19:47:28 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdw
19:47:28 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-irc
19:47:30 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
19:47:30 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdw
19:47:32 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
19:47:32 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
19:47:33 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
19:47:33 <trackbot> Date: 06 January 2016
19:47:44 <eparsons> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:47:59 <eparsons> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160106
19:48:10 <eparsons> Chair: Ed
19:48:20 <eparsons> Chair: eparsons
19:49:14 <kerry> kerry has joined #sdw
19:55:39 <BartvanLeeuwen> BartvanLeeuwen has joined #sdw
19:55:53 <ssimmons> ssimmons has joined #sdw
19:56:17 <ssimmons> present+ Scott Simmons
19:56:35 <BartvanLeeuwen> presen+ BartvanLeeuwen
19:57:04 <phila> phila has joined #sdw
19:57:21 <eparsons> present+ eparsons
19:57:30 <kerry> trackbot, start meeting
19:57:32 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
19:57:34 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
19:57:35 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
19:57:35 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
19:57:36 <trackbot> Date: 06 January 2016
19:57:36 <robin> robin has joined #sdw
19:57:37 <Payam> Payam has joined #sdw
19:57:44 <kerry> present+ kerry
19:58:08 <kerry> regrets+ Rachel Alejandro Linda Andrea
19:58:24 <phila> regrets+ Bill
19:58:28 <phila> present+ phila
19:59:15 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #sdw
19:59:19 <Payam> present+ Payam
19:59:35 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #sdw
20:00:16 <frans> frans has joined #sdw
20:01:14 <ClemensPortele> ClemensPortele has joined #sdw
20:01:29 <jtandy> present+ jtandy
20:01:43 <frans> present+ frans
20:02:00 <ChrisLirrle> ChrisLirrle has joined #sdw
20:02:00 <robin> present+ robin
20:02:05 <ClemensPortele> present+ ClemensPortele
20:02:36 <ChrisLirrle> present+ ChrisLittle
20:02:38 <BartvanLeeuwen> -1
20:03:15 <phila> -> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings#Teleconference_Agendas_and_minutes
20:03:56 <kerry> scribe: Kerry
20:03:58 <ChrisLittle> ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
20:04:04 <kerry> scribenick: Kerry
20:04:11 <kerry> scribe+ kerry
20:04:13 <eparsons> Topic : Approve last week's minutes
20:04:21 <phila> Last meeting's minutes http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes
20:04:24 <eparsons> http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes
20:04:30 <KJanowicz> KJanowicz has joined #sdw
20:04:41 <jtandy> +1
20:04:44 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sdw
20:04:44 <eparsons> +1
20:04:45 <ChrisLittle> What is the Webex password please?
20:04:45 <Payam> +1
20:04:49 <ClemensPortele> +0 (wasn't there)
20:04:59 <eparsons> Proposed : Approve last week's minutes
20:05:04 <ChrisLittle> +1 minute but not there
20:05:07 <eparsons> Resolved : Approve last week's minutes
20:05:08 <BartvanLeeuwen> +1
20:05:09 <kerry> RESOLVED: appove last weeks minutes http://www.w3.org/2015/12/16-sdw-minutes
20:05:09 <MattPerry> present+ MattPerry
20:05:19 <robin> +0
20:06:03 <kerry> ED: robin requested to intro
20:06:20 <kerry> .... no answer from robin
20:06:26 <robin> Hi, I am a student from University of Calgary
20:06:56 <kerry> Robin: PhD student from U Calgary
20:07:13 <kerry> .... works with Steve Liang of sesnor things API
20:07:36 <kerry> eparsons: welcome
20:07:44 <eparsons> Topic : Patent Call
20:07:59 <eparsons> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
20:08:18 <kerry> eparsons: no comments wrt patent call
20:08:35 <eparsons> Topic : Best Practice - Progress to date
20:08:35 <kerry> Topic: best practice deliverable
20:09:05 <kerry> jtandy: I will do most of discussion, payam pls jump in
20:09:26 <kerry> .... linda is holidaying in the sun
20:09:48 <ChrisLittle> +1 phila
20:09:56 <kerry> ... .... question to phila re new style change
20:10:05 <eparsons> q?
