IRC log of sdw on 2016-02-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:51:49 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sdw
07:51:49 [RRSAgent]
logging to
07:51:51 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
07:51:51 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sdw
07:51:53 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SDW
07:51:53 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
07:51:54 [trackbot]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
07:51:54 [trackbot]
Date: 08 February 2016
07:52:21 [phila_train]
rrsagent, make logs public
07:52:52 [phila_train]
meeting: SDW F2F Day 1
07:53:02 [phila_train]
chair: Ed
08:03:41 [Linda]
Linda has joined #sdw
08:03:42 [kerry]
kerry has joined #sdw
08:03:51 [kerry]
present+ kerry
08:03:53 [Linda]
Hi Kerry Ed is not here yet
08:03:59 [Linda]
present+ Linda
08:04:09 [kerry]
Hi linda!
08:04:18 [kerry]
I have not managed to get in on webex yet eiter
08:04:59 [Linda]
Phil is not here yet either. So I suppose we wait a little...
08:05:53 [kerry]
ed just sent an email -- maybe 10?
08:05:59 [kerry]
also bill roberts said 10
08:07:05 [BartvanLeeuwen]
BartvanLeeuwen has joined #sdw
08:07:07 [phila_train]
hi all. Text messages and emails flying around suggest Ed, Bill and I will arrive at Amersfoort station in one hour's time. I just pulled out of Rotterdam Centraal.
08:07:22 [kerry]
phil had said he would be late -- a few days ago -- maybe 11?
08:07:35 [BartvanLeeuwen]
morning everyone
08:08:46 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
08:14:35 [BartvanLeeuwen]
hi kerry
08:14:41 [kerry]
hi bart!
08:15:01 [LarsG]
LarsG has joined #sdw
08:15:05 [kerry]
do you have webex in the room?
08:15:11 [Linda]
not yet
08:15:14 [BartvanLeeuwen]
we are working onthat....
08:15:26 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
08:15:38 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
08:15:46 [LarsG]
present+ LarsG
08:15:48 [kerry]
ok -- ta. It looks a bit like it might need phil to me
08:17:40 [AndreaPerego]
present+ AndreaPerego
08:18:17 [BartvanLeeuwen]
kerry: but I'm not able to dail..
08:18:45 [BartvanLeeuwen]
as in , I can' start a audio connection
08:20:27 [BartvanLeeuwen]
ok, can't you 'take' over the meeting and become host ?
08:22:13 [frans]
frans has joined #sdw
08:23:37 [BartvanLeeuwen]
kerry: do you have skype credits ?
08:25:05 [BartvanLeeuwen]
08:26:13 [BartvanLeeuwen]
can you call long distance on someone elses expense ?
08:26:32 [BartvanLeeuwen]
whats your number ?
08:27:37 [BartvanLeeuwen]
for now yes
08:27:44 [BartvanLeeuwen]
08:28:45 [BartvanLeeuwen]
that is us
08:28:47 [BartvanLeeuwen]
+31 number
08:38:20 [BartvanLeeuwen]
kerry: we will do that
08:38:30 [BartvanLeeuwen]
you didn't receive a call ?
08:38:45 [kerry]
ok, who can chair please?
08:38:56 [aharth]
aharth has joined #sdw
08:39:00 [BartvanLeeuwen]
kerry: linda is chairing
08:39:02 [aharth]
present+ aharth
08:39:06 [frans]
I will start with the UCR topic
08:39:27 [kerry]
+61 2 409788412 (maybe fogot to drop the zero)
08:39:36 [jtandy]
scribenick: jtandy
08:39:42 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
08:39:42 [kerry]
+61 409788412
08:39:44 [BartvanLeeuwen]
present+ BartvanLeeuwen
08:39:45 [jtandy]
scribe: Jeremy Tandy
08:39:56 [kerry]
trackbot, start meeting
08:39:58 [jtandy]
topic: UCR document
08:39:58 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
08:40:00 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SDW
08:40:00 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
08:40:01 [trackbot]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
08:40:01 [trackbot]
Date: 08 February 2016
08:40:02 [AndreaPerego]
present+ AndreaPerego
08:40:03 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
08:40:58 [jtandy]
[we finally get some audio working on the teleconference]
08:41:15 [kerry]
present+ kerry
08:42:14 [kerry]
scribe: jtandy
08:42:18 [kerry]
chair: kerry
08:42:23 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLittle
08:42:23 [jtandy]
scribenick: jtandy
08:42:25 [kerry]
scribenick jtandy
08:42:27 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
08:42:29 [Linda]
present+ Linda
08:42:38 [jtandy]
topic: UCR document
08:42:56 [jtandy]
topic: approve the minutes (of last f2f)
08:43:11 [jtandy]
kerry: did we approve the minutes of the last f2f?
08:43:15 [jtandy]
08:43:48 [kerry]
08:43:56 [jtandy]
jtandy: query- the minutes from sapporo
08:44:03 [jtandy]
kerry: yes- 2-days
08:44:26 [jtandy]
propose: approve sapporo f2f minutes
08:44:44 [jtandy]
08:44:45 [BartvanLeeuwen]
08:44:49 [frans]
day two:
08:44:53 [Linda]
08:44:54 [frans]
08:44:56 [kerry]
08:45:19 [AndreaPerego]
+1 (I was not there, but I trust you)
08:45:37 [jtandy]
resolved: approve sapporo f2f minutes
08:45:55 [ChrisLittle]
+0 not there
08:46:01 [jtandy]
topic: patent call
08:46:03 [kerry]
08:46:28 [roblemmens]
roblemmens has joined #sdw
08:46:38 [jtandy]
propose: approve sapporo f2f minutes day 2
08:46:41 [jtandy]
08:46:57 [kerry]
08:46:59 [BartvanLeeuwen]
08:47:02 [Linda]
08:47:06 [frans]
+1 (I was not there, but I trust you)
08:47:07 [jtandy]
resolved: approve sapporo f2f minutes day 2
08:47:10 [LarsG]
08:47:25 [Stanislav]
Stanislav has joined #sdw
08:48:07 [jtandy]
kerry: BIG thankyou to Linda and Geonovum for hosting the F2F ...
08:48:15 [jtandy]
kerry: does the patent call
08:48:29 [Linda]
You're very welcome! Nice having you all here.
08:48:42 [kerry]
08:49:21 [jtandy]
kerry: reminds people that this follows both W3C and OGC process; particularly for OGC, please declare patent interests ...
08:49:30 [jtandy]
... let me know of anything
08:49:33 [Linda]
08:49:40 [kerry]
ack linda
08:49:54 [jtandy]
Linda: we have two new people in the group today; Rob and Stan ...
08:49:57 [rachel]
rachel has joined #sdw
08:49:59 [jtandy]
... from OGC
08:50:45 [jtandy]
jtandy: asks Rob and Stan to type their intro into the IRC after they do their verbal intro
08:50:57 [rachel]
present+ rachel
08:50:57 [jtandy]
topic: new participants
08:52:03 [roblemmens]
Intro Rob Lemmens
08:52:12 [jtandy]
frans: says great to have you with us ... hopefully you can provide real examples
08:53:16 [jtandy]
kerry: [Rob and Stan] are already OGC members ... welcom
08:53:24 [jtandy]
08:53:42 [jtandy]
kerry: gives some IRC advice to the newcomers
08:53:53 [roblemmens]
We're ITC, Univ Twente, working on visual linked geodata explorer and VGI ontology
08:53:55 [jtandy]
kerry: to the agenda ...
08:54:11 [jtandy]
topic: UCR -- steps to ensure that the remaining issues will not stay open indefinitely
08:54:24 [jtandy]
kerry: invites frans to lead ...
08:55:02 [jtandy]
frans: lists the open actions on the screen
08:55:18 [jtandy]
frans: there's [quite a large number]
08:55:41 [jtandy]
... there has been discussion on the email list, so that probably means these aren't trivial to resolve
08:55:55 [jtandy]
... but we need to finish the requirements before we get on with the work
08:56:06 [jtandy]
... otherwise things are being done backward
08:56:19 [jtandy]
... it's good to take a look at these issues again now
08:56:30 [kerry]
08:56:31 [jtandy]
... we actions in the tracker to get things done
08:57:21 [jtandy]
frans: we assigned actions for the deliverables to particular people
08:57:30 [jtandy]
... we can't allocate to multiple people
08:58:02 [jtandy]
kerry: suggests that we operate in a bit of an agile fashion ...
08:58:19 [jtandy]
... leave some requirements open whilst we don't have resources to work on them
08:58:40 [jtandy]
... also, the timeline shows we have plenty of time for the UCR
08:58:56 [jtandy]
... we don't need to resolve all issues up front
08:59:23 [jtandy]
frans: I got the impression that some of these issues are not resolved because they're difficult
08:59:30 [jtandy]
... not because we're not working on them yet
08:59:43 [jtandy]
... difficult does not mean important
09:00:06 [jtandy]
kerry: fair enough - seems reasonable to review these actions [periodically]
09:00:26 [jtandy]
... but they don't have to be resolved where we are not actively working on the deliverables
09:01:01 [jtandy]
frans: OK - the intention was not to shift the work, just to begin collaboration with these folks
09:01:22 [jtandy]
... the other deliverable editors can then help prioritise which issues to focus on
09:01:55 [jtandy]
... in some cases, we just need to synthesize the discussions [to form a conclusion]
09:02:27 [jtandy]
kerry: what we could do for SSN in particular, is add these issues to tomorrow's agenda
09:02:56 [jtandy]
... for the others, it's a bit harder, because they're not started yet
09:03:04 [jtandy]
frans: seems sensible!
09:03:22 [jtandy]
kerry: better to try to resolve these actions F2F ...
09:03:35 [jtandy]
... time deliverable - we might be able to do that
09:03:49 [jtandy]
... coverages deliverable - not really started yet
09:03:56 [jtandy]
kerry: does that help
09:04:04 [jtandy]
09:04:31 [jtandy]
frans: it's good to make sure that the deliverables have a good chain of requirements
09:04:52 [jtandy]
... [with assoc use cases]
09:05:09 [jtandy]
... I see that BP and SSN have already been through this phase
09:05:41 [jtandy]
kerry: tracking deliverables back to requirements and use cases is a good idea
09:06:11 [jtandy]
... wouldn't say that SSN has done this yet - BP have done this and this might provide an exemplar to follow
09:06:39 [jtandy]
kerry: question to frans - are there any specific actions / issues you want to resolve?
09:07:06 [jtandy]
frans: not a good idea to go into the details now - because these are difficult, we'll loose a lot of time
09:08:02 [jtandy]
frans: let's try to keep the UCR doc up to date with the work of the deliverables
09:08:18 [jtandy]
kerry: we do have _some_ time right now
09:08:28 [jtandy]
... we could try a couple of the harder ones right now
09:08:46 [jtandy]
... are there any?
09:08:58 [jtandy]
frans: asks for volunteers :-)
09:09:08 [jtandy]
... how about CRS?
09:09:14 [jtandy]
09:09:18 [ChrisLittle]
09:09:23 [ChrisLittle]
09:09:32 [kerry]
ack kerry
09:09:37 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
09:09:40 [kerry]
ack jtandy
09:10:02 [Linda]
jtandy: re CRS requirement
09:10:23 [kerry]
jtandy: best rpactice addresses crs
09:10:30 [kerry] taking some of the heat away..
09:10:36 [Linda]
... in the BP we are explaining when you need another CRS than WGS84. Do we think that's a good approach and would it resolve the action?
