See also: IRC log
<gatemezi> Today seems here our Eduroam connection is down
<MakxDekkers> * o
<MakxDekkers> Phil how do you do those starry comments?
<ericstephan> Is zzzzakim awake yet for phone service?
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> I can't dial in to Zakim
<MakxDekkers> would be nice to have hangout today too
<deirdrelee> hangout setup, will post the link in a second...
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> "the conference is restricted at this time"
<deirdrelee> new google hangout for this morning here https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/London_2014#Google_Hangout
<laufer> +laufer
<adler1> HadleyBeeman: I want us to split into group and work on use cases and vocabularies
<adler1> ... we don't have much for each of them
<adler1> ... we can start by creating wiki pages like we did yesterday for best practices
<HadleyBeeman> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Best_practices_notes
<deirdrelee> Good morning Makx, we're in a different room today
<HadleyBeeman> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/London_2014#Preparation
<adler1> ... it would be great if we had other pages and can take headers from documents that are online
<adler1> ... for best practices we can steal headers from mobile best practices
<adler1> ... etc
<adler1> ... each group will need a scribe and to keep track of actions coming out of discussions
<adler1> ... we can look at use cases and existing work that is relevant
<adler1> deirdrelee: we can split challenges into the three groups
<ericstephan> Good morning!
<JoaoPauloAlmeida_> good morning
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> I am having some technical problems, sound is very bad
<deirdrelee> Challenges google doc https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhTZf3B9yQ3odGVvU3pBazFsY3pyUVppNDFSZGtyQkE&usp=sharing&richtext=true#gid=5
<ericstephan> not great sound at this point....
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> Sound was good yesterday, but quite bad today
<ericstephan> might be part of a dream sequence
<deirdrelee> on second tab, master challenges
<ericstephan> It might be too tough with the breakouts
<HadleyBeeman> sorry, joaopaulo and ericstephan. We're trying to make it better — it's a bigger room.
<nathalia> the sound for me is a little low
<ericstephan> is the facility under water?
<MakxDekkers> sound on hangout is reasonable
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> what's different from yesterday?
<HadleyBeeman> joaopaulo: it's a different room
<gatemezi_> same problem here ..
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> ok
<ericstephan> IRC might be our best friend today
<MakxDekkers> better than yesterday, i guess it's room acoustics
<HadleyBeeman> I'm afraid there's not much we can do. I think ericstephan is right: IRC may be even more important than usual.
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> I'll try the sound in hangout
<adler1> deirdrelee: the first one is metadata and it relates to vocabularies as well
<adler1> ... I propose metadata would go in best practices group
<adler1> ... the second challenge is the granularity of data to publish
<adler1> ... formats - CSV and other formats
<adler1> ... different indictors
<adler1> ... heterogeneous formats
<HadleyBeeman> I've updated the agenda for today: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/London_2014#2nd_day_.2801.2F04.29
<adler1> ... common vobs are not used
<adler1> ... added value comes from comparable data sets combined
<adler1> ... usw
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> PhilA, again this code is not valid
<ericstephan> I am just hanging out on IRC
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> adler1, please do not forget to scribe on behalf of us remote participants
<adler1> deidrelee is reading all the challenges from the spreadsheet
<nathalia> I'm not hearing nothing
<nathalia> Hangout is mute
<ericstephan> no sound at all nathalia?
<nathalia> no sound at all
<nathalia> at Hangout
<nathalia> No more parties can be added this time
<nathalia> :(
<nathalia> Zakim said this
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> deirdrelee is almost at the end of the challenges spreadsheet
<ericstephan> Okay I'll hang up and wait on IRC PhilA
<nathalia> ok PhilA
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> MakxDekkers, can you mute yourself?
<ericstephan> Is it the rain in Spain Makx?
<nathalia> I'm at Zakim
<adler1> ... they could all go into best practice and pull out the ones into data usage and granulatiry and they others can go into the other group
<nathalia> :))
<adler1> HadleyBeeman our next step is to split into groups
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> I could be in group 1 if I good hear :-O
<gatemezi_> which are the groups?
