13:56:50 RRSAgent has joined #dwbp 13:56:50 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/02/06-dwbp-irc 13:56:56 RRSAgent, make logs public 13:57:02 zakim, this will be dwbp 13:57:02 ok, phila; I see DATA_DWBP()9:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes 13:57:25 DATA_DWBP()9:00AM has now started 13:57:32 + +1.609.557.aaaa 13:57:51 deirdrelee has joined #dwbp 13:57:57 Eric_Kauz has joined #DWBP 13:59:38 +[IPcaller] 13:59:53 annette_g has joined #dwbp 14:00:03 zakim, [ipcaller] is me 14:00:03 +deirdrelee; got it 14:00:09 cgueret has joined #dwbp 14:00:47 +[IPcaller] 14:00:52 zakim, [ is me 14:00:52 +phila; got it 14:01:18 yaso has joined #dwbp 14:01:24 +Caroline_ 14:01:28 laufer has joined #dwbp 14:01:30 Zakim, Caroline is Yaso 14:01:30 +Yaso; got it 14:02:02 + +1.510.384.aabb 14:02:18 zakim, .aabb is me 14:02:18 sorry, annette_g, I do not recognize a party named '.aabb' 14:02:31 zakim, aabb is me 14:02:31 +annette_g; got it 14:02:35 +HadleyBeeman 14:02:42 +??P21 14:02:52 zakim, ??P21 is me 14:02:53 +cgueret; got it 14:03:03 zakim, who is noisy? 14:03:04 somebody needs to mute 14:03:12 ericstephan has joined #dwbp 14:03:15 phila, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: +1.609.557.aaaa (48%), HadleyBeeman (35%) 14:03:17 zakim, mute me 14:03:17 cgueret should now be muted 14:03:44 agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20150206 14:04:01 -cgueret 14:04:09 jerdeb has joined #DWBP 14:04:12 + +1.509.554.aacc 14:04:13 antoine has joined #dwbp 14:04:27 phila has changed the topic to: agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20150205 14:04:32 zakim, +aacc is me 14:04:32 sorry, ericstephan, I do not recognize a party named '+aacc' 14:04:38 agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20150205 14:04:39 laufer has joined #dwbp 14:04:41 +[IPcaller] 14:04:43 zakim, aacc is me 14:04:43 +ericstephan; got it 14:04:46 zakim, IPcaller is me 14:04:46 +antoine; got it 14:04:48 +??P28 14:04:54 zakim, ??P28 is me 14:04:54 +cgueret; got it 14:04:56 zakim, mute me 14:04:56 cgueret should now be muted 14:05:08 +??P31 14:05:11 JoaoPauloAlmeida has joined #dwbp 14:05:14 Caroline_ has joined #DWBP 14:05:20 meeting: DWBP Weekly 14:05:28 Zakim, yaso has caroline and newton 14:05:28 +caroline, newton; got it 14:05:31 Zakim, ??P31 is me 14:05:31 +jerdeb; got it 14:05:34 +[IPcaller] 14:05:44 newton has joined #dwbp 14:05:47 zakim, IPcaller is me 14:05:47 +laufer; got it 14:05:56 +[IPcaller] 14:06:01 Zakim, IPcaller is me 14:06:01 +JoaoPauloAlmeida; got it 14:06:07 zakim, mute me 14:06:07 laufer should now be muted 14:07:00 i can scribe 14:07:11 newton has joined #dwbp 14:07:12 scribe: deirdrelee 14:07:18 +[IPcaller] 14:07:24 chair: Hadley 14:07:29 zakim, [IPcaller] is me 14:07:29 +cgueret; got it 14:07:31 zakim, mute me 14:07:31 cgueret was already muted, cgueret 14:07:51 -> http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2015-01-30 Last week's minutes 14:07:59 AdrianoC-UFMG has joined #DWBP 14:08:00 Propose: accept last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2015-01-30 14:08:03 +1 14:08:04 +1 14:08:04 +1 14:08:05 +1 14:08:06 +0 (absent) 14:08:06 +1 14:08:07 +1 14:08:09 s/propose/proposed/ 14:08:11 +1 14:08:12 +1 14:08:32 +1 14:08:33 +1 14:08:33 +1 14:08:36 accepted: last week's minutes http://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/dwbp/2015-01-30 14:08:49 Our current meeting page says "05-Feb" when it should say "06-Feb". Same in the URL. 14:08:54 s/accepted/approved 14:08:56 zakim, aaaa is me 14:08:56 +Eric_Kauz; got it 14:08:57 adrianov-UFMG has joined #DWBP 14:09:01 s/accepted/resolved/ 14:09:02 topic: f2f meeting 14:09:07 s/approved/resolved/ 14:09:36 hadleybeeman: there are two days suggested for f2f in april, we need to decide today! 