09:10:54 [LarsG]
09:11:17 [kerry]
09:11:53 [kerry]
fantastic! -- i liked what i saw on this in the BP
09:12:12 [LarsG]
jtandy: we need guidance on when WGS84 is not enough and when the publisher needs to be explicit (and how to do it)
09:12:23 [LarsG]
... this also goes into geometry etc.
09:12:42 [LarsG]
... How are we able to meet the requirement we've got
09:12:53 [kerry]
09:13:01 [LarsG]
frans: But we've been unable to specify requirments
09:13:32 [LarsG]
jtandy: But isn't the req: when is WGS84 not enough and what do I do when not?
09:14:15 [billroberts]
present+ billroberts
09:14:25 [LarsG]
frans: Has problem with the way it's done in geosparql (conflating CRS URI with geometry)
09:15:21 [LarsG]
... BP editors can try to formulate requirements as the BP document progresses
09:15:28 [kerry]
09:15:44 [kerry]
ack ChrisLittle
09:16:02 [jtandy]
ChrisLittle: just to follow up frans comment about chaining back to requirements and use cases
09:16:11 [jtandy]
... the spreadsheet we produced
09:16:18 [jtandy]
... is it deficient?
09:16:27 [jtandy]
frans: we stopped working on that
09:16:34 [kerry]
09:16:41 [jtandy]
... it was just input to our UCR FPWD
09:16:51 [jtandy]
09:16:52 [kerry]
ack kerry
09:17:29 [jtandy]
kerry: did we resolve the CRS issue?
09:18:36 [phila]
phila has joined #sdw
09:18:38 [jtandy]
jtandy: responds [...]
09:19:00 [rachel]
e.g. in geojson when you specify CRS other than WGS84 most mapping applications that read geojson just ignore that and try to plot it as WGS84. The applications need to show an “unsupported crs” message
09:19:13 [jtandy]
... noting that frans encouraged the BP editors to write down what they understood were the requirements
09:19:36 [BartvanLeeuwen]
09:19:51 [jtandy]
kerry: can we write these in the TRACKER now????
09:19:55 [kerry]
ack bart
09:19:56 [jtandy]
... please :-)
09:20:21 [jtandy]
BartvanLeeuwen: asks that we have a short break to organise webex connection
09:20:48 [jtandy]
[... short break ...]
09:20:51 [rachel] other words, requirement that CRS issue needs to be solved on consumer end as well as publisher
09:21:43 [jtandy]
[@rachel ... yes I think so]
09:22:25 [BartvanLeeuwen]
kerry: do you hear us ?
09:24:25 [ChrisLittle_]
ChrisLittle_ has joined #sdw
09:24:56 [ChrisLittle_]
09:25:20 [ChrisLittle_]
ChrisLittle_ has left #sdw
09:27:04 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
09:27:15 [phila]
present+ phila
09:27:33 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLittle
09:28:15 [frans]
present+ frans
09:28:34 [phila]
09:32:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
09:32:15 [aharth]
aharth has joined #sdw
09:32:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
09:33:24 [kerry]
09:33:28 [kerry]
ack kerry
09:37:05 [jtandy]
jtandy: asks frans to tell us where we got to ...
09:37:16 [eparsons]
eparsons has joined #sdw
09:37:21 [eparsons]
Morning !!
09:37:23 [jtandy]
[resuming ...]
09:37:49 [jtandy]
frans: so we've done topic for point 1 ""
09:38:17 [jtandy]
... before we finish that, are there any other volunteers to talk about open issues
09:38:21 [kerry]
chair: eparsons
09:38:38 [jtandy]
frans: what about ChrisLittle - he sent an email about time requirements
09:38:50 [jtandy]
ChrisLittle: no - I think we're fine there
09:38:51 [phila]
present+ rachel
09:39:04 [jtandy]
frans: also - what about SSN folks?
09:39:17 [eparsons]
present+ eparsons
09:39:35 [jtandy]
... there's still an open action to turn the reqs from the SSN incubator group into use cases [?]
09:40:02 [jtandy]
... that's a question to kerry: are there still missing SSN requirements in the doc
09:40:18 [jtandy]
kerry: I put a summary on the mailing list to cover this
09:40:26 [jtandy]
... still an open action on me
09:40:37 [jtandy]
... leave at that for now and remind me again
09:40:44 [jtandy]
... I've done the analysis
09:41:06 [jtandy]
frans: can we do that at the same time as we go through the wiki page for SSN requirements?
09:41:11 [jtandy]
... is that possible?
09:41:24 [jtandy]
kerry: ... hmmm ... hmmm ... yes
09:41:35 [jtandy]
eparsons: what's the doubt?
09:41:41 [jtandy]
kerry: there isn't one
09:42:13 [jtandy]
... the wish list is 98% constructed by me; it's not the original incubator group list, its what people have asked me for
09:42:28 [jtandy]
... these might not actually constitute _requirements_
09:43:01 [jtandy]
eparsons: [agrees] we need to trim the wishlist; having more concrete requirements might help this
09:43:19 [jtandy]
... is this a good mechanism [for managing the scope] of the SSN deliverable
09:43:26 [jtandy]
kerry: yes ...
09:43:40 [jtandy]
... we can keep the bigger list for context
09:43:51 [jtandy]
eparsons: thanks kerry - that helps
09:45:13 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
09:45:17 [jtandy]
kerry: notes that in the spirit of W3C chair training, have a wishlist of things that you _want_ to do, but might not have the resources to get to
09:45:26 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLIttle
09:45:27 [jtandy]
... the SSN wishlist is done in that spirit
09:45:42 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLittle
09:45:59 [jtandy]
frans: no other volunteers?
09:46:14 [jtandy]
... we've talked about trying to sync the UCR with other deliverables ...
09:46:29 [jtandy]
frans: let's move to the next topic
09:46:37 [kerry] is the "wish list" of things for ssn I have picked up
09:46:41 [jtandy]
topic: Use cases missing arising from recent work?
09:46:49 [phila]
Thansk Kerry
09:47:06 [jtandy]
frans: I have a new use case ... the web is a distributed system
09:47:34 [jtandy]
... it's not always easy to find what you need
09:47:51 [jtandy]
... does the BP doc provide a solution to this?
09:48:11 [jtandy]
billroberts: we can't provide a _complete_ resource
09:48:29 [jtandy]
eparsons: [agrees] we provide a starting point
09:48:53 [jtandy]
frans: proposes that we add this use case, and explicitly say that the BP doc resolves ths
09:48:57 [jtandy]
09:49:35 [jtandy]
eparsons: this could work - the link has always been implicit, it would hurt to make this explicit
09:49:44 [jtandy]
... what do the BP editors think?
09:49:54 [jtandy]
Linda: hmmm ...
09:50:17 [jtandy]
frans: so the BP doc provides a starting point to get people going.
09:50:34 [jtandy]
... similar to the "linked data book" that I started with for that topic
09:50:50 [jtandy]
Linda: yes- this could work
09:50:53 [jtandy]
09:51:24 [jtandy]
ChrisLittle: the only thing that's not explicit in the charter that was provide the _single point of reference_
09:51:33 [jtandy]
... we provide some best practice
09:51:46 [jtandy]
eparsons: we're not trying to be canonical
09:52:03 [jtandy]
... it's only as good as it is when the doc is published
09:52:18 [jtandy]
... it's ok to have this "meta requirement"
09:52:35 [jtandy]
... but don't oversell this as the "final word"
09:53:06 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #SDW
09:53:11 [jtandy]
eparsons: maybe what we need is a _short_ summary that helps people get started; the BP doc will [likely] be quite long
09:53:25 [phila]
09:53:28 [eparsons]
09:53:48 [jtandy]
frans: yes - the BP doc needs to be read in many ways
09:54:10 [aharth]
aharth has joined #sdw
09:54:13 [eparsons]
ack next
09:54:25 [phila]
jtandy: I noted that you cited the Linked data books as a place to learn about that. Are you hoping that the BP doc will be as informative?
09:54:41 [phila]
frans: It's called a book but it's a single Web page
09:54:56 [phila]
billroberts: It's the one Tom Heath did
09:55:15 [BartvanLeeuwen]
09:55:24 [phila]
frans: It was a complete narrative with pointers to relevant information so if you needed to pick a single starting point, it was a good one
09:55:25 [jtandy]
eparsons: @frans ... you've given yourself a task to write the requirement there
09:55:47 [phila]
frans: I think that's something to keep in mind when writing the Bp doc
09:56:11 [eparsons]
09:56:12 [phila]
BartvanLeeuwen: I think there's so much info around about spatial data, it's hard to create a single starting point
09:56:26 [phila]
BartvanLeeuwen: But I like the objective
09:56:44 [phila]
Ack eparsons
09:56:44 [jtandy]
scribe: phila
09:56:56 [phila]
eparsons: We recognise that we're not starting with a blank sheet of paper
09:57:03 [phila]
... We're opening up that info
09:57:07 [phila]
scribe: phila
09:57:11 [phila]
scribeNick: phila
09:57:29 [phila]
jtandy: I'm concerned that we're setting ourself too big a target
09:57:45 [phila]
jtandy: I don't think we can aim for publishing a complete ref for spatial data
09:58:38 [phila]
jtandy: We should limit our focus to getting spatial data 'on the Web' - although I don't think we all agree what that means
09:58:49 [phila]
... not about spatial data in general
09:59:25 [phila]
eparsons: We shoujld recognise 2 braod communiites. Someone who is pubolishing spatial data for the first time
09:59:40 [phila]
... the other one is slightly different. I already have data that I probably already publish using OGC services
09:59:47 [ChrisLittle]
09:59:48 [phila]
... but I need to do x y z
10:00:03 [phila]
... So they start from different points and therefore need to give them both a starting point.
10:00:27 [phila]
eparsons: You're a good citizen of the Web, it's about URIs, etc.
10:00:40 [phila]
... It doesn't need to be an encyclopaedia
10:00:52 [eparsons]
10:00:59 [phila]
frans: If you say on one side that you have a requirement but we can also say that we can't necessarily meete them all.
10:01:02 [rachel]
10:01:34 [kerry]
10:01:37 [phila]
jtandy: When you word this requirememnt, pls make sure you're talking about publishing spatial data on the Web.
10:02:12 [phila]
ChrisLittle: The contents of the LD book - there's some good structure there you can reuse (nick)
10:02:19 [rachel]
10:02:59 [eparsons]
action frans "to write meta requirement that the BP will provide guidance to spatial data publishing"
10:02:59 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-135 - "to write meta requirement that the bp will provide guidance to spatial data publishing" [on Frans Knibbe - due 2016-02-15].
10:03:58 [phila]
jtandy: We have an action to think about how to structure the BPs to give people an 'in'
10:04:19 [phila]
... especially for people with a short attention span
10:04:45 [phila]
frans: Are thereany other use cases arising from recent work.
10:05:03 [phila]
roblemmens: We're new of course. I've been looking at the UCR and BP doc
10:05:18 [phila]
... I've been looking at the ?? paradigm. Are there use cases for that?
10:05:29 [eparsons]
10:05:37 [phila]
10:05:43 [AndreaPerego]
Another source to look into is "Linked Data Patterns" (by Ian Davis and Leigh Dodds):
10:05:54 [eparsons]
10:05:58 [phila]
roblemmens: I saw some frontier issues in the UCR, but maybe they're spread here and there. It's related to provenance of course.
