IRC log of dwbp on 2016-03-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:57:00 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dwbp
07:57:00 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-irc
07:57:05 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #dwbp
07:57:26 [phila]
meeting: DWBP Face to Face, Zagreb, Day 1
07:57:37 [phila]
chair: Yaso & Deirdre
07:58:03 [phila]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/ZagrebF2F
07:58:13 [phila]
RRSAgent, make logs public
08:02:59 [annette_g]
annette_g has joined #dwbp
08:03:32 [ericstephan]
ericstephan has joined #dwbp
08:06:52 [Ig_Bittencourt]
Ig_Bittencourt has joined #DWBP
08:09:47 [ericstephan]
present+ ericstephan
08:09:56 [annette_g]
present+ annette_g
08:10:05 [hadleybeeman]
present+ hadleybeeman
08:11:04 [laufer]
laufer has joined #dwbp
08:11:20 [annette_g]
all the sound from zagreb went out
08:11:28 [ericstephan]
yes same for me
08:12:43 [zagreb]
zagreb has joined #dwbp
08:12:45 [annette_g]
*hi, Hadley and everybody!*
08:12:50 [ericstephan]
Hello
08:13:52 [hadleybeeman]
hmm... I wonder at what point we'll get someone's attention in the room. They'll have to look at IRC sooner or later, right? :)
08:15:01 [Ig_Bittencourt]
Hi hadleybeeman
08:15:19 [hadleybeeman]
hi Ig_Bittencourt !
08:15:36 [Ig_Bittencourt]
They are make some adjusts...
08:15:53 [hadleybeeman]
yeah, it does look like they are getting settled
08:16:13 [ericstephan]
yes
08:16:30 [laufer]
present+ laufer
08:16:50 [Ig_Bittencourt]
present+ Ig_Bittencourt
08:17:03 [laufer]
hi hadley
08:18:57 [annette_g]
*is Phil showing slides?*
08:19:52 [deirdrelee]
deirdrelee has joined #dwbp
08:20:02 [annette_g]
* hi Deirdre! *
08:20:32 [deirdrelee]
hi annette_g !
08:21:37 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
08:22:05 [annette_g]
* hi Newton! *
08:22:27 [PWinstanley]
PWinstanley has joined #dwbp
08:22:30 [hadleybeeman]
morning, laufer :)
08:22:35 [BernadetteLoscio]
BernadetteLoscio has joined #dwbp
08:22:37 [PWinstanley]
present+ PWinstanley
08:22:57 [BernadetteLoscio]
present+ BernadetteLoscio
08:23:04 [yaso]
yaso has joined #dwbp
08:23:10 [hannes]
hannes has joined #dwbp
08:23:37 [annette_g]
*01:00*
08:23:59 [ericstephan]
daylight's savings time started yesterday (an hour ahead)
08:24:13 [hadleybeeman]
wow -- to both of you
08:24:15 [deirdrelee]
chair: deirdrelee
08:24:16 [annette_g]
*yeah, that helps. My body thinks it's only midnight.*
08:24:25 [andras]
andras has joined #dwbp
08:24:28 [deirdrelee]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/ZagrebF2F
08:24:40 [cjh]
cjh has joined #dwbp
08:24:49 [ericstephan]
Hello Berna!
08:25:30 [annette_g]
*Hi Berna!
08:26:55 [Laci]
Laci has joined #Dwbp
08:27:17 [PWinstanley]
Introductions fro Share-PSI and DWBP
08:27:40 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
08:28:41 [deirdrelee]
topic: bp doc
08:28:44 [deirdrelee]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html
08:29:01 [ericstephan]
could you hear me?
08:29:12 [annette_g]
*I think I am hooked up. could you not hear me?*
08:29:31 [Caroline_]
Caroline_ has joined #DWBP
08:30:12 [pekka]
pekka has joined #dwbp
08:30:13 [ericstephan]
did you hear my intro? Eric Stephan Pacific Northwest National Labs USA Washington State
08:30:47 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: link to BP doc - we use github to track changes. last published version was 1 onth ago
08:30:55 [PWinstanley]
...tackle today the ost difficult issue
08:31:08 [PWinstanley]
...editors have created a teable of current issues and status
08:31:28 [PWinstanley]
...we need to complete these
08:31:35 [hadleybeeman]
https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/F2F_Zagreb_-_Agenda_Proposal_DWBP
08:32:00 [annette_g]
*dunno what the problem is. I tried reconnecting, too.*
08:32:06 [PWinstanley]
subsetting data and api have a couple of issues each, so skip these till later
08:32:17 [PWinstanley]
...let's deal with simpler issues first
08:32:24 [annette_g]
somebody needs to mute
08:33:20 [miskaknapek]
miskaknapek has joined #dwbp
08:33:27 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: first issues #246
08:33:31 [phila]
issue-246?
08:33:32 [trackbot]
issue-246 -- Find an alternative to make the Challenges' diagram bigger -- raised
08:33:32 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/246
08:33:35 [PWinstanley]
...challenges diagram
08:33:48 [deirdrelee]
w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#challenges
08:33:54 [deirdrelee]
q?
08:34:14 [PWinstanley]
...after chnging the aspect the diagram is difficult to read, can we make it more readable. Think we should keep, but it is not right size for reading at the moment
08:34:17 [davide_]
davide_ has joined #dwbp
08:34:47 [PWinstanley]
phila: answer is redesign and make more linear
08:34:52 [annette_g]
q+
08:34:57 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: let's do ... create action
08:36:04 [annette_g]
I was wondering if anyone other than me felt the diagram wasn't very helpful
08:36:06 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: it should be SVG
08:36:11 [newton]
q?
08:36:13 [phila]
action: burle to arrange redseign of the challenges diagram
08:36:13 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-243 - Arrange redseign of the challenges diagram [on Caroline Burle - due 2016-03-21].
08:36:23 [annette_g]
I typed it
08:36:29 [annette_g]
I can hear you
08:36:33 [Caroline_]
thank you! :)
08:36:38 [ericstephan]
audio is working fine
08:36:44 [annette_g]
I wondered if anyone other than me felt the diagram didn't add much
08:36:48 [phila]
deirdrelee: I think it is helpful
08:37:08 [Caroline_]
+1 to deirdrelee
08:37:24 [yaso]
q+
08:37:26 [deirdrelee]
anyone else have an issue with it?
08:37:28 [Ig_Bittencourt]
I also think it is useful. It is easy to navigate through challenges.
08:37:29 [deirdrelee]
ack annette_g
08:37:32 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1 to deirdrelee
08:37:44 [annette_g]
It repeats the index mostly
08:37:48 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: we had discussion recently about the document structure. we changed the place of the challenges and the benefits, we made links from challenges and benefits and I think the diagram is helpful as an index and to chunk information to assist understanding
08:38:05 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: I think it is a small issue
08:38:07 [annette_g]
If nobody else is bothered, I'm fine with it.
08:38:34 [annette_g]
+1 to yaso
08:38:35 [PWinstanley]
yaso: I think it is useful but should be in the use cases doc rather than the BP doc, and should have links
08:38:47 [deirdrelee]
q?
08:38:51 [PWinstanley]
...because it is redundant as an index in the BP doc
08:38:54 [deirdrelee]
ack yaso
08:39:11 [yaso]
q+
08:39:14 [yaso]
ack yaso
08:39:17 [phila]
q+ to talk about process and resources for a change
08:39:26 [deirdrelee]
ack yaso
08:39:28 [PWinstanley]
laufer: I prefer to keep it in the BP because the first doc was challenges and the link should be back from last doc to first
08:39:44 [Caroline_]
+1 to laufer
08:39:45 [deirdrelee]
axk phila
08:39:55 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1 to laufer
08:39:57 [phila]
ack me
08:39:57 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about process and resources for a change
08:40:06 [PWinstanley]
phila: if we move to the use case doc we can, but we need to repeat the publication cycle and this might be more administrative activity than people want
08:40:18 [annette_g]
no no, it's fine
08:40:47 [annette_g]
I can't hear anything now. :(
08:40:51 [Caroline_]
we hear a lot of sounds
08:41:10 [Caroline_]
now it is mute :) tks phila
08:41:11 [annette_g]
*better now*
08:41:17 [phila]
PROPOSED: Leave the Challenges diagram where is it, but redesign it
08:41:20 [Caroline_]
annette_g: can you hear us?
08:41:21 [newton]
+1
08:41:22 [laufer]
+1
08:41:25 [Caroline_]
+1
08:41:26 [PWinstanley]
+1
08:41:28 [annette_g]
+1
08:41:28 [deirdrelee]
+1
08:41:28 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
08:41:30 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
08:41:32 [ericstephan]
+1
08:41:34 [hadleybeeman]
+0
08:41:34 [yaso]
0
08:41:51 [yaso]
+0
08:41:58 [phila]
RESOLVED: Leave the Challenges diagram where is it, but redesign it
08:42:24 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: next issue: #245
08:42:25 [phila]
present+ phila
08:42:41 [newton]
close ISSUE-246
08:42:41 [trackbot]
Closed ISSUE-246.
08:42:57 [deirdrelee]
q?
08:43:09 [deirdrelee]
q+
08:43:13 [hadleybeeman]
q+
08:43:16 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: we were discussing about having a filter that could be used to select BP by benefit or by challenge
08:43:20 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
08:43:43 [PWinstanley]
...so a facet filtering would make it easier to find a BP
08:43:44 [annette_g]
cool idea as long as it doesn't add length to the doc.
08:44:00 [PWinstanley]
...we could use these for key word filtering
08:44:11 [PWinstanley]
...just a usability improvement for navigation
08:44:41 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: I think there is enough structure at the moment,
08:44:49 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
08:44:52 [deirdrelee]
ack hadleybeeman
08:45:22 [LivarB]
LivarB has joined #dwbp
08:45:42 [yaso]
q+
08:45:45 [PWinstanley]
hadleybeeman: I second that. I think the users of specs being developers in a hurry. rarely do people read from beginning to end, but if filtering makes it more simple then I'm in favour but otherwise I think it should be left
08:45:55 [hadleybeeman]
q?
08:45:56 [yaso]
ack yaso
08:45:57 [PWinstanley]
yaso: I agree with hadleybeeman
08:46:08 [phila]
present+ Chris_Harding_(The_Open_Group), Davide_Allavena_(POLITO), Diana_Šimić_(Uni_Zagreb), Hannes_Kiivet_(Estonia), miskaknapek_(Peter_Krantz), LivarB_(Difi), Pekka_Koponen_(Helsinki)
08:46:16 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: proposal not to filter
08:46:25 [Caroline_]
Present+ Caroline_
08:46:28 [phila]
PROPOSED: Not to filter BPs by challenges and benefits
08:46:36 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
08:46:38 [yaso]
+1
08:46:39 [laufer]
+1
08:46:40 [PWinstanley]
+1
08:46:41 [deirdrelee]
+1
08:46:42 [annette_g]
0
08:46:54 [annette_g]
just in the sidebar
08:47:11 [newton]
+0
08:47:14 [phila]
present+ Joseph_Azzopardi_(Malta)
08:47:24 [deirdrelee]
present+ deirdrelee
08:47:32 [deirdrelee]
q?
08:47:36 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: annette_g made a proposal to include in the proposal to improve the indexing, but this increases the complexity of numbering of the BPs
08:48:02 [BernadetteLoscio]
+0
08:48:04 [laufer]
q+
08:48:07 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: can we complete the earler issue
08:48:09 [annette_g]
The zero was for the filter
08:48:15 [annette_g]
I don't care if we have it or not
08:48:22 [newton]
@annette_g, we tried it, but it hasn't worked as we expected, because the respec has created a new level of numbering for each BP... for instance, in the 7.2 section, we had the 7.2.1 BP
08:48:29 [phila]
issue-245?
08:48:29 [trackbot]
issue-245 -- To include filters in the summary to sort BPs according to Benefits or Challenges -- raised
08:48:29 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/245
08:48:38 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
08:48:40 [annette_g]
I would like to see the BPs in the sidebar, so you can navigate to them easily
08:48:54 [PWinstanley]
laufer: i understand that we have a format problem, but we need a list of the BPs, we have the groups of the BP but we need a list of the names as they act as a key for the search
08:49:06 [ericstephan]
+1 to Laufer
08:49:15 [PWinstanley]
...I think that we have a format problem around the numbering,
08:49:21 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: we will come back to that
08:49:27 [hadleybeeman]
@phila, will respect let us do what annette_g is suggesting?
08:49:36 [hadleybeeman]
s/respect/ReSpec
08:49:36 [annette_g]
no, I don't want the filter
08:49:42 [Caroline_]
+0
08:49:43 [phila]
RESOLVED: Not to filter BPs by challenges and benefits
08:49:49 [phila]
q+
08:49:58 [newton]
close ISSUE-245
08:49:58 [trackbot]
Closed ISSUE-245.
08:50:02 [yaso]
I think it will be bad for the UX. Some of the BPs has huge names like " Use persistent URIs as identifiers of datasets"
08:50:06 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: can we close that issue
08:50:12 [phila]
ack me
08:50:22 [yaso]
The list will take almost half of the screen horizontally...
08:50:45 [PWinstanley]
phila: ReSpec assumes that it is organised by section, so if a BP is a section then it is numbered. ReSpec is there to help, not to contstrain
08:50:55 [Caroline_]
thank you for this explanation phila
08:50:56 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: issue #247
08:51:02 [phila]
issue-247?
08:51:02 [trackbot]
issue-247 -- How to test dataset discoverability? -- raised
08:51:02 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/247
08:51:32 [PWinstanley]
newton: there is a test 'how to test the automatic discoverability' . we don't know how to test
08:51:46 [yaso]
sure, deirdrelee
08:51:58 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: we say that user agents shoul dbe able to automatically discover the dataset. How do we test?
08:52:00 [ericstephan]
q+
08:52:03 [annette_g]
q+
08:52:14 [PWinstanley]
...this is BP #2
08:52:16 [deirdrelee]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#metadata
08:52:17 [phila]
ack e
08:52:31 [deirdrelee]
ack ericstephan
08:53:07 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: what is the definition of 'discover'? sometimes search and discovery can be synonymous, but to me they can also be different. What do we mean by 'discovery'?
08:53:14 [deirdrelee]
q+
08:53:16 [yaso]
+q
08:53:20 [laufer]
q+
08:53:39 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: I think the idea is synonymous in this case
08:54:17 [deirdrelee]
q?
08:54:41 [annette_g]
We're asking ourselves the wrong question. The BP is not about discoverability; it's about metadata. That's what you need to test.
08:54:42 [PWinstanley]
...testing is not clear ....
08:54:44 [ericstephan]
A search to me means, finding something over a known inventory of something. Discovery to me means I was looking for something and found this
08:55:15 [newton]
We need to test if the machine-readable metadata is there. Is that right, @annette_g?
08:55:19 [annette_g]
"check that metadata is included with the dataset"
08:55:22 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
08:55:23 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: from what annette_g says, the test is to see if descriptive metadata is provided or not
08:55:23 [ericstephan]
that makes more sense annette_g
08:55:45 [annette_g]
discoverability is a "benefit", not a BP
08:56:18 [deirdrelee]
ack annette_g
08:56:22 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
08:56:23 [ericstephan]
using schema.org and publishing metadata to commericial search engines is an example of discoverable metadata to me
08:56:41 [deirdrelee]
+1 to annette_g
08:56:47 [deirdrelee]
ack yaso
08:56:51 [hadleybeeman]
q+
08:57:04 [BernadetteLoscio]
q-
08:57:07 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
08:57:22 [annette_g]
we could identify some descriptive metadata fields that all datasets should have and tell people to grep for them.
08:57:25 [PWinstanley]
yaso: i would be looking to read documentation or use a crawler to look for semantic references if I was looking for datasetts. this is linked to the enrichment BP. enrichment can improve discoverability
08:57:35 [deirdrelee]
q+
08:57:41 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
08:57:44 [newton]
@annette_g did you see the test of BP1? I think it would be quite the same for the BP2...
08:58:24 [ericstephan]
rdesc one of our use cases shows an example of discoverable metadata as provided in rdfa embedded in a html doc https://rdesc.org/metadata.php?uri=http://rdesc.org/arm/datastream/sgpswatsE25.b1
08:58:46 [annette_g]
@newton, it's just more specific
08:58:51 [phila]
q+ PWinstanley
08:59:17 [PWinstanley]
laufer: I agree with annette_g that the BP is about providing descriptive metadata. If we have a standard way to describe then we have an approach to metadata
08:59:51 [PWinstanley]
hadleybeeman: I don't think data catalogues are scalable. This is imortant to help us get away from data catalogues
09:00:09 [PWinstanley]
...i think it is useful for people using our spec to think about this
09:00:44 [PWinstanley]
...it might be an area to focus on, this metadata might be a way of helping people move away from discoverability portals
09:01:00 [phila]
q+ to talk about merged tests
09:01:05 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:01:06 [phila]
ack h
09:01:06 [PWinstanley]
...I think discoverability should be part of the description, but the test should be on the metadata
09:01:14 [yaso]
* The scribes list is open * https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/ZagrebF2F#Scribing
09:01:36 [annette_g]
Just tell people to do: cat mydataset | grep "title"
09:01:58 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: maybe what we can do is to say that humans and user agents shouldbe able to find the datasets, but in the test we remove the machine discoverability test.
09:02:16 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
09:02:21 [PWinstanley]
hadleybeeman: add search engines as I see them as prozy for users
09:02:32 [phila]
s/prozy/proxy/
09:02:53 [deirdrelee]
PWinstanley: is there anything that we can pick up from the VID vocabulary,
09:03:08 [newton]
q?