14:09:56 -> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Choosing_the_venue_for_a_F2F_2015_hosted_by_NIC.br Wiki page with options for f2f 14:09:56 https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Choosing_the_venue_for_a_F2F_2015_hosted_by_NIC.br 14:10:01 ...because each meeting needs 8 wks advance so that people can organise travel 14:10:18 vagner has joined #dwbp 14:10:27 ...the suggested dates are april 6-8 or 13-14 14:10:37 I think we can vote 14:10:41 ... in sao paulo. should we vote on that now? 14:10:48 :-) sleepy here 14:10:57 ... vote for 13-15 april, as that's more popular 14:11:07 Fair enough, ericstephan :) 14:11:17 q+ 14:11:19 phila: are there any other suggestions that we want to consider today? or is the choice those 2 dates in brasil? 14:11:26 hadleybeeman: happy to take other suggestions 14:11:28 Ack yasi 14:11:34 Ack yasi 14:11:44 ack yaso 14:11:52 q+ 14:11:56 q+ to talk about TPAC 14:12:01 yaso: if we can't get enough people to come to brasil, we can also consider europe or U.S. 14:12:22 How many more particpants would we get hosting F2F in Europe or USA? 14:12:44 newton has joined #dwbp 14:12:48 ericstephan: when he looked at the names, many people from abroad said it was unlikely they could join, and that's not good 14:13:23 hadleybeeman: if the meeting is in europe, it's more likely for europeans to join, but then it's difficult for those from south america to travel 14:13:27 q+ to propose two remotely-connected f2f 14:13:28 ...and that's not fair either 14:13:34 ack me 14:13:40 q- later 14:13:44 zakim, ack me 14:13:44 unmuting cgueret 14:13:45 cgueret, you wanted to propose two remotely-connected f2f 14:13:45 I see phila on the speaker queue 14:13:49 @deirdre I believe that might have been vagner speaking? 14:14:19 cgueret: maybe there could be two locations for f2f, so that it's easier to travel 14:14:23 zakim, mute me 14:14:23 cgueret should now be muted 14:14:43 hadleybeeman: it would be difficult with time zones 14:14:59 :-/ 14:15:09 ack me 14:15:09 phila, you wanted to talk about TPAC 14:15:16 ... there was a GLD meeting that was in two places, it was okay, but a challenge to participate actively 14:15:25 time zone difference Europe-Brazil will be 5 hours in April 14:15:55 phila: not uncommon for other WGs to do this, for exactly the issues we are facing here 14:16:29 newton_ has joined #dwbp 14:16:32 ...it was good, as there was video conference 14:16:51 ...time zones aren't extreme, only 3 hours apart 14:16:57 laufer: it's 5 hours 14:17:01 ..diff 14:17:08 The idea of video conference sounds appealing 14:17:09 s/laufer/JoaoPauloAlmeida 14:17:11 phila: ok, not ideal, but doable 14:17:25 hadleybeeman: steve is offering ibm space 14:17:40 ...but maybe he could offer ibm space in europe 14:17:46 Those who wrote that will not attend due to budget constraints to travel out of Europe could tell us if they would attend F2F in Europe 14:17:53 ...a dual-citied approach may not a bad event 14:17:57 zakim, unmute me 14:17:57 cgueret should no longer be muted 14:18:03 s/event/approach 14:18:08 +??P39 14:18:12 traveling beyond country borders is such a bother for my company. I am sad to say. 14:18:24 zakim, mute ??P39 14:18:24 ??P39 should now be muted 14:18:24 mine, too 14:18:36 cgueret: bart had suggested before that they could provide a location in amsterdam 14:18:41 ??P39 is AdrianoC-UFMG 14:18:42 ...they could have a look and report back 14:18:52 I can ask Ivan at CWI 14:18:58 (also Amsterdam) 14:19:08 zakim, AdrianoC-UFMG has adrianov-UFMG 14:19:08 sorry, AdrianoC-UFMG, I do not recognize a party named 'AdrianoC-UFMG' 14:19:15 hadleybeeman: perhaps we whould tentatively commit to f2f on 13-15 april 14:19:34 CarlosIglesias has joined #dwbp 14:19:34 zakim, who is here? 14:19:35 On the phone I see Eric_Kauz, deirdrelee, phila, Yaso, annette_g, HadleyBeeman, ericstephan, antoine, cgueret, jerdeb, laufer (muted), JoaoPauloAlmeida, cgueret.a, ??P39 (muted) 14:19:35 +1 to commit the face to face the week of April 13-15 14:19:35 ...and spend the next week looking at venues 14:19:37 Yaso has caroline, newton 14:19:37 On IRC I see CarlosIglesias, newton_, newton, vagner, adrianov-UFMG, AdrianoC-UFMG, Caroline_, JoaoPauloAlmeida, laufer, antoine, jerdeb, ericstephan, yaso, cgueret, annette_g, 14:19:37 ... Eric_Kauz, deirdrelee, RRSAgent, Zakim, phila, hadleybeeman, rhiaro, sandro, trackbot 14:19:52 Zakim, newton is newton_ 14:19:52 sorry, newton_, I do not recognize a party named 'newton' 14:19:57 probably too far, because a different country 14:20:00 ...if we had a f2f in south america or europe, would that be helpful? 