IRC log of sdw on 2016-09-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:13:32 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sdw
07:13:32 [RRSAgent]
logging to
07:13:34 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
07:13:34 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sdw
07:13:36 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SDW
07:13:36 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
07:13:37 [trackbot]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
07:13:37 [trackbot]
Date: 19 September 2016
07:14:19 [phila]
s/Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference/Spatial Data on the Web WG F2F, TPAC 2016 Day 1
07:14:31 [phila]
RRSAgent, make logs public
07:14:37 [phila]
present+ phila
07:14:51 [BartvanLeeuwen]
BartvanLeeuwen has joined #sdw
07:15:53 [ByronCinNZ]
ByronCinNZ has joined #sdw
07:32:28 [eparsons]
eparsons has joined #sdw
07:32:32 [ByronCinNZ]
ByronCinNZ has joined #sdw
07:34:54 [RaulGarciaCastro]
RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdw
07:39:12 [eparsons]
Morning all - We are working on getting the webex to work with the room ... please wait than you
07:39:14 [AZ]
AZ has joined #sdw
07:39:31 [AZ]
07:40:02 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
07:40:23 [AZ]
In order to join the webex, I need a password.
07:40:42 [AZ]
Could a friendly W3C contact person provide it to me, please?
07:41:14 [ByronCinNZ]
07:42:09 [AZ]
Thanks, ByronCinNZ
07:42:58 [eparsons]
trackbot, start meeting
07:43:00 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
07:43:02 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SDW
07:43:02 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
07:43:03 [trackbot]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
07:43:03 [trackbot]
Date: 19 September 2016
07:43:26 [billrobe_]
billrobe_ has joined #sdw
07:43:28 [eparsons]
Present+ eparsons
07:43:47 [ByronCinNZ]
present+ ByronCinNZ
07:44:00 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
07:44:25 [eparsons]
RRSAgent, make logs public
07:44:25 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
07:44:25 [Linda]
Linda has joined #sdw
07:44:32 [ahaller2]
present+ ahaller2
07:44:34 [Linda]
present+ Linda
07:44:38 [billrobe_]
present+ billroberts
07:44:42 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
07:44:46 [ClemensPortele]
ClemensPortele has joined #sdw
07:44:52 [kerry]
kerry has joined #sdw
07:45:01 [kerry]
present+ kerry
07:45:02 [ClemensPortele]
present+ ClemensPortele
07:45:03 [frans]
frans has joined #sdw
07:45:33 [kerry]
scribe: Armin
07:45:46 [kerry]
scribenick: ahaller2
07:46:00 [AZ]
present+ AZ
07:47:17 [BartvanLeeuwen]
present+ BartvanLeeuwen
07:47:53 [frans]
present+ frans
07:49:24 [RaulGarciaCastro]
present+ RaulGarciaCastro
07:50:08 [eparsons]
still working on the webex phone....
07:50:18 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
07:50:29 [AndreaPerego]
present+ AndreaPerego
07:52:16 [kerry]
... still trouble geting webex xonnection sorted
07:55:15 [AZ]
AZ = Antoine Zimmermann
07:55:47 [eparsons]
Phil is running webex from his laptop can you hear ?
07:55:55 [ByronCinNZ]
07:56:16 [AZ]
I can hear fine
07:56:25 [AZ]
but I use my phone
07:57:25 [ByronCinNZ]
sound is gone
07:57:33 [AZ]
same here
07:57:39 [phila]
OK,we're working on it
07:57:58 [ByronCinNZ]
07:58:04 [dmckenzie]
dmckenzie has joined #sdw
07:58:39 [dmckenzie]
present+ dmckenzie
07:59:50 [phila]
07:59:51 [ByronCinNZ]
I can hear most people in the room fine
08:01:07 [phila]
phila has changed the topic to: agenda for today
08:02:59 [phila]
chair: Ed
08:03:24 [ahaller2]
eparsons: introduction
08:04:20 [ericP]
ericP has joined #sdw
08:05:33 [fasr]
fasr has joined #sdw
08:05:59 [fasr]
08:06:10 [fasr]
present+ fasr
08:08:32 [phila]
scribe: phila
08:08:37 [phila]
scribeNick: phila
08:08:46 [phila]
Ed: begins with a tour de table
08:10:29 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
08:10:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
08:11:52 [fasr]
fasr = Francisco Regateiro (Lisbon University)
08:12:15 [phila]
scribe: ahaller2
08:12:19 [phila]
scribeNick: ahaller2
08:13:32 [kerry]
regrets+ payam
08:14:07 [eparsons]
08:14:41 [ahaller2]
eparsons: going through agenda
08:15:49 [eparsons]
08:15:54 [ahaller2]
eparsons: patent call
08:16:09 [frans]
overview of recent changes in the UC&R document:
08:16:34 [ahaller2]
frans: UC&R introduction
08:17:28 [ahaller2]
... some changes to requirements have been made
08:17:37 [frans]
08:18:04 [ahaller2]
... 6 possible upcoming changes
08:18:32 [ahaller2]
... other subgroups should be aware of these new requirements
08:19:42 [ahaller2]
eparsons: are there any requirements we can close now?
