm tied up next week, so two weeks after puts it into early may. Then a few weeks to transition/publication. 10:00:49 PROPOSED: having examined the summary for ORG comments, another iteration of Last Call for ORG is not needed. 10:01:00 +1 10:01:01 +1 10:01:02 +1 10:01:03 +1 10:01:05 +1 10:01:06 +1 10:01:15 RESOLVED: having examined the summary for ORG comments, another iteration of Last Call for ORG is not needed. 10:01:18 +1 10:01:23 +1 10:01:30 +1 10:02:55 Sandro: Someone should review the editorial changes to ORG before we vote to go to CR 10:03:02 … (two people) 10:03:23 +1 10:03:29 zakim, who is on the call? 10:03:29 On the phone I see no one 10:04:22 Sandro: review could happen today? 10:05:04 zakim, mute martinA 10:05:04 sorry, PhilA, I do not know which phone connection belongs to martinA 10:06:14 DaveReynolds: Last change to ORG was in response to the response to the PROV WG. Has anyone looked at it since then? 10:06:27 … Could we have a volunteer to do that? 10:06:37 … We can then vote when that's done and we have the exit criteria for CR. 10:06:38 I can do that 10:06:55 me too 10:08:00 5 min break 10:08:21 Resuming at 11.15AM Dublin time 10:15:55 i am back in 10:16:00 Back 10:19:09 http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-vocab-regorg-20130108/ 10:19:22 Topic: RegORG 10:19:38 PhilA: RegORG, we've previously decided, is a profile of ORG. 10:20:06 … We have no open Tracker issues on RegORG 10:20:09 Zakim has left #gld 10:20:15 Zakim has joined #gld 10:20:50 +Sandro 10:21:06 :) 10:21:41 q+ 10:21:49 … I need to reconcile dcterms:type as aproplert on adms:identifier, or should it just be a type:literal on adms:notation. (This is a new issue on regORG: alignment on ADMS identifier) 10:22:55 davereynolds: noticed admsscheme:agency ? 10:23:07 phila: It's a literal. I need to make that clearer. 10:23:33 s/admsscheme:agency/adms:schemaAgency 10:24:08 phila: best practice doesn't say anything about encoding skos? 10:24:53 DaveReynolds: SDMS attribute code. Published as XML, using Jena. Mechanical translation. Info may be in the google group. 10:25:01 martinA has left #gld 10:25:05 PhilA: that is an example on how to do it; would be nice to have it as documentation. 10:25:51 … I'd like to do something on how to create a SKOS concept scheme from a PDF of a vocabulary. We haven't got time to do it though. 10:26:00 martinA has joined #gld 10:26:19 bhyland: I'm making a note to see about addressing this in Best Practices. People always ask how to do that. 10:26:54 philA: in mapping between ORG and RegORG: it should be a vertical list (to be mobile-friendly). I'll get rid of the table. 10:28:04 … Want to point from org:organization to the registeredOrganization. We should just keep the domain of registeredOrganization as foaf:agent 10:28:36 … Marios, as co-editor, will be helping with this. 10:29:38 … I will fix the issue re adms:identifier. Next version to group, which will be the final note. Bottom line, nothing huge on it. We haven't received many comments (though we may not have asked them for it.) 10:31:10 scribe: deirdrelee 10:33:05 Topic: Exit Criteria for CR 10:33:20 sandro: requirement that at least 2 systems have to pass the test suite is to prove that the spec could be implemented and could be implemented interoperably 10:33:20 Each item in a test suite needs to be passed by two implementations 10:34:44 ... if there is no software consuming the data, it is difficult to identify if data is being published incorrectly 10:35:01 ... therefore there's a need to show data consumption as well as publication 10:35:11 q+ 10:35:34 ... should every term be used? I would say so, as that is the only way we can show that the term is being correctly utilised 10:36:06 ... so every term in spec should be used in 2 publication implementations, and most terms in 2 consumption implementations 10:36:17 q? 10:36:20 q+ 10:36:27 q 10:36:30 q+ 10:36:38 ack DaveReynolds 10:37:15 ack bhyland 10:37:27 DaveReynolds: agrees that this is a high bar. it would require people on our side to record all implementations and to see if every term is being used from every vocab 10:37:55 ... to show that we pass the exit criteria test 10:39:06 I wonder whether things like dcterms and foaf would pass the test? 10:39:24 ... if consumption is to prove that terms are being interpreted in the same way, we would need a consumption implementation from a different publisher implementer 10:40:06 ... another point: if we have no evidence of a given term being used, should the term be deleted? 