09:03:09 [hadleybeeman]
s/search engines as I see them as a proxy for users/search engines as I don't think of them as user agents. I generally think of browsers as user agents
09:03:15 [deirdrelee]
... important thing is not just the discoverability of the datasets, but the relationships as well
09:03:19 [deirdrelee]
s/vid/void
09:03:28 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:03:33 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
09:03:35 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
09:03:37 [deirdrelee]
ack PWinstanley
09:03:39 [deirdrelee]
ack phila
09:03:39 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about merged tests
09:03:40 [annette_g]
2 is more specific, has to be discovery metadata
09:03:43 [laufer]
q+
09:04:01 [yaso]
+1 to phila
09:04:02 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
09:04:04 [deirdrelee]
q+
09:04:12 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
09:04:13 [PWinstanley]
phila: I was looking at the tests for 1st and 2nd, and they are the same, so why don't we just say see above or see below. If we need to merge tests for multiple Ps then we just do that
09:04:32 [newton]
s/Ps/BPs
09:04:42 [BernadetteLoscio]
q-
09:04:45 [PWinstanley]
laufer: I think the answer to phila is to provide metadata for people and machines.
09:05:03 [newton]
maybe the test section could be "Check that the metadata, both human-readable and machine-readable, for the dataset itself includes the overall features of the dataset."
09:05:05 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
09:05:11 [annette_g]
Grep can do exactly what we need. cat mydataset | grep "keywords"; cat mydataset | grep "description"
09:05:17 [phila]
laufer: The secomnd is a specialisation of the first, so it inherits the tests
09:05:28 [PWinstanley]
...so the 1st BP you have to test that all metadata is provided both for humans and machines
09:05:31 [phila]
s/secomnd/second
09:05:33 [newton]
very similar of the BP1
09:05:41 [PWinstanley]
...the second is a specialisation
09:06:41 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: the tests that are there are fine, the text of the BP might be updated - hadleybeeman -
09:07:10 [annette_g]
q+
09:07:11 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio:i think we should remove the second test, because it is not clear how to do
09:07:20 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
09:07:22 [PWinstanley]
...so the proposal is to remove the second test
09:07:22 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
09:07:37 [PWinstanley]
...and should we change the intended outcome to remove the second part
09:07:39 [phila]
PROPOSED: Remove second line in BP How to Test which currently says: "Check that the metadata for the dataset itself includes the overall features of the dataset.
09:07:39 [phila]
Check if a user agent can automatically discover the dataset."
09:08:04 [PWinstanley]
....We need to test if the intended outcome can be reached, because if we need to test it needs to be removed from the intended outcome
09:08:19 [yaso]
q+
09:08:20 [annette_g]
All the metadata BPs will have the same issue unless we come up with specific tests for each type of metadata. It can be done with grep or some other search utility
09:08:25 [yaso]
q-
09:09:00 [laufer]
q+
09:09:16 [annette_g]
I don't understand the proposal to remove a line
09:09:19 [annette_g]
sorry
09:09:47 [annette_g]
ah, yes, that makes sense
09:09:50 [phila]
ack l
09:09:52 [newton]
@phila, could you rewrite the proposal?
09:09:53 [phila]
ack a
09:10:00 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: BernadetteLoscio is suggesting that we only keep that the metadata includes the overall features of the dataset
09:10:07 [annette_g]
we could add a machine test, though, if we wanted.
09:10:49 [phila]
+1 to laufer
09:10:53 [newton]
we suggest the test become only one: “Check if the metadata, both human and machine-readable, for the dataset itself includes the overall features of the dataset.”
09:11:08 [phila]
I see what you mean, annette_g
09:11:13 [PWinstanley]
laufer: if we remove then we need to change the intended outcome. We cannot guarantee human interpretation, we cannot say that 'humans should be able', agents should receive enough information to be able to .
09:11:15 [yaso]
"automatic discoverability should be available"?
09:11:15 [phila]
PROPOSED: Remove the line "Check if a user agent can automatically discover the dataset." from the How to Test section of BP
09:11:27 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: propsal to remove the second line of the test
09:11:32 [phila]
PROPOSED: Remove the line "Check if a user agent can automatically discover the dataset." from the How to Test section of BP and update the Intended Outcome section to match
09:11:35 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:11:50 [phila]
PROPOSED: Remove the line "Check if a user agent can automatically discover the dataset." from the How to Test section of BP 2 and update the Intended Outcome section to match
09:11:58 [newton]
+1
09:11:59 [deirdrelee]
+1
09:12:00 [PWinstanley]
+1
09:12:00 [phila]
+1
09:12:01 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
09:12:01 [Caroline_]
+1
09:12:01 [laufer]
+1
09:12:02 [hadleybeeman]
q+
09:12:02 [ericstephan]
+1
09:12:04 [annette_g]
+1
09:12:05 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
09:12:07 [phila]
ack h
09:12:39 [deirdrelee]
q+
09:12:40 [yaso]
q+
09:12:48 [PWinstanley]
hadleybeeman: I can see wbout the testable / not testable, but removing checking the outcome have we not just removed the BP
09:13:08 [phila]
q+ to talk about user agent abilities
09:13:10 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: it will still be included, but not tied so closely to the user agent
09:13:14 [hadleybeeman]
+1
09:13:17 [PWinstanley]
hadleybeeman: ok, I'm happy
09:13:21 [yaso]
q-
09:13:22 [phila]
q-
09:13:35 [newton]
close ISSUE-247
09:13:35 [trackbot]
Closed ISSUE-247.
09:13:35 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: close issue and create action
09:13:39 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
09:13:58 [phila]
issue-161?
09:13:58 [trackbot]
issue-161 -- Whether we should recommend https by default, rather than http -- open
09:13:58 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/161
09:13:59 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: issue #161
09:14:09 [annette_g]
q+
09:14:20 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: this is not in the document, it's an old one
09:14:23 [hadleybeeman]
q+
09:14:26 [annette_g]
I am totally on board with "http everywhere", but it's not specific to data
09:14:29 [newton]
action newton to remove the 2nd line of test section and rewrite the intended outcome of the BP2 Provide Descriptive Metadata
09:14:29 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-244 - Remove the 2nd line of test section and rewrite the intended outcome of the bp2 provide descriptive metadata [on Newton Calegari - due 2016-03-21].
09:14:54 [deirdrelee]
ack annette_g
09:15:21 [PWinstanley]
hadleybeeman: I think this is out of scope - it is being dealt with elsewhere --- see these two docs from the TAG
09:15:24 [hadleybeeman]
https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/encryption-finding/ https://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/web-https
09:15:25 [phila]
RESOLVED: Remove the line "Check if a user agent can automatically discover the dataset." from the How to Test section of BP 2 and update the Intended Outcome section to match
09:15:30 [annette_g]
it will happen anyway, because of http2, IMO
09:15:41 [phila]
+1 to Hadley - thank you
09:16:01 [phila]
close issue-161
09:16:01 [trackbot]
Closed issue-161.
09:16:05 [phila]
issue-167?
09:16:05 [trackbot]
issue-167 -- DCAT lacking in date, time and number formats -- open
09:16:05 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/167
09:16:08 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: #167
09:16:13 [phila]
q+
09:16:17 [hadleybeeman]
ack me
09:16:17 [PWinstanley]
DCAT lacking in datetime formats
09:16:20 [newton]
q+
09:16:31 [deirdrelee]
q+
09:16:37 [deirdrelee]
ack phila
09:17:03 [davide__]
davide__ has joined #dwbp
09:17:11 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:17:13 [PWinstanley]
phila: DCAT lacks a lot of things and I am hopeful that there will be a new WG to review. Workshop in Ghent later this year?
09:17:19 [PWinstanley]
...it should happen soon
09:17:49 [deirdrelee]
ack newton
09:18:01 [ericstephan]
q+
09:18:11 [PWinstanley]
newton: What should we suggest to describe date / time
09:18:39 [ericstephan]
q-
09:19:00 [davide__]
davide__ has left #dwbp
09:19:01 [phila]
q+ to talk about date/time formats
09:19:05 [ericstephan]
https://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime
09:19:21 [Ig_Bittencourt]
q+
09:19:27 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: we have the machine readable descrption of the dataset and the date format - we can use DCT but we don't know a vocabulary that has formats for date and time
09:19:55 [phila]
ack d
09:20:02 [phila]
q-
09:20:09 [phila]
+1 to Dee
09:20:22 [deirdrelee]
ack Ig_Bittencourt
09:20:32 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: are we talking about a data dictionary? DCAT has scope for useing 8601, we can just use this for the time being and await the output of the DCAT review group
09:20:45 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:21:19 [phila]
q+
09:21:30 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: it is ok for BP 3 if we don't show the other properties, just the language. On the intended outcome we talk about date, time, numbers
09:21:32 [annette_g]
q+
09:21:37 [hadleybeeman]
q?
09:22:16 [PWinstanley]
phila: it is all about the standard that the content conforms to
09:22:19 [hadleybeeman]
I agree it looks a bit awkward to not have date, etc in the example
09:22:27 [phila]
q-
09:22:31 [PWinstanley]
q+
09:22:40 [annette_g]
This seems very parallel to the locale parameters, which we felt was wroth its own BP. I feel like we might as well add one for datatime. DCAT is too many hops away.
09:22:53 [annette_g]
yes
09:22:59 [annette_g]
sure
09:23:03 [annette_g]
what the heck
09:23:12 [annette_g]
exactly
09:23:21 [hadleybeeman]
I'm confused... why?
09:23:27 [annette_g]
Use ISO-8639 for data and time values
09:24:28 [annette_g]
In this case, I'm not sure flexibility is helpful.
09:25:05 [ericstephan]
q+
09:25:06 [phila]
I don't think a sepcific new BP is necessary - a tightened up version of what we have seems right to me
09:25:07 [hadleybeeman]
With all due respect, I'm not sure specificity is helpful either. We want dates to be discoverable and comparable; we don't need them to be conformant to ISO-8639
09:25:36 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: proposal is not to be specific about date time etc, as it will be resolved with the DCAT review. use conformsTo to link to other standards
09:25:40 [yaso]
q?
09:25:40 [annette_g]
is you try to compare with another standard, you get errors
09:25:48 [deirdrelee]
ack annette_g
09:25:49 [annette_g]
s/is/if
09:25:52 [deirdrelee]
ack PWinstanley
09:25:59 [deirdrelee]
ack ericstephan
09:25:59 [laufer]
q+
09:26:10 [hadleybeeman]
Right, annette_g, but if both datasets use another standard... then they're consistent with each other.
09:26:22 [annette_g]
what other standard is there???
09:26:35 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: a way around this is that data publishers can insist on a data format that they choose. Date times might be published in epoch format, other times in other formats
09:26:36 [deirdrelee]
acl laufer
09:26:51 [newton]
q?
09:26:54 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
09:27:03 [deirdrelee]
issue-167
09:27:03 [trackbot]
issue-167 -- DCAT lacking in date, time and number formats -- open
09:27:03 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/167
09:27:05 [newton]
q+
09:27:24 [PWinstanley]
laufer: do we need a new BP? we don't need to recommend any standard, we need to talk about standards later. recommending standards is a rule-of-thumb, we don't need to be specific
09:27:26 [ericstephan]
its not about standards, its more about micro format consistency to me
09:27:30 [deirdrelee]
ack newton
09:27:34 [phila]
There's that horrible month/day/year thing, annette_g ;-) Joking aside, it's obviously common in datasets
09:27:34 [annette_g]
https://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime
09:27:44 [PWinstanley]
newton: we are not recommending a standard, we are looking for a term
09:28:16 [phila]
q+
09:28:28 [PWinstanley]
laufer: this is an example, in future someone could define some new useful vocabulary. we are not describing how to define the standard, just recommending that a standard be used
09:28:37 [annette_g]
https://xkcd.com/1179/
09:28:50 [hadleybeeman]
(Amused to note that we've been arguing about ISO 8639:2000 - Glass-reinforced thermosetting plastics :) I think we meant ISO 8601)
09:28:53 [deirdrelee]
ack phila
09:28:57 [PWinstanley]
phila: I think we are talking about being able to handle nuancesof the formats that are used for data formats
09:29:19 [newton]
close ISSUE-167
09:29:19 [trackbot]
Closed ISSUE-167.
09:29:21 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: proposal to use 'conforms to'
09:29:22 [laufer]
q+
09:29:24 [annette_g]
no vote??
09:29:26 [phila]
PROPOSED: For BP3, just use conformsTo and leave it at that. Close issue 167
09:29:30 [hadleybeeman]
+1
09:29:42 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
09:29:44 [newton]
+1
09:29:55 [Caroline_]
+1
09:30:05 [annette_g]
is this vote about the datetime format?
09:30:16 [phila]
s/conformsTo/dcterms:conformsTo/
09:30:32 [phila]
This is about how we say which date time format has been used
09:30:41 [PWinstanley]
laufer: a general comment: i think we are recommending things here where we don't have vocabularies. some terms that we don't have vocabularies to describe, it's just a placemarker for vocabulaires that might need to be developed
09:30:48 [yaso]
+1
09:30:49 [annette_g]
-1
09:30:52 [deirdrelee]
+1
09:30:55 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
09:30:56 [PWinstanley]
-0
09:31:08 [newton]
it's not the format of the value itsel, it's about the specific property
09:31:32 [annette_g]
q+
09:31:45 [newton]
s/itsel/itself
09:31:49 [laufer]
+1
09:31:51 [PWinstanley]
+1
09:31:54 [annette_g]
I think data and time are an exception to the typical case.
09:31:55 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
09:32:06 [phila]
PWinstanley: I'm happy if the example shows how to use dcterms:conformsTo (for e.g. to point to ISO8601)
09:32:20 [ericstephan]
+1
09:32:20 [annette_g]
There is an agreed-upon standard with virtually no competition.
09:32:31 [BernadetteLoscio]
yes Peter! that's the idea
09:32:36 [phila]
Yes, annette_g, that's not the issue. It's how we show that it has been used
09:32:38 [annette_g]
It's important enough for xkcd comics
09:32:46 [annette_g]
!!
09:32:59 [phila]
XKCD927 is scorsched on my mind
09:33:14 [annette_g]
yes
09:33:24 [annette_g]
hey, I"m getting fast at it
09:34:34 [yaso]
scribe: yaso
09:34:36 [laufer]
q+
09:34:39 [PWinstanley]
phila: if we are creating datasets like annette_g works with the ISO8601 then that's clear, but if local authorities are using their own format, how do they tell people the format that they are using?
09:34:41 [deirdrelee]
q+
09:35:00 [PWinstanley]
...there isn't a vocab for anything other than 8601
09:35:04 [hadleybeeman]
Annette_g, I don't doubt your capacity to write this. :) But I'm not convinced we've done the use case research to be sure that EVERY LAST instance of publication of data on the Web -- should use ISO 8601
09:35:09 [PWinstanley]
...we need a way to describe this
09:35:11 [annette_g]
Hm, that makes sense. So, maybe you figure that saying to use 8601 is out of scope because it's about building the original dataset, not publishing it.
09:35:30 [annette_g]
I'm okay with leaving a new BP out now. Thanks Phil!
09:35:33 [phila]
I guess so annette_g, yes
09:36:17 [annette_g]
+1 to Laufer, it is not a metadata issue
09:36:33 [yaso]
laufer: if we assume that everyone is using the same standard, we need to talk about the metadata. If all people use, is not a standard anymore, we don't need to talk about this
09:36:36 [ericstephan]
1457948104 is epoch, I want a way to tell people this number means something. Julian date is another example meteorologists use
09:37:06 [phila]
PROPOSED: For BP3, just use conformsTo and leave it at that. Close issue 167
09:37:11 [annette_g]
+1
09:37:12 [yaso]
+1
09:37:13 [newton]
+1
09:37:13 [ericstephan]
+1
09:37:14 [deirdrelee]
+1
09:37:15 [hadleybeeman]
+1
09:37:18 [phila]
+1
09:37:18 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
09:37:18 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
09:37:19 [PWinstanley]
+1
09:37:23 [laufer]
I am just illustrating. I think we have to tell what standard is being used
09:37:31 [laufer]
+1
09:37:35 [phila]
RESOLVED: For BP3, just use conformsTo and leave it at that. Close issue 167
09:37:40 [phila]
close issue-167
09:37:40 [trackbot]
Closed issue-167.
09:37:54 [phila]
issue-195?
09:37:54 [trackbot]
issue-195 -- Provide data up to date -- open
09:37:54 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/195
09:37:54 [yaso]
deirdrelee: so, next is issue-195
09:37:59 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:37:59 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
09:38:10 [yaso]
BernadetteLoscio: it's about BP 24, raised by annette_g
09:38:22 [phila]
RRSAgent, make logs public
09:38:26 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:38:26 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
09:38:27 [annette_g]
so old, I don't remember what the issue was
09:38:31 [yaso]
... from june 2015
09:38:32 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:38:36 [deirdrelee]
ack annette_g
09:38:42 [laufer]
q-
09:38:42 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
09:38:47 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
09:39:03 [annette_g]
yes
09:39:15 [yaso]
issue-203
09:39:15 [trackbot]
issue-203 -- Status of UK URI design guidelines -- open
09:39:15 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/203
09:39:36 [annette_g]
Here's my original note: Provide data up to date
09:39:36 [annette_g]
* I think this needs editing. It’s difficult to understand the actual requirement. At times it sounds like we are saying all data should be published immediately, which is impractical for many publishers. I think the goal should be to adhere to a published schedule for updates.
