See also: IRC log
<hadleybeeman> hi dei
<hadleybeeman> deirdelee: I haven't managed to get webex sorted :(
<hadleybeeman> I'm so sorry
<hadleybeeman> am trying to see if anyone is around now
<BernadetteLoscio> Hi Hadley!
<deirdelee> no worries
<deirdelee> if it's only a couple of us, we could have call on skype
<deirdelee> just to touch base
<deirdelee> not an official meeting
<hadleybeeman> that might be a good way to go
hello!
<deirdelee> hello everyone
<deirdelee> i'm afraid we don't have webex as we're beyond dwbp charter!
<BernadetteLoscio> hi Deirdre!
can all use Skype?
<antoine> hi, I can't get into the webex - it says that the meeting has been cancelled
<antoine> @deirdelee: ok I understand now
<hadleybeeman> hi antoine — we need Phil back to fix that. Our charter is being renewed
<deirdelee> I suggest we have an unofficial meeting on skype, which we can still scribe here?
+1 to deirdelee
<hadleybeeman> I'm up for that
I may scribe :)
<deirdelee> my skype id is deirdrelee
<antoine> ok with this, as the informal call last week was quite productive
<deirdelee> add me if we're not already connected
<hadleybeeman> deirdelee, do you want to start a call?
<deirdelee> :) lots of informal calls
<deirdelee> yes hadleybeeman, i'll see who i have in contacts
<hadleybeeman> k
<antoine> my skype id is antoine.isaac
we may approve all the minutes at once afterwards
mine is carolineburle
<annette_g> mine is annette.greiner.1
<deirdelee> sent invites to caro & newton
I received :)
<newton> Received!
<deirdelee> ok, think that's everyone who's here...
<scribe> scribe: Caroline
deirdelee: we decided to postpone
the meeting with the Director
... because of the i18n comments that are still being
resolved
<deirdelee> webex doesn't work as we're over charter
<deirdelee> want to join?
BernadetteLoscio: we added the comments we discussed on last week's meeting. They are available in Github
<deirdelee> send me your skype id
BernadetteLoscio: we sent a
message to the i18n group and we are waiting for their
feedback
... we have some doubts to clarify with them
... the comments we resolved are adressed and we are waiting
for i18n confirmation
... also annette_g has comments
annette_g: about local neutral and local parameters
<deirdelee> link to i mean
annette_g: we had a question
about it because they don't seem all neutral. I asked how to
make sure they are neutral
... hoe to make representation comparable
<BernadetteLoscio> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Status_of_comments_about_the_last_call_working_draft
annette_g: I didn't get a response about it yet
<BernadetteLoscio> wiki table with comments status
annette_g: I got a response about
saying that you have to have some sort of representation
there
... we are waiting confirmation about specific details
... the question for the DWBP WG is if do we need to have a new
BP about it
... how we will add it if we add it
... I think we should cover it
hadleybeeman: as a separate BP?
annette_g: I am neutral about it. I am not yet giving up to find a way to include it without creating a new BP
<deirdelee> +1 to hadleybeeman
hadleybeeman: from a process pperspective I am worried about creating a new BP
<BernadetteLoscio> +1 to hadleybeeman
hadleybeeman: I think it is a
sort of metadata
... is there a way to extend the language a bit to fit it
in?
<riccardoAlbertoni> \me yes please add me .. :)
annette_g: I would find odd to put in withou generalizing the title a litle so would make sense for both
hadleybeeman: if we can make it a
editorial change it would be good
... if it has to be fundamental chance it worries me that the
director would like to see more evidence that more people has
reviewed it
antoine: I am also in favor to
keep this on the existing BPs
... also because of the spirit of the i18n
<hadleybeeman> An editorial change is a different way to describe what we mean. A more substantive change (which I think would require more review from other people) would be us recommending something that is technically different, or new.
antoine: they tried to put
internationalization in what has been done already
... besides I don't think we should change a lot the
document
deirdelee: we were asking for
minor comments
... if we don't add would that be okay?
