12:56:02 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdw
12:56:02 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/20-sdw-irc
12:56:04 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
12:56:04 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdw
12:56:06 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
12:56:06 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
12:56:08 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
12:56:08 <trackbot> Date: 20 July 2016
12:56:25 <eparsons> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:56:35 <eparsons> Present+ eparsons
12:56:56 <eparsons> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160720
12:57:15 <eparsons> Chair: eparsons
12:58:08 <eparsons> Regrets: Rachel, Lars, SimonCox
12:58:44 <eparsons> Regrets: Andrea, Danh
12:58:59 <billroberts> billroberts has joined #sdw
12:59:32 <ScottSimmons> ScottSimmons has joined #sdw
12:59:39 <josh> sigh+ remind of webex password, please
12:59:46 <BartvanLeeuwen> BartvanLeeuwen has joined #sdw
12:59:48 <Linda> Linda has joined #sdw
13:00:25 <josh> sdw
13:00:38 <Nicky> present+ NickyVanOorschot
13:00:44 <ByronCinNZ> ByronCinNZ has joined #sdw
13:00:56 <kerry> kerry has joined #sdw
13:00:56 <ByronCinNZ> +present
13:01:08 <BartvanLeeuwen> present+ BartvanLeeuwen
13:01:09 <kerry> present+ kerry
13:01:15 <aharth> aharth has joined #sdw
13:01:26 <ScottSimmons> present+ ScottSimmons
13:01:47 <billroberts> present+ billroberts
13:01:56 <aharth> present+ aharth
13:01:56 <ByronCinNZ> present+ ByronCinNZ
13:02:05 <Linda> present+ Linda
13:02:12 <josh> present+ josh
13:02:34 <BartvanLeeuwen> http://www.slideshare.net/semanticfire/action-85-64205032
13:02:40 <RaulGarciaCastro> RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdw
13:03:16 <jonblower_> jonblower_ has joined #sdw
13:03:23 <jonblower_> present+ jonblower
13:03:55 <RaulGarciaCastro> present+ RaulGarciaCastro
13:04:03 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #sdw
13:04:12 <MattPerry> MattPerry has joined #sdw
13:04:17 <Linda> scribe: Linda
13:04:20 <jtandy> present+ jtandy
13:04:43 <eparsons> Topic : Approve last week's minutes
13:04:45 <Linda> eparsons: lets start
13:04:49 <eparsons> PROPOSED : Approve last week's minutes
13:04:50 <MattPerry> present+ MattPerry
13:04:53 <Maik> Maik has joined #sdw
13:04:57 <eparsons> http://www.w3.org/2016/07/06-sdw-minutes.html
13:05:05 <BartvanLeeuwen> +1
13:05:07 <Linda> +1
13:05:13 <billroberts> +1
13:05:17 <ChrisLittle> ChrisLittle has joined #Sdw
13:05:21 <kerry> +1
13:05:22 <Nicky> +1
13:05:23 <RaulGarciaCastro> +1
13:05:25 <aharth> +1
13:05:30 <jtandy> +1
13:05:30 <eparsons> RESOLUTION : Approve last week's minutes
13:05:31 <ChrisLittle> Present+
13:05:38 <ChrisLittle> +1 minutes
13:06:08 <eparsons> Topic : Patent Call
13:06:10 <Linda> eparsons: checks attendees - ok
13:06:11 <Maik> +present Maik
13:06:15 <eparsons> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
13:06:24 <eparsons> Topic : Demo
13:06:25 <Linda> [silence]
13:06:25 <josh> +1 minutes
13:07:00 <BartvanLeeuwen> http://www.slideshare.net/semanticfire/action-85-64205032
13:07:00 <Linda> eparsons: bart and nicky have put together a demo. Mentioned at BP call last week but better to show it in this bigger group.
13:07:17 <Linda> BartvanLeeuwen: link to the slides is here.
13:07:21 <billroberts> yes, got it
13:07:23 <ByronCinNZ> +1
13:07:23 <kerry> +1 works
13:07:46 <Linda> ... we do a lot of work for emergency response orgs who need to work together in crisis situations
13:08:13 <Linda> ... for proper information sharing between them we created the Firebrary, a SKOS vocabulary
13:09:03 <Linda> ... people started putting things on maps so then sharing geo-information became a topic
13:09:29 <Linda> ... for example here a map of the Netherlands with companies at risk for high water
13:09:43 <Linda> ... represented as purple dot but user has no idea what it means
13:10:32 <eparsons> jtandy just the one...
13:11:22 <Linda> ... in the demo we have geo data in a postgis data, served in a standard WFS but also R2R mapping to RDF
13:12:52 <Linda> ... used a rdf:about attribute on the data, linking to Firebrary
13:13:30 <Linda> ... and can visualise the data based on the semantics
13:13:41 <Linda> ... based on DWBP work
13:14:25 <Linda> ... SKOS can also be used to map icons from different communities or countries.