<PhilA> Thing 1 is best Practices
<adler1> had: the discussion groups will discuss use cases and the structure of the documents
<PhilA> Thing 2 is Quality & Granularity
<PhilA> Thing 3 is Data Usage
<adler1> creating requiremenst from the challenges
<adler1> the requirements we come up with will go into the use case docuemnt
<PhilA> Not writing the vocabs, but working on requirements for those requirements
<adler1> who are the discussion leaders - each group decides
<nathalia> ok
<gatemezi_> Can't we merge Thing 2 and Thing 3 ?
<HadleyBeeman> gatemezi_: the decisions may merge, but first we need to sort out the notes and use cases for each.
<gatemezi_> Ok, HadleyBeeman
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> sound is gone worse now
<ericstephan> During this breakout time I'm wondering for productivity if it would be helpful to spend some time doing analysis between syergistic/overlapping CSVW Use Cases and DWBP Challenges. Would this be too divergent?
<adler1> leigh dods is doing some work on licensing in ODI and we agreed to park that idea and come back to it later
<PhilA> I was suggesting that we split off licences, i.e. machine readable licences. Invite Leigh Dodds, and perhaps the ODRL folks, to look at that. This WG *could* be a vehicle for standardisation of that work if a) this WG felt it useful; b) extra capacity came to the WG to deliver it
<PhilA> ACTION: PhilA to contact Leigh Dodds wrt exchangeable licences etc. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/01-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-17 - Contact leigh dodds wrt exchangeable licences etc. [on Phil Archer - due 2014-04-08].
<antoine> for the record i am also to do some work on licenses for europeans
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> so, what's going on?
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> HadleyBeeman, what's going on?
<HadleyBeeman> JoaoPaulo, Makx, Eric:
<nathalia> I'm thinking is dividing groups
<HadleyBeeman> (and nathalia, gatemezi)
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> It's so crazy that video feed is good and sound terrible...
<HadleyBeeman> We are splitting up into 3 groups. One for Best practices, one for Data usage vocab, one for data quality vocab.
<HadleyBeeman> Give us a sec — I will tell you how to join
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> thx
<nathalia> ok
<gatemezi_> ok
<ericstephan> Ok great, thank you
<laufer> çlaufer
<laufer> -laufer
<Caroline_> Best Practices groups is working on IRC #dwbpbestpractices
<yaso> dwbp-DataUsage
<yaso> Data Usage Task force: #dwbp-DataUsage
<HadleyBeeman> Okay, remote participants: we are splitting into the groups, each with their own IRC channel.
<JoaoPauloAlmeida> ok, What about sound/hang out?
<HadleyBeeman> They are working on notes on the wiki: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Main_Page#Deliverables
<deirdrelee> IRC Channel for quality and granularity group is #dwbpq&g
<HadleyBeeman> JoaoPauloAlmeida, there is a google hangout in the Best Practices discussion, and a Skype connection in the Data Quality discussion
<HadleyBeeman> And a hangout for the Data Usage discussion too, I think.
<jeremy> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_quality_notes
<adler1> PhilA, when you publish a dataset its for the potential users of the dataset is this a one off and will it be updated every month
<adler1> ... what ever the update period is where is the policy that says you are going to do so
<adler1> .. DCAT is missing things that we can add to
<deirdrelee> MakxDekkers: the subjective quality parameters are more difficult to capture and represent
<deirdrelee> ... should be careful not to mix these with the objective aspects, which will lead to quality
<deirdrelee> adler1: could we include both?
<deirdrelee> PhilA: how to express something that is subjective
<adler1> jeremy, metrics are subjective to each person point of view
<adler1> ... we encounter a number of subjective metrics
<deirdrelee> adler1: quality should be bidirectional, user opinions should be incorporated
<MakxDekkers> can we separate and start with the objective facts?
<deirdrelee> PhilA: there is a w3c workshop on this in san francisco
<PhilA> Annotations workshop
<MakxDekkers> a subjective statement is not a fact about a resource
<MakxDekkers> it's a fact about the relationship between the person that makes a jusdgment and the resource
<MakxDekkers> those are objective facts deirdre
<deirdrelee> yes
<MakxDekkers> +q
<deirdrelee> jeremy: different domains have different quality requirements
<adler1> MakxDekkers, the provider will never say its rubbish whereas the user may provide that feedback
<deirdrelee> antoine: many quality metrics can be added by data publisher or user, it's data centric
<deirdrelee> MakxDekkers: the data publisher and user will add different kinds of metrics, we should make a distinction between statement of facts and opinions
<deirdrelee> antoine: why close the door on data user adding objective facts?