10:40:15 ... DaveReynolds does not think so 10:40:31 ... it may be useful in the future 10:40:45 sandro: we could argue for a lower bar 10:40:55 q- 10:40:55 ack me 10:41:03 q+ 10:41:04 DaveReynolds: difficulty with a lower bar is that it is more difficult to define 10:42:05 PhilA: PhilA has done some work iwht the Greek gov using google refine, suggesting it could be plugged into the organogram 10:42:32 ... organogram from data.gov.uk 10:42:44 q+ 10:43:20 +1 phil Yeah, it's probably enough to have multiple instance data files and inspect them by hand to make sure the terms are being used consistently 10:43:40 ... so for org ontology, PhilA proposes....? 10:44:07 ... for dcat, we could look at data.gov.fr to see how they're using it 10:44:21 daon't forget the spanish DCAT profile 10:44:34 q+ 10:44:53 ack HadleyBeeman 10:45:04 draft http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition 10:45:11 ... for dcat, we have a wide range of people looking at it & implementations,which we can use to see how it is being used, how the terms are being understood 10:45:41 Not for the English version yet 10:46:05 PROV did a very high bar process 10:46:07 ack me 10:46:08 HadleyBeeman: are there any other groups that have gone through this CR process, who we can learn from 10:46:15 cygri: skos & prov 10:46:27 DaveReynolds: sparql 10:46:33 Prov CR Exit Criteria http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria#PROV_CR_Exit_Criteria 10:46:33 technical specification on PSI reuse in Spain: http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/03/04/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-2380.pdf 10:47:03 Some uses of ORG: http://stats.lod2.eu/vocabularies/149 10:47:09 bhyland1: would question if existing rec would reach the high bar 10:47:23 For the record http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/03/04/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-2380.pdf is a profile of DCAT as used in Spain (doc is in Spanish) 10:47:43 sandro: happy to lower bar to what DaveReynolds suggested, that implementations could be manually inspected 10:47:46 for reference, the exit criteria for SKOS to get to CR: 1. At least two implementations have been demonstrated that use 10:47:46 features of the SKOS vocabulary. Other vocabularies that use 10:47:46 SKOS are candidates for inclusion in the implementation report. 10:47:46 2. All issues raised during the CR period against this document 10:47:46 have received formal responses. 10:47:51 ack bhyland 10:47:59 the European AP draft is at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/asset_release/dcat-application-profile-data-portals-europe-draft-1 10:48:27 sandro: this is not uncommon, WEBIDL has been stuck in CR for over a year, although it is widely used 10:48:40 Also for the record, this is a draft with a guide for using the Spanish DCAT Profile and other best practices on PSI publication using Linked Data: http://administracionelectronica.gob.es/recursos/pae_000023387.pdf (also in Spanish, I'm sorry) 10:49:10 HadleyBeeman: the skos exit criteria is much less laborious 10:49:24 PhilA: prov-o exit criteria is very complex 10:49:36 q? 10:49:51 HadleyBeeman: have we settled on 2 implementations? 10:50:08 q+ 10:50:57 PhilA: we should at least have one publication implementation for every term, and if a term is used in multiple implementations, it should be used in a common way 10:51:01 q? 10:51:24 sandro: do we need example files? Not a full test suite, but evidence it works? 10:52:04 BartvanLeeuwen: is publication of org data for the community directory count as a valid implementation (using or not using diromatic) 10:52:21 bhyland1: yes 10:53:37 ack me 10:53:42 PhilA: we could use the Community Directory as an implementation 10:54:57 BartvanLeeuwen: could we describe the comm directory using dcat? 10:55:02 fadmaa: comm directory is not a data catalogue 10:55:14 anything can be a dataset 10:55:26 q? 10:55:42 PhilA: comm directory could be a data catalogue 10:55:58 An attempt of using DCAT by the city of Montpellier.. http://opendata.montpelliernumerique.fr/datastore/villeMTP_MTP_Opendata.zip 10:56:11 They are still using an old version of DCAT 10:57:00 http://dadesobertes.gencat.cat/recursos/datasets/cataleg.rdf (Catalonia) 10:57:22 q? 10:57:25 ack cygri 10:57:52 q? 10:58:47 cygri: calling a publisher an implemtation of a vocab is not a very useful way of showing that a vocab is right 10:59:10 ... anyone can throw something together, but this does not show that this facilitates successful interoperability 10:59:48 +10 to a test suite that consumes a given vocabulary and does something basic & simple. 11:00:09 ... a better way might be to create a test suite that uses the vocabulary, and show that there are two consumers can do something useful with these 'agreed upon' published data 11:00:12 q+ with possible route to 'implementations' 11:00:12 I'm sorry, I have to leave. Enjoy the rest of the meeting. I'll read the minutes. See you soon. 11:00:16 That would help vocab designers, publishers & consumers. 11:00:24