... if we incude as a part of an existing BP would be
suficient
antoine: I don't think we can say we were expecting minor comments
<Zakim> hadleybeeman, you wanted to respond re what the director will look for
antoine: someone could come with a big comments
hadleybeeman: the director is
only going to care if the i18n is happy
... not how we made them happy
... we can talk with them and check if they are happy :)
... the director only has to see that it is solved
... I agree with antoine that we need to solve independtly of
the size of the change
... we need to say that was solved to the director
annette_g: it seems that changing
the title could be editorial change
... I will think about the title
BernadetteLoscio: I agree that
would be complicated to add a new BP
... are talking about BP3
... the focus about this BP is about metadata
... I don't know if would be weird if became not related to
metadata
deirdelee: if we change the
title, remove metadata and change the position of it
... if we move the position of it out of metadata section it
would cover
I am not sure it would be possible to do what deirdelee is suggeting
BernadetteLoscio: we need to see
were we could put it
... I am not sure if creating a new section is a good idea
<annette_g> "internationalize your data with locale parameters metadata and locale-neutral presentation"
BernadetteLoscio: I am not crazy about this idea
annette_g: I suggested the title "internationalize your data with locale parameters metadata and locale-neutral presentation"
hadleybeeman: we can add under
another Possible approach to implementation or using the
example they gave
... basicaly to include where appropriate in the BP3
... I am not suggesting changing the title, but adding their
example as another apossible approach to implementation
annette_g: I feel it need to be in the title or it could get lost otherwise
deirdelee: what if we do what hadleybeeman is suggesting and id they are not happy about it we change the title?
annette_g: I worry about us being
driven by trying to minimize change
... if we prefer to do something different otherwise
deirdelee: if we jsut change the
short description
... I don't think we have to change the title to prove we are
talking about it
... maybe we could make the title more general
antoine: I am trying to
understand what are talking about
... about comment 13?
deirdelee: yes
antoine: I think we should have
metadata about the localization
... the data is already localized
... are we going to ask people to change their data?
<annette_g> Title: Provide locale information. Subtitle: "internationalize your data with locale parameters metadata and locale-neutral presentation"
antoine: if we do this, we could suggest as part of data enrichment
deirdelee: do we need local neutral and local parameters?
antoine: is it changing the
data?
... are we asking people to change their value and units?
BernadetteLoscio: I agree with
antoine
... BP 3 is not the place to alk about it
... we could mention it as a general guideline in the
introduction
... I am not sure if I understood correctly, but I think it is
something different of what we say at BP3
annette_g: we still have the same problem if we put it in the data enrichment section
BernadetteLoscio: If I look into
the BPs now I don't see a BP where this comment really fit
in
... I can add a phrase about it in the introduction
... say something that this is also a standard and give links
to documents related to it
... I think we shouldn't include another BP
... the introduction of the document itself
... in the introduction there is a paragraph that says that it
is need to use standards to publish data on the web
... we had this discussion with laufer and the group and we
added that paragraph
deirdelee: let's hear antoine and
annette_g and discuss the vocabs
... then we can finish this discussion on the mailing list
antoine: I feel okay as having this on BP 31 - data enrichment
annette_g: this is not new
data
... BP 31 is enrich data on generating new data
... if I have my value in feet and I want in meeters it is new
data
... I think we are asking people to separate value from the
unit
... in many situation the unit will be just implicit
<annette_g> My suggestion for where to put it: BP 3. Title: Provide locale information. Subtitle: "internationalize your data with locale parameters metadata and locale-neutral presentation"
giving them these options
<BernadetteLoscio> +1 to Hadley
hadleybeeman: I think the discussion with the i18n will go better with a suggestion
okay, hadleybeeman :)
deirdelee: we are moving to DQV and moving the comments to email as annette_g is typing it
<deirdelee> My suggestion for where to put it: BP 3. Title: Provide locale information. Subtitle: "internationalize your data with locale parameters metadata and locale-neutral presentation"
BernadetteLoscio: just to clarify, annette_g is suggesting to change the title of BP3 and then we will discuss it by email before sending the suggestion to the i18n group?
deirdelee: yes
<riccardoAlbertoni> yes
<riccardoAlbertoni> please
antoine: we are using the extra
time during summer to polish it
... we are not changing much to the basic proposal on data
model
... we want to make the document better for readers
... most of the changes are editorial
... we still have ongoing discussions
... people made some suggestions
... they might endup in several extra changes
... if people in the group are okay with it that is the way we
can continue owrking in August
... we are happy the way the document is being changed in the
past weeks
<Zakim> Caroline, you wanted to ask about having a discussion with i18n before we decide
antoine: there need to be a pont when the group decide to publish it
Zakim: I asked already
deirdelee: it is completely fine
to use the time until September
... it is good to have a particularly cutting point
... would be good to have implementation examples
<Zakim> hadleybeeman, you wanted to talk about deadlines... and the working group
hadleybeeman: Phil is owrking to have an extention of the WG
<antoine> list of pointers for implementations of DQV: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DQV_implementations
hadleybeeman: it is good to use
the time to improve the document
... if we get pass the end of having regular meetings we will
have to call a specific meeting to pass on transitions
<Zakim> newton, you wanted to talk about evidences
hadleybeeman: you will have to catch everyone's atention and the further we get away from our rotine will be harder to get the WG together to review and vote on publication
riccardoAlbertoni: considering
the implementation for DQV my group is planning to use the
doument
... in September we will have dataset to document the DQV
implementation
... the implementation being already collected
... we are not on the CR
deirdelee: to vote DQV when would that be/
s//?