09:39:50 [annette_g]
It may have been rewritten since then
09:40:10 [yaso]
phila: BP 11
09:40:56 [deirdrelee]
q+
09:41:07 [yaso]
... years ago, (?) wrote a pdf about URI design, very useful. there's another version of the doc, on a github repo
09:41:19 [annette_g]
I think BP24 is okay now, that can be closed.
09:41:25 [yaso]
... github repo is not persistent necessarily
09:41:38 [yaso]
... so I don't know how to solve that
09:41:51 [yaso]
.. temptation to leave it as it is, but I don't know
09:42:04 [yaso]
hadleybeeman: I'm looking at the BP now, don't see any references
09:42:07 [phila]
It's in the table above the issue
09:42:30 [yaso]
... i think that there's some useful stuff in that guide but is not persistent
09:42:46 [yaso]
... this doc should be economical on references
09:43:11 [yaso]
deirdrelee: could we invite them to add a note?
09:43:45 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
09:44:21 [annette_g]
*lol*
09:44:28 [yaso]
phila: unofficially, is a doc at my website. There's 2 places on the web that has the doc on persistence, one is w3.org, other is my personal website
09:44:42 [yaso]
... is the heritage that I'll leave for my son
09:44:48 [annette_g]
*this is all so ironic*
09:45:26 [yaso]
... so hadleybeeman how about we link to Github doc and say at the doc that is not normative
09:46:01 [yaso]
deirdrelee: so the proposal is to link to the doc at github
09:46:02 [phila]
PROPOSED: To link to the PDF (as now) and provide a link to the GH repo in BP11
09:46:07 [yaso]
+1
09:46:08 [deirdrelee]
+1
09:46:11 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
09:46:13 [ericstephan]
+1
09:46:14 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
09:46:14 [Caroline_]
+1
09:46:16 [laufer]
+1
09:46:16 [phila]
+1
09:46:24 [annette_g]
+1
09:46:32 [hadleybeeman]
+0
09:46:35 [phila]
RESOLVED: To link to the PDF (as now) and provide a link to the GH repo in BP11
09:47:38 [yaso]
hadleybeeman: we don need to care about intellectual property here, right?
09:47:52 [yaso]
phila: is not a normative thing.
09:48:26 [yaso]
phila: we are not, in any way, affecting the BP pointing to that
09:48:47 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:49:07 [yaso]
... I think we can link to that pdf because it is to what people point, it's well done, on github, perfectly readable
09:49:17 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
09:49:44 [phila]
action: phila to update BP 11 table to link to the PDF and the GH update.
09:49:44 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-245 - Update bp 11 table to link to the pdf and the gh update. [on Phil Archer - due 2016-03-21].
09:50:01 [yaso]
hadleybeeman: I think we should explain more clearly that is not normative
09:50:12 [yaso]
deirdrelee: can we just use them as references?
09:50:59 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:51:45 [yaso]
phila: I don't think that I could make it any more suscint
09:51:49 [newton]
close ISSUE-203
09:51:49 [trackbot]
Closed ISSUE-203.
09:53:26 [yaso]
sping newton
09:53:52 [yaso]
(sorry newton, hexchat problems)
09:54:09 [annette_g]
I think Hadley is making sense
09:54:12 [yaso]
deirdrelee: any comments?
09:54:39 [yaso]
phila: i can do it, bu need examples
09:54:51 [yaso]
deirdrelee: hadleybeeman would you do that?
09:54:53 [phila]
close action-245
09:54:53 [trackbot]
Closed action-245.
09:55:22 [phila]
action: hadley to rewrite BP11, in particular the way the external refs are included
09:55:22 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-246 - Rewrite bp11, in particular the way the external refs are included [on Hadley Beeman - due 2016-03-21].
09:55:38 [phila]
issue-226?
09:55:38 [trackbot]
issue-226 -- Should we remove the Reuse benefit? -- open
09:55:38 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/226
09:56:05 [yaso]
deirdrelee: reuse is all of them, should we just remove?
09:56:28 [yaso]
... maybe we can just update the diagram to reuse in the green box
09:56:29 [deirdrelee]
q?
09:56:42 [annette_g]
+1 to deirdrelee
09:56:57 [phila]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#bp-benefit
09:57:02 [phila]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#bp-benefits
09:57:11 [phila]
q+
09:57:26 [Ig_Bittencourt]
q+
09:57:45 [deirdrelee]
ack phila
09:58:15 [yaso]
phila: what concerns me is that if we follow Dee's suggestion, we will repeat what is already there
09:58:19 [annette_g]
q+
09:58:30 [yaso]
... if the groups wants me to do it, I'm happy to do that
09:58:39 [annette_g]
q-
09:59:07 [yaso]
BernadetteLoscio: it's just one update in the diagram
09:59:14 [deirdrelee]
ack Ig_Bittencourt
09:59:24 [Caroline_]
q+
09:59:30 [yaso]
deirdrelee: I suggest not removing it
10:00:06 [yaso]
Caroline_: we will keep the table, so the simple will be there, but we will keep it in the general table
10:00:19 [phila]
PROPOSED: The Green reuse box will simply say: "All BPs" (and not include the list). This will be above the other smaller boxes/lists. (and close issue226)
10:00:24 [annette_g]
+1
10:00:26 [yaso]
+1
10:00:32 [Caroline_]
+1
10:00:37 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:00:43 [deirdrelee]
ack Caroline_
10:01:12 [yaso]
laufer: I agree that all the things provide a kind of reason to be reused, but I think that we can remove the reuse from the list
10:01:19 [Caroline_]
q+
10:01:38 [yaso]
... maybe one will reuse because trusts the data, because is readable, etc
10:01:46 [yaso]
... so reuse its a consequence
10:02:06 [yaso]
Caroline_: for example, for same BP the only benefit is reuse
10:02:39 [yaso]
laufer: reuse is in all of our best practices
10:02:42 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:02:45 [deirdrelee]
ack Caroline_
10:02:46 [yaso]
Caroline_: yes, that's the point
10:02:55 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:02:56 [yaso]
... you'll see that all of them have reuse
10:03:03 [yaso]
... but some of them only have reuse
10:03:06 [deirdrelee]
q+
10:03:17 [annette_g]
Is there an *ility that applies to the ones that only list reuse?
10:03:25 [yaso]
laufer: I think that where there's only reuse, it because something is missing
10:03:48 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:03:59 [yaso]
... when you only have the reuse, the reason is missing
10:04:14 [yaso]
+1 to laufer about something is missing
10:04:16 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1 to Deirdre
10:04:32 [yaso]
deirdrelee: I think that for a BP doc there is no problem to be redundant
10:04:37 [phila]
PROPOSED: The Green reuse box will simply say: "All BPs" (and not include the list). This will be above the other smaller boxes/lists. (and close issue226)
10:04:43 [deirdrelee]
+1
10:04:46 [annette_g]
+1
10:04:47 [hadleybeeman]
+1
10:04:48 [laufer]
+1
10:04:48 [phila]
+1
10:04:48 [Caroline_]
+1
10:04:50 [PWinstanley]
+1
10:04:51 [newton]
+1
10:04:53 [ericstephan]
+1
10:04:59 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
10:04:59 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
10:05:04 [yaso]
+1 but with laufer's observations that those BPs that has only reuse should be carefully reviewed
10:05:07 [phila]
RESOLVED: The Green reuse box will simply say: "All BPs" (and not include the list). This will be above the other smaller boxes/lists. (and close issue226)
10:05:14 [newton]
close issue-226
10:05:14 [trackbot]
Closed issue-226.
10:05:20 [annette_g]
I have to go to sleep
10:05:29 [hadleybeeman]
sleep well, annette_g :)
10:05:42 [ericstephan]
dream new bps
10:05:50 [ericstephan]
ok
10:05:54 [annette_g]
did people see that the issue on real-time access can be closed?
10:05:57 [ericstephan]
:-)
10:06:29 [annette_g]
I should say "data up-to-date"
10:06:37 [annette_g]
night!
10:06:45 [hadleybeeman]
:)
10:06:55 [annette_g]
3
10:07:25 [annette_g]
I have to sleep now, can discuss tomorrow
10:07:31 [Caroline_]
have a good night!
10:07:34 [annette_g]
great
10:07:50 [yaso]
the linkk for the scribe list https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/ZagrebF2F#Scribing
10:07:52 [phila]
Thank you annette_g for sticking with us so late tonight
10:08:02 [annette_g]
np
10:08:06 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
10:08:06 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
10:24:34 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
10:35:07 [ericstephan]
are you having nice weather there?
10:35:25 [ericstephan]
yes
10:35:42 [ericstephan]
yes, that is correct
10:35:44 [ericstephan]
:-)
10:36:10 [yaso]
yaso has joined #dwbp
10:36:15 [livarb]
livarb has joined #dwbp
10:36:30 [deirdrelee]
we're back
10:37:02 [yaso]
present+ yaso
10:37:07 [miskaknapek]
miskaknapek has joined #dwbp
10:37:20 [Caroline_]
Caroline_ has joined #DWBP
10:37:24 [Caroline_]
Issue 229
10:37:25 [phila]
issue-229
10:37:25 [trackbot]
issue-229 -- Review requirements x BP -- open
10:37:25 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/229
10:37:39 [PWinstanley]
PWinstanley has joined #dwbp
10:37:44 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:37:48 [phila]
Not all Reqs are matched to BPs
10:37:55 [riccardoAlbertoni]
riccardoAlbertoni has joined #DWBP
10:38:05 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: review the use case requirements
10:38:17 [Caroline_]
... and see if they match the BPs
10:38:48 [Caroline_]
bernadette: we have requirements that there are no BPs for them
10:39:16 [Caroline_]
... we removed the BP about creating vocabularies
10:39:19 [phila]
q+
10:39:56 [Caroline_]
... in this case we have a requirement without a BP, but that is because we realized it would be out of scope
10:40:19 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: we dont'have to address all requirements
10:40:43 [Caroline_]
... I will go to trough the requirements and check if there is some that we nedd to address
10:40:48 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
10:40:49 [deirdrelee]
ack phila
10:41:05 [Caroline_]
phila: you could add a section to the Use Cases Documents
10:41:11 [Caroline_]
... and link to the BP
10:41:37 [phila]
q-
10:41:49 [Caroline_]
Issue-229 closed
10:41:49 [trackbot]
Closed Issue-229.
10:42:12 [phila]
action: deirdrelee to fill in the blanks in table at http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#requirements
10:42:12 [trackbot]
Error finding 'deirdrelee'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
10:42:20 [Caroline_]
issue-239
10:42:20 [trackbot]
issue-239 -- machine-readable standardized data formats - serialization data formats - dataset formats -- open
10:42:20 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/239
10:42:25 [phila]
action: lee to fill in the blanks in table at http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#requirements
10:42:25 [trackbot]
'lee' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., dlee8, klee5).
10:42:36 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
10:42:37 [phila]
action: deirdre to fill in the blanks in table at http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#requirements
10:42:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-247 - Fill in the blanks in table at http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#requirements [on Deirdre Lee - due 2016-03-21].
10:42:45 [Caroline_]
laufer: I was reviewing the data format BP
10:42:49 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:43:00 [Caroline_]
... there is a BP to provide the dataset in a standardized data format
10:43:11 [deirdrelee]
Best Practice 14: Use machine-readable standardized data formats
10:43:18 [diana]
diana has left #dwbp
10:43:19 [Caroline_]
... we use the term standards and formats as if would be only one level of standard
10:43:27 [pekka]
pekka has joined #dwbp
10:43:29 [Caroline_]
... we could call serialization standard data format
10:43:48 [Caroline_]
... we are not talking about a dataset of schema
10:43:54 [hannes]
hannes has joined #dwbp
10:43:58 [phila]
q+ to talk about profiles
10:43:58 [Caroline_]
... we have another level of format in this document
10:44:06 [Caroline_]
... I think this not appear only in this BP
10:44:15 [BernadetteLoscio]
BernadetteLoscio has joined #dwbp
10:44:20 [Caroline_]
... it is a thing that cross all the documents
10:44:28 [BernadetteLoscio]
present+ BernadetteLoscio
10:44:47 [Caroline_]
... I talked with the editors and we decided to include a paragraph in the introduction
10:45:12 [Caroline_]
... the 1st phrase is "A general best practice to publish Data on the Web is to use standards."
10:45:24 [newton]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#intro (5th paragraph)
10:45:27 [Caroline_]
... the following phrases are in the introduction
10:45:53 [deirdrelee]
paragraph included in introduction: http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#intro
10:45:55 [Caroline_]
... this paragraph says that we are talking about standards
10:46:02 [Caroline_]
q+
10:46:09 [Caroline_]
q-
10:46:22 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:46:26 [deirdrelee]
ack phila
10:46:26 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about profiles
10:46:29 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
10:46:43 [Caroline_]
phila: the idea of it is not a XML it is a XML schema
10:47:12 [ericstephan]
q+
10:47:15 [Caroline_]
... ??? phila please help to complete what you said
10:47:35 [Caroline_]
laufer: phila could you add that in the paragraph that I wrote?
10:47:55 [Caroline_]
phila: we think this other level will be there
10:48:15 [phila]
scribe: Caroline_
10:48:40 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: laufer was talking about the libary standard
10:48:56 [Caroline_]
phila: we don't have yet
10:49:03 [deirdrelee]
ack ericstephan
10:49:17 [ericstephan]
http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/software/netcdf/conventions.html
10:49:34 [Caroline_]
ericstephan: the unidata use a convention
10:49:53 [Caroline_]
... you hace a lot of different people with different approaches
10:50:00 [Caroline_]
... just to let you know
10:50:02 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:50:19 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: should we accept the paragraph or not
10:50:26 [Caroline_]
... it is in the current version
10:50:40 [Caroline_]
laufer: it is to accept the idea in the paragraph
10:50:54 [Caroline_]
this is the paragraph: A general best practice to publish Data on the Web is to use standards. Different types of organizations specify standards that are specific to the publishing of datasets related to particular domains/applications, involving communities of users interested in that data. These standards define a common way of communicating information among the users of these communities. For example, publishing of timetables have two standards, the[CUT]
10:51:35 [newton]
Caroline_: it's the 5th paragraph in the introduction
10:51:47 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: can we close this issue?
10:53:23 [Caroline_]
close issue-239
10:53:23 [trackbot]
Closed issue-239.
10:53:38 [phila]
issue-240?
10:53:38 [trackbot]
issue-240 -- To consider a new bp around numeric accuracy. comes from sdw's concern about useless extra decmimal places -- open
10:53:38 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/240
10:53:39 [Caroline_]
issue-240
10:53:39 [trackbot]
issue-240 -- To consider a new bp around numeric accuracy. comes from sdw's concern about useless extra decmimal places -- open
10:53:39 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/240
10:54:01 [Caroline_]
laufer: I think this is in the paragraph that I wrote
10:54:21 [deirdrelee]
q?
10:54:22 [Caroline_]
phila: the issue came up in the spacial data on the web WG
10:54:41 [Caroline_]
... one of their issues is the size o data
10:54:42 [ericstephan]
+1 phila
10:55:18 [Caroline_]
... the diference betweeen precision and accuracy
10:55:46 [Caroline_]
... if it says I was born on 19 February
10:55:51 [Caroline_]
... it is accuracy
10:56:14 [Caroline_]
... if it says I was born on 19 February of 1963 at 12pm it is precise
10:56:22 [Caroline_]
q+
10:56:27 [hadleybeeman]
+1 to phila: This is a useful distinction
10:56:36 [laufer]
q+
10:56:49 [deirdrelee]
ack Caroline_
10:57:06 [newton]
Caroline_: if you @phil could do that BP would be nice.
10:57:23 [newton]
... yestarday we reviewed some BPs and this subject came up in our discussion
10:57:25 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
10:57:36 [Caroline_]
laufer: I don't agree with this new BP
10:57:41 [newton]
s/yestarday/yesterday/g
10:57:44 [phila]
action: phila to write a BP around accuracy and precision, the pitfalls of false accuracy etc.
10:57:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-248 - Write a bp around accuracy and precision, the pitfalls of false accuracy etc. [on Phil Archer - due 2016-03-21].
10:57:51 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
10:57:52 [deirdrelee]
q+
10:57:53 [Caroline_]
... I think this is an especialization
10:57:59 [Caroline_]
... I think it is important
10:58:26 [phila]
Apologies, but I need to step away for a short time
10:58:36 [Caroline_]
... my example of a standar was to show that if someone use a standard he/she might say that the information is a standard
10:58:48 [Caroline_]
... this procedure might be external
10:59:14 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: I agree with laufer because it is a specific domain
10:59:25 [ericstephan]
q+
10:59:47 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: maybe it could go to data quality
10:59:49 [ericstephan]
q-
10:59:57 [Caroline_]
phila: I will try that
11:00:32 [Caroline_]
q+
11:00:44 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
11:00:45 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
11:00:47 [deirdrelee]
ack Caroline_
11:01:00 [ericstephan]
q+
11:01:34 [Ig_Bittencourt]
Which BP?
11:02:29 [ericstephan]
I am talking
11:02:36 [newton]
We can't hear you
11:02:37 [laufer]
Hi Eric, are you in the line
11:02:50 [hadleybeeman]
I can hear Eric
11:02:55 [hadleybeeman]
Is your speaker working?