10:06:11 [phila]
... For those datasets, you want to know how they came into being
10:06:17 [ChrisLittle]
+1 to roblemmens comment
10:06:27 [phila]
frans: We have this general discoverability requirement that everyone thinks is important. Not going far enough?
10:06:42 [phila]
roblemmens: You have data in general, but volunteered data...
10:06:53 [phila]
10:06:58 [jtandy]
+1 to @roblemmens thoughts about VGI; especially regarding provenance of that info
10:07:14 [phila]
eparsons: Playing devil's advocate - don't issues of provenance solve that?
10:07:17 [jtandy]
10:07:22 [phila]
... All that's differnet is the people who cfeate it
10:07:47 [LarsG]
10:07:49 [jtandy]
10:07:51 [phila]
eparsons: If you know that this temperature record was made by the Met office vs. someone in their garden, that tells you what you need, no?
10:08:11 [phila]
roblemmens: But they sometimes form communities that have a common purpose, and that is also discoevrable.
10:08:14 [phila]
ack j
10:08:14 [eparsons]
ack next
10:08:48 [kerry]
10:08:49 [phila]
jtandy: So we tried to pick up the VGI stuff in the BP doc. In many situations where people are volunteering that info, they're using existing channels, like Twitter
10:09:09 [phila]
... So you end up with unstructured info that the service will probbaly have to process.
10:09:27 [phila]
jtandy: But yes, VGI is often as structured as official info. OSM is an obvious example.
10:09:42 [eparsons]
ack next
10:09:42 [LarsG]
10:09:55 [phila]
ChrisLittle: Ancenstry info is an example., In the UK they've all agreed to use pre-1977 boundary change data
10:10:03 [rachel]
10:10:29 [phila]
roblemmens: OK, but there are different levels of formality, and depending on that you may need to do more or less pre-processing
10:10:33 [kerry]
10:10:45 [phila]
kerry: I wanted to point to that use case ^^
10:10:53 [phila]
... It's a VGI use case, not sure if it made it into the UCR
10:11:07 [phila]
... This talks about official info that is volunteered.
10:11:21 [phila]
... So maybe we've already covered it?
10:11:46 [phila]
eparsons: Asks roblemmens to look through the requirements to see if VGI is covered sufficienetly.
10:12:01 [ChrisLittle]
10:12:11 [phila]
roblemmens: Yes, OK. I'm not sying it's missing, I'm just checking that it has been discussed.
10:12:18 [phila]
Linda: Do we have requirements on provenance.
10:12:30 [phila]
frans: Prov is a general data issue
10:12:41 [phila]
... So this req is about alignment with existing practices.
10:12:53 [eparsons]
action roblemmens Review current Reqs and add one if needed for VGI issues
10:12:53 [trackbot]
Error finding 'roblemmens'. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
10:13:07 [phila]
frans: Many issues that people deal with, like prov, is not specially spatial
10:13:29 [Linda]
10:13:41 [eparsons]
ack next
10:14:06 [phila]
Linda: responding to Frans' question about additional UCRs. I sent an e-mail to the list a while back with an addition to the construction use case
10:14:12 [phila]
... Do you intend to add that Frans?
10:14:29 [phila]
frans: I think more discussion is needed. I had questions about it - I created an issue so it won't be forgotten.
10:14:37 [phila]
Linda: So let's discuss..
10:15:27 [phila]
10:15:27 [trackbot]
issue-38 -- decide if and how to add the proposed use case -- raised
10:15:27 [trackbot]
10:16:37 [phila]
Linda: This is from the construction industry. They find they have to integrate data as construction is in progress.
10:17:07 [phila]
... Some data is about real world things, some data is about virtual things/records in a database. Those differences matter of course. So we need some way to model these things.
10:17:24 [phila]
... They wrote their whole use case down and I'm hoping it can be added to the UCR.
10:18:18 [phila]
-> E-mail thread
10:18:42 [phila]
Linda: The key thing is that difference in perspective
10:18:44 [phila]
10:18:56 [eparsons]
ack next
10:19:08 [phila]
Linda: They talk about the chart perspective/map perspective. Those are the spatial things and they need to integrate that with the real world.
10:19:39 [billroberts]
10:20:16 [billroberts]
10:22:08 [phila]
phila: Waffles on about HR14
10:22:28 [phila]
... Emphasising that a URI is a dumb string and you don't know what it identifies until you dereference it
10:22:58 [phila]
eparsons: Yes, we do need to think about it. In the spatial world, we only talk about data about real world things.
10:23:12 [phila]
frans: We don't have the same confusion
10:23:33 [jtandy]
[note: we had this discussion on the mailing list, see thread:]
10:23:40 [phila]
eparsons: I think we do, in that don't think in terms of the physical thing that you can walk into
10:23:56 [phila]
billroberts: You can't think in terms of who owns the spatial data, you think about who owns the building.
10:24:14 [phila]
ChrisLittle: The building would be ap;oint on a map
10:24:15 [jtandy]
[also see URLs in data primer, W3C WD]
10:24:21 [phila]
... then you get closer and it has extent and so s
10:24:35 [jtandy]
s/ap;oint/a point/
10:24:40 [jtandy]
10:25:04 [phila]
frans: That's an issue, you have multiple representations of the thing. The idea of having to do something with the real world thing never arises.
10:25:15 [eparsons]
ack next
10:25:21 [phila]
LarsG: You said, it's not your problem, Frans, but someone else will have the problem.
10:25:46 [phila]
... If we don't separate the thing from the metadata, that might not be a problem for you but it might create a problem downstream.
10:25:59 [billroberts]
10:26:03 [eparsons]
ack next
10:26:15 [phila]
jtandy: I just wanted to highlight that we had a lot if this discussion on the email thread. We also discussed it f2f in Saporro
10:26:49 [kerry]
10:27:11 [phila]
jtandy: A guy called Tim said that, yes, we've talked about this for a long time and in the end people generally think it really doesn't matter. using a VCard as a proxy for the person is commonly done and we need to get over it.
10:27:39 [phila]
jtandy: We can use 'punning' so that we can treat it as a real world thing or a record.
10:27:50 [phila]
frans: Can we ignore it unless it becomes a problem.
10:27:52 [Linda]
10:28:00 [BartvanLeeuwen]
10:28:24 [phila]
jtandy: SDOs have this problem. But looks at what people do and peopel do this all the time...
10:28:30 [eparsons]
ack next
10:28:39 [LarsG]
q+ to talk about licensing content vs licensing metadata
10:28:42 [phila]
billroberts: Is anyone sufficiently familiar with Jeni's work on trying to solve this?
10:28:57 [phila]
-> URLS in Data
10:29:07 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
10:29:08 [LarsG]
10:29:34 [phila]
jtandy: What she said is - the best thing to do is to give differnet identifiers for the real world thing and the record. Most of you don't, but if you don't, it would be helpful if you ...
10:30:19 [phila]
... distinguished between a direct property about the thing itself (creation date etc.) and an indirect one about the page about the thing.
10:30:37 [phila]
frans: So that's an example where people use web pages as the real thing.
10:30:57 [phila]
Linda: That's what this use case from the construction industry is about. They need to make that distinction.
10:31:13 [phila]
... I think one of them is coming to the workshop on Wednesday.
10:31:17 [eparsons]
ack next
10:31:42 [phila]
BartvanLeeuwen: I was amused that HR14 comes up in every F2F meeting I've ever been to.
10:31:59 [phila]
... I am sympathetic with Frans's view of ignoring it until and if it bites us.
10:32:05 [phila]
... But we might get comments...
10:32:17 [eparsons]
ack next
10:32:17 [phila]
... In the end, we are probably going to have to formulate an answer.
10:32:18 [Zakim]
LarsG, you wanted to talk about licensing content vs licensing metadata
10:34:49 [phila]
frans: Points to some proposed text... you mint a URI for the building ...
10:34:56 [phila]
(lost some detail)
10:35:31 [phila]
jtandy: INSPIRE gives identifiers to information records. And then you have thematic identifiers and these can be confusing.
10:35:46 [phila]
jtandy: I think we're saying that you should create a URI for the real thing.
10:35:51 [AndreaPerego]
10:36:06 [phila]
LarsG: We've said in the library world that we need differnet URIs for the document and metadata about the doc.
10:36:29 [eparsons]
ack next
10:36:33 [phila]
LarsG: There's a huge difference in the licensing of the two
10:36:52 [phila]
AndreaPerego: We had the same in DCAT which has the datasets and catalogue records.
10:37:03 [phila]
... It's usually the record that gets the reliable URI.
10:37:16 [phila]
... It's probably related to how we use the IDs.
10:37:37 [phila]
... Any feedback on the UK work on URIs for spatial objects?
10:37:47 [phila]
... Did it meet the requirements?
10:38:26 [phila]
phila: That work is withering on the vine, not because it isn't good, but because the individuals are otherwise engaged.
10:39:06 [phila]
jtandy: Since that work, there seems to have been a groundswell of using the context to determine whether we're talking about the real world thing or the data.
10:39:22 [phila]
eparsons: I have an app on my phone that opens the door to my hotel.
10:39:33 [phila]
... So my phone is interacting with a real world thing
10:39:57 [jtandy]
[wow - he can use bluetooth LE to open the lock on the door after online check-in!]
10:40:19 [phila]
eparsons: We can skirt around it but I think we do have to draw that line in the sand and say that it is going to be necessary to have different identifiers for the two. And that would be BP
10:40:27 [jtandy]
[key point is that we need to be _clear_ which is the real world lock, which is the information record about that lock]
10:40:58 [phila]
Linda: They're not trying to describe the building, they're trying to integrate different datasets related to the building.
10:40:59 [eparsons]
10:41:09 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
10:41:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
10:42:14 [phila]
eparsons: Talks about links between thing and n records about the thing.
10:42:30 [phila]
AndreaPerego: The catalogue record is defined in the context of the catalogue, it's not an absolute resource.
10:43:08 [phila]
... In this case, the prov of the metadata is important. It's improtant to tell the record from the description of the resource and the resource itself.
10:43:20 [phila]
... It makes sense to me to apply that as a general requirement for data on the Web.
10:44:04 [phila]
frans: So the req from this use case is being able to integrate data with different perspectives.
10:44:20 [rachel]
10:45:09 [jtandy]
10:45:35 [jtandy]
q+ to note that we can make general statements about data on the web- but through a spatial lens
10:46:51 [phila]
frans: I'm looking for a case where the difference really matters.
10:47:09 [eparsons]
ack next
10:47:10 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to note that we can make general statements about data on the web- but through a spatial lens
10:47:13 [phila]
eparsons: My lock on the door is my example
10:47:33 [phila]
billroberts: We need to be careful not to be drowned in the swamp of HTTP Range 14
10:47:50 [phila]
eparsons: I think it's a bigger issue for the spatial community than it is for the general data community.
10:48:22 [phila]
... We're both communities that have grown up digitising representations of the real world. But now we're seeing more need to refer to the real world thing.
10:49:37 [phila]
action: frans to clarify use case requring differentiation between real world and representation identifers, during Wendesday's workshop
10:49:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-136 - Clarify use case requring differentiation between real world and representation identifers, during wendesday's workshop [on Frans Knibbe - due 2016-02-15].
10:50:00 [phila]
jtandy: I think we're Ok to cover this as long as we show the issue through the spatial lens.
10:50:19 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
10:50:38 [phila]
eparsons: Any more UCR issues to tackle?