14:20:10 Zakim, P39 is AdrianoC-UFMG 14:20:11 sorry, AdrianoC-UFMG, I do not recognize a party named 'P39' 14:20:22 ericstephan: even going across the border to british columbia is a hassle, it's just the paperwork is a hassle 14:20:24 Zakim, ??P39 is AdrianoC-UFMG 14:20:24 +AdrianoC-UFMG; got it 14:20:41 q+ 14:20:47 ...i can certainly check into it,, but will be a hassle 14:21:07 +[IPcaller] 14:21:14 phila: if we do that, i'll have a terrible time deciding where to go. 14:21:25 zakim, IPcaller is really me 14:21:25 +CarlosIglesias; got it 14:21:25 ...everyone working on limited budget & time 14:21:39 ...if we go ahead with dual meeting, that seems to be a practical thing to do 14:21:40 -> http://www.sora-scc.jp/eng/index.html TPAC 14:21:40 q+ 14:21:45 Zakim, yaso has vagner 14:21:45 +vagner; got it 14:21:53 Ack phila 14:21:59 ...worth noting, this year's tpac is in japan, 14:22:08 /me if we have two sites, maybe only brazilians would be in brazil... 14:22:24 ...will this effect our decision for going to sao paolo, if we're thinking of having 2nd f2f then 14:22:35 Ack vagner 14:22:41 hadleybeeman: having a f2f at tpac is worth it, meeting other WGs, etc. 14:22:45 zakim, ??P39 is AdrianoC-UFMG 14:22:45 I already had ??P39 as AdrianoC-UFMG, AdrianoC-UFMG 14:23:42 vagner: considering the geo issues of the f2f is important, but we have to be practical, where is the place that will attract more of the active members of the WG 14:23:48 zakim, AdrianoC-UFMG has adrianov-UFMG 14:23:48 +adrianov-UFMG; got it 14:23:51 Q? 14:24:06 +1 to vagner 14:24:07 ...if we will take decisions at the f2f meeting on specific issues, it's important that those people are present 14:24:12 Zakim, who is here? 14:24:12 On the phone I see Eric_Kauz, deirdrelee, phila, Yaso, annette_g, HadleyBeeman, ericstephan, antoine, cgueret, jerdeb, laufer (muted), JoaoPauloAlmeida, cgueret.a, AdrianoC-UFMG 14:24:15 ... (muted), CarlosIglesias 14:24:15 AdrianoC-UFMG has adrianov-UFMG 14:24:15 Yaso has vagner 14:24:15 On IRC I see CarlosIglesias, newton_, vagner, adrianov-UFMG, AdrianoC-UFMG, Caroline_, JoaoPauloAlmeida, laufer, antoine, jerdeb, ericstephan, yaso, cgueret, annette_g, Eric_Kauz, 14:24:16 ... deirdrelee, RRSAgent, Zakim, phila, hadleybeeman, rhiaro, sandro, trackbot 14:24:24 ...having a look at the wiki, many europeans won't be able to attend because of budget restrictions 14:24:36 ... but there are many europeans in the group 14:24:50 ...maybe there is the possibility that more brasilians can travel 14:25:08 ...so if the meeting was in europe, might allow more people to attend 14:25:15 adler1 has joined #DWBP 14:25:35 ...choosing just based on region may not be the best criteria to decide where the meeting is 14:26:05 hadleybeeman: we usually try to rotate locations to be more inclusive. phil, what's the norm in other groups? 14:26:17 I am double booked and can only participate via chat 14:26:28 I agree Phil! 14:26:44 +1 to phil 14:26:47 phila: there's no written rules, there are more brasilians in this group than in others, but it just feels right for us to hold a f2f in brasil 14:26:49 but I want to voice my preference that we meet in Brazil in April 14:27:00 I want to see the country where my teammates work 14:27:04 ... a halfway point would be lisbon 14:27:10 q+ 14:27:29 +1 for a f2f on a boat ^_^ 14:27:36 hadleybeeman: connectivity might be a problem, connecting to zakim 14:27:48 Lisbon is an acceptable alternative if only because they speak portugese, the city is lovely, and the weather is quite fine 14:27:48 q+ 14:27:48 ... Steve also suggested New York 14:28:07 for me New York or Sao Polo is the same... 14:28:13 +1 14:28:20 same problems for Brazil or EEUU, not much difference for me 14:28:24 if the group decides other than my preferences, IBM stands ready to host wherever the group decides 14:29:16 deirdrelee: it might be difficult to find a venue in lisbon 14:29:29 q? 14:29:38 hadleybeeman: is anyone against new york? 14:29:40 ack deirdrelee 14:29:50 IBM Lisbon: Rua Mar da China Lote 1.07.2.3, 1990-138 Lisboa, Portugal 14:29:50 New York Where? 