Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference

<kerry> regrets Jeremy, Frans, Lewis, Rachel, Ed, Danh, Clemens, Simon

<kerry> regrets Jeremy, Frans, Lewis, Rachel, Ed, Danh, Clemens, Simon

<phila> The new look BP doc

<Linda> Linda+

<laufer> hello all

<laufer> please, could anybody tell me the webex password?

<ChrisLittle> v4qtEh56

<phila> scribe: phila

<scribe> scribeNick: phila

<laufer> thank you

Topic Last week's minutes

<kerry> https://www.w3.org/2016/02/24-sdw-minutes.html

<Linda> +1

<kerry> +1

PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes

<RaulGarciaCastro> +1

<robin> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

<ChrisLittle> +1

<ClausStadler> +1

<billroberts> +1

+0 (absent)

RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes

Patent Call

<kerry> https://www.w3.org/2016/02/24-sdw-minutes.html

https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call

Sub-group meeting schedule

kerry: I believe BP set a date for their calls

Linda: Wednesdays at 15:00 UTC

<scribe> ACTION: phila to set up WebEx for the BP task force call [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/03/02-sdw-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-147 - Set up webex for the bp task force call [on Phil Archer - due 2016-03-09].

kerry: Is that every week or just when we're not doing the joint meeetings
... There will be agendas adn minutes

<robin> Thanks Phila, I have finished the registration.

kerry: Coverages was getting close - billroberts?

billroberts: Yes, we haven't fixed it yet. I've got some responses that I'll summarise tomorrow.
... Main problem is that we have people in both China, Aus, USA and Europe... so it means *someone" is bound to miss out. May need to alternate times
... Current plan is to propose an alternating time

kerry: I recommend against that, you have alternating times and alternating weeks, that's hard

billroberts: The alternative is to tell someone they can't take part.
... We'll go on continents

kerry: If I can't join, I can't join
... try and get the editors there - they're the most critical.
... Having said that, we have the same problem with SSN
... How's time going.

ChrisLittle: I failed to e-mail Simon to get the first slot. I haven't thought much as I'm rushing off to Washington shortly

kerry: SSN Doodle poll still to be filled in by some gfolks, including an editor

<kerry> SSN may be Th 8pm UTC

kerry: Please fill in the Doodle poll as soon as possible. Please be generous with your availability - 3 slots may not be enough.
... Plan is that all those meetings take place next week so there won't be a call at this time next week.

phila: So this call only happens every 2 weeks now so that the other TFs can meet in between.

CEO-LD meeting

<billroberts> yep

<billroberts> scribenick:billroberts

<kerry> scribe: billroberts

jtandy, billroberts, denise mackenzie, maik reichert visited Beijing to discuss CEO-LD

'Coverages and earth observations in linked data'

a small amount of funding from the UK government to prmote UK-China collaboration to allow meetings to take place

University of Reading (Jon Blower and Maik Reichert) have done some very promising work on representing coverage data in JSON 'CoverageJSON'

<ChrisLittle> * jeremy now going to Korea

The meeting led to 3 Chinese organisations to commit to developing demos with reprsenting coverage in JSON

the resulting data can be presented in the browser using prototype software from U of Reading

We made good progress

kerry: has a group of final year software engineering students interested in working in this space
... they are just getting started this week.
... is very keen to participate in coverage calls and to keep in close touch, in order to liaise with the students and make best use of their time, skills and enthusiasm
... planning to use the DGGS

so backend might be different to that used by Reading

phila: will keep kerry informed on outputs from CEO-LD. There are things the students could do which would be very helpful

kerry: has asked the students to look at RDF Data Cube, which would be quite a different approach to that used by Reading

phila: note that the RDF Data Cube approach is very verbose so may not work for large coverage data
... want to take the RDF Data Cube's notion of pre-defined slices to help with subsetting of coverage data. Should be fairly easy particularly for gridded data

chrislittle: has discussed this with jtandy and will raise it with OGC next week. Will raise in WCS SWG
... data cube may need enhancing. A 'slice' could be too much. Actually want a 'dice'.
... can request an n-dimensional 'tile'
... have started looking at it but not got very far yet

phila: that's it for the Beijing meeting

<phila> scribe: phila

<kerry> scribe: phila

<scribe> scribeNick: phila

Feedback from Data on the Web Best Practices

kerry: Thanks to the members of that WG for joining us

<laufer> and me...

<BernadetteLoscio> thank you!

And laufer

<BernadetteLoscio> and Newton

kerry: Can you lead this bit Linda?

Linda: Not too prepared but I can step in...

Linda: I was looking through the minutes from last time. The topics that we wanted to discuss more were mostly around APIs
... What to write about that and maybe also something about the DQV
... And there was something more about identifiers, but I'm not sure why.
... I'd like to hear from DWBP on these

BernadetteLoscio: ... WE had some discussions about APIs and made some changes in the GH doc

<BernadetteLoscio> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#dataAccess

BernadetteLoscio: One of our worries is the intesection between the BPs.

<newton> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#documentYourAPI

BernadetteLoscio: No 25 says document your APIs which is related to SDW 29 that says APIs should be self decribing
... They seem to be more generic, so we were thinking - if the BP that we have is enough for you, or what change should we make?
... Or should we add a new one to incorprate your needs
... Our 26 is similar to your 28

Linda: Looking
... Our 28 says you should have a convenience API that allows users to ask basic questions - make simple queries
... because APIs tailored to a simple goal

BernadetteLoscio: I think we don't have this kind of detail

<annette_g> no , we don't have that in dwbp

BernadetteLoscio: What we were discussing, for e.g., this notion of data granularity isn't clear for us. Is that the same as subsetting data?