11:03:17 [Caroline_]
we cannot hear hadleybeeman
11:03:20 [hadleybeeman]
I'm talking :)
11:03:21 [Caroline_]
we cannot hear ericstephan
11:03:23 [Caroline_]
:(
11:03:27 [ericstephan]
Our mics aren't working
11:03:28 [hadleybeeman]
We can hear each other, eric and I
11:03:32 [Caroline_]
we lost the soud
11:03:38 [Caroline_]
s/sou/sound
11:03:38 [ericstephan]
I can hear Hadley and she can hear me
11:03:47 [hadleybeeman]
I think you might have lost your speaker, in Zagreb
11:03:47 [Caroline_]
we cannot hear neither of you
11:03:54 [Caroline_]
now we hear
11:03:56 [Caroline_]
:)
11:03:58 [Caroline_]
thank you! :)
11:04:14 [hadleybeeman]
:)
11:04:25 [Caroline_]
ericstephan: my question is that if it is only mentioned in the data wuality vocabulary
11:04:26 [deirdrelee]
q+
11:04:30 [deirdrelee]
ack ericstephan
11:04:36 [hadleybeeman]
s/wuality/quality
11:04:39 [newton]
s/wuality/quality/g
11:04:40 [laufer]
q+
11:04:42 [Caroline_]
... I am not sure how that would be conveyd
11:04:54 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: my suggestion is to include in the data quality BP
11:04:59 [Caroline_]
... ot in the vocabulary
11:05:08 [ericstephan]
I'm sorry I didn't hear correctly
11:05:11 [Caroline_]
... in the example section of the data quality in the BP document
11:05:29 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
11:05:31 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
11:05:41 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
11:05:46 [Caroline_]
laufer: you need to put it in somewhere
11:05:56 [Caroline_]
... I just think it shouldn't be put in our document
11:06:04 [ericstephan]
I am on mute, I hear the same thing hadleybeeman
11:06:11 [Caroline_]
... I think it is out of socpe
11:06:24 [yaso]
s/socpe/scope
11:06:43 [deirdrelee]
hmm, no
11:06:43 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: on thing is to specify
11:07:04 [Caroline_]
... another is to use the data quality vocabulary to have a dimension to talk about the accuracy
11:07:05 [deirdrelee]
i increased sound here
11:07:23 [deirdrelee]
now?
11:07:23 [ericstephan]
q+
11:07:25 [laufer]
q?
11:07:29 [yaso]
ack BernadetteLoscio
11:08:15 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
11:08:21 [deirdrelee]
ack ericstephan
11:08:21 [Caroline_]
ericstephan: I think of what phila said is that the RFC you only share what your data can describe
11:08:45 [deirdrelee]
q?
11:08:53 [Caroline_]
... if you are trying to look between 2 cities and you have to go down on google maps for accuracy
11:09:12 [Caroline_]
... I think you can't stand behind accuracy
11:09:19 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: can we close this issue
11:09:20 [ericstephan]
could we vote?
11:09:35 [ericstephan]
on something?
11:09:37 [Caroline_]
... should we include a new BP or not?
11:09:46 [ericstephan]
yes!
11:09:55 [Caroline_]
... the proposal would be not to include a new BP
11:09:58 [yaso]
q?
11:10:14 [yaso]
ack laufer
11:10:21 [Caroline_]
laufer: we have to things: one is to have a new BP to say that we need precision
11:10:28 [Caroline_]
... this would be a new BP
11:10:39 [deirdrelee]
q?
11:10:43 [Caroline_]
... deirdrelee suggested to put this in the example of the data quality BP
11:10:53 [Ig_Bittencourt]
PROPOSED: Not to include a new BP on numeric accuracy, but instead to add it as an example in Data Quality BP
11:10:54 [yaso]
and now, hadleybeeman ?
11:10:57 [Caroline_]
... I was saying that put this in an example would not be a solution
11:11:05 [PWinstanley]
q+
11:11:05 [Caroline_]
... this should be a BP, but not in our group
11:11:15 [Caroline_]
... it should be in the SDW BPs
11:11:25 [Caroline_]
... it is too specifc
11:11:30 [deirdrelee]
ack laufer
11:11:43 [deirdrelee]
ack PWinstanley
11:11:50 [Caroline_]
PWinstanley: it also aplyes for..
11:11:53 [diana]
q
11:11:59 [diana]
q+
11:12:29 [yaso]
I'm trying to fix the input manually, hadleybeeman
11:12:32 [Caroline_]
,,, we need to have this idea of what point the data is stupid or relevant
11:12:53 [ericstephan]
Yes PWinstanley I agree
11:13:26 [Caroline_]
diana: when you are providing data you have no idea of the precision
11:13:29 [yaso]
let me know if it gets any better, please, hadleybeeman
11:13:30 [Caroline_]
... accuracy it is no precision
11:13:39 [deirdrelee]
q?
11:13:45 [deirdrelee]
ack diana
11:13:46 [Caroline_]
... if you have a data with 10cm you should provide it because someone might use it
11:14:01 [Caroline_]
laufer: this is a problem of data on the web?
11:14:05 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
11:14:09 [Caroline_]
... I think it is a specific domain
11:15:04 [deirdrelee]
q?
11:15:09 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
11:15:23 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: maybe this type of information (cm, mm, parameters in genereal) it is for the publisher to say
11:15:37 [newton]
q?
11:15:40 [Caroline_]
... the data format, the numerical former, is it part of the locale parameters?
11:15:51 [Ig_Bittencourt]
PROPOSED: Not to include a new BP on numeric accuracy, but instead to add it as an example in Data Quality BP
11:15:51 [Caroline_]
... it is similar with the discussion we had before
11:16:07 [laufer]
-1
11:16:16 [yaso]
and now?
11:16:27 [ericstephan]
+1 btw happy Pi day
11:16:43 [laufer]
-1
11:16:54 [ericstephan]
no, sorry just a lot of noise
11:17:07 [yaso]
now?
11:17:25 [Caroline_]
laufer: I think this is an important BP, but not for our document
11:17:38 [hadleybeeman]
okay... Maybe I'll drop off for now and just watch on IRC.
11:17:48 [Caroline_]
... if we have this in the data quality is okay, but it is out of scope
11:17:58 [Caroline_]
... to have a BP for that
11:18:12 [BernadetteLoscio]
we can hear you!
11:18:49 [Ig_Bittencourt]
PROPOSED: Not to include a new BP on numeric accuracy in our document, because is out of the scope and add it as an example in Data Quality BP
11:19:03 [deirdrelee]
+1
11:19:05 [laufer]
+1
11:19:13 [deirdrelee]
sound guy in
11:19:23 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
11:19:25 [PWinstanley]
+1
11:19:30 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
11:19:31 [yaso]
+1
11:19:31 [ericstephan]
thank you for the help!
11:19:33 [Caroline_]
+1
11:19:45 [deirdrelee]
hadleybeeman ericstephan do you agree with proposal?
11:19:57 [hadleybeeman]
I'm really not sure. Probably...? :)
11:20:09 [newton]
+0
11:20:10 [Ig_Bittencourt]
RESOLVED: Not to include a new BP on numeric accuracy in our document, because is out of the scope and add it as an example in Data Quality BP
11:20:11 [hadleybeeman]
I'm not against it. So do carry on.
11:20:22 [ericstephan]
I think that is okay +0.5
11:20:41 [yaso]
(I'll leave the sound with "the guy")
11:20:43 [ericstephan]
It will be sufficient
11:21:19 [Caroline_]
newton: it is a issue and we need a answer and provide a guidance about it
11:21:29 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
11:21:34 [cjh]
cjh has joined #dwbp
11:21:40 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: we can add a comment in the issue and leave it open for now
11:21:42 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
11:21:50 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: how can we provide a general guideline for this
11:22:14 [Caroline_]
... we could say something about it in another place of the document, specifizing that it is domain specific
11:22:21 [Caroline_]
issue-160
11:22:21 [trackbot]
issue-160 -- Should we add at BP about subsetting data? -- open
11:22:21 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/160
11:22:42 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: we don't have a BP related with subsetting data
11:22:49 [Caroline_]
... we had a lot of discussion by email
11:22:59 [Caroline_]
... some BPs of SDW are related to it
11:23:11 [Caroline_]
... the issue is if should we add a BP about it or not
11:23:24 [ericstephan]
I thought we decided to not pursue that
11:23:32 [ericstephan]
in the last meeting
11:23:57 [deirdrelee]
hadley, eric can u hear us?
11:24:06 [deirdrelee]
can you tal
11:24:12 [deirdrelee]
ywez
11:24:13 [Ig_Bittencourt]
YES
11:24:39 [deirdrelee]
let us know if you can hear testing :)
11:24:47 [ericstephan]
ok
11:24:53 [deirdrelee]
or tapping
11:25:05 [ericstephan]
no sounds at all at this point
11:25:26 [deirdrelee]
tee hee
11:25:35 [ericstephan]
:-)
11:25:56 [Caroline_]
we are not saying anything right now. Everyone is waiting to fix the mic
11:26:10 [Caroline_]
pause!
11:26:10 [yaso]
can you hear beats on the mic?
11:26:14 [hadleybeeman]
no
11:26:15 [ericstephan]
no
11:26:52 [Caroline_]
newton: I don't remember what we decided about subsetting data
11:27:11 [ericstephan]
hearing static
11:27:11 [Caroline_]
... does anyone remember?
11:27:39 [Caroline_]
ericstephan and hadleybeeman we are trying to remember what was discussed about subsetting data
11:27:44 [hadleybeeman]
mintues re subsetting: https://www.w3.org/2016/03/11-dwbp-minutes
11:27:45 [Caroline_]
do you remember?
11:27:49 [Caroline_]
thank you hadleybeeman
11:27:52 [deirdrelee]
hadleybeeman: was there decisions in last friday's meeting abut subsetting?
11:27:53 [hadleybeeman]
I think annette_g was going to write something for the group to review?
11:27:59 [Caroline_]
we should approve this minutes
11:28:16 [hadleybeeman]
But she had the weekend in which to do it.
11:28:28 [ericstephan]
in the last meeting I believe phila mentioned the sdw was pursuing this and that it was such a vast topic, it would be difficult to put together a BP.
11:28:32 [hadleybeeman]
Because we knew there wasn't much time left for additions
11:28:55 [Caroline_]
laufer: we have a section about data access
11:29:11 [ericstephan]
Hope I'm remembering that correctly, as I recall the idea was to at least look at domain specific examples and maybe do something more generic at some point
11:29:35 [Caroline_]
... we have a BP that says taht you have a link to provide all the data
11:29:40 [hadleybeeman]
I think so, ericstephan. And annette_g was reluctant to let it go.... she really wanted to try.
11:29:50 [Caroline_]
... we do not say what API should provide
11:29:51 [ericstephan]
that's right
11:29:53 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
11:30:02 [ericstephan]
she did want to try to put something together
11:30:03 [Caroline_]
... it is out of our scope to say what is the group of data
11:30:27 [hadleybeeman]
Oh no wait, she was more excited about the other topic on Friday. But she offered to try subsetting too.
11:31:03 [Caroline_]
... you need to provide access to all data and you have an API
11:31:31 [ericstephan]
Is this something we can table until Annette can join again?
11:31:43 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: I think it is worth reading the minutes of last minutes
11:32:01 [Caroline_]
... if I understood correctly the idea it is not go deeper on this discussion
11:32:07 [Caroline_]
q+
11:32:35 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: we will talk about it tomorrow morning
11:32:44 [Caroline_]
... when annette is there
11:32:52 [Caroline_]
... let's read the minutes to prepare for it
11:33:16 [Caroline_]
... befor lunch let's see the comment tracker
11:33:25 [newton]
s/befor/before/g
11:33:36 [Caroline_]
... in order to go to candidate recommendation we must answer the comments
11:33:40 [Caroline_]
... try to close them
11:33:53 [Caroline_]
q-
11:34:11 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
11:34:25 [Caroline_]
hadleybeeman and ericstephan are you following the IRC?
11:34:43 [hadleybeeman]
pretty much, caroline_
11:34:50 [hadleybeeman]
thanks :)
11:34:52 [newton]
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150625/
11:34:53 [Caroline_]
we will talk about subsetting tomorrow morning
11:35:03 [Caroline_]
now we will discuss the comment tracker
11:35:32 [yaso]
you hear us now, hadleybeeman ?
11:35:40 [hadleybeeman]
no, nothing yaso
11:35:41 [yaso]
beatings
11:35:53 [hadleybeeman]
We can still see you all though. :) WebEx is working
11:36:08 [Caroline_]
great! :)
11:36:14 [Caroline_]
I think they are fixing the mic
11:36:21 [yaso]
ok, thanks hadleybeeman, the guy will try another solution
11:36:30 [Caroline_]
we are deciding about what comment to start discussing
11:36:31 [hadleybeeman]
ok
11:36:51 [BernadetteLoscio]
https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Comment_tracker_status
11:37:22 [ericstephan]
I think I am hearing moving around
11:38:34 [Caroline_]
we will use the link BernadetteLoscio put https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Comment_tracker_status
11:39:01 [hadleybeeman]
Do carry on with the discussion though -- kind of silly to wait for the microphone, when we don't know how long it will take.
11:39:41 [Caroline_]
okay
11:40:05 [Caroline_]
we will talk about the comments that have a proposed resolution already
11:40:05 [ericstephan]
agreed, thank goodness for irc
11:40:10 [Caroline_]
:)
11:40:28 [deirdrelee]
https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150625/3057
11:40:32 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: we will start with https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/3051
11:41:00 [antoine]
antoine has joined #dwbp
11:41:06 [antoine]
present+ antoine
11:41:12 [newton]
Caroline_: the comment is about the difference between the BP8 and BP18
11:41:32 [Caroline_]
present+ Caroline_
11:41:38 [newton]
... Erik, says that they are very similar
11:41:41 [hadleybeeman]
we can hear something!!!
11:41:42 [ericstephan]
Yeah I can hear
11:42:03 [Caroline_]
BernadetteLoscio: the BP about vocabuaries we don't have anymore
11:42:17 [Caroline_]
... that is why we proposed resolution: Best Practice 18 Vocabulary versioning was removed from the document. The current version of the document doesn't deal with vocabulary versioning.
11:42:18 [hadleybeeman]
wait -- the sound is gone. :( We could hear bernadette
11:42:18 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: just to let you know, this comment is about "an older" version of the document, so the numbers don't correspond to the BPs on the current document
11:42:28 [Ig_Bittencourt]
q+
11:42:28 [Caroline_]
it is gone hadleybeeman
11:42:31 [yaso]
hadleybeeman, are hearing us now?
11:42:39 [Caroline_]
that is why we proposed to say the problem is solved
11:42:40 [ericstephan]
rats, it was great for a couple of minutes
11:42:43 [Caroline_]
no
11:42:56 [Ig_Bittencourt]
q-
11:43:09 [ericstephan]
we are back
11:43:18 [yaso]
hearing now, ericstephan ?
11:43:21 [ericstephan]
yes
11:43:30 [yaso]
no static, hadleybeeman
11:43:31 [yaso]
?
11:43:47 [hadleybeeman]
no... Phila has just joined webex, and we could hear him
11:43:53 [yaso]
phila effect: he is back, the sound is back
11:44:00 [ericstephan]
much better
11:44:08 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
11:44:08 [Caroline_]
Next comment https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150625/3062
11:44:11 [newton]
action to Caroline_ to answer comment 3051 from Eric Wilde (https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/3051)
11:44:11 [trackbot]
Error finding 'to'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
11:44:16 [newton]
action Caroline_ to answer comment 3051 from Eric Wilde (https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/3051)
11:44:16 [trackbot]
Error finding 'Caroline_'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
11:44:20 [newton]
action Caroline to answer comment 3051 from Eric Wilde (https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/3051)
11:44:21 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-249 - Answer comment 3051 from eric wilde (https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/wd-dwbp-20150224/3051) [on Caroline Burle - due 2016-03-21].
11:45:20 [Caroline_]
Proposed resolution: To update the text on the DWBP document to replace public-dwbp-wg@w3.orhttps://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/3034g by public-dwbp-comments@w3.org.
11:45:28 [yaso]
hadleybeeman and ericstephan, tell me if you are hearing beats
11:46:16 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
11:46:16 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
11:46:40 [yaso]
and now do you hear deirdrelee speaking?
11:46:42 [hadleybeeman]
no
11:46:46 [newton]
action newton to update the config on respec with the public mailing address and answer comment LC-3062 (https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150625/3062)
11:46:47 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-250 - Update the config on respec with the public mailing address and answer comment lc-3062 (https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/wd-dwbp-20150625/3062) [on Newton Calegari - due 2016-03-21].
11:47:10 [ericstephan]
hmmmm I can hear phila
11:47:47 [Caroline_]
phila: is trying to fix the mic issue
11:49:21 [Caroline_]
one more comment: https://www.w3.org/2006/02/lc-comments-tracker/68239/WD-dwbp-20150224/3038
11:49:27 [Caroline_]
See: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jun/0084.html. This comment should be discussed with Eric Stephan.
11:49:40 [Caroline_]
ericstephan: could you read it there and comment on IRC?
11:50:11 [newton]
Caroline_: the comment is about feedback and data preservation
11:50:53 [ericstephan]
yes
11:51:00 [newton]
... the proposal is to move this discussion to the DUV
11:51:13 [newton]
... it's a comment from Andrea Perego, from SDW
11:51:15 [ericstephan]
Sorry let me look at what you mentioned Caroline_
11:52:32 [Caroline_]
thank you ericstephan
11:52:37 [Caroline_]
we think it is resolved
11:52:48 [Caroline_]
but if you may take a look just to make sure! :)
11:52:57 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: is proposing to have a lunch break now
11:53:07 [Caroline_]
are you going to be here and hour from now?