14:30:00 deirdrelee: New York as an only venue, or a second venue for dual meeting 14:30:05 hadleybeeman: either or 14:30:07 At an IBM installation, Eric_Kauz 14:30:16 In New York, I can host at Civic Hall on 20th & 5th Avenue 14:30:30 @adler1: where in New York could you host? 14:31:04 or at IBM on 57th street, but internet is awkward at that location. But NY is so easy for me. I have so many friends with space 14:31:09 Yes I can hear as well 14:31:14 I can hear 14:31:30 I can hear the birds too :-) 14:31:56 vagner: we should ask where is the place that can attract more people 14:32:09 -HadleyBeeman 14:32:13 ..my feeling is europe is the best place, not necessarily new york 14:32:30 +HadleyBeeman 14:32:45 ...let's focus on europe for now, if it really is the best place 14:33:03 ...if we host the f2f meeting in lisbon, do we have a venue? 14:33:29 ...steve posted a link to ibm lisbon, that could be the venue 14:33:42 +1 even with my travel constraints its better to alternate countries, I'll just have to deal with it. 14:33:51 -antoine 14:33:59 ...we should ask everyone to confirm if they can go to lisbon 14:34:17 hadleybeeman: to move forward, we agree on the dates today, the 13-15 april 14:34:22 +[IPcaller] 14:34:35 zakim, IPcaller is me 14:34:35 +antoine; got it 14:34:38 ...and tentatively plan for two sites - lisbon and new york 14:34:44 q? 14:34:45 +1 14:34:48 ack vagner 14:34:52 +1 14:35:05 proposed: the next f2f will take place on 13-15 april 14:35:06 +1 14:35:08 +1 14:35:09 +1 14:35:12 +1 14:35:12 +1 14:35:12 +1 14:35:13 +1 14:35:13 +1 14:35:15 +1 14:35:16 +1 14:35:17 +1 14:35:17 +1 14:35:21 +1 14:35:26 +0 on behalf of my daughter who's 14th birthday I will therefore miss 14:35:28 +1 14:35:51 Its time to get her that pony @Phila 14:35:52 resolved: the next f2f will take place on 13-15 april 14:35:53 +1 14:36:27 hadleybeeman: could the american members (eric or annette_g ) decide on what is the best venue 14:36:47 annette_g: is there really only the two of us that are restricted? 14:37:00 ericstephan: there's also eric kauz 14:37:08 hadleybeeman: and steve and a guy from gpl 14:37:17 ...it would be good if they were all together 14:37:50 Action: ericstephan to find a venue for U.S. F2F meeting 14:37:51 Created ACTION-137 - Find a venue for u.s. f2f meeting [on Eric Stephan - due 2015-02-13]. 14:38:15 Action: adler1 to find a venue for Lisbon F2F meeting 14:38:15 Error finding 'adler1'. You can review and register nicknames at . 14:38:40 Steve, is that okay? 14:38:40 action: adler to find a venue for Lisbon F2F meeting 14:38:41 Created ACTION-138 - find a venue for lisbon f2f meeting [on Steven Adler - due 2015-02-13]. 14:39:03 Topic: BP document 14:39:14 q+ 14:39:31 Ack caro 14:39:37 hadleybeeman: please read it, so we can get it out next week 14:39:55 ... bernadette not on the call, but does anyone else want to talk about it? 14:40:15 S/read it/read it and try to resolve any problems 14:40:54 Caroline_: if everyone aggre 14:41:00 q+ 14:41:12 ..we don't use the RFC 14:41:18 ...invites feedback 14:41:20 q+ to comment on RFC normative terms 14:41:21 RFC 2119 14:41:30 MUST, MAY, SHOULD and all that (RFC 2119) 14:41:36 Ack j 14:41:36 JoaoPauloAlmeida, you wanted to comment on RFC normative terms 14:42:08 JoaoPauloAlmeida: if we don't use it, then what kind of normative can the bp have 14:42:26 q+ 14:42:31 ...then what kind of conformance will the document have 14:42:47 Caroline_: it's a good question, we don't have the answer 14:42:48 What kind of normative force would the recommendation have? 14:43:03 +1 to JoaoPauloAlmeida 14:43:10 Q? 14:43:17 annette_g: people