20:10:25 <kerry> ... almost signed off, easy  change for a Note, just a respec tweak
20:10:40 <kerry> phila:   yes, starts from 1 feb
20:10:54 <kerry> ... cannot use before then
20:11:23 <ChrisLittle> present+ ChrisLittle
20:11:46 <kerry> jtandy: so it will have a sidebar with ToC, but we will beat the new style adn will use the existing style for our fpwd
20:12:40 <kerry> phila: asking Scott about 3 week ucr process that took 8 days second time -- for this new fpwd will it be 1 week or 3?
20:13:03 <kerry> ssimmons: 3 weeks review plus 8 day vote
20:13:17 <kerry> phila:  so will be feb
20:13:26 <kerry> jtandy: questions the 3 weeks
20:14:05 <kerry> ssimmons: if only for review can skip the 3 weeks wait, could be zero wait -- you can approve now
20:14:20 <ChrisLittle> +1 to release doc for public review
20:14:30 <kerry> jtandy: this is a stable snapshot of unfinished work so does not need a TC vote
20:14:34 <kerry> ssimmons: confirmed
20:15:03 <kerry> ssimmons: this gropu can approve it. it only needs to go to geosemantics group in final release
20:15:14 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #sdw
20:15:43 <kerry> jtandy: our plan was to provide stable snapshot today and vote in meeting next week -- but that vote may be subject to changes being made
20:15:45 <eparsons> rrsagent, draft minutes
20:15:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes.html eparsons
20:16:27 <kerry> phila: yes, depending on content -- the tues or thurs after the next meeting is k with review over next 7 days
20:16:30 <SimonCox> present+ SimonCox
20:16:34 <kerry> s/k/ok/
20:16:54 <jtandy> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/
20:16:59 <kerry> phila: that means tuesday 19 Jan for publication, all being straightforward
20:17:41 <kerry> jtandy: BP doc review -- I will cover from the top in summary
20:18:04 <kerry> .... please mail changes to public mail list this week
20:18:08 <phila> chair: eparsons
20:18:20 <kerry> ... for direct text changes that you provide we will apply them
20:18:24 <phila> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160106
20:18:39 <kerry> ....for something without the text we will record an issue but not make the change
20:19:16 <phila> q+
20:19:23 <eparsons> ack next
20:19:26 <kerry> ....for difficult  things that are drastically wrong and you could not support in vote please attend call and disccuss next week
20:19:39 <kerry> s/disccuss/discuss/
20:20:37 <kerry> phila: this is important --- in another group we had some approval subject to changes but we ended up with  public doc with a no vote against it
20:21:03 <kerry> ... please ensure that you are indeed happy before we publish as we want to get this right
20:21:26 <phila> -> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/ The Current Ed Draft of the BP doc
20:21:29 <kerry> jtandy: abstract is a short para for press release that will bring people to see it
20:22:24 <phila> q+
20:22:43 <kerry> .... next is status of doc trying to resolve a number of things raised in last meeting ... focus on concerns raised in last meeting, evidence needed
20:23:02 <phila> q-
20:23:05 <frans> q+
20:23:09 <kerry> eparsons: i think t his is what we needed -- perhaps should go in press release too
20:23:22 <frans> q-
20:23:44 <kerry> jtandy: eparsons can write the press release to do thius!
20:23:52 <kerry> s/thius/this/
20:24:04 <frans> q+
20:24:17 <kerry> jtandy: ... at the bottom of intro is issue-81 (reads out)
20:24:19 <eparsons> ack next
20:25:24 <kerry> frans: Q about intro: what is the realtionship between this doc and the charter deliverable for next practice? restful API and spatial ontology?
20:25:37 <kerry> s/next/best/
20:25:49 <kerry> s/real/rel/
20:26:03 <frans> BP deliverable in the charter: http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/charter#bp
20:26:19 <kerry> jtandy: i picked out charter things to include in abstract as here (sumarises abstract)
20:26:39 <kerry> ... are you saying there are BP deliverables from charter that are not in this note?
20:26:49 <kerry> frans: yes
20:28:19 <kerry> frans: (reads from charter) ... an ontology is not a document -- what do we do with this?
20:28:20 <KJanowicz> I agree with Ed
20:28:38 <kerry> eparsons: we have not got to finding we need this yet
20:29:11 <kerry> jtandy: we plan at this point to review whate there is and to say what to use and when, we may not need to make a new one
20:29:38 <SimonCox> +1 franz!