11:53:18 [Caroline_]
so they guys are trying to fix the mic
11:55:02 [Caroline_]
ericstephan: we will answer the comments, so if you could check this and send us an email about it saying if you agree that it is resolved (or not) would be great
11:55:15 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
11:55:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
11:55:33 [Caroline_]
ericstephan: would that be okay?
11:58:04 [Caroline_]
we are having a pause for lunch :)
11:58:55 [deirdrelee]
ericstephan:
11:59:13 [deirdrelee]
what time suits you for DUV?
12:00:22 [deirdrelee]
ericstephan, are you there?
12:20:50 [deirdrelee]
hadleybeeman, ericstephan you there to test sound?
12:20:53 [deirdrelee]
we think it's fixed?
12:21:16 [hadleybeeman]
deirdrelee, I'm here
12:21:21 [hadleybeeman]
I think ericstephan went to bed
12:21:24 [deirdrelee]
on webex
12:21:29 [hadleybeeman]
dialing in
12:21:29 [deirdrelee]
ok :)
12:22:49 [deirdrelee]
can you hear anything?
12:22:50 [hadleybeeman]
I can hear echoey background noises
12:23:12 [hadleybeeman]
I can see you talking, deirdrelee -- but can't hear anything from you
12:23:26 [deirdrelee]
are you talking?
12:23:31 [hadleybeeman]
From WebEx, it looks like all the sound is coming in through phila's computer
12:27:59 [deirdrelee]
ok :)
12:30:24 [hadleybeeman]
I can hear the test test test
12:30:30 [hadleybeeman]
Not sure if he can hear me?
12:30:56 [deirdrelee]
ok, last time, say sth?
12:32:02 [hadleybeeman]
I can still hear you... crystal clear
13:01:45 [yaso]
yaso has joined #dwbp
13:02:19 [BernadetteLoscio]
BernadetteLoscio has joined #dwbp
13:04:31 [LivarB]
LivarB has joined #dwbp
13:05:02 [deirdrelee]
we're back
13:05:20 [miskaknapek]
miskaknapek has joined #dwbp
13:05:30 [deirdrelee]
topic: open actions
13:05:30 [deirdrelee]
https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/open
13:06:19 [BernadetteLoscio]
present+ BernadetteLoscio
13:06:53 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
13:06:59 [phila]
action-121?
13:06:59 [trackbot]
action-121 -- Ig Ibert Bittencourt Santana Pinto to Look at linked data bp at http://www.w3.org/tr/ld-bp/#vocabularies and to talk with mark h and antoine to see if the controlled vocab section fits with the data vocabs -- due 2014-11-07 -- OPEN
13:06:59 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/121
13:07:18 [Caroline_]
Caroline_ has joined #DWBP
13:07:33 [PWinstanley]
PWinstanley has joined #dwbp
13:07:46 [newton]
close action-121
13:07:46 [trackbot]
Closed action-121.
13:07:52 [yaso]
"overtaken by the events" is the phrase.
13:08:02 [deirdrelee]
action-141
13:08:02 [trackbot]
action-141 -- Deirdre Lee to Coordinate with chairs to establish timetable for f2f meeting -- due 2015-02-27 -- CLOSED
13:08:02 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/141
13:08:12 [deirdrelee]
action-144
13:08:12 [trackbot]
action-144 -- Bernadette Farias Loscio to Work with newton and carol to include multilingualism in the best practice document as per resolution of issue-142 -- due 2015-03-20 -- OPEN
13:08:12 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/144
13:09:47 [phila]
scribe: laufer
13:10:40 [deirdrelee]
action-146
13:10:40 [trackbot]
action-146 -- Sumit Purohit to Examine Different Aspects of Feedback -- due 2015-04-17 -- OPEN
13:10:40 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/146
13:10:43 [phila]
action-146?
13:10:43 [trackbot]
action-146 -- Sumit Purohit to Examine Different Aspects of Feedback -- due 2015-04-17 -- OPEN
13:10:43 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/146
13:10:44 [pekka]
pekka has joined #dwbp
13:10:44 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: we can close 144 because in already talk about dct:language and we do not need to talk more about this
13:10:50 [newton]
close action-144
13:10:50 [trackbot]
Closed action-144.
13:10:52 [riccardoAlbertoni]
present+ riccardoAlbertoni
13:11:22 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: we can also close this issue because we have already talk a lot about feedback
13:11:28 [hannes]
hannes has joined #dwbp
13:11:29 [Caroline_]
present+ Caroline_
13:11:37 [newton]
close action-146
13:11:37 [trackbot]
Closed action-146.
13:11:42 [newton]
action-147
13:11:42 [trackbot]
action-147 -- Bernadette Farias Loscio to to add a bp for structural metadata -- due 2015-04-20 -- OPEN
13:11:42 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/147
13:11:48 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: we can close 146
13:11:52 [newton]
close action-147
13:11:52 [trackbot]
Closed action-147.
13:12:12 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: we have a bp for the issue 147. we can close it
13:12:19 [newton]
action-148 ?
13:12:19 [trackbot]
action-148 -- Yaso Córdova to Include a definition of 'a standard' in the glossary -- due 2015-04-20 -- OPEN
13:12:19 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/148
13:12:38 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
13:12:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
13:12:41 [deirdrelee]
BernadetteLoscio: action-147 is addressed by bp 4
13:13:54 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: we do not have the definition of standard in the glossary and yaso will answer about this later
13:14:05 [newton]
deirdrelee: skip action-148 for now
13:14:13 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: I solve this issue. Is done.
13:14:23 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: I wrote to Andrea, action-150 cna be closed
13:14:26 [phila]
BernadetteLoscio: Wrote to Andrea, so close 148
13:14:27 [newton]
close action-150
13:14:27 [trackbot]
Closed action-150.
13:14:48 [newton]
s/so close 148/so close 150/g
13:14:52 [newton]
action-155
13:14:52 [trackbot]
action-155 -- Phil Archer to Write to danbri in response to comment 3006 -- due 2015-04-21 -- OPEN
13:14:52 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/155
13:15:27 [phila]
act.ion: phila to explicitly invite danbri to review the doc when next published
13:15:35 [newton]
action-156
13:15:35 [trackbot]
action-156 -- Deirdre Lee to Change should to must in http://www.w3.org/tr/dwbp-ucr/#r-sensitiveprivacy -- due 2015-04-21 -- OPEN
13:15:35 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/156
13:15:36 [phila]
close action-155
13:15:36 [trackbot]
Closed action-155.
13:15:54 [newton]
close action-156
13:15:54 [trackbot]
Closed action-156.
13:16:09 [newton]
deirdrelee: we decided to don't have the RCF terms anymore
13:16:15 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: we decided not to use SHOULD, MUST etc...
13:16:24 [phila]
s/RCF/RFC 2119/
13:16:27 [newton]
action-173
13:16:27 [trackbot]
action-173 -- Gisele Pappa to Create bp for data enrichment -- due 2015-04-21 -- OPEN
13:16:27 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/173
13:16:34 [newton]
action-171
13:16:34 [trackbot]
action-171 -- Bernadette Farias Loscio to to add all public comments to comment tracker -- due 2015-04-21 -- OPEN
13:16:34 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/171
13:16:44 [phila]
BernadetteLoscio I did 171
13:16:46 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: I did it. It's done.
13:16:49 [newton]
close action-171
13:16:49 [trackbot]
Closed action-171.
13:16:54 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: 171 is done
13:16:54 [newton]
action-173
13:16:54 [trackbot]
action-173 -- Gisele Pappa to Create bp for data enrichment -- due 2015-04-21 -- OPEN
13:16:54 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/173
13:17:02 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: Gisele did this. Can close the action.
13:17:05 [newton]
close action-173
13:17:05 [trackbot]
Closed action-173.
13:17:09 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: 173 is done too.
13:17:12 [newton]
action-176
13:17:12 [trackbot]
action-176 -- Phil Archer to Incorporating citations in Dataset Usage Vocabulary -- due 2015-05-01 -- OPEN
13:17:12 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/176
13:17:40 [newton]
phila: that was done by DUV editors.
13:17:40 [phila]
DUV already includes citations now so we can close 176
13:17:42 [laufer]
phila: this has been done by DUV team (citations)
13:17:48 [newton]
close action-176
13:17:48 [trackbot]
Closed action-176.
13:17:51 [newton]
action-177
13:17:51 [trackbot]
action-177 -- Bernadette Farias Loscio to Putting Dataset Usage Vocabulary in Github -- due 2015-04-24 -- OPEN
13:17:51 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/177
13:17:57 [newton]
close action-177
13:17:57 [trackbot]
Closed action-177.
13:18:11 [newton]
action-179
13:18:11 [trackbot]
action-179 -- Sumit Purohit to Identifying Mechanisms Dataset Usage Vocabulary -- due 2015-05-01 -- OPEN
13:18:11 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/179
13:18:39 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: I think he didn't do that. We don't have this on the vocabulary yet.
13:18:53 [newton]
... we have some examples, but this is something else
13:19:01 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: We have some examples but I think we need something else
13:19:13 [newton]
deirdrelee: is Sumit still envolved in DUV?
13:19:19 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: should ask Eric, I'm not sure
13:19:24 [phila]
s/envolved/involved/
13:19:26 [newton]
action-181
13:19:26 [trackbot]
action-181 -- Yaso Córdova to Review csv spec -- due 2015-05-15 -- OPEN
13:19:26 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/181
13:19:54 [newton]
close action-181
13:19:54 [trackbot]
Closed action-181.
13:19:57 [newton]
close action-182
13:19:57 [trackbot]
Closed action-182.
13:20:18 [Ig_Bittencourt]
laufer: I reviewed but i did not publish anything
13:20:35 [newton]
action-185
13:20:35 [trackbot]
action-185 -- Eric Stephan to Create template for feedback on dqv and duv together with all editors -- due 2015-07-24 -- OPEN
13:20:35 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/185
13:20:59 [laufer]
I did not strong objections to teh csv documents
13:21:34 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: It's about how to get feedback about our vocabularies
13:21:40 [phila]
Glad to hear it laufer!
13:21:40 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: the idea is to have templates for feedbacks
13:21:51 [newton]
... so he was planning to do a template to send to everybody in order to get feedbacks
13:22:06 [newton]
deirdrelee: this action is overtaken by events
13:22:11 [newton]
close action-185
13:22:11 [trackbot]
Closed action-185.
13:22:24 [newton]
action-186
13:22:24 [trackbot]
action-186 -- Eric Stephan to Target specific groups to ask for feedback on duv -- due 2015-07-24 -- OPEN
13:22:24 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/186
13:22:32 [newton]
deirdrelee: he did it
13:22:35 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: yes, he did it
13:22:40 [newton]
close action-186
13:22:40 [trackbot]
Closed action-186.
13:22:40 [laufer]
eric did the action
13:22:44 [newton]
action-189
13:22:44 [trackbot]
action-189 -- Eric Stephan to Update to Data Vocabulary document required based on resolved issues 169, 170, 171, 172 -- due 2015-07-31 -- OPEN
13:22:44 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/189
13:22:52 [phila]
issue-169?
13:22:52 [trackbot]
issue-169 -- Should usage be specified at the Dataset or Distribution level? -- closed
13:22:52 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/169
13:22:59 [newton]
deirdrelee: close because it is done
13:23:02 [phila]
issue-170?
13:23:02 [trackbot]
issue-170 -- Should we use Software or earl:Software instead of duv:Application? -- closed
13:23:02 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/170
13:23:05 [newton]
close action-189
13:23:05 [trackbot]
Closed action-189.
13:23:06 [phila]
issue-171
13:23:06 [trackbot]
issue-171 -- Should dct:creator or doap:developer be used instead of duv:developedBy? -- closed
13:23:06 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/171
13:23:14 [newton]
action-184
13:23:14 [trackbot]
action-184 -- Peter Winstanley to Review the existing template and identify any additional fields that could be added to improve the bp -- due 2015-07-17 -- CLOSED
13:23:14 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/184
13:23:41 [newton]
action-191
13:23:41 [trackbot]
action-191 -- Peter Winstanley to Create examples following his suggestions on action 184 -- due 2015-08-14 -- OPEN
13:23:41 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/191
13:23:50 [newton]
deirdrelee: it's done. can close.
13:23:54 [newton]
close action-191
13:23:54 [trackbot]
Closed action-191.
13:23:57 [newton]
action-193
13:23:57 [trackbot]
action-193 -- Caroline Burle to Send draft agenda ideas to the chairs -- due 2015-08-21 -- CLOSED
13:23:57 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/193
13:24:08 [newton]
action-148
13:24:08 [trackbot]
action-148 -- Yaso Córdova to Include a definition of 'a standard' in the glossary -- due 2015-04-20 -- OPEN
13:24:08 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/148
13:24:59 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: we have the glossary in the document, but we don't have the 'standard' definition in it
13:25:34 [phila]
q+
13:26:02 [phila]
ack me
13:26:41 [BernadetteLoscio]
q+
13:27:01 [newton]
phila: it's not a simple thing to have... the uk gov has been working on a definition of standard for two years
13:27:36 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: if there is a definition, we can use, but not to define it
13:28:08 [newton]
phila: if there isn't a definition, we won't define it
13:28:30 [newton]
deirdrelee: leave this action-148 open for now
13:28:40 [newton]
... yaso will make it and mail the group
13:28:51 [newton]
action-196
13:28:51 [trackbot]
action-196 -- Eric Stephan to Create updated timetable for duv in wiki -- due 2015-08-28 -- OPEN
13:28:51 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/196
13:28:55 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: it's done.
13:28:57 [newton]
clsoe action-196
13:28:58 [yaso]
http://dublincore.org/documents/2012/06/14/dcmi-terms/?v=terms#Standard definition for standard at dublincore
13:29:10 [newton]
action-198
13:29:10 [trackbot]
action-198 -- Deirdre Lee to To reassign products on open issue list https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/open -- due 2015-09-11 -- OPEN
13:29:10 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/198
13:29:26 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: the tracker was messed up
13:29:29 [phila]
198 was done
13:29:29 [newton]
deirdrelee: it's done
13:29:33 [newton]
close action-198
13:29:33 [trackbot]
Closed action-198.
13:29:41 [phila]
action-200?
13:29:41 [trackbot]
action-200 -- Wagner Meira Jr. to Collect examples of qualitative feedback and send them to the group, including 5 star scales -- due 2015-10-01 -- OPEN
13:29:41 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/200
13:30:02 [newton]
deirdrelee: close action 200, overtaken by events
13:30:06 [newton]
close action-200
13:30:06 [trackbot]
Closed action-200.
13:30:24 [newton]
action-202
13:30:24 [trackbot]
action-202 -- Giancarlo Guizzardi to Share examples around service level agreement activity -- due 2015-10-01 -- OPEN
13:30:24 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/202
13:30:57 [Caroline_]
scribe: Caroline_
13:31:22 [Caroline_]
antoine: João Paulo should had get a reminder, but we don't need it anymore
13:31:25 [newton]
deirdrelee: there's another example in the document
13:31:27 [Caroline_]
... there is another example in the document
13:31:31 [newton]
close action-202
13:31:31 [trackbot]
Closed action-202.
13:31:33 [newton]
action-203
13:31:33 [trackbot]
action-203 -- Nandana Mihindukulasooriya to Add an example with an sla as quality policy, trying to use the same dimensions as metrics and annotations -- due 2015-12-05 -- OPEN
13:31:33 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/203
13:31:43 [Caroline_]
scribe: newton
13:31:50 [newton]
deirdrelee: action 203 is done
13:31:54 [newton]
close action-203
13:31:54 [trackbot]
Closed action-203.
13:31:55 [Caroline_]
s/ ... there is another example in the document/
13:31:56 [newton]
action-205
13:31:56 [trackbot]
action-205 -- Bernadette Farias Loscio to Tabulate requirements against the bps that address them -- due 2015-10-02 -- OPEN
13:31:56 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/205
13:31:59 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: it's done
13:32:04 [newton]
close action-205
13:32:04 [trackbot]
Closed action-205.
13:32:09 [newton]
action-207
13:32:10 [trackbot]
action-207 -- Gisele Pappa to Modify the data enrichment best practice to cover data as well as metadata -- due 2015-10-02 -- OPEN
13:32:10 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/207
13:32:20 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: I think she did it.
13:32:28 [newton]
deirdrelee: overtaken by events
13:32:30 [newton]
... or done
13:32:33 [newton]
close action-207
13:32:33 [trackbot]
Closed action-207.
13:32:38 [ericstephan]
Hi
13:32:51 [Caroline_]
we can hear you ericstephan :)
13:32:59 [Caroline_]
can you hear us?
13:32:59 [newton]
action-196
13:32:59 [trackbot]
action-196 -- Eric Stephan to Create updated timetable for duv in wiki -- due 2015-08-28 -- OPEN
13:32:59 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/196
13:33:02 [ericstephan]
Yeah I can hear everyone again!
13:33:08 [Caroline_]
great! :)
13:33:13 [newton]
deirdrelee: close action 196 because it's done
13:33:17 [newton]
close action-196
13:33:17 [trackbot]
Closed action-196.
13:33:23 [newton]
action-208
13:33:23 [trackbot]
action-208 -- Antoine Isaac to Contact oa wg to see whether they would consider adding dqv motivation -- due 2016-04-01 -- OPEN
13:33:23 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/208
13:33:40 [ericstephan]
thank you thank you!
13:34:15 [newton]
antoine: let's keep it, because it's another iteration
13:34:20 [newton]
... leave it open for now
13:34:30 [newton]
action-209
13:34:30 [trackbot]
action-209 -- Eric Stephan to Contact oa wg to see whether they would consider adding duv motivation -- due 2015-10-16 -- OPEN
13:34:30 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/209
13:34:47 [newton]
deirdrelee: we can close this?