10:50:41 [kerry]
10:50:47 [eparsons]
ack next
10:51:14 [phila]
kerry: I don't have another use case, but I was going to suggest we might move on to the topic of @@ ?
10:51:35 [phila]
eparsons: Can you clarify who is coming on Wednesday?
10:52:07 [phila]
Linda: Our regular Platform Linked data Nederland will be here. Some are very technical, RDF heads, others are more business
10:52:18 [phila]
... Come from academia, business etc.
10:52:34 [phila]
... This Wednesday we have a lot coming from outside NL
10:52:51 [phila]
... There's a EURO SDR workshop as well as us so that's increasing interest
10:53:01 [phila]
eparsons: Thayt's more cadstral, mapping agencies, IGN etc.
10:53:27 [phila]
Linda: The theme of the meeting is Spatial Data on the Web. More from Geo world than normal. 160 registered
10:53:56 [phila]
eparsons: Have we thought about how we want to do this? Picking some UCs that we think might be useful cf. asking for ideas for UCs?
10:54:33 [phila]
jtandy: Linda asked me to give a 10 minute talk on what we're doing with a focus on the BP doc. The people tendering for the Geonovum tender will be there too.
10:54:55 [phila]
... All I'd mention in terms of UCs, the 30 BPs we have so far are underpinned by multiple UCs.
10:55:13 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
10:55:19 [phila]
... We have a parallel threada. If people want to engage with theis group, then the // thread is the way to do that.
10:55:40 [phila]
Linda: So not all 160 people will be in the workshop - which is good as the room isn't that big.
10:55:57 [phila]
Linda: So we'll have about 1.5 horus to engage with those folks.
10:56:10 [rachel]
10:56:14 [phila]
s/tendering for/working on/
10:56:54 [phila]
jtandy: I'm explicitly asking them... we need you if we're to provide something useful to you.
10:56:57 [ChrisLittle]
10:57:34 [phila]
jtandy: So really asking for help with what they need help with.
10:57:40 [phila]
(scribe paraphrase)
10:58:11 [phila]
roblemmens: Maybe a short walk through the document?
10:58:19 [phila]
jtandy: We could do that in the // track?
10:58:38 [phila]
eparsons: This is about doing a santity check on the work we've done, talking to customers.
10:58:59 [phila]
eparsons: I would hope that there won't be loads of new use cases popping up. WE perhaps shouldn't fish for new UCs.
10:59:07 [phila]
frans: If there are any, it's better to have them ASAP.
10:59:44 [phila]
eparsons: Yes, but I don't want to put UCs front and centre. The view into the use cases is probably going to be the BP doc. If there's something misisng, let us know.
11:00:02 [phila]
jtandy: if there's something grossly missing, tell us the use case and cite the real world case where this is important.
11:00:09 [phila]
... We may be able to amend anexisting UC to include that.
11:00:16 [phila]
... But we can't take pet projects.
11:00:54 [phila]
-> Workshop website
11:00:56 [rachel]
s/anexisting/an existing/
11:01:24 [phila]
eparsons: We've done a lot of homework gathering these UCs. This isn't our pet project - we have evidence that these things are important.
11:02:39 [phila]
jtandy: I'll give a short plenary talk at the star, and then in our // track we can have the full conversation.
11:03:04 [phila]
frans: I agree with not fishing for new use cases, but we can seek new requirements
11:03:11 [phila]
jtandy: And they need to be hooked on to an existing UC.
11:03:24 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
11:03:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
11:03:32 [phila]
Topic: Time
11:03:52 [jtandy]
s/talk at the star/talk at the start/
11:03:58 [phila]
11:04:29 [phila]
ChrisLittle: We've talked about this before. Time is not specifically spatial - it's more fundamental than that.
11:05:03 [phila]
... There's a lot of confusion and mix up of time and dates.
11:05:11 [phila]
eparsons: So what is the real problem.
11:05:29 [phila]
ChrisLittle: The real problem is the confusion between precison and accuracy
11:05:54 [phila]
ChrisLittle: ISO 8601 gives you a false sense...
11:06:14 [phila]
... It's the same as the confusion with WGS84.
11:06:28 [frans]
11:06:30 [phila]
... If you don't care about precision to the nearest minute, then OK.
11:06:40 [phila]
jtandy: many communities ignore what other people want.
11:06:53 [phila]
... It's when we look in from the outside, it doesn't necessarily line up.
11:07:12 [phila]
eparsons: We have a bunch of expert communities who know more that we do.
11:07:35 [phila]
jtandy: Our biggest problem is that there is no formal way of writing down time as an ontology.
11:08:02 [phila]
... If Simon were here, he'd say there is no way to talk about non-Gregorian calendars, or indeed ones that include leap seconds.
11:08:05 [LarsG]
s/more that we/more than we/
11:08:06 [eparsons]
ack next
11:08:16 [phila]
... cretaceous peroiod etc. Lots of things it doesn't do.
11:08:34 [phila]
jtandy: Our charter asks us to finish the work off. It matters whewn something is where.
11:08:42 [phila]
ack frans
11:08:51 [jtandy]
11:08:55 [rachel]
11:08:59 [AndreaPerego]
11:09:11 [phila]
frans: To respond to Chris's remark on precision and accuracy - it's a general data thing, not spatial.
11:09:17 [rachel]
11:09:21 [phila]
... Maybe we can ask the DWBP about this.
11:09:38 [phila]
... Maybe we should make a list of things to talk to DWBP about on the call next week (17/2)
11:09:41 [phila]
eparsons: nyone else?
11:10:07 [phila]
aharth: I think it's a problem that we don't have an onology for time - but our use cases don't say that. An ontology is a long way from the UCs.
11:10:10 [AndreaPerego]
s/ nyone/ anyone/
11:10:30 [phila]
... ISO 8601 gets you a long way. How big is the community that need non-Gregorian time?
11:10:55 [eparsons]
action ChrisLittle "bring up time issues with DWG on next weeks telecon"
11:10:55 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-137 - "bring up time issues with dwg on next weeks telecon" [on Chris Little - due 2016-02-15].
11:11:28 [phila]
ChrisLittle: The problem is that ISO8601 allows accuracy but it's not precise. It doesn't include leap seconds so GPS time is currentely 30 adrift from the real time.
11:11:35 [phila]
aharth: So who cares?
11:12:10 [phila]
ChrisLittle: The defence community thinks it's a big problem. Just as people think of bombing the wrong place, you can be equally inaccurate about when.
11:12:29 [jtandy]
q+ to talk about archaeology
11:12:48 [phila]
ChrisLittle: We're committed to leap seconds until at least 2022. So we'll move a few more seconds adrift from real time.
11:12:49 [eparsons]
ack next
11:12:50 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to talk about archaeology
11:13:30 [phila]
ChrisLittle: There are use cases of people trying to extract meteorological info from old sheeps logs. If you write down gthat info, which calendar were they using?
11:13:54 [kerry]
11:13:54 [rachel]
11:13:57 [phila]
jtandy: We have use cases from archaeological and cultural history
11:14:35 [phila]
jtandy: And geologists who want to talk agbout the anthropocene
11:15:15 [phila]
aharth: Is unconvinced. I don't think the community is a big one. If we look at things like SSN...
11:15:24 [phila]
ChrisLittle: becomes animated
11:15:57 [phila]
ChrisLittle: Let's talk about the IoT people - a growing community. Each of those things will have a time on them. But where does that time come from.
11:16:15 [phila]
... Different computers may have different times. They need to be synchronised.
11:16:20 [phila]
eparsons: It works now, doesn't it?
11:16:28 [phila]
ChrisLittle: Not really, it might.
11:16:36 [phila]
q+ to ask about internet time
11:17:02 [eparsons]
ack next
11:17:03 [phila]
aharth: It's about raising a flag about the difference between accuracy and precision.
11:17:04 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to ask about internet time
11:18:09 [phila]
eparsons: Internet time generally runs of GPS time
11:18:41 [phila]
eparsons: We've signed up to finishing the ontology about time. We just need to make sure it fits within the community we're serving.
11:18:43 [frans]
11:18:50 [kerry]
11:19:00 [phila]
ChrisLittle: My concern is that as we fix the OWl ontology, we need to go beyond spatial context.
11:19:26 [phila]
roblemmens: A more prinicpalled problem - often there is no time label at all, when sometimes you need it.
11:19:39 [phila]
... You find the spatial data but you don't know when it was true.
11:19:44 [eparsons]
ack next
11:19:48 [phila]
... But that has nothing to do with the ontology as such.
11:20:01 [phila]
frans: It's common practice to use XML schema datatypes
11:20:27 [phila]
... Most standards seem to recommend xsd:dateTime which goes to a time
11:20:33 [phila]
... So false info is created
11:20:51 [eparsons]
ack next
11:21:07 [phila]
roblemmens: That's why time labels are often missing
11:21:49 [phila]
frans: The otehr thing I wanted to say... some communities don't have a big Web presence at the moment. We shouldn't only look at current Web presence - some may be waiting for us to help them.
11:22:05 [AndreaPerego]
11:22:16 [phila]
... So we should look at some who are not really on the Web yet. people dealing with professional data, gov data, historical data.
11:22:57 [phila]
kerry: I wanted to say ... this is something I've been troubled with. What does SSN look like? Yes, it's an ontology. But we need to talk about how to use it.
11:23:06 [phila]
... I don't think I'd include that in the BP doc.
11:23:16 [phila]
... It's within scope if we have the resources.
11:23:20 [jtandy]
q+ to point out Best Practice 11: How to describe properties that change over time
11:23:23 [ChrisLittle]
+1 to Kerry's comments
11:23:29 [eparsons]
+1 to kerry
11:23:29 [phila]
... So I think we need to talk about time anbd how to handle it on the Web.
11:23:37 [kerry]
11:23:45 [jtandy]
11:23:50 [AndreaPerego]
11:24:09 [phila]
kerry: Modulo a check over the UCs, I think this pretty much covers things on the e-mail list.
11:24:19 [phila]
... Maybe that's enouigh?
11:24:32 [phila]
... I'd like us to talk about how to use this.
11:24:41 [AndreaPerego]
11:25:07 [phila]
eparsons: What's you sense, ChrisLittle, if the work is completed - how much does that solve where the issues are and how much does the BP doc need to give a narrative.
11:25:29 [phila]
ChrisLittle: I think fixes to the ontology will help encourage better practice.
11:25:37 [jtandy]
q+ to say that BP editors intend to use examples to illustrate how time should be used properly
11:25:54 [phila]
... People use 8601 time when they don't really mean it because that's what the javascript libraray offers.
11:25:56 [eparsons]
ack next
11:25:57 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to say that BP editors intend to use examples to illustrate how time should be used properly
11:26:19 [phila]
jtandy: BP editors... section 6.2.3 which talks about temporal aspects of data that currently has no BPs in it.
11:26:45 [phila]
... What we thought we'd do, rather than talk about that, was to use examples of how we write spatial data that had temporal aspects.
11:27:04 [phila]
... I'm sure there's more work to do there to cover archaeology etc.
11:27:17 [phila]
... That's where I'd like to show people how to do it properly.
11:27:54 [phila]
eparsons: But there's still that wider requirement around spatiotemporal. The time ontology has a wider scope than ours.
11:28:20 [phila]
jtandy: I think the work has more or less been done. Simon has written his proposal for extending the time ontology to cover non-Gregorian stuff.
11:28:36 [phila]
... I'd take what Simon has done and see if it meets our needs
11:28:39 [phila]
11:28:51 [phila]
ChrisLittle: I think we need some BP exemplars, saying don't do this etc.