13:14:51 <Linda> ... could this be a BP?
13:14:55 <roba> roba has joined #sdw
13:14:59 <Linda> ... Is this in scope?
13:15:08 <Linda> ... is rdf:about the right way of doing a backlink?
13:15:10 <BartvanLeeuwen> http://geo.resc.info/geoserver/netage/wms?service=WMS&version=1.1.0&request=GetMap&layers=netage:fb_demo&styles=&bbox=7.00324749210733,52.2615836944433,7.00881387704046,52.2640494501209&width=768&height=340&srs=EPSG:4326&format=application/openlayers
13:15:46 <Linda> ... this map shows red dots, each has a link to RDF information about the item
13:16:06 <aharth> +1
13:16:09 <jtandy> q+
13:16:09 <aharth> q+
13:16:13 <eparsons> ack next
13:16:21 <josh> q+
13:17:10 <Linda> jtandy: use of rdf:about to include identifier which allows users to lookup information, right?
13:17:38 <eparsons> rrsagent, draft minutes
13:17:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/20-sdw-minutes.html eparsons
13:18:05 <Linda> BartvanLeeuwen: yes, this separates use of WFS only for markers on maps, the information is elsewhere
13:18:22 <Linda> jtandy: why rdf:about?
13:18:42 <Linda> BartvanLeeuwen: had to pick something, any suggestions?
13:18:48 <aharth> rdfs:seeAlso
13:18:57 <Linda> jtandy: anyone on the call has suggestions?
13:19:04 <eparsons> ack next
13:19:24 <Linda> aharth: rdf:about is a remnant of rdf/xml
13:19:36 <Linda> ... but not worrying to use this. Cool demo.
13:19:52 <Linda> ... is there live lat/lon information in the maps?
13:20:05 <Linda> BartvanLeeuwen: no, it's a scenario drawn on a map, but live info is also possible
13:20:28 <Linda> aharth: do you have datasets with polygons as well?
13:21:30 <Linda> BartvanLeeuwen: for me representing geometries in RDF was out of scope for this demo
13:21:45 <eparsons> ack next
13:22:12 <Linda> josh: there is an RML extension that encorporates the geosparql spatial functions
13:22:37 <roba> present+ roba
13:22:49 <Linda> ... would be interesting to standardize that
13:22:57 <jonblower_> +1 to what Josh is saying about ontop-spatial. It's good but documentation is lacking
13:24:02 <Linda> ... Interesting way of linking information to spatial data, valuable.
13:24:15 <Linda> ... but not easy
13:24:36 <Linda> eparsons: if this isn't a BP, what would it need to be to become one?
13:25:20 <Linda> josh: should be general; in linking spatial data the links should be available
13:25:47 <Linda> BartvanLeeuwen: the links should be from the SDI to the data published on the web
13:25:55 <roba> q+
13:26:06 <Linda> eparsons: would be valuable to give a contribution on this in the BP
13:26:52 <Linda> jtandy: so the BP is if you provide data through an SDI, publish the information in a complementary manner and link them
13:27:11 <Linda> BartvanLeeuwen: yes, and somehow do the backlinking
13:27:30 <eparsons> ack next
13:27:38 <Linda> eparsons: any comments on the backlinking?
13:28:17 <Linda> we hear you rob
13:28:26 <josh> It seems to me to be a mismatch to develop links "back" to non-linked data. It would make more sense to me to make sure that SDI data is (alternately) accessible as linked data.
13:29:03 <Linda> +1
13:29:15 <Linda> roba: see redundancy in the identifiers in the example
13:29:37 <Linda> ... you could generate some automatically during rendering
13:30:20 <Linda> ... Also, in LD world there are often multiple views, one of them can be backlinks.
13:31:08 <Linda> ...e.g. links from data back to services where you can get the data
13:31:41 <Linda> eparsons: Thanks Bart for this interesting example.
13:32:08 <eparsons> Topic : Simple Spatial Ontology,
13:32:24 <josh> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Further_development_of_GeoSPARQL
13:32:31 <Linda> josh: put some info in the wiki
13:33:31 <Linda> ... there needs to be a common way to express spatial data so that you can have a common way to query it using geosparql.
13:33:57 <Linda> ... the spatial ontology in geosparql 1.0 has good things but is not well-used
13:34:37 <Linda> ... if we create version 1.1 it would be an OGC update of an existing standard. Not sure what it would be in SDWWG terms
13:35:06 <Linda> ... geosparql 1.0 is considered too complicated, but just using lat/long is too simple and unexpressive
13:35:26 <Linda> ... update could be to add simple geometry properties
13:36:26 <Linda> ... another update is to have a way to infer relationships between features from relationships between geometries
13:36:45 <Linda> ... Features and Geometries are disjoint
13:37:16 <Linda> ... but are both SpatialObjects and share the same possible relationships
13:37:41 <Linda> ... There was an issue with three different types of spatial relations which many found confusing.
