Warning:
This wiki has been archived and is now read-only.
Meetings:F2F4-best-practice-agenda-scratch-pad
From Spatial Data on the Web Working Group
Draft agenda for Best Practice sub-group session @ F2F4
- 10:30 – 12:30 Shake down of best practices
- Group picks BPs to discuss; ‘new BP’ is also a BP one can pick.
- Timeboxed discussion of picked BPs.
- 12:30 Lunch
- 14:00 – 14:30 Demonstration & discussion: WFS extra feature property as semantic Link (see presentation)
- 14:30 – 15:30 General BP issues (picked from list below + suggestions during meeting, timeboxed discussion)
- Are we meeting the needs of practitioners- if not, how can we improve?
- Are we avoiding a RDF bias- if not, how do we remove that bias?
- Which topological, distance and directional spatial relations do we recommend - for use & publication in the IANA Link Relations registry
- How do we attach metadata to spatial data (at dataset, resource and property level) that allows us to interpret values?
- 16:00 Narrative
- 17:00 Plan for completion to pwd (aim to vote in 3 weeks)
- Increasing contribution from the WG members
- Agree plan for publication
- 18:00 End
(for more details about the agenda items see below)
Agenda planning for Best Practice sub-group session @ F2F4
10:30AM (start) > 6:00PM (finish)
- Improving the best practices:
- Shake down of best practices
- checking scope against UCR (homework: see if the DWBP and SDW best practices help answer the use case you submitted - or pick an interesting one to check); are we assuming SSN, Time or Coverage are picking something up and they're not? e.g. the sensor-specific elements have been removed from the BP doc (following discussion in BP sub-group call on 24-Aug) as these seem to be for an audience specifically interested in sensors; there's too much detail for general 'spatial data on the web' best practices. We thought that these concerns would be better covered in a SSN (or SOSA?) Primer that illustrates how the revised SSN vocabulary should be used.
- is their further opportunity for consolidation?
- are there any missing best practices? (homework: be prepared to state you case and provide evidence/examples of best practice)
- is there really evidence of each best practice being applied in the wild? provide examples that we can cite.
- can we relate SDW best practices to the benefit categories in DWBP? is this valuable? if so, what's the mapping?
- Are we meeting the needs of practitioners- if not, how can we improve?
- Are we avoiding a RDF bias- if not, how do we remove that bias?
- Which topological, distance and directional spatial relations do we recommend - for use & publication in the IANA Link Relations registry (see email thread) ... is there sufficient evidence to support use of these relation types as best practice?
- What is the best practice for describing "fuzzy" spatial things (e.g. American West or Renaissance Italy) where we know roughly where it is and what it includes but have no consensus regarding a specific geometry (see email thread)
- How do we attach metadata to spatial data (at dataset, resource and property level) that allows us to interpret values; e.g. unit of measure for CRS or statement of spatial precision; e.g. details of data acquisition such as the measurement event (ref. O&M) or the source of an assertion on social media (see email thread)
- Is there such a thing as "minimum information"? (ref. BP16 "Provide a minimum set of information for your intended application" - does a combination of DWBP16 "Choose the right formalization level" and BP4 "Make your data indexable by search engines" suffice? (see email thread)
- Shake down of best practices
- Demonstration & discussion: WFS extra feature property as semantic Link (see presentation)
- Further development of the Nieuwhaven flooding narrative
- describe what the actors are doing in each of the case studies
- identify examples (with real data / code snippets) that can be incorporated to illustrate
- Review unresolved comments and issues from WG (list?)
- Review open issues (in GitHub Issue List and Tracker)
- Review public comments
- Integration with other SDW deliverables; what can we reference from "Best Practices"?
- Increasing contribution from SDW working group (let the editors edit)
- how: writing content? review and comment? ownership of sections / best practices?
- agree plan of work for publishing next Best Practices WD "soon after TPAC"
Please add topics here that you think we need to discuss during the Best Practice sub-group session at TPAC. Also, can you add your name against entries you make so that we editors know who to ask for clarification.
This is just a scratch list of topics - not a running or priority order.
- (Jeremy) How to increase contributions from SDW WG members ...
- While we have lots of participation in discussion, the BP Editors are struggling to turn these into content in the BP document.
- We also need detailed review and comment on each section.
- Can WG members take the lead to write / review specific sections within the document?
- How did DWBP organise itself to complete this task?
- (Jeremy) Shake down of Best Practices ...
- Have we got the scope, as defined in the Use Case and Requirements, fully covered? (probably need to look at this in combination with the SSN, Time and Coverage activities; make sure there are neither gaps nor unintended overlaps)
- Are there further opportunities for consolidation amongst the Best Practices.
- Are there any Best Practices missing?
- Are the SDW Best Practices properly aligned with DWBP?
- (Jeremy) Further development of the "examples" in the Nieuwhaven flooding narrative ...
- Each example needs to provide enough detail that our readers can implement it themselves - which makes each example more like a mini case study; we editors expect these to be incomplete at time of TPAC
- Further develop the examples; providing code and data snippets ... perhaps even full worked examples that could be referenced
- Evaluate that the examples actually represent real practice; identify the evidence where we see these patterns being applied in the wild
- (Jeremy) Discuss specific topics:
- Are we meeting the needs of practitioners- if not, how can we improve?
- Are we avoiding a RDF bias- if not, how do we remove that bias?
- Which topological, distance and directional spatial relations do we recommend - for use & publication in the IANA Link Relations registry (see email thread) ... is there sufficient evidence to support use of these relation types as best practice?
- What is the best practice for describing "fuzzy" spatial things (e.g. American West or Renaissance Italy) where we know roughly where it is and what it includes but have no consensus regarding a specific geometry (see email thread)
- How do we attach metadata to spatial data (at dataset, resource and property level) that allows us to interpret values; e.g. unit of measure for CRS or statement of spatial precision; e.g. details of data acquisition such as the measurement event (ref. O&M) or the source of an assertion on social media (see email thread)
- Is there such a thing as "minimum information"? (ref. BP16 "Provide a minimum set of information for your intended application" - does a combination of DWBP16 "Choose the right formalization level" and BP4 "Make your data indexable by search engines" suffice? (see email thread)
- (Jeremy) Review open issues (in GitHub Issue List and Tracker) ...
- Many of these can be closed following the updates to the FPWD
- (Jeremy) Review public comments
- (Linda) "Benefits" sections
- Each BP has a Benefits section, as in the DWBP. But applying the DWBP benefits to the SDWBP is not trivial.
- (Linda) Publication of new Working Draft
- Review comments by WG members
- Vote for publication
- (Jeremy) How to relate BP document to other SDW deliverables (and vice-versa)
- For example, the sensor-specific elements have been removed from the BP doc (following discussion in BP sub-group call on 24-Aug) as these seem to be for an audience specifically interested in sensors; there's too much detail for general 'spatial data on the web' best practices. We thought that these concerns would be better covered in a SSN (or SOSA?) Primer that illustrates how the revised SSN vocabulary should be used.
- (Bart) Discuss the WFS extra feature property as semantic Link
