13:56:45 RRSAgent has joined #dwbp 13:56:45 logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/12/12-dwbp-irc 13:56:51 Zakim has joined #dwbp 13:57:28 phila has changed the topic to: Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20141212 13:57:36 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:57:45 zakim, this will be dwbp 13:57:45 ok, phila; I see DATA_DWBP()9:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes 13:58:42 DATA_DWBP()9:00AM has now started 13:58:45 AdrianoPereira-UFMG has joined #dwbp 13:58:49 +[IPcaller] 13:58:49 zakim, ipcaller is me 13:58:50 +phila; got it 13:59:25 JoaoPauloAlmeida has joined #dwbp 13:59:26 gatemezi has joined #dwbp 13:59:41 Hi all 13:59:58 hello! 14:00:01 MTCarrasco has joined #dwbp 14:00:10 +??P21 14:00:12 +[IPcaller] 14:00:20 Zakim, IPcaller i sme 14:00:20 I don't understand 'IPcaller i sme', JoaoPauloAlmeida 14:00:26 zakim, ??P21 is me 14:00:26 +MTCarrasco; got it 14:00:26 Zakim, IPcaller is me 14:00:27 +JoaoPauloAlmeida; got it 14:01:36 Hello! 14:01:55 ericstephan has joined #dwbp 14:02:03 Oh no! Sorry to hear that, cgueret 14:02:24 laufer has joined #dwbp 14:02:38 + +1.509.554.aaaa 14:02:51 zakim, +1.509 is me 14:02:51 +ericstephan; got it 14:02:58 +??P28 14:03:04 Zakim, ??P28 is me 14:03:04 +cgueret; got it 14:03:09 zakim, mute me 14:03:09 cgueret should now be muted 14:03:20 +Reinaldo 14:03:31 phila has changed the topic to: Agenda: Chair brought to you by Royal Appointment. We are your humble servants, ready to do as you command 14:03:48 :) 14:03:54 Ha! Thanks, PhilA. *blushes* 14:04:15 yaso has joined #dwbp 14:04:34 Hi all 14:04:39 Hi yaso 14:05:07 I was going to ask about this, hadleybeeman ... 14:05:09 +Steve 14:05:17 phila has changed the topic to: Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20141212 14:05:22 RiccardoAlbertoni has joined #DWBP 14:05:23 adler1 has joined #DWBP 14:05:34 + +1.510.384.aabb 14:05:52 Zakim, yaso has newton 14:05:52 sorry, yaso, I do not recognize a party named 'yaso' 14:06:04 +[IPcaller] 14:06:11 Zakim, who’s on the phone 14:06:11 I don't understand 'who’s on the phone', yaso 14:06:15 annette_g has joined #dwbp 14:06:16 + +39.349.096.aacc 14:06:17 Zakim, IPcaller is me 14:06:17 +laufer; got it 14:06:38 Zakim, Caroline is yaso 14:06:38 sorry, yaso, I do not recognize a party named 'Caroline' 14:06:40 zakim, mute me 14:06:40 laufer should now be muted 14:07:00 zakim, +39.349.096.aacc is me 14:07:00 +RiccardoAlbertoni; got it 14:07:40 jerdeb has joined #DWBP 14:08:19 +HadleyBeeman 14:08:39 +??P33 14:08:40 Hello all 14:08:44 + +33.4.93.00.aadd 14:09:00 Zakim who is making noise? 14:09:03 :-) 14:09:08 hello! 14:09:22 Zakim, ??P33 is AdrianoPereira-UFMG 14:09:22 +AdrianoPereira-UFMG; got it 14:09:32 newton has joined #dwbp 14:09:43 Zakim, +33.4.93.00.aadd is me 14:09:43 +gatemezi; got it 14:09:51 +??P32 14:10:08 Zakim, ??P32 is me 14:10:08 +jerdeb; got it 14:10:42 Hot 14:10:47 PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-12-05 14:10:51 laufer lives in Rio :-) 14:10:52 very hot 14:10:58 right? 14:11:05 right 14:11:36 +0 since I was absent 14:11:39 +1 14:11:39 +0 didn't attend 14:11:41 +1 14:11:43 I was impressed to see that Sumit scribed so well last week that I didn't need to make any edits to get rid of red boxes 14:11:46 +1 14:11:48 +1 14:11:50 I was in Michigan, not very hot 14:11:57 scribe: yaso 14:11:57 proposed: aprove last week’s minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-12-12 14:11:57 PROPOSED: aprove last week’s minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-12-12 14:11:57 +1 14:11:57 PROPOSED: aprove last week’s minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-12-12 14:12:09 +1 14:12:14 that's the minutes for today... 