DWBP Weekly -- 08 Apr 2016

<hadleybeeman> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160408

<scribe> scribe: annette_g

<hadleybeeman> https://www.w3.org/2016/04/01-dwbp-minutes

<ericstephan> sorry time got away from me, calling in shortly

PROPOSED: accept last week's minutes.

<yaso> +1

<hadleybeeman> +1

<BernadetteLoscio> +1

<riccardoAlbertoni> +1

+1, given that Phil fixes the date

<ericstephan> +1

<phila> +1

<newton> _1

RESOLUTION: accept last week's minutes.

<newton> +1

<Caroline> +1

hadleybeeman: 30 seconds of update on the BP doc

BernadetteLoscio: it's almost ready!

BP doc

<phila> Ed Draft of BP

BernadetteLoscio: we're finishing some more updates, can finish during the day today and freeze at the end of today

hadleybeeman: please send a message out when it's time to start reviewing

BernadetteLoscio: we want comments during the week. We'll wait to update the doc.
... also, we need some help
... with examples, the structural metadata example in particular. Can Phil help?

phila: I'll ask people who are more connected with the csv work, but I will try.

<ericstephan> yes Gregg would be great

BernadetteLoscio: If it's not possible, we'll freeze like this.

phila: I'll ask Greg Kellogg
... or someone from the CSV group

BernadetteLoscio: is it okay to freeze later today?

hadleybeeman: yes

BernadetteLoscio: we made some editorial changes on intended outcomes of some best practices, so I want feedback about that.
... we are trying to have a standard way of presenting the outcomes. So if something isn't correct, please tell us

<Zakim> phila, you wanted to ask about native speaker bits

PWinstanley: had a question about policy of content. Is it a good idea to link to live example? One example is the API stuff.

hadleybeeman: we should copy stuff into our doc if we can

PWinstanley: would like to change the API documentation

<ericstephan> We could find a Citation to a paper written on the Flood project

phila: I want to do a native speaker review on the doc
... is it okay to do that while it's frozen?

forking -1

hadleybeeman: my inclination is to do it in parallel but add them at the end with all other changes

BernadetteLoscio: the editors think it's okay, Phil can choose

<ericstephan> Is this editorial "fracking"? ;-)

phila: I wouldn't do a merge

hadleybeeman: it sounds to me like that should go with the other changes

<ericstephan> sorry its something being done in the US where people search for oil underground and create havoc for those living above ground

annette_g: my experience as an editor screams "don't fork it"

newton: would someone help with validating the RDF in the doc?

phila: I'll do that as part of my review

<riccardoAlbertoni> thanks!!

hadleybeeman: congrats to the editors for doing a fantastic job!

<phila> PROPOSED: Vote of thanks to the BP doc editors for doing so much work

<riccardoAlbertoni> to the editor of bp

<phila> +1

<yaso> +1

<ericstephan> ++++1

Data Quality vocab

<newton> :-)

<riccardoAlbertoni> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-dqg.html

RESOLUTION: Vote of thanks to the BP doc editors for doing so much work

<BernadetteLoscio> :)

riccardoAlbertoni: we've had some great input, but still have to do some work. Given that the BP doc is where it is, we're thinking about how to schedule the DQV. we could consider another round of feedback or try to take advantage of the 3 weeks in which we're waiting for comments on the BP doc.
... I'd like to hear the opinion of the group. From the point of view of transparency, adding a new working draft is a good option, but I'm worried that if we add new comments that will distract us from ongoing edits.

@hadleybeeman help never hurts, but yes

riccardoAlbertoni: I'd like to know the group's preference.

antoine: I think I"m okay getting feedback. We're already aiming in that direction.

riccardoAlbertoni: but should we do that with a new draft or not?

<Zakim> phila, you wanted to be the ex-advertising bloke

phila: we're heading towards a date when we'll be saying the BP doc is done unless you think otherwise (last call).

<ericstephan> and in conclusion e=mc squared..

phila: it's a nice PR message

<phila> I'm saying we should get feedback on all docs together

<ericstephan> :-)

<Zakim> hadleybeeman, you wanted to ask about implementations

<ericstephan> +1 hadleybeeman

hadleybeeman: the vocabs are not rec track, but we do get a lot of credibility by demonstrating that it's not stuff we just made up by ourselves. It would be good for the vocabs to go out to the general public and help us build up our documentation to justify the decisions we're making.

ericstephan: I understand the need to say we've completed these activities, but the data modeler in me says that vocabs will continue to change because they always do. How do we deal with that in the future?

<ericstephan> oh no

phila: one the WG is closed, the team is responsible for maintenance.

<ericstephan> nice

<ericstephan> regarding content negociation by profile

phila: the next working group will be doing an update of DCAT, will look at content negotiation by profile, could potentially also come back to the DQV and DUV to put them on the rec track..