11:29:00 [BartvanLeeuwen]
11:29:01 [phila]
... Just as we do on precision and accuraxcy on CRSs
11:29:08 [eparsons]
ack next
11:29:54 [phila]
phila: Can Simon publish what he's done as a ReSpec document?
11:30:05 [kerry]
11:30:15 [eparsons]
ack next
11:30:39 [phila]
BartvanLeeuwen: Since we said a long time ago that we'd talk about best practice, not best theory.
11:31:06 [phila]
... How do you say that this building was built in 1980 in LD? There's no BP for that yet.
11:31:39 [phila]
eparsons: To be brutal, our charter says we'll do the time ontology. We haven't said we'll give BPs on how to use it.
11:31:47 [phila]
... We're all going to be time pushed this year.
11:31:53 [phila]
q+ to say BPs for time not needed
11:32:06 [eparsons]
ack next
11:32:27 [phila]
kerry: I was going to say, in terms of Time Ontology influencing BPs, there's plenty out there already.
11:32:50 [kerry]
11:32:56 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
11:33:16 [phila]
... There's a lot on that list already
11:33:19 [eparsons]
ack next
11:33:20 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to say BPs for time not needed
11:34:36 [kerry]
11:35:00 [AndreaPerego]
q+ about time URIs and the use of Time ontology by
11:35:10 [phila]
phila: Talks about diff between implementation experience - needed for the Recs - and BPs, which will come later.
11:35:34 [phila]
phila: Explains kind of exvidence needed to get to rec for an ontology. Each term used in data >= 2 times
11:35:51 [eparsons]
ack next
11:35:54 [AndreaPerego]
q+ to ask about time URIs and the use of Time ontology by
11:36:06 [eparsons]
ack next
11:36:07 [phila]
(scribe missed aharth's point, because it's lunch time)
11:36:08 [Zakim]
AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask about time URIs and the use of Time ontology by
11:36:29 [phila]
AndreaPerego: We haven't talked about the UK time URIs. You get back time ontology data
11:36:44 [phila]
... Do we think they're good?
11:36:56 [phila]
... Also I'd be interested in experience of using them.
11:37:34 [phila]
billroberts: We have used those time interval URIs in data quite a lot. There is the question of what is the point of doing that rather than using a literal.
11:37:45 [phila]
... Not all the would be literals are convenient
11:37:49 [eparsons]
@kerry might finish a few mins early
11:37:55 [phila]
... and it allows you to have a time as the subject.
11:38:40 [phila]
billroberts: The downside is that you can't always take advantage of some of the SPARQL features for ordering
11:38:45 [phila]
... although the URIs can be ordered.
11:39:03 [phila]
AndreaPerego: I think Ian Davis did some work on this and geometries for time and space
11:39:27 [phila]
... I think maybe you, Bill, made comments about having URIs for geometries in different formats
11:39:28 [rachel]
11:39:40 [phila]
... I think these topics are very internlinked.
11:39:45 [aharth]
phila: my point was that OWL Time depends heavily on OWL 2 DL, but I don't know whether reasoners exist that support the translation from xsd:date to OWL Time and back
11:40:19 [phila]
ChrisLittle: When you have geometries in space, you can recognise differnece based on CRS. Most time formats look similar and people assume that there is no transformation but that's not right.
11:40:44 [LarsG]
11:40:53 [phila]
billroberts: I need to understand these differences.
11:41:26 [phila]
eparsons: Straw man - we need to get the ontology to a point where it becomes a Rec later this year. To cover these otehr aspects about best practice, not BP, maybe we need to have key references in the BP doc.
11:41:35 [phila]
q+ to talk about cross links
11:41:46 [phila]
eparsons: We don't have other mechanisms to get things out.
11:41:50 [LarsG]
11:41:58 [phila]
akc me
11:42:00 [phila]
ack me
11:42:00 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about cross links
11:42:28 [jtandy]
+1 ... agree with eparsons
11:42:32 [phila]
phila: Talks about linking from the BP doc to all 3 of our other docs
11:42:36 [Linda]
+1 to having key references to time issues in the BP doc
11:42:42 [phila]
eparsons: We all need food
11:43:06 [phila]
== Lunch ==
11:43:14 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
11:43:14 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
12:26:49 [LarsG]
LarsG has joined #sdw
12:27:36 [ClemensPortele]
ClemensPortele has joined #sdw
12:27:59 [eparsons]
Returning from Lunch...
12:28:52 [frans]
frans has joined #sdw
12:29:23 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
12:29:55 [ClemensPortele]
present+ ClemensPortele
12:30:21 [kerry]
present+ kerry
12:30:28 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
12:32:16 [eparsons]
eparsons has joined #sdw
12:33:27 [BartvanLeeuwen]
scribe: BartvanLeeuwen
12:33:34 [BartvanLeeuwen]
scribenick: BartvanLeeuwen
12:34:06 [BartvanLeeuwen]
topic: Best Practices
12:34:18 [aharth]
aharth has joined #sdw
12:34:55 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #SDW
12:35:01 [BartvanLeeuwen]
jtandy: pointed to real examples in the wild
12:35:09 [BartvanLeeuwen]
12:35:24 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLittle
12:35:41 [BartvanLeeuwen]
jtandy: we need to provide real examples, examples need to be informative, short
12:36:00 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... it needs massaging to get them compact enough to get into our document
12:36:04 [ChrisLittle]
* no idea why I keep timiing out (sic)
12:36:19 [Linda]
Linda has joined #sdw
12:36:33 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... the working group asked us for examples from the BP's
12:36:48 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... we need you ( The WG ) to give us these examples
12:37:07 [BartvanLeeuwen]
eparsons: I hunted long and hard to use to have a best practice around that
12:37:08 [eparsons]
12:37:19 [BartvanLeeuwen]
eparsons: I came up with this article
12:37:42 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... it was the best place I could find to show what can do, and described in the best way
12:37:59 [roblemmens]
roblemmens has joined #sdw
12:38:16 [BartvanLeeuwen]
jtandy: which best practices does this apply to
12:38:26 [Stanislav]
Stanislav has joined #sdw
12:38:35 [BartvanLeeuwen]
eparsons: that is the issue, there are multiple, discoverabilty / findabilty
12:39:01 [roblemmens]
present+ roblemmens
12:39:20 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... will we extract multiple best practices, or one document which reference multiple BP's
12:39:55 [BartvanLeeuwen]
jtandy: this is one of the challenges of the document, we might end up with 120 examples
12:40:06 [eparsons]
12:40:33 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... in the BP's themselves we try to pull out snippets of the examples, which show you how to do small things
12:40:55 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... have the full examples reference the BP's which contain the snippets.
12:41:49 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... we also might want to reference external resources where things are working together
12:42:06 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... do we want something like jsfiddle to let people play with examples.
12:42:50 [BartvanLeeuwen]
eparsons: how much of examples do you want to show it is real, and how much do you want the examples to be usefull
12:43:25 [BartvanLeeuwen]
jtandy: the first is about 'this is practice, not theory', the examples in the document are illustrative
12:43:30 [frans]
12:43:58 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... we might say this illustrative example is composed of a certain example in the wild
12:44:07 [eparsons]
ack next
12:45:03 [BartvanLeeuwen]
frans: there is case to be made to create your own examples, examples in the wild my disappear. We need small consice examples where examples in the wild my be containing multiple BP's
12:45:33 [BartvanLeeuwen]
jtandy: this is a good point, its similar to what I was suggesting.
12:45:44 [kerry]
12:46:05 [BartvanLeeuwen]
... we need ilustrative examples that we 'own' but they should point to examples in the wild
12:47:10 [rachel]
+1 to illustrative easy to read examples (patterns) and real uses in the wild
12:47:55 [BartvanLeeuwen]
eparsons: we use small snippets to explain how to implement a BP, but also point to real world examples
12:48:45 [BartvanLeeuwen]
jtandy: we might want to have fixed set of examples which hang together, which we could publish as a appendix
12:49:12 [BartvanLeeuwen]
eparsons: we need to think about a sample. e.g. which wants to publish data
12:49:38 [BartvanLeeuwen]
BartvanLeeuwen: it needs the BP's to be reordered
12:51:43 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen makes a presentation on work with Dutch fire department
12:52:04 [billroberts]
...supplement a WFS with additional information about each feature
12:52:44 [billroberts] the user understand the meaning/background of the geo features they are looking at
12:53:38 [billroberts]
...Bart added a new feature name, to connect the feature to the thing it is about
12:53:43 [Stanislav]
12:54:15 [billroberts]
...(rdf:about in Bart's example, but that choice is up for discussion)
12:54:39 [billroberts]
frans: there are mechanisms already in WFS to use XML schema to do this
12:54:59 [billroberts]
eparsons: we should agree a standard way to do this. Which way is for us to discuss
12:55:22 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: also wants a backlink. If you know the thing of interest, how do you find a WFS URL for that thing
12:55:58 [billroberts]
eparsons: most valuable thing may be simply to put the extra field into the standard WFS response
12:56:27 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: it's hard for the fire department users to figure this out in the middle of the night. Need to make it standardised and hence easier
12:57:08 [billroberts]
jtandy: for the BP, a tangible example, such as emergency response, could make a good consistent thread that we could use in several examples, to help make the BP doc more coherent and easier to understand
12:58:01 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: the Dutch fire department would definitely be interested and an emergency response example makes it particularly relevant for them
12:58:08 [ClausStadler]
ClausStadler has joined #sdw
12:58:36 [billroberts]
eparsons: which of the best practices would Bart's example be appropriate for?
12:58:51 [billroberts]
agreement that there are several relevant BPs for this example
12:59:10 [billroberts]
stanislav: there is a lot of relevant data around, eg from cadastral services
12:59:15 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
12:59:54 [billroberts]
jtandy: challenge for users of WFS is that in many cases the only info a user can get is from the layer names
13:00:14 [billroberts]
eparsons: one could argue that metadata catalogues would help with that problem
13:00:33 [billroberts]
eparsons: nice idea, but need more than just Bart to work on it, because of volume of work
13:01:08 [billroberts]
frans: other gruops are working on similar things: how to modify WFS to be more 'webby'
13:01:54 [billroberts]
[BartvanLeeuwen highlights a diagram in the presentation]
13:02:48 [eparsons]
@kerry may have lets check...
13:02:54 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: system uses Geoserver to do WFS plus PostGIS with R2RML to create RDF, with the RDF connected in a 1:1 mapping with the WFS
13:03:06 [Stanislav]
13:03:19 [eparsons]
ack next
13:04:16 [billroberts]
stanislav: there is software LOD4WFS that can help in creating new RDF for publishing via WFS
13:04:44 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: how can I create a triple which has a WFS URL as object? to relate other data to the relevant WFS
13:05:03 [billroberts]
Frans: why do this?
13:05:12 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: to support various user communities as well as we can
13:05:43 [billroberts]
jtandy: work in Australia (didn't catch who?) on publishing identifiers for places and links to info about them
13:05:59 [eparsons]
Aussie chap Rob Atkinson
13:06:29 [ClausStadler]
present+ ClausStadler
13:06:37 [billroberts]
jtandy: value for this group is to bring together the RDF and WFS communities
13:07:05 [ClausStadler]
(hi, what's the webex meeting password?)