20:29:42 <kerry> frans: there is a need for harmonisation of existing standards we need to do this
20:29:48 <KJanowicz> IMHO, there is a need for such an ontology
20:29:54 <KJanowicz> (and related ontologies)
20:30:48 <eparsons> rrsagent, draft minutes
20:30:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes.html eparsons
20:31:15 <kerry> jtandy: frans please write down a note for this and I will include a comment in our intro about this -- that we might make something new but our first attempt is to review an recommend existing
20:31:32 <kerry> frans: also needd for API deliverable
20:31:45 <Payam> +q
20:32:01 <kerry> jtandy: I beleive we are offering advice on APIs and not defining one -- this looks the right approach
20:32:03 <eparsons> ack next
20:32:32 <kerry> frans: agrees that APi may not be neccessary but we need to leave this option open where requirements are not met by existing solutions
20:32:56 <kerry> Payam:  part of what Frans is looking for may arise from examples as we get to those
20:33:37 <SimonCox> q+
20:33:40 <kerry> eparsons: agrees , also a broader point is that we will identify gaps we may not be able to fill  but just identify these due to lack of resources
20:33:43 <eparsons> ack next
20:34:00 <kerry> SimonCox: exercise becomes a meta-exercies if e do not address the gaps
20:34:36 <kerry> eparsons: points out that we do have limited time -- we need to be realistic
20:35:15 <kerry> jtandy: in some places we have expert opinions amongst us and we can answer those gaps. e.g. issue-81
20:35:39 <kerry> ... simon says just cataloguing is insufficient
20:36:08 <kerry> SimonCox: a list of gaps is not a useful list of best practices
20:36:34 <kerry> jtandy: we might have to identify what is needed that we cannot do
20:36:39 <ClemensPortele> q+
20:36:51 <frans> q+
20:36:56 <eparsons> ack next
20:37:06 <kerry> eparsons: best practice must be practice -- if we see a gap our solution we design in a short time is not best practice
20:37:45 <phila> W3C doesn't have a definition of Best Practice - WGs are sovereign!
20:37:55 <kerry> ClemensPortele: both views are valid --- one option could be to create a new document type or additional deliverables to close the gaps?
20:38:49 <kerry> jtandy: acking Phil's comment , it is what we want to make it. we can make additional deliverables as we see fit but resourcing is an issue
20:39:23 <eparsons> ack next
20:39:31 <frans> an agreed spatial ontology conformant to the ISO 19107 abstract model and based on existing available ontologies such as GeoSPARQL, NeoGeo and the ISA Core Location vocabulary
20:39:34 <kerry> jtandy: lets see how this goes as we identify the gaps
20:40:20 <kerry> frans: charter says based on existing ontologies -- suggesting it does not exist yet
20:41:03 <kerry> jtandy: too much choice at moment -- do we really need another choice?
20:41:06 <kerry> +q
20:41:07 <KJanowicz> (and there are also cases where we have not suitable vocabulary/ontology)
20:41:16 <phila> -> http://www.w3.org/2014/03/lgd/report#conclusion LGD Report conclusion
20:42:21 <kerry> phila: this arose from the workshop  in the final panel session, stuart  williams said "where do i pour the concrete"
20:43:12 <KJanowicz> +q
20:43:44 <kerry> ...so charter says we have all these things already but what is someone to do? workshop said do we pick one and forget all the rest or advise what is needed in the right situation, or should we just change something existing a bit?
20:44:07 <frans> I like the option of picking the best ontology and try to improve it
20:44:20 <kerry> ....charter aims to not predefine the decision of the working group about how to deal with this
20:44:23 <ChrisLittle> q+
20:44:52 <kerry> ... you can do, if you choose, a comply or explain model -- it really is this group's decision how we solve this.
20:44:59 <eparsons> ack next
20:45:42 <kerry> frans:  I like the 3rd option, not developing and not picking but improving the best one a little
20:46:00 <KJanowicz> IMHO, we should work on the interface level and there is actually tons of work left to be done there
20:46:01 <phila> In case anyone hasn't seen it... http://xkcd.com/927/
20:46:02 <kerry> ... we could empower other working groups to help us
20:46:45 <phila> q+
20:46:46 <eparsons> ack next
20:47:20 <kerry> kerry: our use cases to identify some missing things and we may need a core vocab
20:47:46 <frans> Yes. A simple core ontology that is extensible would be a great achievement
20:48:16 <kerry> KJanowicz: e.g moving objects and trajectories  is a common task that has specific requirements... types of measurements is another one.. common guidance at least could be provided
20:48:22 <eparsons> ack next
20:49:11 <eparsons> ack next
20:49:18 <eparsons> rrsagent, draft minutes
20:49:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes.html eparsons
20:49:24 <kerry> ChrisLittle: Being blunt, we should not be scared to point to bad practices such as using WGS84 for highly precise locations
20:49:51 <KJanowicz> IMHO,  our work should be about finding and defining the common cores underlying the solutions that exist out there and enabling these common core vocabularies to become the minimal interoperability layer used to translate between the more application oriented vocabularies.