<BernadetteLoscio> great :)

hadleybeeman: there's a certain amount of stability that we need to emphasis by completing a version of this (or anything). Industry or developers need to be able to focus on something stable for a length of time.

ericstephan: one of the things we found in the DUV is that there are holes in DCAT, so I"m very excited about the revision of DCAT. The DUV could in some ways update based on what DCAT does.

hadleybeeman: back to riccardoAlbertoni's question. Should they get feedback in parallel with the BP doc or use the time to write?

riccardoAlbertoni: would the doc continue to be a public working draft?

hadleybeeman: yes, until it becomes a note

antoine: I'm leaning toward making a public working draft

riccardoAlbertoni: that means we have to finish up some things. Is that okay for you, antoine?

antoine: we can put in some notes marking things as unfinished and asking for feedback

hadleybeeman: in order to publish next week, we still need to get the working group to vote, which means we have to be okay that it's not finishted.

<phila> Yes, there is more time for changes for the vocabs than for the BP doc

hadleybeeman: I don't want people to be saying we should not publish because they still want to make changes. there will still be plenty of time for changes afterward.
... are you guys okay with that

antoine: yes

hadleybeeman: DUV update?

DUV

<ericstephan> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html

<ericstephan> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Data_usage_schedule

ericstephan: the DUV right now has been making some slight changes in some of the examples (more elaborate, aligned with the bus timetable example), we tried to link in from the vocabulary overview section. We're trying to put things into some sort of a final state. There was a request for a schedule.

<ericstephan> https://www.force11.org/meetings/force2016

ericstephan: BernadetteLoscio provided some editorial changes, so we pushed things out to April 10. Also coming up this week is that I'm going to be going to a Force 11 conference where we'll present a poster on the DUV. We hope to get community feedback there.
... any questions?

phila: thank you eric for getting into the Force11 event. Have you created the poster, can we get some images of it and you in Portland?

ericstephan: yes, I'll be happy to do that
... I was asked to participate in a debate about good open standards practices. I want to refer to our best practices doc.
... I've reached out to some communities about how you measure citations. If you reference a paper, what is the value of that? There should be some interesting nuances in data usage that I can come back with.

<phila> Thank you Eric

<ericstephan> http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/vocab-du.html#conclusion

ericstephan: one last thing: this may be a bit controversial, I put a conclusion in. It brings up future work. I don't know if this is protocol.
... I don't know what's normal for that, but these are our desires for where this work could go.

<Zakim> phila, you wanted to talk about [vocab-dcat] and normative/nn in vocabs

<ericstephan> I am all ears

phila: It's difficult.
... I struggle with putting this in a document like this. I think this belongs more in a blog post or group page. I'll think about it some more. I recognize that that's how it's done when you publish scientific research.

ericstephan: I love the idea of if it's on our web site.

<ericstephan> understood :-)

phila: we have to think about what the frozen group web page looks like when we finish up.

<ericstephan> interesting, ok no normative

phila: becaues it's a note, nothing is normative, so it's not appropriate to talk about normative /non-normative

<ericstephan> thank you phila!

<phila> I believe the reference for DCAT is vocab-dcat

<ericstephan> thank you hadleybeeman!

hadleybeeman: it's really useful to be able to go back and see what we wanted to do next, so it will be good to capture that somewhere useful.
... let's look at actions

<phila> We have a process for translations

<phila> Labels etc in the RDF file can be added reaily enough

ericstephan: there is one thing in the schedule I want to mention. Those of us a the national labs have a lot of connection to people who speak different languages. we'd like to get as many different languages into the DUV as possile. Japanese, mandarin, russian, spanish, portuguese, all would be good to cover.

<hadleybeeman> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/

phila: docs in /tr space link to translations. we normally run things past a translator person. DCAT has labels in a bunch of languages all in one document, which is pure pornography if you're a UTF person.

<phila> action-208?

<trackbot> action-208 -- Antoine Isaac to Contact oa wg to see whether they would consider adding dqv motivation -- due 2016-04-01 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/208

hadleybeeman: is that still open?

antoine: yes, that continues

action-210

<trackbot> action-210 -- Eric Stephan to Investigate the relationship between dqv and duv wrt citations that can be considered as a quality annotation -- due 2016-04-04 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/210

<phila> action-210?

<trackbot> action-210 -- Eric Stephan to Investigate the relationship between dqv and duv wrt citations that can be considered as a quality annotation -- due 2016-04-04 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/210

hadleybeeman: is that still open, Eric?

<phila> action-226

<trackbot> action-226 -- Newton Calegari to To move the indexes and keep the BP Summary at the top of the doc -- due 2016-02-12 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/226

ericstephan: yes

hadleybeeman: newton, what's the status?

newton: we can close this one

<phila> close action-226

<trackbot> Closed action-226.

phila: done!