Linda: Yes, making a subset of the data

BernadetteLoscio: How do you see this?

<annette_g> *the line is noisy

Linda: I think that some of the content that we have in SDW on APIs is more detailed. It's up to you how much of our content you'd like to use.
... I know that JT offered to work with you on that

<annette_g> *it's better now

<ChrisLittle> * the panting dog is back on audio

annette_g: There are some things that we're thinking about changing in DWBP. Maybe we can make those changes and then let you know
... Then SDW can decide whether you want to keep it.
... We looked at your self documentation info. We might say that self-documenting is a way to do that.
... And we may offer something on subsetting
... We can make those changes and then you can take a look

Linda: That sounds like a good approach to me
... If you make some changes, then please let us know, especially Jeremy, Payam and me
... If you're adding more content on APIs then we can lose some of ours

<annette_g> *I don't hear any sound

BernadetteLoscio: I talked about the identifiers section at the end of the meeting
... I was reading the SDW doc. You have some BPs for identifiers that are similar or that cover things that we don't cover
... And I was wondering ... what I'm worried about is that we have BPs that are similar in 2 different documents. Maybe we're going to have a common audience
... I think for e.g. you have BP1 on gloablly unique identifiers and we have BP11 on persistent IDs for datasets. We don't have anything like your BP2
... So is there a way for us to refer to your doc? Can we cooperate more closely?
... For e.g. BP2 is not specifically spatial

<newton> (we are without numbering in our BPs for while, so, for now, its easier to see the index on this page: http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp-status.html )

Linda: What we tried to do in SDW is that it's an extension of DWBP
... We want to avoid having similar BPs.
... What we have is a first draft. There are thing there that I don't think are specifically spatial, so if we can move some of our BPs to your doc, that makes sense to me

BernadetteLoscio: Thank you

Linda: Then we'd have to discuss which ones.

BernadetteLoscio: I think we have to have this discussion in our WG too of course. It woujld be good to align them.
... We discussed this in our WG - how our BPs can be extended in specific domains anda SDW will be one of those.

Linda: That's interesting as we're alreadyt doing and we can describe how to do it.#
... So at the moment, when we think there's an overlap, we make a reference to you

annette_g: I was just going to say that SDW has used references, that's fine - I don't think we need to do anything special with that

BernadetteLoscio: I was saying that the idea of using references is all right but they have some BPs that we don't haev but that maybe we shuold have

annette_g: +1

BernadetteLoscio: The ones they have should be more specific

annette_g: Sounds like everyone agrees with that

<Zakim> phila, you wanted to makea boring process comment

<BernadetteLoscio> ok... i understand

phila:

Talked about need for implementation evidnce requirements in DWBP and the fact that SDW is a joint Wg with OGC which *may* have an effect - certaunly we need to be aware of it if moving content

BernadetteLoscio: Did you find a gap in our doc about linking data?

Linda: hard for me to answer as Jeremy wrote that. It says that it extends your BP. It talks about linking at data level, you ytalk about dataset level

phila: That sounds like the BP I wrote needs more work

BernadetteLoscio: Not sure we havae one about link creation

<scribe> ACTION: phila To look at data item linking cf SDW BP on this topic and see if more needs to be done [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/03/02-sdw-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-148 - Look at data item linking cf sdw bp on this topic and see if more needs to be done [on Phil Archer - due 2016-03-09].

BernadetteLoscio: We dodn't talk about links because we dodn't want to be biased to RDF

annette_g: Were SDW thinking about hypermedia APIs for that or something else?

Linda: I don't have that in my mind

ChrisLittle: A lot of spatial data is complex, lots of objects in a box anbd you want to pick those out. That's not really hypermedia

annette_g: We've been adding a little more about hypermedia APIs and we are trying to say mnore about that

ChrisLittle: I don't think we've talked about streaming at all. If we do then we would get into hypermedia

annette_g: Our discussion isn't about streaming, it's about an API that returns links as well as data

kerry: There was one more topic that, about data quality. Is there sometehign we can do about that. Do we need anotehr meeting?

BernadetteLoscio: I think it's better to meet about that separately with those editors (who aren't here)

Linda: I could get involved with that. We have to make some recommendations about precision and accuracy and I think the DQV could help us with that.

<scribe> ACTION: phila to put Linda in touch with Antoine and Riccardo [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/03/02-sdw-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-149 - Put linda in touch with antoine and riccardo [on Phil Archer - due 2016-03-09].

next meetings

kerry: No joint meeting next week, but the sub groups should meet
... Ed and I will try and join those calls
... We can use this IRC channel and the agendas and minutes can go in the same system as we use for the group.
... The meetings are open to all, they're just specialised to SDW.

<ChrisLittle> +1 to kerry re minutes irc etc

kerry: Any more comments?

<ChrisLittle> bye

<billroberts> ok thanks, bye

<annette_g> bye, and thanks!

<RaulGarciaCastro> bye

kerry: Then that will do for now.

<LarsG> bye and thanks

<Linda> bye

kerry: Thanks to DWBP folks for coming

<robin> bye

<laufer> bye

<newton> bye, thanks

<BernadetteLoscio> bye, thanks

BernadetteLoscio: Pleasure to be here thanks for having us