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: we can first look at obective facts and then subjective, but who adds the objective facts (users or publishers) is irrelevnat
<deirdrelee> adler1: user is not only an individual, but could also be an institution. publisher could also be an individual
<deirdrelee> antoine: for example OSM
<PhilA> Jeremy's slides
<deirdrelee> jeremy: a colleague of Jeremy's in Uni of Leipzig did a paper on quality metrics, should be available soon
<MakxDekkers> does daQ include information about the entity that did the measurement?
<deirdrelee> jeremy: the provenance should be included in vocab, but at what level, per metric, per dimension?
<deirdrelee> PhilA: there could be multiple metrics on a particular dataset
<deirdrelee> antoine: our role would be to define what metrics to include?
<deirdrelee> PhilA: jeremy has to convince dwbp chairs that we should use daQ
<deirdrelee> phi
<deirdrelee> PhilA: Evaluation and Report Language (EARL) W3C accessibility has some of what jeremy can reuse http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/earl.php
<deirdrelee> ... it includes provenance etc.
<deirdrelee> jeremy: nobody whould question the data in the quality graph
<deirdrelee> antoine: why not?
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: jeremy's model is for automatically created metrics, not necessarily human-created
<deirdrelee> PhilA: are there liability issues with quality metrics?
<deirdrelee> adler1: there could be multple values for each metric
<MakxDekkers> Looking at EARL schema. Looks quite useful
<MakxDekkers> http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Schema/
<deirdrelee> PhilA: can jeremy add a real use-case?
<deirdrelee> ... any metric that you measure is a subset of those that could be measured, the selection of metrics is subjective
<deirdrelee> adler1: quality can be a composite point of view
<deirdrelee> antoine: we will still have to define some metrics
<deirdrelee> PhilA: jeremy is doing this
<deirdrelee> antoine: if there are multiple use-cases that point to same metrics, we can include them in the vocab, but they can be extended
<deirdrelee> PhilA: there are some datasets that are authoritative, this should be a metric, but is this a quality metric or a descriptive metric (for dcat+)
<deirdrelee> jeremy: we should think about what consumers need to know
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: data publishers could also say their data is not good quality
<deirdrelee> antoine: what is the relationship with datacube?
<deirdrelee> adler1: there are metrics for confidence, but no metric for measuring doubt,
<deirdrelee> ... to allow human nature to admit some doubt
<MakxDekkers> deirdre a publisher would most likely not say unqualified "not good", they would probably say things like ...
<MakxDekkers> this data hasn't bee ncleaned, or it comes from a source we haven't been able to verify
<deirdrelee> ... don't only have positive assertiions on data, how about negative assertions, but phrased in a way to make it 'pschologically' ok for data not to be great
<MakxDekkers> that's what I meant
<MakxDekkers> the negative or disclaimers
<deirdrelee> cheers makx
<deirdrelee> chris taggart from opencorporates chatting to group now
<MakxDekkers> can't hear chris at all
<deirdrelee> he's just chatting, not a presentation
<deirdrelee> we're having a coffee break now too
<deirdrelee> chat in 10 mins
<MakxDekkers> so is it sensible to say there are three levels: 1. dcat+-type facts 2. daQ/EARL-type metrics 3. opinions?
<jeremy> This is the survey paper I was talking about: www.semantic-web-journal.net/system/files/swj556.pdf - it is still under review, but a good overview of what metrics exists for LOD
<MakxDekkers> useful refernce.
<MakxDekkers> Maybe also useful http://www.slideshare.net/OpenDataSupport/open-data-quality-29248578
<MakxDekkers> Slide 8 has an overview of quality dimensions
<deirdrelee> cheers
<jeremy> @MakxDekkers - did you actually implement those metrics?
<MakxDekkers> jeremy, these are not metrics -- the slides provide best practice advice to publishers to address those dimensions
<MakxDekkers> we haven't measured the data they provide
<jeremy> yes you are right... my mistake.. they would be "Dimensions" in terms of daq - (as you rightly said in the slides)
<MakxDekkers> BP recomm is eg "check data before publication to increase consistency" (slide 17)
<MakxDekkers> has the group reconvened yet?