08:20:01 [ahaller2]
frans: more that people are aware of them
08:21:10 [ahaller2]
kerry: let's work through the list of requirements
08:21:52 [ahaller2]
frans: issue-75
08:22:03 [phila]
08:22:03 [trackbot]
issue-75 -- quality metadata out of scope? -- open
08:22:03 [trackbot]
08:22:50 [ahaller2]
frans: quality for each set of data point may be needed
08:23:02 [jtandy]
q+ to ask if the requirement is a little more generic ...
08:23:20 [ahaller2]
kerry: quality indicators can be modelled in SSN
08:23:31 [eparsons]
ack next
08:23:32 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to ask if the requirement is a little more generic ...
08:23:36 [ahaller2]
... SSN will be linked to Coverage which is one requirement
08:23:59 [phila]
q+ to talk about DQV
08:24:15 [ahaller2]
... in my opinion, it is out of scope here
08:24:37 [billrobe_]
08:24:48 [ahaller2]
jtandy: data acquisition may be another use case where you attach metadata to a data point
08:25:08 [eparsons]
ack next
08:25:09 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about DQV
08:25:10 [ahaller2]
... i have not seen a common practice how to attach metadata to the data point
08:25:53 [ahaller2]
... for example, someone says the flood water has come to their house. it would be useful to see metadata attached to that.
08:26:28 [ahaller2]
... attach metadata to a dataset record
08:27:07 [ahaller2]
kerry: it is a pattern, not an ontological requirement
08:27:19 [ahaller2]
phila: I don't think it is out of scope
08:27:38 [ahaller2]
... we don't have to do it ourselves, other working groups have done that
08:27:39 [phila]
-> DQV
08:28:08 [eparsons]
ack next
08:28:20 [ericP]
q+ to say that clinical sometimes relegate uncertainty to extensibility mechanisms have lots include stuff lke at-least or at-most in the core
08:28:23 [ahaller2]
... it is in scope, it is important to talk about accuracy and precision. It is important for the editors for those deliverables to include examples how to use it.
08:28:43 [eparsons]
ack next
08:28:44 [Zakim]
ericP, you wanted to say that clinical sometimes relegate uncertainty to extensibility mechanisms have lots include stuff lke at-least or at-most in the core
08:29:37 [ahaller2]
billrobe_: identify individual data points might be a requirement too.
08:31:06 [ahaller2]
ericP: clinical domain, where it was very important to talk about quality of data
08:31:56 [ahaller2]
eparsons: we could close issue-75 by saying it is in scope
08:32:24 [ahaller2]
frans: do we have a crowd-sourcing use case
08:32:33 [ahaller2]
08:33:07 [ahaller2]
... use case to attach metadata not for datasets, but for individual data points
08:34:12 [phila]
RESOLUTION: Issue-75 is in scope, close issue-75.
08:34:21 [BartvanLeeuwen]
08:34:27 [eparsons]
08:34:41 [ahaller2]
frans: make it a requirement for best practices, potentially also for SSN
08:34:43 [ahaller2]
08:34:45 [phila]
present+ DanBri
08:35:48 [ahaller2]
frans: Issue-70
08:35:50 [phila]
close issue-75
08:35:50 [trackbot]
Closed issue-75.
08:35:54 [phila]
08:35:54 [trackbot]
issue-70 -- Add a requirement for avoiding coordinate transformations? -- open
08:35:54 [trackbot]
08:35:55 [ahaller2]
08:36:06 [AndreaPerego]
08:36:19 [ahaller2]
frans: I don't think anyone is opposed to this requirement
08:36:29 [ByronCinNZ]
08:37:05 [ahaller2]
eparsons: can we talk about the wording
08:37:15 [danbri]
danbri has joined #sdw
08:37:39 [billrobe_]
08:37:54 [ahaller2]
... putting a huge effort on the publishers, realistically we don't project data to multiple coordinate reference systems
08:38:01 [jtandy]
q+ to suggest that we're missing a best practice for publishing in multiple formats and representations?