14:12:22 BernadetteLoscio has joined #dwbp 14:12:22 +1 14:12:42 +1 to approve last week minutes 14:12:48 RESOLVED: Accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2014-12-05 14:12:50 We still continue with +1's from phil link ;) 14:13:04 agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20141212 14:13:15 chair: Hadley 14:14:06 Regrets: Makx, Antoine 14:14:23 Zakim, unmute me 14:14:23 cgueret should no longer be muted 14:14:35 Not sure to understand .. 14:14:48 I think Newton is talking about http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett/tidy/ 14:14:51 +[IPcaller] 14:14:53 zakim, ipcaller is BernadetteLoscio 14:14:53 +BernadetteLoscio; got it 14:15:03 zakim, mute BernadetteLoscio 14:15:03 BernadetteLoscio should now be muted 14:15:40 xmllint 14:15:52 https://github.com/w3c/tidy-html5 14:16:00 tidy -im bp.html 14:16:23 Zakim, unmute me 14:16:23 gatemezi should no longer be muted 14:16:35 yaso_ has joined #dwbp 14:17:14 newton: I think that everyone that is editting the document should use the same html format 14:17:28 nathalia has joined #dwbp 14:17:48 q+ 14:17:58 q+ 14:18:05 ack me 14:18:06 Zakim, yaso has nathalia 14:18:06 sorry, nathalia, I do not recognize a party named 'yaso' 14:18:13 Zakim, yaso_ has nathalia 14:18:13 sorry, nathalia, I do not recognize a party named 'yaso_' 14:18:22 Zakim, yaso has nathalia 14:18:22 sorry, nathalia, I do not recognize a party named 'yaso' 14:18:35 phila: the reason that we had a problem with a merge this week is that html tidy changes things 14:18:44 Zakim, caroline has nathalia 14:18:44 sorry, nathalia, I do not recognize a party named 'caroline' 14:19:03 +1 phila 14:19:09 +1 14:19:11 q 14:19:14 q+ 14:19:17 the editor could use it... 14:19:29 to clean things up 14:19:35 we can use just in the end? 14:19:45 yes at certain milestones 14:19:50 zakim, mute me 14:19:50 cgueret should now be muted 14:19:55 +1 to that 14:19:57 +1 14:19:57 +1 14:20:03 +1 14:20:13 q? 14:20:15 newton: we keep editing the document without using tidy and just run it at the end ? 14:20:18 +1 14:20:22 q- 14:20:30 q- 14:20:36 q+ 14:20:40 ack MTCarrasco 14:20:58 q- 14:21:06 MTCarrasco: I use XML Lint - it gives a minimal syntax validation 14:21:08 q- 14:21:11 ack me 14:21:46 +1 14:21:49 +1 14:21:51 phila: I suggest to move on to the standards document 14:21:51 q- yaso_ 14:21:52 +1 14:21:53 +1 14:21:54 +1 14:21:55 to Phil 14:22:07 +1 to Phil 14:22:34 Newton: no problem, I’ll send an email later 14:22:42 topic: Best practices document 14:23:03 hadleybeeman: this discussion should be guided by the editors 14:23:07 regrets+ Caroline 14:23:17 newton: caroline is not here 14:23:40 BernadetteLoscio can you hear us? 14:23:44 yes... 14:23:51 there is a lot of noisy here 14:23:56 i can try to talk 14:24:12 zakim, unmute BernadetteLoscio 14:24:12 BernadetteLoscio should no longer be muted 14:24:31 BernadetteLoscio: to noise here, and with bad connection 14:24:59 BernadetteLoscio: I’m happy we have a first version, thanks, but we still have a lot of work to do 14:25:29 BernadetteLoscio: we had a discussion about the audience, this is one of my ponts, the other is about the organizations of the best practices: if we are going to organize it 14:25:41 http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html 14:25:46 s/ponts/points 14:25:50 .. according to the lifecicle or other organization 14:26:20 