13:35:09 [Caroline_]
scribe: Caroline_
13:35:10 [newton]
scribe: Caroline_
13:35:22 [Caroline_]
antoine: is it a general question?
13:35:30 [Caroline_]
ericstephan: it is more than a general question
13:35:38 [Caroline_]
... it would be good to keep it
13:35:44 [newton]
scribe: newton
13:35:57 [newton]
deirdrelee: action 209, keep it open for now
13:36:12 [newton]
... the due date is April 1st
13:36:36 [trackbot]
Please see <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
13:37:00 [newton]
action-210
13:37:00 [trackbot]
action-210 -- Sumit Purohit to Investigate the relationship between dqv and duv wrt citations that can be considered as a quality annotation -- due 2015-10-02 -- OPEN
13:37:00 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/210
13:37:18 [newton]
deirdrelee: ericstephan, bernadette, do you know if it has been done?
13:37:32 [phila]
trackbot, issue-209 due 2016-04-01
13:37:32 [trackbot]
Sorry, but issues don't support set_due changes.
13:37:35 [newton]
ericstephan: I don't think if it's done
13:37:42 [phila]
trackbot, action-209 due 2016-04-01
13:37:42 [trackbot]
Set action-209 Contact oa wg to see whether they would consider adding duv motivation due date to 2016-04-01.
13:38:02 [newton]
deirdrelee: Sumit is still working on the doc? Could assign this action to him? Is it relevant?
13:38:16 [phila]
deirdrelee: Is Sumit still involved? We're looking at 210
13:38:23 [phila]
ericstephan: Pls reassign it to me
13:39:00 [phila]
trackbot, action-210 due in 3 weeks
13:39:00 [trackbot]
Set action-210 Investigate the relationship between dqv and duv wrt citations that can be considered as a quality annotation due date to 2016-04-04.
13:39:26 [newton]
deirdrelee: ericstephan, there's another action assigned to sumit
13:39:36 [newton]
... do you know if it's done or isn't relevant anymore?
13:39:54 [newton]
ericstephan: it's not relevant anymore
13:40:03 [newton]
deirdrelee: we can close it. overtaken by events.
13:40:09 [newton]
close action-179
13:40:09 [trackbot]
Closed action-179.
13:40:12 [newton]
action-212
13:40:12 [trackbot]
action-212 -- Deirdre Lee to Follow up on issue-94 with comsode project -- due 2015-10-16 -- OPEN
13:40:12 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/212
13:40:12 [phila]
action-212?
13:40:12 [trackbot]
action-212 -- Deirdre Lee to Follow up on issue-94 with comsode project -- due 2015-10-16 -- OPEN
13:40:12 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/212
13:40:41 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: the issue-94 is closed, and we have the link to the minutes when it was closed
13:40:51 [newton]
deirdrelee: so the action can be closed
13:40:54 [newton]
close action-212
13:40:54 [trackbot]
Closed action-212.
13:41:00 [newton]
action-213
13:41:00 [trackbot]
action-213 -- Eric Stephan to Look into issue 148 and restart the conversion or close the issue -- due 2015-10-16 -- OPEN
13:41:00 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/213
13:41:10 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: the issue is closed
13:41:22 [newton]
deirdrelee: close the action-203
13:41:26 [phila]
action-214?
13:41:26 [trackbot]
action-214 -- Newton Calegari to Create the assignment table for relate people to work on examples -- due 2015-10-16 -- OPEN
13:41:26 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/214
13:41:33 [phila]
214 was done
13:41:37 [newton]
newton: was done
13:41:38 [phila]
action-216?
13:41:38 [trackbot]
action-216 -- Bernadette Farias Loscio to Add note to the bp doc that we are discussing the issue of subsetting data, and identifying those subsets. and that we're talking to the sdw wg about this issue too -- due 2015-11-13 -- OPEN
13:41:38 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/216
13:41:43 [newton]
close action-214
13:41:43 [trackbot]
Closed action-214.
13:41:55 [newton]
s/close the action-203/close the action-213/g
13:42:01 [newton]
close action-213
13:42:01 [trackbot]
Closed action-213.
13:42:25 [phila]
action 216 overtaken by events
13:42:25 [trackbot]
Error finding '216'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
13:42:34 [newton]
deirdrelee: close action-216, overtaken by events
13:42:38 [phila]
close action-216
13:42:38 [trackbot]
Closed action-216.
13:42:38 [newton]
close action-216
13:42:38 [trackbot]
Closed action-216.
13:42:43 [newton]
action-218
13:42:43 [trackbot]
action-218 -- Phil Archer to Add the example for the data identifiers section -- due 2015-11-13 -- OPEN
13:42:43 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/218
13:42:46 [newton]
phila: did that
13:42:49 [phila]
That was done
13:42:51 [newton]
close action-218
13:42:51 [trackbot]
Closed action-218.
13:42:58 [newton]
action-220
13:42:58 [trackbot]
action-220 -- Yaso Córdova to Reach out with giancarlo about the http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/202 -- due 2015-12-11 -- CLOSED
13:42:58 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/220
13:43:08 [newton]
close action-220
13:43:08 [trackbot]
Closed action-220.
13:43:14 [newton]
action-224
13:43:14 [trackbot]
action-224 -- Carlos Laufer to Send a list of things to be added to/addressed in the duv document -- due 2015-12-18 -- OPEN
13:43:14 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/224
13:43:18 [newton]
deirdrelee: it's done
13:43:22 [newton]
close action-224
13:43:22 [trackbot]
Closed action-224.
13:43:28 [newton]
action-227
13:43:28 [trackbot]
action-227 -- Antoine Isaac to Work with eric s on writing section on evolution of duv wrt reuse of namespaces etc. -- due 2016-02-12 -- OPEN
13:43:28 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/227
13:43:46 [newton]
antoine: cof cof
13:43:50 [phila]
trackbot, 229 due 2016-03-15
13:43:50 [trackbot]
Sorry, phila, I don't understand 'trackbot, 229 due 2016-03-15'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
13:43:53 [Caroline_]
scribe: Caroline_
13:43:59 [phila]
trackbot, action-229 due 2016-03-15
13:43:59 [trackbot]
Set action-229 Send bp editors implementation-questionaire template due date to 2016-03-15.
13:44:05 [Caroline_]
antoine: don't close action-227
13:44:18 [Caroline_]
... I can continue the action
13:44:23 [phila]
trackbot, action-230 due 2016-03-15
13:44:23 [trackbot]
Set action-230 Create process for gathering evidence of implementations, e.g. wiki, google form due date to 2016-03-15.
13:44:25 [Caroline_]
... change one example in BP 17
13:45:02 [Caroline_]
deirdrelee: action-227 leave it open
13:45:06 [Caroline_]
scribe: newton
13:45:09 [phila]
trackbot, action-227 due 2016-04-01
13:45:09 [trackbot]
Set action-227 Work with eric s on writing section on evolution of duv wrt reuse of namespaces etc. due date to 2016-04-01.
13:45:11 [newton]
action-229
13:45:11 [trackbot]
action-229 -- Phil Archer to Send bp editors implementation-questionaire template -- due 2016-03-15 -- OPEN
13:45:11 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/229
13:45:26 [newton]
phila: the due date for that is tomorrow
13:45:30 [newton]
... tomorrow afternoon
13:45:44 [newton]
... the two groups will be together
13:46:31 [newton]
deirdrelee: leave action-229 open, because will be done and discussed in the 2nd F2F
13:46:47 [newton]
action-230
13:46:47 [trackbot]
action-230 -- Caroline Burle to Create process for gathering evidence of implementations, e.g. wiki, google form -- due 2016-03-15 -- OPEN
13:46:47 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/230
13:47:04 [newton]
deirdrelee: it's related to the previous one. leave it open.
13:47:05 [phila]
phila: The aim of tomorrow afternoon is to define the set of questions to be used by both DWBP and Share-PSi to gather evidence of implementation of our BPs
13:47:11 [newton]
action-231
13:47:11 [trackbot]
action-231 -- Annette Greiner to Talk to eric wilde about open comments and reach resolution -- due 2016-02-19 -- OPEN
13:47:11 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/231
13:47:33 [newton]
BernadetteLoscio: she sent a message about this.
13:47:43 [newton]
... I updated the comments on the table
13:47:57 [newton]
... and Annette saw that and left some comments on that table
13:48:02 [newton]
... maybe is better to ask her tomorrow
13:48:11 [newton]
action-233
13:48:11 [trackbot]
action-233 -- Newton Calegari to Check if the turtle and rdfa examples are validated -- due 2016-03-04 -- OPEN
13:48:11 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/233
13:48:44 [newton]
action-234
13:48:44 [trackbot]
action-234 -- Newton Calegari to Check if the turtle and rdfa examples are validated -- due 2016-03-04 -- OPEN
13:48:44 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/234
13:49:06 [newton]
close-234
13:49:08 [phila]
-> http://rdf-translator.appspot.com/ RDF translator might be useful newton
13:49:13 [newton]
close action-234
13:49:13 [trackbot]
Closed action-234.
13:49:23 [newton]
deirdrelee: action-234 is duplicated to 233
13:49:36 [newton]
action-235
13:49:36 [trackbot]
action-235 -- Newton Calegari to Review annette's test for bp8 -- due 2016-03-04 -- OPEN
13:49:36 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/235
13:50:20 [phila]
-> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#VersioningInfo BP8 Provide a version indicator
13:51:11 [newton]
antoine: I reviewed the vocabulary aspects of it and sent a message
13:51:32 [newton]
... but it needs a complete review
13:52:15 [newton]
deirdrelee: action-235 and action-236 can be closed, it's done.
13:52:33 [newton]
Caroline_: we gonna review all the BPs again
13:52:37 [newton]
close action-235
13:52:37 [trackbot]
Closed action-235.
13:52:38 [newton]
close action-236
13:52:38 [trackbot]
Closed action-236.
13:52:43 [newton]
action-237
13:52:43 [trackbot]
action-237 -- Annette Greiner to Email sdw (and dwbp) to ask about their api work (with regard to examples for bp 10) -- due 2016-03-04 -- OPEN
13:52:43 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/237
13:53:00 [newton]
action-238
13:53:00 [trackbot]
action-238 -- Newton Calegari to Include rdfa to the human-readable example of strucutral metadata (dwbp-example.html) -- due 2016-03-11 -- OPEN
13:53:00 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/238
13:53:10 [newton]
newton: it's done
13:53:11 [phila]
trackbot, action-233 due 2016-04-01
13:53:11 [trackbot]
Set action-233 Check if the turtle and rdfa examples are validated due date to 2016-04-01.
13:53:17 [newton]
close action-238
13:53:17 [trackbot]
Closed action-238.
13:53:22 [newton]
action-239
13:53:22 [trackbot]
action-239 -- Peter Winstanley to Check on using an example about real-time data for bp23 -- due 2016-03-18 -- OPEN
13:53:22 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/239
13:53:32 [phila]
ongoing
13:54:40 [phila]
trackbot, action-239 due 2016-03-25
13:54:40 [trackbot]
Set action-239 Check on using an example about real-time data for bp23 due date to 2016-03-25.
13:54:45 [newton]
action-240
13:54:45 [trackbot]
action-240 -- Annette Greiner to Work on the bp for enriching data before the f2f -- due 2016-03-18 -- OPEN
13:54:45 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/240
13:54:50 [phila]
-> http://agreiner.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#EnrichData Annette's work on enrichment
13:54:51 [newton]
deirdrelee: it's done
13:54:54 [newton]
close action-240
13:54:54 [trackbot]
Closed action-240.
13:54:57 [newton]
action-241
13:54:57 [trackbot]
action-241 -- Hadley Beeman to Review bp 22 -- due 2016-03-18 -- OPEN
13:54:57 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/241
13:55:19 [newton]
action-242
13:55:19 [trackbot]
action-242 -- Newton Calegari to Follow up on issue 220 -- due 2016-03-18 -- OPEN
13:55:19 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/242
13:55:25 [phila]
issue-220?
13:55:25 [trackbot]
issue-220 -- Should we include a more complexe example to illustrate provenance? -- closed
13:55:25 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/220
13:55:49 [newton]
newton: not done yet. I need to put the examples
13:56:27 [newton]
action-243
13:56:27 [trackbot]
action-243 -- Caroline Burle to Arrange redseign of the challenges diagram -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN
13:56:27 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/243
13:57:00 [newton]
deirdrelee: yaso, any update on action-148?
13:57:12 [phila]
Yaso proposes to use the Dublin Core definition of a standard
13:57:14 [yaso]
https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/open
13:57:19 [phila]
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-Standard
13:57:32 [newton]
yaso: proposing the Dublin Core definition of standard
13:57:43 [phila]
It defines standards as "A basis for comparison; a reference point against which other things can be evaluated."
13:57:54 [newton]
action-148 ?
13:57:54 [trackbot]
action-148 -- Yaso Córdova to Include a definition of 'a standard' in the glossary -- due 2015-04-20 -- OPEN
13:57:54 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/148
13:58:15 [phila]
trackbot, action-148 due 2016-04-01
13:58:15 [trackbot]
Set action-148 Include a definition of 'a standard' in the glossary due date to 2016-04-01.
13:58:41 [newton]
deirdrelee: we can move to the DQV
13:58:51 [newton]
... ericstephan, are you ok?
13:59:03 [newton]
ericstephan: is ok with that
13:59:06 [phila]
Topic: Dataset Usage Vocabulary
13:59:40 [ericstephan]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html
13:59:53 [phila]
ericstephan: Thanks Uni Zagreb for fixing the audio feed
14:00:16 [deirdrelee]
q?
14:00:27 [deirdrelee]
ack BernadetteLoscio
14:00:36 [laufer]
eric talking about the open issues
14:00:40 [ericstephan]
•Remove requirements section, parts of it is out of date and inaccurate: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/219
14:00:49 [phila]
issue-219?
14:00:49 [trackbot]
issue-219 -- Tying DUV to Use Case requirements. -- open
14:00:49 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/219
14:01:02 [laufer]
issue 219
14:01:08 [deirdrelee]
iisue-219
14:01:13 [deirdrelee]
issue-219
14:01:13 [trackbot]
issue-219 -- Tying DUV to Use Case requirements. -- open
14:01:13 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/219
14:01:15 [phila]
ericstephan: Purpose was to do more with the UCR section. It's at the bottom of the doc
14:01:20 [phila]
... section 9
14:01:21 [ericstephan]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#duvrequirements
14:01:25 [phila]
scribe: laufer
14:02:00 [laufer]
we are working on that now
14:02:21 [laufer]
ericstephan: to remove that section and actually go to the vocabulary overview section
14:02:27 [ericstephan]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#Vocab_Overview
14:03:04 [laufer]
ericstephan: to write how we describe our models
14:04:07 [phila]
ericstephan: Section 6.1 talks about which terms are relevant to which use of the DUV http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#Citation_Model
14:04:13 [laufer]
ericstephan: describing how the duv model is exposed in duv document
14:04:35 [phila]
... our aproach to handling this issue is remove the req section and move some of that documentation into the intro section.
14:04:47 [yaso]
q?
14:04:54 [laufer]
feedback of the group about this way of describing duv model
14:04:57 [yaso]
ack phila
14:06:39 [laufer]
eric: the list of requirements and the list of use cases were updated in the document
14:07:32 [laufer]
ericstephan: we are missing in the duv model to track metrics
14:07:33 [ericstephan]
•We are missing tracking usage counts. Can we use the data quality metrics in the data usage vocabulary?
14:07:59 [riccardoAlbertoni]
q+
14:08:02 [laufer]
ericstephan: we need to work with dqv team to talk about these kind of things
14:08:12 [phila]
q+
14:08:15 [phila]
ack r
14:08:27 [laufer]
riccardoAlbertoni: I can support eric in that issue
14:09:05 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to work with ericstephan on creating examples of dataset usage counts in the DQV
14:09:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-251 - Work with ericstephan on creating examples of dataset usage counts in the dqv [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
14:09:12 [laufer]
riccardoAlbertoni: I will talk to eric asking the type of examples he want
14:09:16 [phila]
ack me
14:10:02 [ericstephan]
oShould the examples in the DUV align with examples provided in the BP document for better readability?
14:10:11 [laufer]
phila: the people want to have a feedback abou who is using the dataset
14:10:18 [phila]
phila: I don't think it's up to the DUV to count uses. The suer only uses it once
14:10:26 [phila]
s/suer/user/
14:10:37 [ericstephan]
•Citation: 1) Basic Criteria for a reference, 2) Approach to associate an article or reference to a dataset. 3) Rationale for use of citation.
14:10:50 [ericstephan]
•Data Usage: 1) Data usage instructions, 2) Data Usage with Tool, 3) Counting Data Usage with DQ Metrics
14:11:04 [ericstephan]
feedback
14:11:11 [yaso]
q?
14:11:32 [laufer]
eric we need more examples of data citations
14:12:02 [phila]
ericstephan: I'm proposing that we write different examples, which won't take long. 2nd - after working on the BP Feedback doc, should we have our examples aligned with the bus schedule example?
14:12:14 [laufer]
ericstephan: in bp about feedback we need also more examples
14:12:26 [phila]
... Would it be helpful to use the same running example as the BP doc?
14:13:02 [BernadetteLoscio]
i think its good!
14:13:22 [laufer]
BernadetteLoscio: agrees with aligning the running examples of the documents
14:13:54 [deirdrelee]
+1
14:14:06 [phila]
phila: I'd say it's better of the DUV examples were aligned with BP but not essential.