08:38:32 [eparsons]
ack next
08:39:51 [eparsons]
ack next
08:39:52 [ahaller2]
ByronCinNZ: default CRS should be the fall back
08:40:36 [frans]
proposed requirement: *Requirement: *Data consumers should be helped in avoiding coordinate
08:40:36 [frans]
transformations when spatial data from multiple sources are combined.
08:40:40 [ahaller2]
billrobe_: in practice we talk about 2 CRS covering 99% of the use cases
08:40:46 [eparsons]
ack next
08:40:47 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to suggest that we're missing a best practice for publishing in multiple formats and representations?
08:40:59 [ahaller2]
... the publisher taking work of the user is a good thing
08:42:05 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
08:42:05 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
08:42:07 [ahaller2]
jtandy: if you publish in the CRS of your national agencies requirement, look at your audience and decide if you can publish in multiple CRSs, e.g. your national and mercator
08:42:37 [kerry]
08:42:38 [ahaller2]
... if you can afford it, do it
08:42:59 [ahaller2]
eparsons: finesse the wording here. publish in multiple CRS to meet your user requirements
08:43:26 [ahaller2]
... e.g. if you are in Britain, publish in British national grid and another one
08:43:54 [ahaller2]
frans: we need to keep the requirement phrased as a requirement, not to propose a solution
08:44:06 [jtandy]
q+ to agree with Frans
08:44:23 [ahaller2]
... one solution is to publish data using multiple CRS, but we should not include that in the requirement
08:44:27 [phila]
phila: Notes BWBP 14
08:44:34 [kerry]
08:44:38 [phila]
phila: As many users as possible will be able to use the data without first having to transform it into their preferred format.
08:44:39 [eparsons]
ack next
08:44:42 [phila]
08:45:07 [ahaller2]
kerry: the publishers are our users as well. We should make the life easy for both.
08:45:22 [ahaller2]
... how to we identify the CRS and is there a default CRS?
08:45:37 [eparsons]
ack next
08:45:38 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to agree with Frans
08:45:38 [ahaller2]
jtandy: there is never to be a default CRS
08:46:09 [ahaller2]
... we can't make a reference to a coordinate without a CRS!
08:46:39 [eparsons]
ack next
08:47:20 [ahaller2]
phila: best practice 14 from dwbp
08:47:56 [ahaller2]
... as many people as possible will be able to use the data without transforming it
08:48:04 [ericP]
08:48:08 [eparsons]
ack next
08:48:14 [ahaller2]
08:48:50 [ahaller2]
ericP: encouraged to publish in standard format is always a good best practice
08:49:46 [jtandy]
08:50:14 [ahaller2]
... if there is a publisher who does not use the standard format, a third party can come along and do the transformation
08:50:29 [ahaller2]
eparsons: can we close that issue?
08:51:32 [ahaller2]
eparsons: pass it on to the best practices requirements
08:51:33 [phila]
PROPOSED: Close issue-70 that we need to pass this on to BP to handle, encouraging publishers' need to meet broadest possible community
08:53:05 [AndreaPerego]
08:53:08 [eparsons]
08:53:11 [phila]
RESOLUTION: Close issue-70 that we need to pass this on to BP to handle, encouraging publishers' need to meet broadest possible community
08:53:18 [ByronCinNZ]
08:53:20 [AZ]
08:53:22 [ahaller2]
08:53:24 [phila]
close issue-70
08:53:24 [trackbot]
Closed issue-70.
08:53:29 [phila]
08:53:29 [trackbot]
issue-74 -- That uom and precision and accuracy should be covered in ucr and bp (and respected in other deliverables too) -- open
08:53:29 [trackbot]
08:53:33 [ahaller2]
frans: issue-74
08:54:43 [ahaller2]
... current proposal is to have unit of measurements should always be included in observations
08:55:26 [phila]
q+ to dig into "unit of measurements should always be included in observations"
08:55:46 [eparsons]
ack next
08:55:47 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to dig into "unit of measurements should always be included in observations"
08:56:38 [sangchul]
sangchul has joined #sdw
08:57:08 [ahaller2]
phila: dwbp, uom should be included, but not in the string, but as a separate attribute
08:57:42 [ahaller2]
danbri: in we have some workarounds
08:57:59 [phila]
present+ Chris_McGlyn
08:58:03 [ahaller2]
... space between $ and price, but it is not a best practice as such
08:58:17 [phila]
08:58:50 [ahaller2]
eparsons: wouldn't the uom not be part of the metadata of the dataset
08:58:51 [RaulGarciaCastro]
08:59:00 [kerry]
08:59:07 [eparsons]
ack next
08:59:53 [ahaller2]
kerry: it is very particular kind of metadata. If you have spatial data and you don't have the uom, it is useless. So it is essential metadata.