13:07:13 [ClausStadler]
ah nm
13:07:56 [billroberts]
eparsons: if we can't point to existing best practices, can present our preferred option (even if not yet well established)
13:08:14 [billroberts]
eparsons: not so helpful if we say, well you could do one of 4 things. Better to be specifci
13:08:33 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: need enough people to start implementing the extra column in WFS
13:08:52 [billroberts]
eparsons: could propose this to OGC for the WFS standard (or a profile for WFS)
13:09:11 [jtandy]
13:09:17 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: could probably avoid changing the WFS spec by using a profile
13:09:17 [eparsons]
ack next
13:09:34 [billroberts]
jtandy: if phila were here, he'd remind us that BPs should be durable
13:10:08 [billroberts]
jtandy: could be more than one way to achieve something (to reflect changing fashions and practices) while still following the underlying, persistent BP
13:10:37 [billroberts]
eparsons: but make document usable by practitioners so not loads of different choices
13:10:50 [billroberts]
frans: WFS is not hte only kind of spatial data service we might have to consider
13:11:25 [billroberts]
jtandy: so, emergency response looks good for a common narrative through many examples in BP doc
13:12:07 [billroberts]
jtandy: how best to structure doc to make it easy to add value. How can we help spatial data publishers to add value without having to do very complicated things. What are the first/easiest things?
13:12:23 [billroberts]
jtandy: step 1 might be: get people to use HTTP URIs in their data
13:12:46 [billroberts]
jtandy: look for things that are profound but don't take much effort
13:13:24 [billroberts]
eparsons: different approaches might be appropriate for (a) 'green field' data publisher starting from nothing or (b) someone with a well-established set up that needs modification
13:14:16 [billroberts]
frans: examples could start simple (tweet about a fire) but bring in lots of detail later
13:14:33 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: flooding might be better example than fire for some BPs
13:15:07 [billroberts]
eparsons: if you didn't have GIS adn WFS 'baggage' where would you start
13:15:22 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: good question, but people always want to see stuff on a map so GIS may be a good place to start
13:15:50 [billroberts]
eparsons: could just have an HTML page per record - simple, discoverable. May not need fancy GIS functionality
13:16:13 [billroberts]
eparsons: if I haven't got a GIS, do I need one? (for simple examples)
13:17:01 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: in a flood warning, someone wants to know where to go to a safe place - doesn't want to start a GIS to get that
13:18:28 [Stanislav]
13:18:40 [billroberts]
roblemmens: time also relevant
13:18:54 [eparsons]
ack next
13:19:06 [billroberts]
stanislav: in a complex emergency situation, improtant to have access to all relevant data in one place
13:19:54 [billroberts]
eparsons: emergency services 99.9% likely to have a GIS infrastructure
13:20:26 [billroberts]
ChrisLittle: these organisations may be in their own data silo but probably shouldn't be. Better to also be looking at eg social media and other external data sources to get whole picture
13:21:38 [billroberts]
eparsons: eg need to find all Starbucks stores (say) in response to a potential threat. Starbucks probably have a GIS but it's not accessible quickly to emergency services, whereas their store locator web page probably is accessible
13:21:55 [billroberts]
roblemmens: emergency services not the only users, also perhaps reporters/journalists
13:22:26 [billroberts]
eparsons: so we could recommend to companies to publish machine readable store locator info on their websites (whether or not they also have a GIS)
13:22:51 [eparsons]
13:22:54 [billroberts]
jtandy: BBC uses linked data for underlying data infrastructure eg for sporting events. Could potentially be combined with other emergency response data
13:23:32 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: even if you can see a GIS you may not have enough info to interpret correctly. (eg opaque short codes for layers)
13:23:51 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: also multilingual issues sometimes - eg between Germany and the Netherlands in river flooding situations
13:24:40 [billroberts]
eparsons: so let's work with our current list of BPs and see if we need to restructure to allow us to use flooding as a narrative
13:24:52 [billroberts]
jtandy: also useful as a way to bring in Coverage data
13:25:09 [billroberts]
jtandy: as remote sensing very useful in flood situations
13:25:32 [billroberts]
eparsons: should also include fire based examples - Australian bush fires also brings some broader interest
13:25:58 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: flooding tends to be more interdisciplinary than fires,hence more interesting data exchange problems
13:26:40 [billroberts]
jtandy: what about examples of existing 'in the wild' best practices
13:27:09 [billroberts]
eparsons: should go through BPs and ask: who has a good example?
13:27:39 [billroberts]
jtandy: if you don't volunteer something, we'll have to get our dentist's pliers out
13:28:34 [billroberts]
jtandy: anyone got prepared examples relevant to specific BPs?
13:28:49 [billroberts]
jtandy: who has done their homework?
13:29:13 [ClemensPortele]
13:29:22 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: BP22. DBpedia uses Geonames
13:29:58 [eparsons]
ack next
13:30:39 [LarsG]
BP 22:
13:30:41 [billroberts]
ClementsPortele: (audio hard to follow but...) he is using Geonovum testbed. Experiment to supplement existing WFS infrastrucure to be more webby
13:30:52 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: has x-ref'd that with the BPs.
13:31:14 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: offers to share more detailed information about htat, or could present during the meeting if required
13:31:22 [billroberts]
eparsons: please send a link to online info
13:31:49 [billroberts]
jtandy: (1) sounds great, thanks (2) could you show it on webex, or is that practically difficult
13:31:58 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: yes, could show on webex
13:32:16 [billroberts]
webex being screen transferred to ClemensPortele...
13:32:42 [billroberts]
[ClemensPortele presents from his screen]
13:33:21 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: data from the Netherlands, including kadaster
13:35:47 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: based on existing SDI in NL
13:36:04 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: make a new 'layer' to access the data in a more webby way
13:36:25 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: using, using HTML and JSON-LD, supporting content negotiation, allow all data to be indexed
13:37:10 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: [shows list of BPs - which have been implemented?]
13:37:40 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele is currently writing this up, report available around end of month and will share it when ready, so we can read more about which aspects of BPs have been implemented
13:38:42 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: thinking about providing a Swagger description for the API, but not sure when taht will be done
13:39:02 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: not implementable BPs: reusing authoritative identifiers...
13:39:31 [billroberts]
and other not implementable (for this work) BPs listed
13:40:15 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: experience of trying to x-ref to BPs has revealed some cases where revising the BPs might make them easy to work with or test
13:41:00 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: eg need metadata in both DCAT and - content negotiation not sufficient to distinguish these two
13:41:25 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: struggling to implement some best practices.
13:42:41 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: Agricultural data example. Shows links from RDF data to the WFS resources
13:43:03 [eparsons]
13:43:28 [billroberts]
eparsons: thanks Clemens for v useful presentation
13:44:46 [billroberts]
jtandy: great piece of work, thanks. Thanks also to Geonovum for the testbed. As well as stuff in the BP doc, can we also have interactive resources, such as Clemens' demonstrated systems?
13:45:24 [billroberts]
frans: can W3C host persistent example services. Question for phila when he's back
13:46:15 [billroberts]
eparsons: to be pragmatic, treat persistent testbed as a nice to have. Often practical difficulties about ongoing funding for hosting
13:46:41 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele will post a link in IRC
13:47:14 [billroberts]
ChrisLittle: Clemens, how confident are you of categorisation of BPs as implementable/not-implementable. Was it difficult to decide?
13:47:31 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: some of those categorisations of BPs need some detail/qualification
13:48:57 [billroberts]
jtandy: useful to know if the BP is clear as a standalone text. Asks Clemens for further insights as we go on
13:49:18 [billroberts]
eparsons: next item, scoping issues
13:49:31 [rachel]
q+ to mention examples of named epochs and events for BP1
13:49:43 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
13:50:11 [kerry]
13:50:25 [eparsons]
ack next
13:50:26 [Zakim]
rachel, you wanted to mention examples of named epochs and events for BP1
13:50:51 [billroberts]
rachel: has done some work on BP1, names of epochs etc
13:51:27 [billroberts]
rachel: Linked Open Data Finland has useful examples of referring to events and places
13:51:52 [rachel]
13:51:56 [BartvanLeeuwen]
scribe: BartvanLeeuwen
13:52:00 [BartvanLeeuwen]
scribenick: BartvanLeeuwen
13:52:13 [rachel] Linked Open Data Finland
13:52:27 [rachel]
e.g. Event: Atrocities in Namur
13:52:57 [rachel]
Geological epoch
13:53:36 [eparsons]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:53:36 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate eparsons
13:54:00 [rachel]
Fosse Way Roman road
13:54:54 [ClemensPortele]
Link to my slides:
13:55:36 [eparsons]
13:55:40 [rachel]
13:56:10 [rachel]
Getty Iconography Authority
13:56:39 [eparsons]
ack next
14:01:25 [rachel]
Getty Iconography Authority (cultural objects including historical events) a module of Cultural Objects Name Authority (CONA)
14:01:44 [aharth]
aharth has joined #sdw
14:10:44 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
14:10:54 [kerry]
14:12:34 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
14:12:40 [LarsG]
scribe: Lars
14:12:45 [LarsG]
scribenick: LarsG
14:13:00 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:13:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
14:13:04 [LarsG]
Stanislav: presents a spatio-temporal content explorer
14:13:38 [LarsG]
... can navigate from a class of objects and show instances on the map
14:13:45 [LarsG]
... (all in one screen)
14:13:55 [LarsG]
.. result filtering features
14:14:58 [LarsG]
... particularly limiting the number of results (for SPARQL endpoint reasons)
14:15:51 [eparsons]
14:16:00 [LarsG]
... then navigate through relations (properties) and then filter again (e. g addressable objects) and connect to house numbers
14:16:21 [LarsG]
... backend is GeoSparql
14:16:51 [LarsG]
... can also filter on time
14:17:21 [LarsG]
phila: Do you filter the subset or all the data on the same time?
14:17:33 [LarsG]
Stanislav: it's a subset already
14:19:09 [LarsG]
... Navigating data (e. g. buildings) filtering by temporal extent
14:19:22 [LarsG]
... showing a timeline when buildiings were erected
14:20:45 [LarsG]
ChrisLittle: highlights how important it is to tell what calendar was used
14:21:14 [LarsG]
roblemmens: This example shows the value of linking data
14:21:45 [LarsG]
eparsons: This way linked data can add back to geospatial
14:22:13 [LarsG]
phila: billroberts does this kind of visualisation for a living hiding triples from the end users
14:23:19 [LarsG]
Stanislav: in geospatial the human interfaces are extra helpful (easier to show it on a map than to explain)
14:23:57 [LarsG]
... uses Parliament (only triple store that supports full geosparql)
14:24:25 [LarsG]
roblemmens: usability aspects are still to be solved
14:24:35 [LarsG]
... UI hard to grasp for inexperienced users
14:25:17 [LarsG]
jtandy: With geosparql you are constrained to geosparql vocabulary
14:25:37 [LarsG]
Stanislav: Yes, we use WKT for geometries
14:27:01 [LarsG]
ChrisLittle: particular case of presenting spatio-temporal data
14:27:43 [LarsG]
aharth: has played with web data and one important point is how to visualise people on a map
14:28:23 [LarsG]
... datasets differ on how they attach lat/long to objects. DBPedia attaches directly to the location, others do it differently
14:28:51 [LarsG]
... sometimes you have to go through the attached geometry
14:29:12 [LarsG]
phila: foaf:Person is subclass of wgs84:SpatialObject
14:29:18 [eparsons]
ack next
14:29:50 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
14:29:57 [LarsG]
kerry: how would jtandy want people to contribute to the BP? One wiki page per BP?