q+ 14:26:50 … the other thing is that I don’t know if our priority now, to have the 1st wd, is writing more content on sections that are empty or continue editing the sections that are already being constructed 14:26:53 s/lifecicle/lifecycle 14:27:03 … this is something that I would like to discuss with the group 14:27:04 q+ 14:27:09 zakim, mute BernadetteLoscio 14:27:09 BernadetteLoscio should now be muted 14:27:24 ack mt 14:27:34 MTCarrasco: regarding the content: I’m adding parts of the COMURI document 14:27:37 http://dragoman.org/bpc.html 14:27:40 q+ 14:27:56 q+ 14:28:03 … and there was no comments about the document, so I’m going forward merging it 14:28:23 q+ to speak about preservation, again 14:28:37 ack adler 14:28:48 adler1: first I wanna to comment that we’re doing fantastic work 14:29:00 Tomas, before doing the merge, I think you should specify in which sections of the BP document the information from COMURI should be included. 14:29:04 +1 to Steve: everyone on the BP doc has done a great amount of work 14:29:11 zakim, who is noisy? 14:29:15 Zakim, whos noisy? 14:29:15 I don't understand your question, yaso. 14:29:22 hadleybeeman, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Steve (67%), Reinaldo (14%), gatemezi (45%) 14:29:36 Zakim, mute me 14:29:36 gatemezi should now be muted 14:30:06 CarlosIglesias has joined #dwbp 14:30:23 … phil has begun with providing some native english to the document, I can help with this too 14:30:45 q? 14:30:49 adler1: I suggest that the group can focus on content and not with sintaxes 14:30:58 ack annete 14:31:01 ack annette 14:31:03 Bernadette: the sections that are starting to appear in BP and that are in http://dragoman.org/bpc.html and http://dragoman.org/comuri.html 14:31:32 URI should be in COMURI 14:31:37 hadleybeeman: are you talking about the COMURI? 14:31:54 hadleybeeman: we have to agree on publishing the COMURI document 14:32:03 q+ 14:32:48 +[IPcaller] 14:32:51 ack bernadette 14:32:51 zakim, unmute BernadetteLoscio 14:32:53 BernadetteLoscio was not muted, BernadetteLoscio 14:33:02 zakim, [ipcaller] is me 14:33:02 +CarlosIglesias; got it 14:33:32 -HadleyBeeman 14:33:33 BernadetteLoscio: we should not be specific about technologies, so MTCarrasco if you can 14:33:47 +HadleyBeeman 14:33:55 … check what information fits in each section 14:34:05 zakim, mute BernadetteLoscio 14:34:05 BernadetteLoscio should now be muted 14:34:07 … just to help us to organize all this information of the COMURI document 14:34:07 q? 14:34:33 ack mtcarrasco 14:34:45 +??P37 14:34:45 MTCarrasco: the point is: dont’ want to merge the document if the content is not relevant 14:34:50 zakim, ??P37 is me 14:34:50 +cgueret; got it 14:34:54 q? 14:35:01 … the COMURI is mostly concerned about URIs 14:35:56 … I’ll have to create a new section on 14:36:04 ack cgueret 14:36:05 cgueret, you wanted to speak about preservation, again 14:36:47 archiving +1 14:37:00 q+ 14:37:10 cgueret: can you repeat your proposal? 14:37:33 q+ 14:37:39 currently as 6.2.2 on github 14:37:44 section 6.2.2 cgueret 14:37:45 cgueret: thanks 14:37:49 http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#dataPreservation 14:38:11 ack mt 14:38:15 zakim, mute me 14:38:15 cgueret should now be muted 14:38:22 MTCarrasco: This is a good way to put it 14:38:28 I bleieve that preservation is outside the scope because our focus in on the interoperability of data (data on the web). 