<MakxDekkers> I hear the word "quality" but I can't hear what people are saying.
<deirdrelee> no,everyone's still out for coffee
<MakxDekkers> ok
<deirdrelee> steve and i talking to chris
<MakxDekkers> the issue of trust is a completely different aspect
<MakxDekkers> the model needs to allow for lying
<MakxDekkers> reputation is certainly an issue
<Caroline_> Scribe: JoaoPauloAlmeida
<Caroline_> sorry!
that would be complicated
<Caroline_> Scribe: JohnGoodwin
<MakxDekkers> any statement about quality needs to be accompanied by provenance info
<MakxDekkers> dcat+-type statements are covered by the fact that it is the publisher saying it
<MakxDekkers> and you either trust the publisher or you don't
<MakxDekkers> deirdre, yes let's get concrete
<MakxDekkers> sound is confused
<MakxDekkers> several people talking
<deirdrelee> adler1: reputation is important
<MakxDekkers> text is data too, e.g. legislation
<MakxDekkers> out scope is not limited to structured data, I think?
<MakxDekkers> our scope
<MakxDekkers> legislation.gov.uk for example
<deirdrelee> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_quality_notes
<MakxDekkers> I don't know how quality and granularity are related?
<deirdrelee> jeremy: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Use_Cases
<deirdrelee> jeremy: granularity is a metric of quality?
<deirdrelee> ... they defined granularity as number of triples
<MakxDekkers> the quality aspect of that are in the area of 'fit for purpose'
<MakxDekkers> e.g. gps with granularity of 1 km is not useful for navigation
<jeremy> you are right MakxDekkers
<deirdrelee> adler1: in terms of lineage, could each entity that touches the data enter quality info?
<MakxDekkers> climate-level granularity is not usful for today's weahter report
<deirdrelee> PhilA: here's the prov-o ontology http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/
<MakxDekkers> too many triples might make data unusable
<deirdrelee> jeremy: there are conciseness issues too, e.g. dbpedia have a lot of triples, but this is necessary
<deirdrelee> MakxDekkers: you can publish the objective metric of 'number of triples', but if this determines good/bad quality depends on user
<deirdrelee> adler1: will link jeremy to ibm guys working on quality
<PhilA> ACTION: antoine to talk to Paul Groth about how prov-o could be used in providing assessment of dataset quality [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/04/01-dwbp-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-18 - Talk to paul groth about how prov-o could be used in providing assessment of dataset quality [on Antoine Isaac - due 2014-04-08].
<deirdrelee> PhilA: granularity may have originally referred to periodicity
<deirdrelee> antoine: could we think of granularity in terms of measurement precision?
<deirdrelee> PhilA: accuracy vs. precision
<adrianov> scriber: adrianov
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: OS is a good example where granularity is a key metric
<deirdrelee> antoine: we could include precision scales within the vocabulary
<deirdrelee> ... we could have a controlled list of levels per domain
<deirdrelee> PhilA: is that not already included in each domain vocabulary?
<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: is this a more important metric that we should focus on it? it is not included in other quality metric lists
<deirdrelee> antoine: we should come up with a pattern to define and quality metric
<deirdrelee> PhilA: just add a metric class in dcat+
<deirdrelee> ... we should not create controlled list of domain-specific things
<MakxDekkers> +q
<MakxDekkers> +1 antoine
<deirdrelee> antoine: data granularity should only apply to the level of detail within the data, e.g. temporal granularity applies to level of data within the dataset, not the rate of change the dataset is updated
<MakxDekkers> +1
<MakxDekkers> +1 to waht antoine just said
<MakxDekkers> point people to dcat property for update frequency of the data set as a whole
<deirdrelee> Hi all, fire alarm went off during lunch
<deirdrelee> we had to head out to the sun by the river!
<HadleyBeeman> And we're coming back, after lunch and the fire alarm
<deirdrelee> quality group: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_quality_notes#From_the_charter
<deirdrelee> Hi JoaoPaulo, we are just back after lunch, everyone is in groups now following up on deliverables
<deirdrelee> do you want to call into any group?