14:30:16 [LarsG]
jtandy: hasn't thought about that yet
14:30:37 [LarsG]
... but acknowledges the need for a place to share content. Wiki page sounds good
14:31:04 [LarsG]
eparsons: it needs to be directed. Start with empty page and then fill iin during the calls.
14:31:10 [LarsG]
Linda: One BP per time?
14:31:24 [LarsG]
eparsons: yes. Perhaps a separate telecon if necessary
14:31:53 [LarsG]
kerry: Prepare a wiki page _before_ the meeting would be ideal
14:32:20 [LarsG]
frans: one page per BP or one per example?
14:32:24 [rachel]
14:32:32 [LarsG]
... and link that to the BPs
14:32:55 [eparsons]
ack next
14:33:00 [LarsG]
jtandy: better to start with one big page
14:33:09 [LarsG]
rachel: +1 to jtandy
14:33:32 [LarsG]
eparsons: should suit the needs of the editors
14:33:47 [LarsG]
... that would naturally work its way through
14:34:15 [LarsG]
topic: Scoping
14:34:35 [LarsG]
jtandy: much in BP is about exposing data through web services
14:35:02 [LarsG]
... all questions were asked through the lense of exposing feature services
14:35:17 [LarsG]
... but it's all appliable to other kinds of data, too
14:35:57 [LarsG]
... so it might be out of scope but otoh it needs to be in the document for the geospatial community to understand that it's important
14:36:46 [LarsG]
eparsons: So are we OK with publishing some BPs that aren't particular to _geospatial_ data? eparsons is OK with that
14:37:05 [AndreaPerego]
14:37:18 [LarsG]
... if we end up with recommendation à la "publish geospatial data the same way you'd publish other data" that is OK
14:37:35 [AndreaPerego]
14:37:44 [LarsG]
frans: anxious we don't have time to deal with hard geospatial problems (CRS)
14:38:02 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
14:38:21 [eparsons]
14:38:31 [LarsG]
... is the point that we would want to point to BPs yet to write by other groups?
14:38:52 [LarsG]
jtandy: DWBP works on a different level, so they might not solve our problems
14:39:07 [eparsons]
ack next
14:39:21 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
14:39:24 [Linda]
14:39:32 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
14:39:32 [LarsG]
phila: If it's not in DWBP now, it won't get there, so if SDW has needs, we must put it into our own document
14:40:05 [LarsG]
AndreaPerego: We must provide examples of how we want our BPs to be done, even if it overlaps with other BPs
14:40:55 [LarsG]
... sometimes we just extend things (e. g. GeoDCAT as an extension to DCAT without disturbing existing infrastructure)
14:41:19 [phila]
q+ to talk about
14:42:31 [aharth]
aharth has joined #sdw
14:42:33 [eparsons]
ack next
14:42:43 [LarsG]
... it's about showing people how to get linkable data within their own infrastructure even if that means giving general advice
14:42:58 [LarsG]
Linda: ClemensPortele has commented on this
14:43:55 [LarsG]
ClemensPortele: comments were specifically on out-of-scope for _our_ implementation, not general comments
14:44:43 [eparsons]
ack next
14:44:44 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about
14:44:56 [LarsG]
phila: points to DWBP example
14:45:05 [phila]
-> Structured
14:45:35 [LarsG]
... example talks about location (use of dcterms:description is incorrect)
14:46:27 [LarsG]
... we need to give guidance
14:47:07 [LarsG]
frans: haven't seen anything about precision, significant digits etc. Worried we might have too much work to do and not have time to focus on geospatial
14:47:21 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
14:47:48 [LarsG]
... we should focus on those.
14:48:04 [LarsG]
... it's a matter of priorities
14:48:05 [jtandy]
14:48:36 [LarsG]
eparsons: but we need to build on general foundations on how to publish data. What do we percieve to be missing from DWBP?
14:48:57 [LarsG]
frans: there are BPs out there not just described in DWBP
14:49:29 [eparsons]
ack next
14:49:47 [LarsG]
... e. g. web documents on how to publish linked data, mint URIs etc. Probably also use of significant digits. We need to find those.
14:50:21 [LarsG]
jtandy: many haven't read common practice because it's not particularly about spatial data. We need to corral those and put all the BPs in one place
14:50:40 [LarsG]
... even if this means stating well-known info about e. g APIs
14:51:17 [LarsG]
eparsons: +1. How much do we need to do before talking about spatial data?
14:51:38 [LarsG]
... Is it a matter of work to do or just work we need to collect?
14:52:01 [LarsG]
... Let's do what we have to do and then the missing pieces will emerge.
14:52:38 [LarsG]
... be it minting URIs or whatever. Let's not panic yet.
14:52:45 [eparsons]
14:53:13 [LarsG]
jtandy: other scoping question: sensor data
14:53:31 [LarsG]
... many say this doesn't fit with spatial data
14:53:50 [kerry]
14:54:05 [eparsons]
ack next
14:54:08 [LarsG]
... How much do we want to pick up sensor data as a thing vs spatio-temporal aspects of sensor data?
14:55:04 [LarsG]
kerry: doesn't have an opinion. SSN ontology is important but that's not a BP document and perhaps we don't need that (nor as a part of another BP doc)
14:55:50 [jtandy]
14:56:40 [LarsG]
jtandy: BP 15 is very specific, describing a data stream, but not specific to sensor data
14:57:14 [LarsG]
eparsons: what is a sensor, someone with a twitter account (from telecon last week)
14:57:26 [LarsG]
... essentially everything is a sensor
14:59:07 [LarsG]
kerry: BP 15 is also about provenance etc so it's not sensor data specific
14:59:32 [LarsG]
... crowd sourced data is similar
15:00:06 [LarsG]
jtandy: is nervous about scope re. consuming sensor data
15:00:42 [LarsG]
kerry: perhaps summarise it all in a single BP ("use ssn ontology for sensor data")
15:01:07 [phila]
15:01:18 [LarsG]
eparsons: perhaps we shouldn't make BPs for sensors and time until we have the ontologies to describe them
15:01:25 [eparsons]
ack next
15:01:40 [LarsG]
kerry: those ontologies should make it into the BP doc
15:02:41 [LarsG]
phila: The BPs came out of use cases and if we strip them out of BP we're ignoring needs coming from UCs.
15:02:59 [LarsG]
... Those are needs from geospatial and web community
15:03:14 [LarsG]
jtandy: many UCs came as input from SSN deliverable, not BP
15:03:50 [LarsG]
ChrisLittle: The ontologies sit on microformats and feed into the ontologies. We cannot do one without the other
15:04:26 [AndreaPerego_]
AndreaPerego_ has joined #sdw
15:04:30 [LarsG]
eparsons: We have problems both in temporal aspects and the fact that much will come from sensors
15:05:00 [LarsG]
... We need to extract the problems from possible solutions (such as SSN and time ontologies)
15:05:48 [LarsG]
... We can say that there are problems with particular technologies without having to provide a solution to them
15:06:12 [LarsG]
... perhaps we need to rephrase some BPs not to cite other deliverables
15:06:31 [LarsG]
jtandy: In emergency response there is much sensor data
15:07:17 [LarsG]
... so instead of saying exactly how it works we just use them as examples (e. g. the location of a smoke detector) and from there convey the connection to the SSN ontology
15:07:33 [LarsG]
frans: it's good to link between the deliverables
15:08:07 [LarsG]
BartvanLeeuwen: No problem to sneak sensors into the emergency rescue narrative is not a problem
15:08:24 [LarsG]
billroberts: and sensors can move around, tooo
15:08:57 [LarsG]
eparsons: time and ssn are both valuable but they might not be BP (yet)
15:09:50 [LarsG]
... if it's not mature we cannot really say it's a best practice
15:10:20 [LarsG]
phila: BP is about "providing sensor data in a structured way; have a look at ..."
15:10:35 [LarsG]
jtandy: (recapping)
15:11:15 [LarsG]
... use web services to publish spatial data. This was an inhibitor.
15:12:08 [LarsG]
... Much future data will be sensor data, but we'll not say how to publish this data unless it's particular to spatial (e. g. an air quality monitor on a bus)
15:12:29 [LarsG]
... or how to deal with streaming data. This is appropriate to sensor but not particular
15:12:48 [rachel]
[river gauges as sensor input to flooding emergency response using]
15:12:58 [LarsG]
... Wild fire observations can come from humans. This is more about semi-structured information than about sensors
15:13:18 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:13:18 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
15:13:23 [LarsG]
eparsons: "If you want to deep dive, have a look at ..."
15:14:02 [LarsG]
... and point people to upcoming work (including CRS, non-Gregorian calendars etc.)
15:14:28 [LarsG]
... but we have to provide some pointers on how not to make certain mistakes
15:17:40 [LarsG]
frans: Important question is how to put geometry on the web. This is not only sensors but everywhere
15:18:18 [LarsG]
... BP right now is to do it in a fashion that fits your need, so we might need to develop our own ontology. This we need to address
15:19:07 [LarsG]
eparsons: do you talk about a simple features ontology or something else?
15:19:43 [LarsG]
frans: not only for buildings or geographical data, but also microscopes and geometry in general (i. e. on the web)
15:21:12 [LarsG]
jtandy: What's wrong with the current five ways?
15:21:14 [AndreaPerego_]
15:22:04 [LarsG]
frans: the problem is that there are five and those are much more about geographical than about geometry. There are too many ways to express time and space
15:22:16 [eparsons]
ack next
15:22:18 [LarsG]
... We need one way to rule them all
15:22:44 [LarsG]
AndreaPerego_: there are reasons that there are more than one
15:23:04 [LarsG]
... applications are built to consume different kinds of data
15:23:31 [LarsG]
... services should ideally serve data in different ways (GML, WKT, ...)
15:23:32 [phila]
-> The Core location Vocabulary
15:24:20 [LarsG]
... we have recommendation on how to represent geometries (GML, WKT, GeoJSON). It depends on the use case which one you pick.
15:24:39 [phila]
-> XKCD 927, the one about having too many standards
15:25:19 [LarsG]
jtandy: sometimes it's too complicated to do simple things in the "best" vocabulary
15:25:22 [aharth]
15:25:47 [eparsons]
ack next
15:26:02 [LarsG]
frans: we shouldn't say it's impossible to come up with one single model. We should attempt to find an interoperable way.
15:26:27 [phila]
15:26:31 [LarsG]
jtandy: Do you want a conceptual model (we've got one) or do you talk about implementations.
15:26:52 [ClausStadler]
15:26:58 [LarsG]
... Should we say "this is the only one we recommend"? That way we can alienate parts of the community
15:28:02 [eparsons]
ack next
15:28:04 [LarsG]
aharth: There are differences in conceptual model. WGS84 doesn't differentiate between thing and geometry. It would be nice to describe the differences between them and align that with the web data model
15:28:58 [LarsG]
Linda: it would help people if we can order the existing models according to ease of implementation ("but if you want polygons, you must use X")
15:29:15 [eparsons]
15:29:19 [LarsG]
AndreaPerego_: Like having a decision matrix
15:29:47 [billroberts]
15:29:57 [LarsG]
phila: OGC is happy to do GeoSparql 1.1 if necessary
15:30:14 [eparsons]
ack next
15:30:22 [LarsG]
... it's not helpful to define a sixth vocabulary
15:30:38 [phila]
q+ to say the thing I forgot to say about addresses
15:30:43 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
15:30:51 [ChrisLittle]
15:31:05 [LarsG]
ClausStadler: there is a difference between how data providers work and how tool implementers work.