14:38:38 s/bleieve/believe 14:38:45 I agree with this 14:38:55 ack adler 14:38:59 MTCarrasco: how to adress that should be in the scope 14:39:03 +1 to tomas 14:39:14 +1 also 14:39:18 BP9 right now for this 14:39:27 ;) 14:39:39 zakim, unmute me 14:39:39 cgueret should no longer be muted 14:39:41 so, requirements on the preservation are relevant (agreeing with MTCarrasco) 14:39:48 hadleybeeman: I don’t think you need formal approval of the group 14:40:06 zakim, mute me 14:40:06 cgueret should now be muted 14:40:08 Thanks JoaoPauloAlmeida 14:40:29 hadleybeeman: What else do we need to have at the document for the FPWD 14:40:40 zakim, unmute BernadetteLoscio 14:40:40 BernadetteLoscio should no longer be muted 14:40:54 hadleybeeman: do you want to propose specific questions to the group? 14:41:36 BernadetteLoscio: we had discussions by email about the audience, annette_g asked if we are going to consider both publishers and consumers 14:41:44 q+ 14:41:45 … I think that we should consider both 14:42:04 BernadetteLoscio: we need to decide if we are going to consider data publishers and data consumers 14:42:25 +1 @BernadetteLoscio publishers and consumers 14:42:27 … in my opinion, the Best Practices should be for both 14:42:33 I agree on having both data consumer and publisher, they are at some extents two faces of the same coin. 14:42:37 ack annette 14:42:39 .. I think data consumers should be aware of it also 14:43:04 I need to know if I merge into BP some relevant sections or not: data packing, etc - COMURI syntax should be a separated doc 14:43:06 +1 for Bernadette's view on data publishers and consumers 14:43:12 annette_g: looking at the list of the best practices that we have now, It seems to me that we should focus on publishers 14:43:22 q+ 14:43:26 a person that is responsible for defining a URI scheme is a data publisher? 14:43:35 q+ 14:43:36 … I don’t know either, but I would like to see what other think about it 14:43:44 q- 14:43:49 q? 14:43:57 q+ 14:44:04 http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Scope 14:44:28 ack ericstephan 14:44:33 laufer URI : yes the publisher is the URI minter 14:44:37 I agree that we should focus on publishers, but also to take into account consumers view during the publication process 14:44:46 ericstephan: I just want to add that even if the document is focused on published 14:45:09 +1 to considering consumers in info for publishers 14:45:18 +1 14:45:23 ericstephan: I think that to publish data without consumers in mind don’t seems to me a good practice 14:45:25 q+ to make a new suggestion 14:45:36 Consumer are the customers 14:45:46 ack bern 14:46:00 BernadetteLoscio: in the document, section 6.3 it’s about BP for external user feedback 14:46:02 +1 to ericstephan 14:46:03 I agree that consumers are consumers... but consumers could assume a publisher role too... 14:46:15 +1 to ericstephan 14:46:21 .. if we are going to consider data enrichment we will have to consider how this data will be used 14:46:34 q- 14:46:34 … we will have to consider how to use this data 14:46:43 q+ 14:47:01 q+ 14:47:24 q+ 14:47:37 zakim, mute BernadetteLoscio 14:47:37 BernadetteLoscio should now be muted 14:47:42 ack mt 14:47:59 zakim, unmute BernadetteLoscio 14:47:59 BernadetteLoscio should no longer be muted 14:47:59 MTCarrasco: the point of the lifecycle - should we take archiving in to account? 14:48:34 MTCarrasco: if the data is dinamic, it will be impossible to read it in the future 14:48:37 ack yaso 14:48:40 zakim, mute BernadetteLoscio 14:48:40 BernadetteLoscio should now be muted 14:49:07 static vs. dynamic data - http://dragoman.org/bpc.html#static-and-dynamic-data 14:49:24 q+ to discuss that data on the web is by definition dynamic 14:49:25 Bernadette: Are we going to draft a "big picture" of the lifecycle ? 