<HadleyBeeman> joaopauloalmeida, there is discussion happening in #dwbp-datausage and #dwbpbestpractices
HadleyBeeman, thanks, I am in #dwbpbestpractices
<MakxDekkers> sorry lost my connection
<HadleyBeeman> welcome back, makxdekkers :)
<deirdrelee> jeremy: information about the quality data should be available, e.g. when it was last recorded, etc. - meta, meta data
<deirdrelee> HadleyBeeman: are there example where some qualities can have specific measurements? data is x% complete?
<deirdrelee> MakxDekkers: it would be good if the data publisher could add an explanation of WHY data is incomplete, not perfect
<deirdrelee> ... in certain cases you can say something is 100% perfect, e.g. in legislation.gov.uk
<laufer_> +laufer
<PhilA> Data Quality Requirements
<nathalia> can we use zakim now?
<Vagner_Br> Wrap-up: Starting with data quality
<PhilA> scribe: Vagner_Br
PhilA: two vocab - 1 about process, accuratenes, completeness
<nathalia> * HadleyBeeman I would to like
We have to collect feedback about two vocabularies
<nathalia> can I?
scribe: next step we have to
thing about whether you want to support SLAs
... probably we will end up with UML diagram
... maybe we should a taks force to take it forward
... task force should have a separated mailing list
<MakxDekkers> nothing to add
<fkyanai> eric, are you listening us ?
Data usage vocabulary:
<yaso> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_usage_notes
Bernadette: we talked about data
usage vocabulary, not about data usage best practice
... how to describe the data usage
... the vocab should focus on traceability (what, who and how
dataset has been used)
... vocab shoul means to be described
... how = transformation - dataset to create another dataset,
visualization or application
... tools to keep track of data transformation
... People using data should provide feedback. Can we have a
machine-readable feedback?
... Feedback on data quality dimensions - completeness,
correctness etc
... Is feedback providing part of data usage vocab>
... Feedback can be used to improve the quality of data
... Another topic is data provenance
... from both the publisher side and from the consumer
side
... Yaso: talking about use cases
... Bernadette: we have not addressed the challenges posted in
the wiki. We talk about general aspects.
... Next step: Use case doc may have requiriments for vocabs.
What kind of terms we need to describe the vocab. It is
important to have clear information of what should be
described
<newton> gatemazi, Bernadette is speaking
Bernadette: also have a look to another documents on vocab description
<ericstephan_> Hello :-) Is everyone back together?
<newton> Yes Eric
PhilA: one of uses we need is to have ways to express scientific data
<ericstephan_> I'll attempt Zakim again ...
<newton> Eric, try to connect on hangout: https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/72cpi53b5160goccfvbb33ho18
PhilA: Internationalization is an issue in W3C. Discussing Multilingual Vocab description. Should be more easy to localize it.
<ericstephan_> Thank you Newton :-)
<PhilA> action PhilA to create mailing list for vocabulary work
<trackbot> Created ACTION-19 - Create mailing list for vocabulary work [on Phil Archer - due 2014-04-08].
http://www.w3.org/International/multilingualweb/lt/
Bernadette: we should work more on scenarios
<PhilA> action bernadette to document the situations/scenarios for the Data Usage Vocab in the UCR
<trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - Document the situations/scenarios for the data usage vocab in the ucr [on Bernadette Farias Loscio - due 2014-04-08].
<PhilA> action deirdrelee to create first draft of UCR in respec
<trackbot> Error finding 'deirdrelee'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
<PhilA> action deirdre to create first draft of UCR in respec
<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Create first draft of ucr in respec [on Deirdre Lee - due 2014-04-08].
Bernadette: for each requirements we should have a use case
<PhilA> action deirdre to work with Bernadette to ensure that each requirement links back to a use case
<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Work with bernadette to ensure that each requirement links back to a use case [on Deirdre Lee - due 2014-04-08].
<PhilA> action bernadette to look up requirements documents for vocabularies such as Prov-o, Data Cube, SKOS
<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Look up requirements documents for vocabularies such as prov-o, data cube, skos [on Bernadette Farias Loscio - due 2014-04-08].