13:39:55 <Linda> ... explains the new proposed spatial ontology
13:40:11 <eparsons> q?
13:41:17 <Linda> ...Another possible improvement is the addition of serialization types, e.g. GeoJSON
13:42:11 <Linda> ... theoretical foundation in ISO191xx
13:42:53 <aharth> q+ ask about conneg for geometry serialisations
13:43:06 <aharth> q+ to ask about conneg for geometry serialisations
13:44:16 <Linda> ... simple geometric properties could be added
13:45:29 <aharth> q+ to ask about possible compatibility with W3C wgs84_pos vocab
13:45:38 <Linda> ... not done, some things are not completely clear yet.
13:46:10 <Linda> ... maybe define a practice for CRS reference and definition, perhaps machine readable?
13:46:22 <Linda> ... or for UOM
13:47:04 <Linda> ... there's a version on Webprotege, but this is hard to work with. Will work with ttl file on Github
13:47:13 <eparsons> ack next
13:47:14 <Zakim> aharth, you wanted to ask about conneg for geometry serialisations and to ask about possible compatibility with W3C wgs84_pos vocab
13:47:51 <Linda> aharth: maybe possible to make the new voc compatible with the simple geo vocabulary by Brickley.
13:48:02 <Linda> ... would be good for existing data on the web
13:48:28 <Linda> ... Also, using conneg for serialization: can that be considered?
13:49:07 <Linda> josh: compatibility with W3C vocabulary: looked at it, but in existing data the use of it is ambiguous.
13:49:24 <ChrisLit> ChrisLit has joined #Sdw
13:49:39 <ChrisLit> Present+
13:49:40 <Linda> ... so worthwile doing, but existing data might have meant different things.
13:50:18 <ChrisLit> present+ ChrisLit
13:50:51 <Linda> ... About conneg: you could offer different serializations of the data. Have this in separate properties?
13:51:11 <Linda> aharth: depends on which community you do it for. Using conneg on URI is fav of some communities
13:52:20 <Linda> josh: how do you negotiate against a property within a geometry? Useful, but not clear how to.
13:52:26 <Linda> ... will think on it
13:52:39 <Linda> eparsons: continue this on email list
13:52:51 <eparsons> Topic : Coverages update
13:53:02 <eparsons> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdw-wg/2016Jul/0172.html
13:53:43 <Linda> billroberts: we made progress, in this email there's a proposal for what we should do in the coverages subgroup
13:53:51 <Linda> ...a fair bit of work but achievable
13:54:00 <Linda> ...need to move on to really doing stuff
13:55:09 <Linda> ... take the CoverageJSON work, though incomplete, and see if that could become a W3C rec / OGC standard
13:55:58 <Linda> ... conceptually it's compatible with existing work, but addressing a user group that is not happy with existing approaches. Web developer type audience.
13:56:18 <Linda> ... also looking at how to use data cubes, different audience.
13:56:46 <ChrisLit> Q+
13:56:53 <Linda> ... For discussion: pure RDF datacube is useful for representing coverages, and a note could be writtne on how to do that
13:57:12 <Linda> ... Also, outstanding tasks for BP narrative.
13:57:26 <Linda> ... Also, plans to write a Primer alongside the spec.
13:58:03 <Linda> ... we welcome opinions through maillist and our call next week.
13:58:18 <eparsons> ack next
13:58:46 <Linda> ChrisLit: extensions to datacube model are needed.
13:59:30 <Linda> ... e.g. datatiles, webtiles. Could be interesting followup work. Will get in touch with bill about this.
13:59:33 <josh> Any new coverage encodings or representation do need to share the conceptual model of existing coverages.
13:59:42 <Linda> eparsons: out of time
13:59:47 <billroberts> thanks Chris - will follow up wiht you on that
14:00:07 <Linda> ... will send email about meetings during holiday
14:00:25 <josh> One issue to explore is that the coverage conceptual model is really a mapping between domain and range spaces. Expression in grids or cubes is convenient, but not fundamental.
14:00:31 <Linda> ... closes meeting
14:00:35 <Linda> bye!
14:00:38 <eparsons> linda thank you !!!
14:00:38 <BartvanLeeuwen> thx bye
14:00:38 <RaulGarciaCastro> bye
14:00:38 <kerry> bye1
14:00:42 <BartvanLeeuwen> thx Linda
14:00:48 <jtandy> bye ... thanks to Ed for Chairing and Linda for scribing
14:00:49 <roba> bye
14:00:50 <eparsons> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:00:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/20-sdw-minutes.html eparsons
14:00:54 <Nicky> bye
14:00:56 <Nicky> Nicky has left #sdw
14:01:06 <ChrisLit> Bye
14:29:40 <jtandy> jtandy has joined #sdw
16:08:03 <Zakim> Zakim has left #sdw
18:23:37 <eparsons> eparsons has joined #sdw
21:02:58 <eparsons> eparsons has joined #sdw