14:49:37 yes! 14:49:42 s/Bernadette/ A question to Bernadette 14:49:52 It is part of our plans 14:49:54 :0 14:49:57 :) 14:50:13 q+ to draw things back to the scope: http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Scope 14:50:15 annette_g: I wanna to adress this question about data enrichnment 14:50:36 annette_g: surely people can reuse data 14:50:40 q+ 14:50:42 +1 to Yaso!!!;) 14:50:49 q+ 14:51:00 Cooks often eat their own food: we must be able to read our own data in the next 25 to 50 years 14:51:24 that's why we need data preservation 14:51:27 … I support doing a separate document - the question of the organization of the data lyfecycle 14:51:56 Zakim, ack me 14:51:56 unmuting cgueret 14:51:57 cgueret, you wanted to discuss that data on the web is by definition dynamic 14:51:57 I see annette_g, hadleybeeman, BernadetteLoscio, laufer on the speaker queue 14:51:59 ack annette 14:52:00 .. I do think that in the organization we should be based on other that the lyfecycle 14:52:11 cgueret: should we take archiving in to account? 14:52:28 q+ 14:52:37 hadleybeeman, should we vote it now? Can I make a proposal on this? 14:52:42 q+ to say that archiving is a publisher function 14:53:02 @yaso, I think we should let the queue run down first. 14:53:14 @hadleybeeman ok! 14:53:17 (since we still have a few more minutes) 14:53:24 q? 14:53:37 zakim, mute me 14:53:37 cgueret should now be muted 14:53:37 ack me 14:53:38 hadleybeeman, you wanted to draw things back to the scope: http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Scope 14:54:33 hadleybeeman: we can’t focus in just one group or other 14:54:49 hadleybeeman: about data preservation and archiving 14:55:20 … it’s important to be aware 14:55:27 ack bern 14:56:22 BernadetteLoscio: I’d like to know if it’s possible to have the FPWD before christmas 14:56:58 hadleybeeman: our next call is in january 14:57:04 @annette perhaps "reuse" as Hadley suggested instead of consumer? 14:57:57 @phila, do you want to comment on what needs to be in a FPWD? 14:57:57 hadleybeeman: its not clear what else is really important to do at the document to have the draft. We are going to work on the document, but we have a lot of questions to answer. 14:58:13 s/hadleybeeman/bernadetteloscio 14:58:33 BernadetteLoscio: can we move on improving the sections that we already have, or should we work on something elsE? 14:59:12 phila: I think that the document is very new, but is evolving fast 14:59:22 Phil +1 - probably too early 14:59:44 … it’s possible that we could have a general resolution that over the christmas people want to take a look over it 14:59:54 +1 phila 15:00:01 +1 15:00:06 well said 15:00:09 +1 15:00:12 +1 15:00:21 +1 15:00:24 BernadetteLoscio: so we are going to continue to work at the document, help is welcome, it’s really important that we continue writing 15:00:26 +1 15:00:27 +1 15:00:28 +1 15:00:38 … we can evaluate and vote for this on the next friday 15:00:48 Data preservation directly related to web technologies - if we recommend only to archive static data, one has to describe the degration of the dynamic data 15:01:04 phila: I would say that at the moment we don’t have consensus on what the audience is 15:01:14 … we have annette_g making a strong objection 15:01:21 … so at the moment we don’t have consensus 15:01:39 +1 15:01:41 I'm happy to continue on email 15:01:50 thank you!!! 15:01:50 thanks all! 15:01:51 Thank you all! 15:01:55