20:49:56 <kerry> phila:  Denise or Bart has mentioned that if we advise geosparql 1.1 then we will.
20:50:39 <KJanowicz> agreed, but this is about striking the right balance
20:50:42 <kerry> ...iso core location vocab aimed to identify hight level core stuff but it turns out not to be useful on its own and then you start developing application profiles vey fast
20:51:26 <kerry> .... to make interoperability to practically work you really need someone to tell you what to do -- this is a difficult balance between theory and practice
20:51:39 <ssimmons> +1
20:51:41 <kerry> eparsons: this doc should be aimed at practitioners
20:52:19 <KJanowicz> Agreed but somebody needs to explain what ways are out there to deal, for instance, with measurement types, what the pros&cons of these approaches are, and which one should be used if you need guidance.
20:52:27 <kerry> jtandy: i will update intro and some other section about helping people choose the right one and make a new one if we need to
20:52:38 <kerry> .... now talking about how we deal with issues
20:53:12 <kerry> ... e.g see the issue box -- not the order in doc is order of creationg in github
20:53:12 <jtandy> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/81
20:53:42 <kerry> ... to repond to issues please click on link in doc and leave your comments there in github
20:53:51 <kerry> please work on issues this way -- is that ok?
20:54:09 <kerry> frans: are github acounts needed?
20:54:38 <kerry> jtandy... comments are public, but you need to be signed in
20:54:53 <eparsons> +1 to issue managment
20:55:02 <kerry> ... this is good for eds to track issues using github
20:55:19 <kerry> .... now issue-79 about sdis
20:55:49 <jtandy> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bp-summary
20:55:49 <kerry> ...sections on audience, scope, best practices template, summary with all bps listd
20:56:12 <kerry> .... summary is auto-generated
20:56:30 <kerry> ... top level sections after that should be no surprise -- there are 30
20:56:33 <jtandy> http://w3c.github.io/sdw/bp/#bp-exposing-via-api
20:56:43 <kerry> ... please discuss this section now
20:57:08 <kerry> ... may not need resolution prior to fpwd?
20:57:47 <kerry> ... but how much of this is about spatial data in particular?  is this in the right place or does it belong in a borader document than ours?
20:58:04 <kerry> s/borader/broader/
20:58:42 <kerry> ...will sek to merge those tables as we go on, also ross ref requirements, also appendix b, incomplete glossary, set of references,
20:59:14 <kerry> ... pls provide feedback on mailing list ideally resolved before next week -- anything outstanding to be discussed in meting next week.
20:59:20 <phila> W3C Draft = OGC draft Discussion Paper
20:59:24 <kerry> ...not not finished -- only FPWD
20:59:33 <kerry> Payam: all covered
20:59:38 <eparsons> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings#Amsterdam
20:59:59 <kerry> eparsons: reminder for f2f only a month away hosted by geonovum
21:00:02 <kerry> +q
21:00:09 <eparsons> ack next
21:00:42 <BartvanLeeuwen> bye
21:00:48 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
21:00:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes.html phila
21:00:58 <kerry> .... please read the doc and make your comments well before next meeting
21:01:04 <frans> Bye, have a great year
21:01:04 <ChrisLittle> bye and thanks
21:01:05 <KJanowicz> bye
21:01:05 <kerry> ... and come to meeting to vote!!!!!
21:01:06 <ClemensPortele> thanks - bye!
21:01:09 <MattPerry> bye
21:01:09 <phila> RRSAgent, draft minutes
21:01:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes.html phila
21:01:12 <eparsons> bye
21:01:15 <kerry> rrsagent, draft minutes
21:01:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/01/06-sdw-minutes.html kerry
21:01:21 <eparsons> thanks kerry !!!
21:01:26 <kerry> rrsagent, make logs public
21:01:34 <ssimmons> quit
21:01:41 <robin> thanks bye
21:01:43 <robin> robin has left #sdw
21:02:33 <kerry> bye all!
21:36:09 <eparsons> eparsons has joined #sdw
23:40:08 <Zakim> Zakim has left #sdw