suggested that we use a maturity model for each best practice, which would do the same thing 14:43:21 Ack annette_g 14:43:24 +1 I like the idea of a maturity model 14:43:32 s/people/Steve 14:43:59 +q to talk about a maturity model 14:44:09 Ack j 14:44:09 JoaoPauloAlmeida, you wanted to talk about a maturity model 14:44:39 JoaoPauloAlmeida: if we have a maturity model, then we'll have to have normative statements for each level of maturity model, we're making our task more difficult 14:44:39 q+ 14:44:48 It could measure different levels of conformance. I don't see a conflict using normative statements for accomplishing this. 14:45:22 ...we can provide broad best practices, but they still should include normative statements 14:45:25 +1 to JoaoPauloAlmeida 14:45:34 And, we will have to focus on this maturity model, I don't think we have time or people to do taht 14:45:40 Q? 14:45:41 -antoine 14:45:44 ...that way people can say they're 'conformant' to our best practices 14:45:45 s/thht/that 14:45:47 I am not saying it is easy to come up with normative statements of this kind 14:45:51 I just like the idea of a maturity model to help communicate conformance. 14:46:09 I don't see this happening before the DBWP draft goes out 14:46:16 I find a maturity model a good idea, but it makes our task much harder 14:46:34 Because we would have to find normative statements for each "level" in the maturity model 14:47:24 Ack a 14:47:24 hadleybeeman: crux of the matter is that we provide standards that people can measure themselves against, so that they can know that my conformant data will work with your conformant data, etc 14:47:43 +[IPcaller] 14:47:48 zakim, IPcaller is me 14:47:48 +antoine; got it 14:48:00 how can you be normative not using deontic terms like must, should, may...? 14:48:01 annette_g: not sure if every level within maturity model would need to use RFC in order provide normative statements 14:48:15 ...having a test in there, will allow people to say if they comply or not 14:48:25 ...perhaps there should be a test for each level 14:48:48 hadleybeeman: the 3 principles for the WG that we came up with at TPAC 14:48:59 -> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#scope 14:49:01 ...what were these? does someone have the link 14:49:07 are specifically relevant to data published on the Web; 14:49:07 encourage publication or re-use of data on the Web; 14:49:07 can be tested by machines, humans or a combination of the two. 14:49:17 Or rather 14:49:18 This document is concerned solely with best practices that: 14:49:18 are specifically relevant to data published on the Web; 14:49:18 encourage publication or re-use of data on the Web; 14:49:18 can be tested by machines, humans or a combination of the two. 14:49:44 q+ 14:50:17 vagner has joined #dwbp 14:50:40 Nathalia and I are researching about Test of BPs 14:50:45 hadleybeeman: has this discussion been sufficient? 14:50:55 ...ultimately it's the decision of editors 14:51:03 Maybe we should make a task force to write/make some tests 14:51:28 vagner: even though i haven't been actively participating in discussion on thread, i have been observing 14:51:35 +1, Yaso 14:51:52 ...i understand the issue is whether to use RFC or to move to maturity model 14:52:25 Q? 14:52:25 ...i think the idea of the maturity model is because we are finding it difficult on whether to use MUST/SHOULD etc 14:52:57 ... we are spending a lot of time on this. if we now look at this from another perspective, this will require a lot more work 14:53:19 ...my suggestion is that we follow the same path the way we have been doing it with the RFC terms 14:53:23 For reference, the three resolutions at TPAC were 14:53:24 RESOLUTION: Do you agree that one of the scoping criteria is “Is it unique to publishing data on the web?”? 14:53:24 RESOLUTION: Do you agree that one of the scoping criteria is “Does it encourage reuse or publication of data on the Web?”? 14:53:24 RESOLUTION: Do you agree that one of the scoping criteria is “Is it testable?”? 14:53:24