<BrianMatthews_> On Academic Data Citation this report is useful: : https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/dsj/12/0/12_OSOM13-043/_article
PhilA: to start with diagrams
<PhilA> action PhilA to draft UML diagram for vocab(s)
<trackbot> Created ACTION-24 - Draft uml diagram for vocab(s) [on Phil Archer - due 2014-04-08].
<BrianMatthews_> Also the SPAR ontologies (especially CiTO) http://sempublishing.sourceforge.net/
<PhilA> Hi Makx - we'd like to ask you to...
<HadleyBeeman> Makx, we were wondering if you would be willing to lead the Data Quality work.
<PhilA> ... (you'll say yes if Deirdre asks you)
<HadleyBeeman> Next steps seem to be exploring the rest of the requirements.
<HadleyBeeman> You'd be ideal for that, we think. :)
<PhilA> Force11 Data Citation principles
<PhilA> ^^ useful and very relevant to data Usage Voc
<MakxDekkers> so please not for the moment
<gatemezi_> There is also this nice SoA on Quality Assessment Methodologies for Linked Data at http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/system/files/swj414.pdf
<MakxDekkers> I am happy to help but not lead for lack of time
<HadleyBeeman> makxdekkers — ah, that's unfortunate.
<HadleyBeeman> Thank you for the reply though.
Mark: presenting the requirements and notes: see https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AhTZf3B9yQ3odGVvU3pBazFsY3pyUVppNDFSZGtyQkE&usp=sharing&richtext=true#gid=6
<nathalia> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_on_the_Web_Best_Practices#Challenges
<jeremy> gatemezi_: thats an earlier version.. www.semantic-web-journal.net/system/files/swj556.pdf (the latest version, but there are still major revisions going on)
<gatemezi_> thanks jeremy ;)
Mark: topics - Static/Real-time ,Tools, Privacy/security, Skills/Expertise - see collumn A, Collumn B is requirement and collumn is Notes
<nathalia> We can see on the wiki too: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_on_the_Web_Best_Practices#Challenges
Carlos: next steps: we should try do draft a BP doc.
<Caroline__> +q
Carlos: wiki is the platform to brainstorm on the draft
<PhilA> I like the idea of a unique ID for each emerging BP (as well as a wiki page etc)
Carlos: telco to not to discuss
the best practices themselves. Telco to create actions
... the idea is to gather real examples already in practive
<PhilA> +1 to keeping discussion of BPs on main list, esp as overlap is clear
Caroline: we decided to not split in task forces but work together.
Deirdree: Should we have a look
at all groups requirements defintions?
... we will set a list of requirements and BP group will use
it
<Zakim> PhilA, you wanted to talk about implementation reporting
PhilA: The UC first draft will evolve.
<HadleyBeeman> example of implementation report for candidate recommendation stage: https://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Data_Cube_Implementations
PhilA: PhilA suggesting to build
a table for implementation
... PhilA advertising PSI workshop
<Ig_Bittencourt> http://www.w3.org/2013/share-psi/
<markharrison_> http://www.w3.org/2013/share-psi/
PhilA: PhilA: this workshop will provide input to this group
Carlos to provide inputs for group brainstorming
<PhilA> action to prepare skeleton best practice wiki pages for each emerging best practice, including its ID
<trackbot> Error finding 'to'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
<PhilA> action carlos iglesias to prepare skeleton best practice wiki pages for each emerging best practice, including its ID
<trackbot> 'carlos' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., carlosiglesias, claufer, dayures).
<PhilA> action carlosiglesias to prepare skeleton best practice wiki pages for each emerging best practice, including its ID
<trackbot> Created ACTION-25 - Prepare skeleton best practice wiki pages for each emerging best practice, including its id [on Carlos Iglesias - due 2014-04-08].
Hadley: is there a need of BP
wiki page separatedly?
... DWBP call on this Friday is confirmed
<MakxDekkers> thanks for great meeting, and to deirdre for remote connection options, talk to you again on Friday, bye now
<gatemezi_> Thanks all! See you on Friday then..
<ericstephan_> Safe travels everyone! Its been fun. See you Friday.
<laufer_> bye eric
<newton> Thank Eric
<nathalia> bye
<newton> Bye
<nathalia> see you friday
<nathalia> good travel back to Brasil