14:14:07 [laufer]
phila: it is not essencial to aling the duv running example to the bp running example
14:14:25 [deirdrelee]
q/
14:14:27 [deirdrelee]
q?
14:14:30 [laufer]
phila: but it will be nice to do it
14:14:39 [ericstephan]
oThe vocabulary overview section should reference examples.
14:15:17 [phila]
ericstephan: Another thing... elaborating on the examples also gives us a place to reference those examples. If we're talking about... connecting them better with the vocab overview.
14:15:22 [yaso]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#Vocab_Overview
14:15:28 [laufer]
ericstephan: we give ways to link directly to the examples of the duv document
14:16:14 [ericstephan]
duv.ttl file, are we declaring any third party vocabularies in our duv.ttl file?
14:16:42 [phila]
q+ to say it's OK to add vann:usageNotes
14:17:15 [phila]
ericstephan: I think it would be nice to have the vocab in multiple languages
14:17:19 [phila]
ack me
14:17:19 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to say it's OK to add vann:usageNotes
14:17:42 [ericstephan]
lol
14:17:43 [laufer]
scribe: PWinstanley
14:17:51 [yaso]
phila: the turtle, having labels in multiple languages: it's nice. We need translators
14:18:24 [ericstephan]
I think we might be able to get support for mandarin and japanese
14:19:07 [PWinstanley]
phila: the more difficult qestion is about terms in other peoples' vocabularies; my normal reply is go and do it. My personal view is that it makes sense to write usage notes, but not to add anything else
14:19:27 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: BernadetteLoscio is there anything else?
14:19:34 [PWinstanley]
BernadetteLoscio: no, you did great!
14:19:38 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:19:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
14:19:38 [BernadetteLoscio]
thanks a lot ;)
14:19:39 [phila]
q+
14:19:42 [deirdrelee]
q+
14:19:43 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: ok, thank you
14:19:47 [yaso]
ack phila
14:20:06 [phila]
... onsumers. In addition to supporting duv:Feedback, because the Web Annotation vocabulary provides a generic way of annotating any Web resource, it is recommended that Web Annotation vocabulary be used to annotate the duv:Dataset for uses beyond the scope of the DUV.
14:20:10 [PWinstanley]
phila: I read through the doc. there's a sentence in the intro that includes ....
14:20:24 [PWinstanley]
...and I wonder whether you mean DUV?
14:20:30 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: I mean DCAT
14:20:56 [PWinstanley]
phila: you use PRISM publication date. What is your reason for this over
14:21:03 [phila]
Why prism:publicationdate not dcterms:issued?
14:21:09 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: it comes from the SPAR ontology
14:21:14 [phila]
ericstephan: Recommendation from SPAR
14:21:24 [PWinstanley]
...i don't think it would break things to use dcterms:issue
14:21:43 [yaso]
q?
14:21:45 [PWinstanley]
phila: dcterms:issue is what DCAT uses, but using prism just looks odd
14:22:07 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: it was the first time I came across prism, and I've only seen it in PDF files
14:22:31 [PWinstanley]
phila: personally I 'd use dcterms:issue
14:22:53 [laufer]
s/dcterms:issue/dcterms:issued/
14:22:58 [PWinstanley]
...when you use rdfs:comment for the usage tool, did you consider ***
14:23:32 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: we are looking for something aligned with DCAT - I would rather use that if it was available
14:23:46 [PWinstanley]
phila: how would you specify the name of the usage tool?
14:24:34 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: right now we have a URI, but I am looking for something human readable. At one point we had more of a description of the application, but that dropped out
14:25:30 [PWinstanley]
...it's a balance between a text file giving a description or an existing RDF term
14:26:02 [PWinstanley]
...I looked at various applications, other public domain applications, and all of them had their own format.
14:26:14 [laufer]
q+
14:26:27 [PWinstanley]
...so we might just let people define it as they feels is right, rather than being prescriptive
14:26:36 [PWinstanley]
phila: I would prefer you to choose one
14:27:01 [PWinstanley]
...rdfs label & comment is normal,
14:27:07 [yaso]
ack laufer
14:27:50 [PWinstanley]
laufer: this is not a vocabulary problem. rdfs:label doesn't make sense as the way we explain things to humans, so perhaps we need an ontology for how we descrieb.
14:28:30 [PWinstanley]
...we need to define how to make a human comment.
14:28:51 [antoine]
q+
14:29:00 [deirdrelee]
q- deirdrelee
14:29:11 [yaso]
ack antoine
14:29:18 [PWinstanley]
antoine: I don't know if we should enforce consistency
14:29:50 [PWinstanley]
...we have strong reason in skos as they are skos concepts, even though using them doesn't require that they are skos concepts.
14:29:56 [PWinstanley]
...maybe something to consider
14:30:17 [BernadetteLoscio]
i think we can consider using skos
14:30:24 [phila]
phila: We'll leave it to the editors to decide/explain thinking
14:30:29 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: it's something we canexplain as part of the vocabulary
14:30:31 [phila]
q?
14:30:54 [PWinstanley]
yaso: I think its a decision the editors can make
14:31:07 [deirdrelee]
q+
14:31:13 [phila]
ack d
14:31:24 [PWinstanley]
deirdrelee: is this a DUV?
14:31:35 [phila]
deirdrelee: In terms of next steps, deadlines etc.
14:31:52 [PWinstanley]
...next steps.... the goal is to have a version that the board can decide on
14:31:54 [phila]
... Our goal here is that by the time we finish here in Zagreb, we should be pretty much finished
14:32:14 [phila]
ericstephan: I think we're talking about finalising examples, making some corrections in the text.
14:32:18 [phila]
... Model is now stable
14:32:24 [PWinstanley]
ericstephan: what we're talking about here is finalising examples. I see the models staying as they are - they are in final form
14:32:25 [phila]
... in final form now.
14:32:47 [phila]
deirdrelee: So maybe we have 2 weeks to finish off.
14:33:10 [phila]
deirdrelee: our end date is July.
14:33:25 [phila]
... Do we say this is the last version from us? No more comments etc.?
14:33:33 [ericstephan]
q+
14:33:42 [deirdrelee]
ack ericstephan
14:34:01 [phila]
ericstephan: One of the things I'm doing is getting with some people at FORECE2015 in April, Datacite efforts on Portland
14:34:18 [phila]
... Also meeting with another person lookingn at how you apply metrics to citations to show value.
14:34:43 [phila]
... So I wouldn't like to say we're completely done, but I'd like to put thinks in a ready state, but with some of ther workshops comign up, I'd like opportunities to iterate.
14:34:46 [phila]
q+
14:34:47 [riccardoAlbertoni]
q+
14:34:52 [phila]
q- later
14:34:57 [riccardoAlbertoni]
q-
14:35:15 [phila]
deirdrelee: I'd be included to put a final deadline on this. Maybe end of March?
14:35:22 [BernadetteLoscio]
yes!
14:35:33 [phila]
ericstephan: I guess an action is to put together/update the timetable
14:36:01 [phila]
action: stephan to create time table for DUV progress/iterations
14:36:01 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-252 - Create time table for duv progress/iterations [on Eric Stephan - due 2016-03-21].
14:36:54 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We'd like anotehr round of feedback. We need to be careful that this feedback doesn't change the example in the BP doc
14:37:15 [phila]
... but the DQV is pretty stable
14:37:25 [phila]
... So the next round of comments may affect the BP doc
14:37:57 [phila]
deirdrelee: If that's happening, and if you're going to workshoips, Eric... we shoud put out both vocabs in a couple of weeks
14:37:58 [phila]
q-
14:38:01 [ericstephan]
This sounds great
14:38:12 [phila]
deirdrelee: So the feedback at those events is part of final feedback
14:38:23 [phila]
deirdrelee: Anything else on DUV?
14:38:29 [phila]
ericstephan: It's done and I'm done
14:38:33 [BernadetteLoscio]
thanks a lot Eric!!!
14:38:41 [phila]
PROPOSED: Vote of thanks to Eric for being awake
14:38:43 [phila]
+1
14:38:48 [riccardoAlbertoni]
bye
14:38:49 [BernadetteLoscio]
+1
14:38:55 [Ig_Bittencourt]
+1
14:38:55 [yaso]
+1!
14:39:07 [ericstephan]
bye take care! Talk to you tomorrow
14:39:09 [phila]
RESOLVED: Vote of thanks to Eric for being awake
14:39:24 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
14:39:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
14:47:12 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
JoaoPauloAlmeida has joined #dwbp
14:55:37 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
is IRC being used for the Zagreb meeting?
14:57:30 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
15:00:15 [yaso]
yaso has joined #dwbp
15:00:28 [phila]
Details at https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/ZagrebF2F#Dial_in_Details JoaoPauloAlmeida
15:00:28 [PWinstanley]
PWinstanley has joined #dwbp
15:00:48 [phila]
topic: Data Quality Vocabulary
15:00:52 [phila]
scribe: phila
15:00:59 [davide_]
davide_ has joined #dwbp
15:01:06 [deirdrelee]
we're back
15:02:20 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
present+JoaoPauloAlmeida
15:02:46 [pekka]
pekka has joined #dwbp
15:02:47 [deirdrelee]
topic: DQV
15:02:53 [miskaknapek]
miskaknapek has joined #dwbp
15:03:02 [phila]
antoine: Before we start... maybe a reminder of the ,ain building blocks
15:03:24 [phila]
... At the root there is either a Dataset or Distribution
15:03:38 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
I can hear perfectly, Deirdre and Phil, thanks
15:03:47 [phila]
antoine: First one if the idea of a quality measure
15:03:48 [riccardoAlbertoni]
to people on irc we are using the diagram at http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/images/DataQuality0.2.8.svg
15:04:03 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
I thought the session would be about DUV. Have the plans changed?
15:04:17 [phila]
... measurement is based on a metric, based on a dimension like the rpecision or the accuracy, using a category of some kind from the ISO spec.
15:04:44 [phila]
... Secone one is not so much about numbers, more subjective. Use web annotation model. Used OA to express quality feedback
15:04:50 [phila]
... This is where we connect with DUV
15:04:58 [phila]
... Also more formal certificates
15:05:20 [phila]
... Fimnally we have the notionof standard, saying that a dataset conforms to a dcterms:Standard
15:05:30 [phila]
... especially the notion fo a quality policy.
15:05:39 [phila]
... this is an issue to talk about later.
15:06:11 [phila]
deirdrelee: So does this address things like how to represnet how the dataset represents time
15:06:33 [phila]
... Can you say that the values of a property use ISO8601 for example
15:06:59 [phila]
antoine: That's the example we use for this. But the problem is the granularity - it's at the level of the dataset, not individual values
15:07:26 [phila]
deirdrelee: I think that overlaps with what we were saying about BP, locale parameters
15:07:49 [phila]
antoine: The example we have is from geoDCAT-AP, saying that the dataset is copmatible with @@@ spec
15:07:58 [phila]
antoine: So we need to go through the issues that we have.
15:08:21 [phila]
... Issues were noted in the doc so we're more or less going through the issues as they appear in the doc.
15:08:32 [phila]
-> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html DQV doc
15:08:33 [deirdrelee]
http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html
15:08:43 [phila]
issue-181?
15:08:44 [trackbot]
issue-181 -- Should we have only the existing class dqv:QualityMeasureDataset (formerly known as daq:QualityGraph) or keep the new class dqv:QualityMetadata? -- open
15:08:44 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/181
15:09:00 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: These 2 classes are called different things
15:09:43 [phila]
... Quality Graph is about RDF, Quality Metadata is all the things you can say in the DQV (scribe unsure if this is accurate)
15:10:28 [phila]
laufer: here we have this discussion in DUV too. Here we are saying things about dcat:Dataset or Distribution. This is a formal thing in RDF
15:10:49 [phila]
... The dataset is defined as a dact:Dataset - or can we have another kind of dataset?
15:11:11 [phila]
... Maybe Data Cube is not a dcat:Dataset?
15:11:23 [phila]
... You have a formal constraint in the RDF?
15:11:33 [phila]
antoine: We have a couple of domain and ranges
15:12:06 [phila]
... but if you apply a property and if the consequence is that the class is inferred to be a dcatDataset or dcat:Distribution - they won't care
15:12:12 [phila]
laufer: I'm not so sure.
15:12:37 [phila]
antoine: We try to avoid making unnecessary inferences
15:13:12 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We decided to leave open whether you're talking about a Dataset or a Distro - no formal constraint.
15:13:38 [phila]
antoine: I can't find any domain or range for Distribution or dataset in the RDF
15:14:28 [riccardoAlbertoni]
Adding a note saying that qualityMetadata graph not necessary contains all of quality statements DQV is supporting and it is left to implementers decide the granularity of containement. Moreover If they want not use graph containement they can consider to use their own property to link instances of quality metadata with instances of other DQV classes. For example using (a subproperty of) dcterms:hasPart.
15:15:21 [deirdrelee]
q?
15:15:39 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: Talks through the proposed text
15:16:57 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to add proposed text above in the minutes on 2016-03-14 and close issue 181
15:16:57 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-253 - Add proposed text above in the minutes on 2016-03-14 and close issue 181 [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
15:17:04 [phila]
RRSAgent, pointer
15:17:04 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-irc#T15-17-04
15:17:16 [phila]
close issue-181
15:17:16 [trackbot]
Closed issue-181.
15:17:34 [phila]
Issue-199?
15:17:34 [trackbot]
Issue-199 -- Is dqv:QualityPolicy a subclass of dcterms:Standard? -- open
15:17:34 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/199
15:18:32 [phila]
antoine: This was related to the action on nandana. We have produced an example that reuses @@@ for ODRL. Want to use offer or agreement from ODRL
15:19:26 [phila]
... Cost us some time talking to ODRL. Ended up with something that looks a little strange but we've added it to the doc. But end result is that dqv:QualityPolicy no longer needs to be a subclass of dcterms:Standard
15:19:35 [phila]
... You may not want to call a policy a standard.
15:19:54 [phila]
... That's why I don't like the dcterms defn of standard as it's too loose.
15:20:10 [phila]
deirdrelee: You're implying that a quality policy could be a standard, but not necessarily
15:21:18 [phila]
laufer: Maybe we can have a direct link from the Dataset to the Quality policy?
15:21:33 [phila]
antoine: Shows updated disgram with odrl:target from a quality policy and the dataset
15:21:34 [phila]
q+
15:21:40 [phila]
q+ to talk about ODRL
15:21:57 [phila]
laufer: If one decides that his policy is a standard, he will make the link
15:22:19 [deirdrelee]
ack phila
15:22:19 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about ODRL
15:23:48 [phila]
phila: You know that ODRL is being put through the rec Track now? Would that affect DQV?
15:24:06 [phila]
antoine: I think we were going to highlight that. It's only in an example here so we'll be OK.
15:24:14 [phila]
... It won't change anything in the DQV itself
15:24:39 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: So we can close this issue
15:24:44 [phila]
close issue-199
15:24:44 [trackbot]
Closed issue-199.
15:25:09 [phila]
deirdrelee: The decision is that it's not a sub class
15:25:24 [phila]
RRSAgent, pointer?
15:25:24 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-irc#T15-25-24
15:26:24 [phila]
action: antoine To turn the text of issue 11 into a Note in the doc
15:26:24 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-254 - Turn the text of issue 11 into a note in the doc [on Antoine Isaac - due 2016-03-21].
15:27:51 [phila]
issue-222?
15:27:51 [trackbot]
issue-222 -- Multiple/Derived values of a metric -- open
15:27:51 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/222
15:28:10 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We decided not to represent multiple values of a metric
15:28:24 [phila]
... because of the way QB works.
15:28:55 [deirdrelee]
q?
15:29:08 [phila]
...QB has 2 patterns. One relies on 1 value for any observation, the other for multiple values fo an observation. We're following the first
15:29:31 [phila]
... We think it's still possible to represent the metric that has a value connecting... @@@ ??
15:30:20 [phila]
... We have an issue with 2 sub issues. The first is about mutliple values. We're not considering this because we'e not allowing ,multiple values for a qualuty measurement.
15:30:47 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: ... we are able to supplor metircs that add multiple values.
15:31:05 [phila]
antoine: Most of the cases we have seen in the comments asking for multiple values, we can represent as derived values.
15:32:04 [phila]
... all the aggregate stuff. You have all the values and you want the average. They wanted both on the same class. WE think it's 2 seperate metrics
15:32:37 [phila]
deirdrelee: So you haven't seen any cases where there's a need for independent measures of the same metrics.
15:33:06 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: If you have 2 metrics about tghe same dimension, you can record that. The problem is where you want to have single metric with multiplevalues.
15:33:39 [phila]
laufer: If we are talking here about relations between metrics. A relation |-| 2 metrics
15:33:46 [phila]
... We can make relations between metrics.
15:34:15 [phila]
... Here we are saying that 2 metrics have a relation. How can we group related metrics. I think this is bigger ... can we group metrics?
15:36:46 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
JoaoPauloAlmeida has joined #dwbp
15:36:54 [phila]
antoine: AS part of the resolution for this issue is to rese the generic relation prov dervied from
15:37:31 [phila]
... If we have identified that one metric can be derived from another, quality annotation can be derived from a metric etc.
15:37:43 [phila]
... So we're thinking about a general derivation framework
15:37:55 [phila]
... People can use it as they see fit.