antoine: we would be ready to
publish something anytime 2 weeks from now
... we are gathering implementations, but they are not needed,
right?
deirdelee: yes
antoine: that is why I said the
model is not changing
... it is stable and if the WG wants to vote we can do it
hadleybeeman: the only thing is that the WG has to vote for any change on the document
deirdelee: that is the same for
DUV
... we should arrange the same dat for both
... let's see with the DUV editors to schedule a date
antoine: we can adpat to the BP document voting
hadleybeeman: we are making
changes because of the i18n comments
... we will need to make a vote to transition on the BP
document
... does it make sense to vote them together?
deirdelee: if we agree on
that
... the BP document voting would tide the DQV and DUV
voting
antoine: I would be help to help to make sure we can vote on the DQV at the same time
<riccardoAlbertoni> sorry i missed the date you proposed
deirdelee: BernadetteLoscio can
you discuss it with Eric and see if we are all on the same
page?
... I think Eric made the last changes we discussed but we
still don't have the implementations
... I will discuss with him to propose imlpementations
... dont'having implementations it isn't a blocking
BernadetteLoscio: I think it is
possible to implementations
... about annette_g's proposal on the BP document
... the proposal annette_g did is good but we also to change
the BP's text
... not only the title
annette_g: true
<newton> Ales Versic | Ministry of Public Administration | aversic@gov.si
newton: about the evidences, we only have a few until now
<newton> Deirdre Lee | National Transport Authority | deirdre@derilinx.com
I still have to send my emails about the evidences
I am sorry I am late on doing that
deirdelee: we are not asking
people for implementation yet
... Caroline made the email that is on the week and we have to
start sending the emails
BP's editors will send an email about the implementations to the WG remember to send emails to their contacts
hadleybeeman: we can have
implementations already, but we don't have to set a deadline
until the director's call
... there is no pressure yet
deirdelee: just a reminder that
we as WG members can also add implementations
... is there any final comments?
hadleybeeman: are we having another call next week?
deirdelee: I hope so
<deirdelee> PROPOSED: Approve meetings from 22nd July https://www.w3.org/2016/07/22-dwbp-minutes.html
hadleybeeman: we can do oficial calls on Skype if they are on the mailing list with 24h in advance
<hadleybeeman> +1
<deirdelee> +1
BernadetteLoscio: one final question about the comment on BP3
<newton> +0
BernadetteLoscio: annette_g is going to make a proposal for the hole BP or are we discussing with the i18n?
annette: I sent an email as a starting point
<riccardoAlbertoni> +1
+1
BernadetteLoscio: I just want to know who is going to make the changes
annette_g: it might help to see the discussion
RESOLUTION: Approve meetings from 22nd July https://www.w3.org/2016/07/22-dwbp-minutes.html
hadleybeeman: if you just put it the proposal new line it might be easier to explains how that meet the i18n's suggestoin
annette_g: I sent the email aleady :s:)
<deirdelee> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/29-dwbp-minutes.html
<newton> bye all
<riccardoAlbertoni> have a good weekend !
<newton> thank you and have a nice weekend!
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144 of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/either change the title/add under another Possible approach to implementation/ Succeeded: s/hitnk/think/ Succeeded: s/implicic/implicit/ WARNING: Bad s/// command: s//? Succeeded: s/data/sdate/ Succeeded: s/sdate/date/ Succeeded: s/ture/true/ Succeeded: s/antoine/annette/ Succeeded: s/0/s:)/ Found Scribe: Caroline Inferring ScribeNick: Caroline Present: antoine Caroline BernadetteLoscio hadleybeeman riccardoAlbertoni deirdelee Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160805 Found Date: 05 Aug 2016 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2016/08/05-dwbp-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]