<phila> action-227?

<trackbot> action-227 -- Antoine Isaac to Work with eric s on writing section on evolution of duv wrt reuse of namespaces etc. -- due 2016-04-01 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/227

hadleybeeman: is it open still?

antoine: yes

<phila> action-229

<trackbot> action-229 -- Phil Archer to Send bp editors implementation-questionaire template -- due 2016-03-15 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/229

phila: that has come screaming up my todo list

<phila> phila: Expect it next week

<hadleybeeman> action-230?

<trackbot> action-230 -- Caroline Burle to Create process for gathering evidence of implementations, e.g. wiki, google form -- due 2016-03-15 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/230

Caroline: this is something we discussed in zagreb, we can close it

<hadleybeeman> action-231?

<trackbot> action-231 -- Annette Greiner to Talk to eric wilde about open comments and reach resolution -- due 2016-02-19 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/231

<hadleybeeman> annette_g: I spoke to him. We weren't able to resolve it. He had concerns we hadn't addressed.

<hadleybeeman> ...We have addressed it since then. There have been several attempts to get his response, but he has hasn't replied.

phila: he responded today

<phila> I just forwarded Erik's mail to the list in case it didn't make it

<hadleybeeman> action-232?

<trackbot> action-232 -- Antoine Isaac to Look into reference to ogc in http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/bp.html#metadatastandardized (raised during joint call with sdw) -- due 2016-02-24 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/232

hadleybeeman: sounds like that's still open

antoine: I think that's been sent to SDW, and I haven't heard anything, so I think we can close it.

hadleybeeman: should we follow up with them?

antoine: if someone else wants to do that, they can do that
... if there's a new version, hopefully they will get in touch.

<phila> +1 to hadleybeeman

hadleybeeman: we should ask them to make sure they do review it.

action-233

<trackbot> action-233 -- Newton Calegari to Check if the turtle and rdfa examples are validated -- due 2016-04-01 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/233

<phila> close action-237

<trackbot> Closed action-237.

hadleybeeman: you were asking for help on that

<phila> See previous about getting SDW review

<phila> I don't think it's needed as SDW is watching us anywat

<BernadetteLoscio> I think so!

<BernadetteLoscio> We had a lot of discussions about this

<BernadetteLoscio> yes, I agree!

action-239

<trackbot> action-239 -- Peter Winstanley to Check on using an example about real-time data for bp23 -- due 2016-03-25 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/239

<phila> close action-232

<trackbot> Closed action-232.

<BernadetteLoscio> Eric sent a first version and we included in the doc!

PWinstanley: that's what eric and I were working on just recently, we're likely to have something very soon

<phila> action-241

<trackbot> action-241 -- Hadley Beeman to Review bp 22 -- due 2016-03-18 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/241

hadleybeeman: Phil and I did that last week

<phila> close action-241

<trackbot> Closed action-241.

action-242

<trackbot> action-242 -- Newton Calegari to Follow up on issue 220 -- due 2016-03-18 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/242

newton: we can close that

action-243

<trackbot> action-243 -- Caroline Burle to Arrange redseign of the challenges diagram -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/243

<phila> close action-242

<trackbot> Closed action-242.

Caroline: it's still open because we need help with it

<phila> phila: I think that's on my plate

hadleybeeman: what do you need?

<phila> SVG

<BernadetteLoscio> yes! SVG :)

<phila> I like playing with SVG :-)

<yaso> I can help, depending on the schedule

<yaso> I like svg too

Caroline: we discussed in zagreb, phila said he might help us, but he already has this huge job of the native speaker review.

hadleybeeman: phila, I can help with the native speaker review

PWinstanley: I can help with it too

Caroline: you guys rock

<Caroline> thank you! :)

hadleybeeman: let's have PWinstanley look at both of our sections

<phila> close action-243

<trackbot> Closed action-243.

<phila> ACTION: phila to redo the challenges diagram [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/04/08-dwbp-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-272 - Redo the challenges diagram [on Phil Archer - due 2016-04-15].

action-244

<trackbot> action-244 -- Newton Calegari to Remove the 2nd line of test section and rewrite the intended outcome of the bp2 provide descriptive metadata -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/244

<phila> action-244?

<trackbot> action-244 -- Newton Calegari to Remove the 2nd line of test section and rewrite the intended outcome of the bp2 provide descriptive metadata -- due 2016-03-21 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/actions/244

newton: we can close this

<phila> close action-244

<trackbot> Closed action-244.

<riccardoAlbertoni> thanks all ...

<laufer> bye all... nice wkd...

<Caroline> thank you!!

<ericstephan> Will the phone line be open for a few minutes?

<riccardoAlbertoni> bye

<yaso> Bye!

hadleybeeman: we should close the call at this point. Eveyrbody's homework is to review the BP doc.

<SumitPurohit> Thanks...