15:38:28 [phila]
... Can't predict all the scenarios
15:39:01 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: So by having this property, we propose to close 222 and have an action for riccardoAlbertoni to add an example of using prov:derivedFrom
15:39:44 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to create an example using prov:wasDerivedFrom in the DQV, close issue-222
15:39:45 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-255 - Create an example using prov:wasderivedfrom in the dqv, close issue-222 [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
15:39:55 [phila]
antoine: We have already gone back to the commenters (A week ago)
15:40:10 [phila]
... The mail has been sent, they can complain of course and we can reopen the issue if needs be.
15:40:24 [phila]
... That was Werner and Andrea p
15:40:45 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:40:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
15:40:48 [phila]
issue-201?
15:40:48 [trackbot]
issue-201 -- Should we exploit predefined instances of oa:Motivation to further characterize the UserQualityFeedback purposes? -- open
15:40:48 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/201
15:40:52 [diana]
diana has joined #dwbp
15:41:17 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We had quality annotations and quality annotations are one kind of annotation
15:41:23 [phila]
deirdrelee: We're skipping 223?
15:41:30 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We're skipping some
15:41:35 [phila]
deirdrelee: Will we come back to it?
15:41:55 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We have some solutions but we're not sure yet. We want to focus on the issues for which we have proposals.
15:42:54 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: So quality annotation can be user feedback or a certificate.
15:43:04 [phila]
... We were thinking of specialising the user feedback.
15:43:25 [phila]
... It could in interesting to distinguish between questions about the data and classifications of it
15:43:36 [phila]
... To solve this issue, we're going to add an example
15:43:45 [phila]
... we have differnet actions to consider.
15:44:10 [phila]
... First is to add a nite to say to the suer that they can, if need to, add their own motivations
15:44:29 [phila]
... Any annotation is connected to a motivation. In DQV we add a specific motication of quality assessment
15:44:50 [phila]
... We plan to use oa:motivatedBy -> dqv:QualityAssessment
15:45:24 [phila]
... But we still want to provide more flexibility. We are adding a note to say that they can add a new motiviation but they should follow the OA guidelines.
15:45:52 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni To add a Note saying that new motivations can be defined but that this should be done following the Open Annotation guidelines
15:45:52 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-256 - Add a note saying that new motivations can be defined but that this should be done following the open annotation guidelines [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
15:46:24 [phila]
antoine: The issue is whether we're going to subclass ?? rather than oa:Motivation
15:46:57 [phila]
... We're suggesting to add guidelines to show how to add finer-grained motivations, rather than defineing sub classes of annotation.
15:47:15 [phila]
s/??/annotation/
15:47:35 [phila]
laufer: So Motivation is for humans. here you are adding something for machines - classification of the text that is in the annotation.
15:47:56 [phila]
laufer: A motivation is a kind of commenet for humans.
15:48:28 [phila]
laufer: You can tell that the annotation expresses a question. Maybe we can represent this thread - all the things related to the request for modification, for example
15:48:41 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: You are thinking about represneting the whole thread?
15:48:56 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: I think the OA work already handles tracking threads.
15:49:04 [phila]
... So we can rely on OA for that.
15:49:42 [phila]
antoine: DQV is a framework for making quality metadata more interoperable. It's going to be hard to share across all applications.
15:49:59 [phila]
... They'd have differnet properties in differnet contexts I think.
15:50:13 [phila]
... We don't want to tell people how to build their application.
15:50:42 [phila]
... You can imagine a very complex sutuation that ultimately comes down to an annotation on quality.
15:50:53 [phila]
... This seems to match what the OA group did.
15:51:03 [phila]
laufer: yes, but this is the beginning of the track.
15:51:20 [phila]
laufer: We're not continuing the track - so why begin it?
15:52:44 [deirdrelee]
q+
15:52:55 [phila]
antoine: Some people will be frustrated that we're not providing all the metrics, but we realise that we can't - which is frustrating to us
15:55:14 [deirdrelee]
ack deirdrelee
15:55:52 [phila]
antoine: In the comments we got about dimensions, we realsied thast dimensions and categories are crucial. We're suggesting applying diments to standards and quality annotations so that every statement can be applied in an existing frameowrk such as the ISO one.
15:55:59 [phila]
deirdrelee: is this a differnet issue?
15:56:09 [phila]
antoine: No, it's a side issue for the current one.
15:56:47 [phila]
antoine: We were afraid that if we didn't do this, people would associate oa:Motivation with category
15:57:02 [phila]
deirdrelee: The DQV quality assessment...
15:57:24 [phila]
antoine: It's still not in the diagram, but it's in the model as an instance of oa:Motivation.
15:57:33 [phila]
... It appears in the spec but we haven't created a table for it
15:57:43 [phila]
deirdrelee: So it shoujld be described somewhere.
15:57:53 [phila]
antoine: There's a passing reference in the text
15:58:32 [phila]
deirdrelee: Do you see it as part of the model or an example of how to use it?
15:58:34 [phila]
antoine: The model
15:59:20 [phila]
action: antoine to add a table describing the resource dqv:QualutyAssessment
15:59:21 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-257 - Add a table describing the resource dqv:qualutyassessment [on Antoine Isaac - due 2016-03-21].
15:59:23 [phila]
q+
15:59:42 [phila]
ack me
15:59:55 [phila]
phila: if it's a term in the vocab, it should have a table
16:00:14 [phila]
antoine: But it's an instance, not a class. You can data without it.
16:00:26 [phila]
... Hmm... maybe we can. OK.
16:00:50 [phila]
... We'll make it more explicit.
16:01:13 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
16:01:16 [phila]
q-
16:01:28 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:01:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
16:02:13 [riccardoAlbertoni]
remove the domain from dqv:inDimension, move it from section measurement and add it in the DQV Diagram and send a email to Jeremy. With the new definition of dqv:inDimension, where dqv:inDimension is a super-property of the inverse of daq:hasMetric,
16:02:38 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to remove the domain from dqv:inDimension, move it from section measurement and add it in the DQV Diagram and send a email to Jeremy. With the new definition of dqv:inDimension, where dqv:inDimension is a super-property of the inverse of daq:hasMetric
16:02:39 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-258 - Remove the domain from dqv:indimension, move it from section measurement and add it in the dqv diagram and send a email to jeremy. with the new definition of dqv:indimension, where dqv:indimension is a super-property of the inverse of daq:hasmetric [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
16:03:06 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to add examples showing user feedback for questioning and classification.
16:03:07 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-259 - Add examples showing user feedback for questioning and classification. [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
16:03:19 [phila]
close issue-201
16:03:19 [trackbot]
Closed issue-201.
16:03:35 [phila]
issue-205?
16:03:35 [trackbot]
issue-205 -- Representing dimensions and categories SKOS Concepts -- open
16:03:35 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/205
16:04:24 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We have already use skos:Concepts in the examples, so... the only thing we have to do to close this is to write down that dimensions and categories are defined as skos:Concepts
16:04:41 [deirdrelee]
+1
16:04:51 [phila]
action: to ensure text makes clear that dimensions anad categories are defined as subclasses of skos:Concept
16:04:51 [trackbot]
Error finding 'to'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/users>.
16:04:58 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to ensure text makes clear that dimensions anad categories are defined as subclasses of skos:Concept
16:04:58 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-260 - to ensure text makes clear that dimensions anad categories are defined as subclasses of skos:concept [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
16:05:07 [phila]
close issue-205
16:05:07 [trackbot]
Closed issue-205.
16:05:12 [phila]
issue-204?
16:05:12 [trackbot]
issue-204 -- Introducing abstract classes and properties -- open
16:05:12 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/204
16:05:40 [phila]
antoine: This is the most difficult issue so far
16:06:24 [phila]
antoine: This is about keeping dimension, categories etc. as abstarct classes that should never be instantiated. Sub classes should be crreated that are instantiated.
16:06:51 [phila]
... They are two abstract to be useful. Also, subclasses can define what the mertics are
16:07:04 [phila]
antoine: Proposal is
16:07:17 [riccardoAlbertoni]
we acknowledge the abstractness of dqv:Dimension and dqv:Category. We believe that defining them as classes is not optimal in terms of complexity of representation and interoperability. Looking at daQ we also think there is no fundamental feature of daQ that it lost in DQV if we represent instances dqv:Dimension and dqv:Category as skos:Concepts (as suggested for Issue-205), which is a way to express that they are abstract entities. Matt[CUT]
16:08:38 [riccardoAlbertoni]
daQ uses classes and subclasses to represent constraints on specific measurement (e.g. type of values). However, this is rather a modeling “trick” (and a requirements for having subclasses of daq:Metric) rather than a real requirement for abstract classes. We also have doubts that with the (open world) RDFS/OWL semantics of classes, these axioms can really enforce constraints on metrics and measurements. With new languages being cur[CUT]
16:08:44 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
JoaoPauloAlmeida has joined #dwbp
16:09:11 [riccardoAlbertoni]
ent constraints (SHACL) we think it is more appropriate not to recommend anything now about treating metrics as subclasses of dqv:Metric, and thus to postpone discussion on this part of the issue. We could add an editor’s note about this (daQ subclass trick, and SHACL for constraints), referring implementers to future progress on SHACL and related technology.
16:10:38 [phila]
antoine: Our objection is that we're not sure this this modelling trick works. The OWA messes it up.
16:10:55 [phila]
... So for constraints, we'd rather postpone and see what SHACL comes up with.
16:11:32 [phila]
... So we'd like to capture constraints but we're not sure that the daQ is the right way
16:11:53 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
RSSAgent, pointer
16:11:54 [phila]
antoine: So we intend to havae a Note to point people to SHACL
16:12:04 [phila]
RRSAgent, pointer?
16:12:04 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-irc#T16-12-04
16:12:26 [JoaoPauloAlmeida]
thanks, phila
16:13:24 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to add a Note to the effect of the decision about using SHACL rather than abstract and sub classes.
16:13:24 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-261 - Add a note to the effect of the decision about using shacl rather than abstract and sub classes. [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
16:13:28 [phila]
close issue-204
16:13:28 [trackbot]
Closed issue-204.
16:13:36 [phila]
issue-202?
16:13:36 [trackbot]
issue-202 -- Relation between dqv, iso 19115/19157 and geodcat-ap -- open
16:13:36 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/202
16:14:05 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We had somments from Andrea Perego about the expression of a dataset is following DCAT-AP standard etc.
16:14:30 [phila]
... We addressed part of that. Then there's the part about if we have to include specific non-conformant stuff to be compliant with INSPIRE
16:14:53 [phila]
... Idea is not to include this is DQV but to refer to GeoDCAT-AP as an example
16:15:29 [deirdrelee]
q+
16:15:38 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: So we suggest the issue can be closed and have an action to add editorial note in which we suggest to refer to geoDCAT-AP solution in order to represent not-conformant...
16:16:26 [phila]
ack d
16:16:46 [phila]
deirdrelee: Not sure I'm understanding this - we're talking about metadata conformance, or data?
16:16:55 [phila]
... Why is the distinction being made?
16:19:32 [phila]
action: riccardoAlbertoni to turn an existing paragraph on representing conformance and non-conformance into the Note pointing to GeoDCAT-AP
16:19:33 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-262 - Turn an existing paragraph on representing conformance and non-conformance into the note pointing to geodcat-ap [on Riccardo Albertoni - due 2016-03-21].
16:19:40 [phila]
close issue-202
16:19:41 [trackbot]
Closed issue-202.
16:20:35 [phila]
issue-225?
16:20:35 [trackbot]
issue-225 -- Levels of granularity for dimensions and categories -- open
16:20:35 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/225
16:21:09 [phila]
antoine: Comments we got were remarking that our classification in dimensions and categories as there were only 2 levels with no way to group them together
16:21:35 [phila]
... We said that by using skos:Concepts, we allow specialisation by broader/narrower
16:22:29 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: We can't use concept for metrics though because...
16:23:32 [phila]
More discussion of broader/narrower but not for metrics
16:23:57 [phila]
antoine: So we've e-mailed the commenter explaining our plan so we plan to close the issue and re-open if we get an objection.
16:24:11 [phila]
antoine: Mail was sent a week ago.
16:24:17 [phila]
close issue-225
16:24:18 [trackbot]
Closed issue-225.
16:24:38 [yaso]
yaso has joined #dwbp
16:24:44 [phila]
issue-191?
16:24:44 [trackbot]
issue-191 -- Backward compatibility with DAQ and Data Cube -- open
16:24:44 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/191
16:25:04 [phila]
riccardoAlbertoni: Propose to postpone
16:25:48 [phila]
antoine: It's a bit of back burner issue. It's been raised as a reminder that we should try to remain compatible. We think we have done our best
16:26:09 [phila]
deirdrelee: We could make it an action to do the comparison
16:26:59 [phila]
action: antoine to assess compatibility of DqV with Data Cube by 2016-04-15
16:26:59 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-263 - Assess compatibility of dqv with data cube by 2016-04-15 [on Antoine Isaac - due 2016-03-21].
16:27:09 [phila]
close issue-191
16:27:09 [trackbot]
Closed issue-191.
16:27:24 [phila]
trackbot, action-262 by 2016-04-15
16:27:24 [trackbot]
Sorry, phila, I don't understand 'trackbot, action-262 by 2016-04-15'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
16:27:35 [phila]
trackbot, action-262 due by 2016-04-15
16:27:35 [trackbot]
Set action-262 Turn an existing paragraph on representing conformance and non-conformance into the note pointing to geodcat-ap due date to 2016-03-21.
16:27:47 [phila]
issue-243?
16:27:47 [trackbot]
issue-243 -- Representing precision and accuracy -- open
16:27:47 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/243
16:28:45 [phila]
antoine: This issue is ensuring that we can say something about this in DQV. We plan to add a BP about this to the BP doc
16:29:00 [phila]
action-248?
16:29:00 [trackbot]
action-248 -- Phil Archer to Write a bp around accuracy and precision, the pitfalls of false accuracy etc. -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN
16:29:00 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/248
16:29:23 [phila]
antoine: So we suggest we create an example showing precision and accuracy based on Andrea's e-mail
16:29:57 [phila]
... We also plan to use a special instance of dqv:Dimension to represent precision, based on the ISo categories
16:30:33 [phila]
... That would be a resource to be used in the example. We don't know whether we chould create a URI for this in the DQV namespace
16:31:04 [phila]
... The comes back to the very first thing about the DQV which was meant to be quality and granularity
16:31:10 [phila]
deirdrelee: That makes it more special
16:31:21 [annette_g]
annette_g has joined #dwbp
16:34:38 [phila]
antoine: So do we want to create a URI for the dimension of precision in the DQV namespace?
16:35:41 [phila]
PROPOSED: That we will add a spedcific dimension of precision to the DQV namespace
16:35:52 [phila]
PROPOSED: That we will add a specific dimension of precision to the DQV namespace
16:36:08 [deirdrelee]
+1 (for now)
16:36:14 [phila]
antoine: We can check when we create the example
16:36:20 [phila]
+1 for now
16:36:43 [phila]
laufer: I havea a comment about dqv:QualityAssessment is an instance of oa:Motivation
16:36:56 [phila]
... so you have rdfs:type oa:Motivation?
16:37:24 [phila]
antoine: we have the action to create a table about that
16:37:48 [laufer]
+1
16:37:50 [phila]
... So we'll create two classes there, or maybe roll back to 1 depending on feedback
16:37:53 [riccardoAlbertoni]
+1 for now
16:37:53 [Ig_Bittencourt]
0
16:38:19 [PWinstanley]
+1
16:38:29 [phila]
Ig_Bittencourt: I'm not sure why need that, I'd need to look back at the thread.
16:38:35 [phila]
RESOLVED: That we will add a specific dimension of precision to the DQV namespace
16:39:18 [phila]
antoine: So we can close issue243
16:39:24 [phila]
close issue-243
16:39:24 [trackbot]
Closed issue-243.
16:39:42 [phila]
close action-248
16:39:42 [trackbot]
Closed action-248.
16:40:04 [phila]
action: phila to ensure that the BP doc refers to the example for representing precision and accuracy in the DQV
16:40:05 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-264 - Ensure that the bp doc refers to the example for representing precision and accuracy in the dqv [on Phil Archer - due 2016-03-21].
16:40:35 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:40:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
16:40:54 [phila]
deirdrelee: Wraps up the meeting for the day
16:41:10 [phila]
deirdrelee: Offers some of tomorrow's time to DQV
16:42:14 [phila]
... First thing we'll do APIs etc with Annette, maybe before lunch we can regroup around DQV and BP
16:42:40 [phila]
deirdrelee: So time line is to close off DQV by end of April.
16:43:00 [phila]
... Still lots of strands to pull in.
16:43:14 [phila]
newton: We have a couple of new ussues for BP but we should be able to resolve them tomorrow
16:43:24 [phila]
s/ussues/issues/
16:44:17 [phila]
Dinner this evening is at 19:00 Žlica i Vilica, Kneza Mislava 13
16:44:27 [phila]
See https://www.google.hr/maps/place/%C5%BDlica+I+Vilica/@45.809031,15.9769658,15z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x4765d655ce0eb7ef:0x49f04319f72721b0
16:45:15 [phila]
deirdrelee: Thanks the scribes, thanks to editors. Thanks to Share-PSI
16:45:24 [phila]
Adjourned
16:45:34 [phila]
RRSAgent, generate minutes
16:45:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/14-dwbp-minutes.html phila
18:00:15 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
18:20:23 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #dwbp
20:51:50 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
20:53:29 [newton_]
newton_ has joined #dwbp
21:16:48 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
21:51:03 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp
22:20:28 [yaso]
yaso has joined #dwbp
22:35:00 [ericstephan]
ericstephan has joined #dwbp
22:49:54 [newton]
newton has joined #dwbp