Meeting Record

There are some format problems with the chatlog. Please correct them and reload this page. They are labeled on this page in a red box, like this message.

It may be helpful to

Zakim IRC Bot: ok, PhilA2; I see T&S_GLDWG()9:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes ←

Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, danbri, muting is not permitted when only one person is present ←

Unknown JeniT: There are 2 tech areas where I think there is a need for standardisation [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... one is data discovery, describing data sets /open initiative, schema.org's work on this ←

Phil Archer: ... so 1 workshop would be to map out what the differnet ways are and which ones should we be writing them down as Best practice ←

Unknown JeniT: The other area is around tabular data, Dataset Publishing lang, Rufus's work, mine of linked CSV format [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... searching towards some standardisation activity in this area, cf. just adopting Google ←

Phil Archer: ... so there could be some standaridisation activity,. WE could do some CG-based work, or we could getpeople in the same room ←

Unknown rgrp: +1 to what Jeni said. There's a real need for this [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... it surprises me how much needs to be done. There's a desire to use what's there, but what is the BP for formats ←

Phil Archer: ... I'm not to attached to data protocols, I want the community to grow up ←

Phil Archer: ... maybe start something semi-formal, so not over-formal to start with ←

Phil Archer: ... data protocols we began in an afternoon following an IRC session ←

Unknown rgrp: I could add data quality? Provenance, and more that could be added. But the thing I'd emphasise is rough consensus and running code etc. [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown rgrp: Strong +1 on the idea and our desire to contribute and collaborate on this ... ←

Unknown ivan: Is there a need to lookat various APIs for accessing and using data [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown ivan: I don't know how this data is consumed by apps and what we need to do here [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown ivan: The emphasis on the 2 topics that jeni mentions is good but I'd be happy to leave the door open to otehr ideas [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown JeniT: maybe we have part of the session at the end to brainstorm about other things to look at in later workshops ←

Unknown danbri: I nod when Jeni presents this. But hang on. Discovery and description an't be separated [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... hot topics for early 2013, that would be a strong one ot loook at ←

Phil Archer: ... don't want to create an event that gives false promise of what might happen. Not a rubber stamp on what we've already decided ←

Unknown rgrp: Can we imagine this being one in a series of workshops? [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... I'd like to leave vis out as we're early in that process and it's very broad ←

Phil Archer: ... people would come along but who are we rea really targeting ←

Phil Archer: ... lots of stuff going on but maybe 3rd workshop would leading to a standard ←

Unknown danbri: W3C still has the submission process which pre-dates CGs etc. [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown ivan: We don't go into as WS and say the goal is to create these two WGs... [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... the idea os more to have a get together and then figure what work if any that needs to be done and by whom usijg which vehicle ←

Unknown danbri_: other topics floating around --- data in the browser APIs (SQL, https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/IndexedDB ... ), ←

Unknown ivan: I'd rather not go into what W3C wants to get. It's a get together [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... if we have 2-3 days of get together we can be more effective than a lot of CG ←

Unknown danbri_: do we all share concern for 'dataset' over 'data in general'? ←

Phil Archer: Rufus mentioned data quality [ Scribe Assist by Unknown JeniT ] ←

Unknown JeniT: ... was not just about metadata, but about what the data was for, who published it ←

Unknown JeniT: ... thinking about the data publishers: they need to feed better about publishing it ←

Unknown JeniT: ... I'd like to have potential publishers in the same room as potential consumers, so the publishers feel better about publishing the data ←

Unknown JeniT: ... and the consumers know why they can't ignore the footnotes ←

Unknown JeniT: ... Rufus, does the data format you've been developing, does that include footnotes? ←

Unknown rgrp: I eat my own dogfood... notes and comments should appear in the general file. Annotations are important [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... issues like support for comments and annotations are important but I don't want tools to enforce it ←

Phil Archer: we don't have preconceived ideas about what these workshops will lead to [ Scribe Assist by Unknown JeniT ] ←

Unknown JeniT: ... I think we are talking about description & discovery, and we are talking about tabular data ←

Unknown danbri: Tabular data includes the whole relational database [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... is there another unstated assumption that we're talking about datasets vs. database ←

Phil Archer: ... A university's database has lots of tables, but that's not what we're talking about ←

Unknown rgrp: It's about Web-oriented formats, things that would be exchanged over APIs [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown danbri: There's so much going around the browser/Dom, there are HTML5 community folk who would need to work on that [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown danbri: I can describe it negatively - things that RDF doesn't work well for [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown JeniT: we should include HTML5 people to argue for using HTML5 for representing/sharing tabular data ←

Unknown rgrp: The summary that we had was pretty good but perhaps to broad for discovery and description [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown Meant: current document quite good ... [ Scribe Assist by Unknown rgrp ] ←

Phil Archer: current dtaft https://docs.google.com/document/d/11v44djF5BoO_Y-vPVLTgzpYi26bc-RY3U8BVOIQxSGg/edit ←

Phil Archer: ... I'm not yet convinced that this is a good idea. I'd think that having a CfP that has: these are the core major topics, we may pick only 2, we may add APIs, these are not priority topics. I'd rather not separate the two days ←

Phil Archer: ... if we get 2 papers on data discover and 50 on visualisation, that gives us a signal. Leaving the door open allows other ideas ←

Unknown JeniT: I think that's a good idea, what I fear though... [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Phil Archer: ... it would be nice to encourage people to submit more than one paper ←

Unknown ivan: Multiple papers. Question is whether same person takes more than one slot depends on the PC [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown danbri_: [aside re schema.org: on discovery/description, this is important for us to help us make rapid 'rough consensus' decisions on which designs are ready to try out via schema.org] ←

Unknown rgrp: My thought about the current doc - you're targeting people who write code, not papers, no? [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown ivan: Having spent many years in research, the name workshop has always been a problem for me at W3C. This is not an academic WS. This is a get together. What we ask is for a short submission (counted in paragraphs). Filter out the spam, decide on the programme and decide who to invite [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown rgrp: CfP comes across as too academic then... [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown rgrp: So if it's not academic, do we need to talk about papers, how about talk proposals [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown ivan: I understand, but we haven't had a big problem with that text (which has been used a lot before) [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown JeniT: It depends who we want to get along [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown JeniT: WE want to see tool makers who are not them selves involved in standards [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown danbri_: eg. in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/events/foaf-galway/#Topics ("We invite the submission of position statements and demonstration descriptions as well as full papers. Position papers and demonstration submissions should not exceed 1000 words, full papers should not contain more than 6000 words") etc ←

Unknown tlr: The text around this usually works. Just give a list of examples that make it clear that it's not an academic exercise [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Unknown danbri_: hmm re https://www.google.com/webhp?q=+open+data+hackathons ... ←

Unknown danbri_: we also have http://www.campuslondon.com/ around the corner from ODI; I can book some space as spill-over ←

Unknown danbri: How many people can Google Campus hold? [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Zakim IRC Bot: tlr, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: danbri (51%), ivan (71%), JeniT (14%) ←

Unknown rgrp: But i would say i think we can find space in london for this one way or the other ... ←

Unknown danbri_: i think series makes sense, maybe a community group can support that aspect somehow ←

Unknown danbri_: JeniT ... thinking out loud but if would be good to do things to appeal to these guys: http://www.londonr.org/ ←

Unknown danbri: I'll redraft the minutes to capture that URI [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←

Zakim IRC Bot: disconnecting the lone participant, ivan, in T&S_GLDWG()9:00AM ←

Government Linked Data Working Group

Minutes of 10 December 2012