15:31:06 [eparsons]
ack next
15:32:08 [BartvanLeeuwen]
15:32:17 [LarsG]
billroberts: If we say there is only one way, we'll be ignored. Instead we should give advice on how to document our decisions (vocabulary, use of CRS) and how to convert between them.
15:32:25 [eparsons]
ack next
15:32:26 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to say the thing I forgot to say about addresses
15:32:27 [LarsG]
... If there are gaps we should close them
15:32:28 [frans]
15:33:11 [eparsons]
ack next
15:33:15 [LarsG]
phila: Addresses are important. vCard is well implemented and is not INSPIRE compliant. We should give advice on how to publish an address
15:33:25 [billroberts]
+1 to importance of addresses
15:33:57 [eparsons]
ack next
15:34:09 [LarsG]
ChrisLittle: All this fits into precision and accuracy. Not only "where is the house" but also "which door". And how to do that transition
15:34:45 [eparsons]
thanks rachel !
15:35:28 [LarsG]
BartvanLeeuwen: We also need a remark on who we expect to consume our data. People often want to publish data because they have it but their customers don't have the tools to consume it
15:35:29 [eparsons]
ack next
15:35:42 [LarsG]
... e. g. no support of arcs in OpenLayers
15:35:48 [BartvanLeeuwen]
+1 to addresses
15:36:39 [LarsG]
frans: no consumer group would be happy with five or six ways to do the same thing since they will need to implement support for all of those
15:36:46 [eparsons]
ack next
15:36:47 [billroberts]
15:36:56 [LarsG]
... that's too much if-then. They will want one spatial ontology
15:37:07 [LarsG]
... we should try to make progress here
15:37:52 [LarsG]
eparsons: we can look at how to close gaps but shouldn't spend too much time
15:38:18 [LarsG]
frans: our extensions should be compatible with all existing (a sort of super-model)
15:38:19 [eparsons]
ack next
15:38:27 [jtandy]
15:38:33 [jtandy]
15:39:27 [eparsons]
ack next
15:39:41 [LarsG]
billroberts: much of data consumption is driven by existing tools. So often we need to publish using several formats/vocabularies
15:39:43 [LarsG]
15:40:22 [LarsG]
jtandy: points to BP 7 where this topic is added
15:40:28 [eparsons]
ack next
15:40:37 [LarsG]
15:41:40 [LarsG]
frans: we should not start from geography but from mathematics when creating this ontology
15:41:58 [aharth]
scribenick: aharth
15:42:04 [phila]
scribe: aharth
15:43:18 [aharth]
LarsG: our discussion relates to Clemens' point earlier: we need to be able to support different representations/schemas of the same thing
15:43:54 [aharth]
... there's an Internet draft in the works regarding Accept-Schema
15:44:07 [eparsons]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:44:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate eparsons
15:44:26 [aharth]
... client and server can negotiate the schema used
15:45:21 [aharth]
eparsons: how does it help if we talk about a very abstract geometry model first, leading to the final encoding
15:46:13 [aharth]
frans: we need an abstract model that is powerful
15:47:11 [billroberts]
15:47:12 [aharth]
phila: how much effort would it be to come up with a table to help people make a decision regarding the vocabulary?
15:47:24 [aharth]
frans: geosparql could be the model
15:48:00 [aharth]
phila: most people might think of terms of addresses rather than geometries...
15:48:37 [jtandy]
[@lars: see RFC 6906 from Eric Wilde - The 'profile' Link Relation Type]
15:48:43 [eparsons]
ack next
15:48:50 [aharth]
frans: it would be helpful to converge to one vocabulary for spatial data
15:49:16 [aharth]
phila: we could get spatial relations into the link registry
15:50:03 [aharth]
billroberts: what are the most common use cases? addresses, geocoding, postcodes, points and polygons...
15:50:13 [aharth]
... but mostly polygons are not available
15:50:42 [aharth]
... then, especially in statistics, the next level of complexity is how polygons relate to each other
15:51:11 [aharth]
... there are many pragmatic problems around that are a big barrier
15:51:27 [aharth]
frans: how do you put a geometry into a triple store?
15:51:59 [aharth]
billroberts: some of the triple store technology is not advanced enough, use postgis, elasticsearch
15:52:13 [aharth]
... we would use more geosparql if there are implementations available
15:52:35 [aharth]
frans: geometry is just a datatype like numbers, string
15:53:26 [eparsons]
15:53:27 [aharth]
aharth: i'd say a polygon is an object, rather than an image
15:53:27 [ClausStadler]
base64 encoding - webpack optimizes html pages by inlining all images like that
15:53:29 [billroberts]
15:54:07 [aharth]
ChrisLittle: numbers are not enough to encode geometries, need numbers + other data
15:54:19 [jtandy]
15:54:25 [eparsons]
ack next
15:54:46 [ClausStadler]
what i wanted to say is that binary data could be encoded using e.g. base64, so in a way it would be possible to support it in rdf
15:54:50 [aharth]
billroberts: is it an object, is it a database-y type of thing? for most things we need both
15:55:32 [eparsons]
ack next
15:55:39 [aharth]
... we are in a tricky situation where we need both
15:56:15 [aharth]
jtandy: i'm reminded of discussions of the JSON-LD space... people were not really fans of RDF triples
15:56:47 [aharth]
... maybe there's a way to use a triple data model without requiring much of the semantic web machinery
15:57:45 [aharth]
ChrisLittle: maybe link to an object, dismantling it does not necessarily have to be done using rdf tools
15:58:04 [aharth]
frans: there are functions in geosparql to do that
15:58:49 [aharth]
eparsons: we carry on discussing this lateron, let's come back to that
15:58:55 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:58:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
16:02:04 [n61860]
n61860 has joined #sdw
16:02:26 [n61860]
present+ ChrisLittle
16:09:56 [aharth]
eparsons: next topic is the engagement with the DWBP
16:12:09 [aharth]
phila: presents the current version of the DWBP document
16:12:27 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
16:14:10 [aharth]
... the document has many navigational aids: challenges, benefits, used to classify the best practices
16:14:53 [aharth]
... only one best practice is open (related to APIs)
16:15:20 [aharth]
... now the thing left to do is to create examples and tests
16:15:58 [aharth]
... the DWBP document will be a Recommendation
16:16:30 [aharth]
... which means for each of the best practices there need to be two organisations that have made the same recommendation
16:17:20 [aharth]
... in other words, find two independent implementations of each best practice
16:17:44 [aharth]
... charter of DWBP runs out in july
16:18:05 [aharth]
... the goal is to provide a running example with actually testable data
16:19:46 [aharth]
... there's currently much effort to finalise the DWBP bp document
16:20:17 [aharth]
jtandy: in preparation for next week's call, what version of the document should we read?
16:20:30 [aharth]
phila: i would read the editor's draft
16:21:12 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
16:22:10 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
16:22:17 [aharth]
phila: for next week, we're flagging places where things related to spatial can be improved
16:23:03 [AndreaPerego]
16:23:06 [aharth]
frans: do they have public comments?
16:24:04 [aharth]
phila: we've got some comments, but would like to have more
16:24:40 [phila]
-> data on the Web Best Practices Editors' Draft
16:24:41 [aharth]
jtandy: please, read through the document and find gaps relative to our work
16:25:22 [eparsons]
ack next
16:26:03 [aharth]
AndreaPerego: there are other deliverables (a couple of vocabularies) that might be worth looking at
16:26:07 [phila]
-> Data Quality Vocabulary
16:26:20 [phila]
-> Dataset usafe
16:26:27 [aharth]
16:27:15 [AndreaPerego]
q+ to ask if DAQ / DUV will address also data granularity
16:27:25 [aharth]
phila: permissions and obligations is another topic that's coming up
16:27:34 [eparsons]
ack next
16:27:35 [Zakim]
AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask if DAQ / DUV will address also data granularity
16:28:44 [aharth]
phila: data shapes (SHACL) is a "schema"-language, there's recent progress there
16:29:15 [eparsons]
rrsagent, draft minutes
16:29:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate eparsons
16:29:18 [aharth]
AndreaPerego: what about granularity in the vocabs? might be relevant to us, for example the way to model spatial resolutions
16:29:54 [aharth]
phila: dcterms:conformsTo is a start
16:30:04 [jtandy]
16:30:08 [aharth]
phila: candidate rec for the two vocabularies is targeted for march
16:30:17 [eparsons]
ack next
16:30:38 [aharth]
jtandy: I wonder if the two vocabs provide examplars for how we should publish vocabs
16:31:13 [aharth]
phila: yes. a class diagram is usually the first thing people look at
16:32:47 [aharth]
... it's the same pattern that the other ontologies (DCAT...) use
16:35:04 [aharth]
jtandy: look to see if they handle location correctly, identify whether they cover our issues (otherwise we need to get the issues into our document)
16:36:01 [aharth]
... best practice: we have a room of implementation community with us on wednesday
16:36:09 [aharth]
... what are the questions we want to ask them?
16:36:17 [eparsons]
action jtandy to email public list with homework re DWBP call next week
16:36:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-138 - Email public list with homework re dwbp call next week [on Jeremy Tandy - due 2016-02-15].
16:36:19 [aharth]
... suggestions: tool chains/software architecture
16:36:42 [aharth]
... e.g., triplestores with sparql, elasticsearch, or something in between, HTML in vi...
16:36:50 [aharth]
... is that a useful question to ask?
16:37:18 [aharth]
... for the data publishing folks: what kind of spatial data are you trying to publish? geometries vs. points?
16:37:53 [aharth]
... for the data consumers: what is preventing you using spatial data in applications and decision making?
16:38:08 [aharth]
frans: i wonder what we do with the answers
16:38:36 [aharth]
jtandy: that might help us prioritise in which order to put different approaches/formats into the bp document
16:38:51 [aharth]
... which formats do you typically publish data in?
16:39:07 [aharth]
frans: ask for what people like to do, but find impossible or difficult to do now
16:39:42 [aharth]
jtandy: format one is interesting, because it gives a hint about the currently used toolchain
16:40:23 [aharth]
... provide examples from the real world
16:40:28 [roblemmens]
roblemmens has joined #sdw
16:40:52 [aharth]
... how should we structure the bp doc for readers with short attention span
16:41:41 [aharth]
eparsons: we should use the event for sense-checking, not gathering new requirements
16:42:08 [aharth]
BartvanLeeuwen: maybe explain how we end up at the WG
16:42:36 [aharth]
jtandy: yes we will do that
16:43:12 [aharth]
BartvanLeeuwen: careful to not raise expectations we cannot fulfil
16:43:56 [aharth]
jtandy: "what do you want from this" would be another question
16:44:03 [eparsons]
16:44:27 [aharth]
Linda: if people asked the public draft, are we going to ask for specific questions?
16:45:18 [aharth]
jtandy: will do
16:45:51 [aharth]
... our sensor data discussion might be worth mentioning
16:46:16 [aharth]
Linda: we have 1 hour 45 minutes, keep time in mind
16:46:30 [aharth]
eparsons: we're about done for the day
16:46:51 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:46:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
16:47:04 [aharth]
Linda: tomorrow we are at a different location, house number 2, in the meeting center, lunch and afternoon session at the same place as today
16:48:06 [aharth]
eparsons: thanks and see you
16:48:09 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:48:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
16:48:49 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has left #sdw