09:00:11 [AndreaPerego]
There's an example in DQV on the use of UoMs for data accuracy and precision:
09:00:18 [phila]
PROPOSED: That it is q requirement to have UoM included
09:00:25 [eparsons]
09:00:27 [BartvanLeeuwen]
09:00:27 [jtandy]
09:00:29 [Linda]
09:00:29 [billrobe_]
09:00:31 [ahaller2]
09:00:31 [AndreaPerego]
09:00:37 [ByronCinNZ]
09:00:39 [phila]
RESOLUTION: That it is a requirement to have UoM included, close issue-74
09:00:46 [kerry]
09:00:47 [phila]
close issue-74
09:00:47 [trackbot]
Closed issue-74.
09:00:57 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:00:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
09:01:06 [frans]
issue 74 proposal 1: We expand CRS definition requirement a bit to make it clear that a CRS definition should include an indication of UoM. For instance:
09:01:06 [frans]
"There should be a recommended way of referencing a Coordinate Reference System (CRS) with a HTTP URI, and to get useful data about the CRS when that URI is dereferenced. The CRS data should include the unit of measurement of the CRS."
09:01:30 [frans]
issue 74 proposal 2: We add a new requirement:
09:01:30 [frans]
"The use of precision that matches uncertainty in coordinate data should be facilitated and encouraged"
09:01:40 [ahaller2]
09:01:40 [trackbot]
issue-76 -- New requirement for multiple CRSs? -- open
09:01:40 [trackbot]
09:01:41 [phila]
09:01:41 [trackbot]
issue-76 -- New requirement for multiple CRSs? -- open
09:01:41 [trackbot]
09:02:34 [ahaller2]
jtandy: there is no requirement to have multiple CRSs, but data should be accessible, which could be multiple CRSs
09:03:29 [ahaller2]
kerry: it is same as issue-70
09:03:37 [ericP]
09:03:37 [trackbot]
issue-70 -- Add a requirement for avoiding coordinate transformations? -- closed
09:03:37 [trackbot]
09:04:43 [ahaller2]
jtandy: geojson does not support multiple representations of the same data
09:05:19 [ahaller2]
... so you split data out in different representations
09:05:25 [eparsons]
09:06:35 [ahaller2]
ericP: 70 says to minimise transformations, 76 is a solution to that
09:07:17 [jungbin]
jungbin has joined #sdw
09:07:17 [ahaller2]
... rephrase 76 to make it a requirement
09:08:01 [ahaller2]
frans: to publish multiple CRS can have different reasons, i.e. to follow standards, not just to make it easier for users
09:08:05 [kerry]
+1 to eric's comment -- make sure issue 70 is just phrased right
09:08:22 [ahaller2]
eparsons: close 76 and it is 70, but rephrased
09:08:53 [ahaller2]
frans: publishing in multiple CRS is already a practice, but they don't know what the best practice is
09:10:08 [chunming]
chunming has joined #sdw
09:10:23 [phila]
PROPOSED: Issue-76 is close enough to issue-70 that we can cover it in the way we closed 70, although there is a difference in perspective
09:11:31 [ahaller2]
eparsons: close enough, they will both be covered in best practices document
09:13:30 [phila]
PROPOSED: There are cases where there is a requirement for more than pone CRS, so we can close issue-76
09:13:37 [eparsons]
09:13:39 [RaulGarciaCastro]
09:13:42 [BartvanLeeuwen]
09:13:44 [ahaller2]
09:13:46 [jtandy]
09:13:48 [ahaller2]
09:13:48 [ClemensPortele]
09:13:51 [ByronCinNZ]
09:13:51 [AndreaPerego]
09:13:55 [ByronCinNZ]
09:14:01 [phila]
RESOLUTION: There are cases where there is a requirement for more than one CRS, so we can close issue-76
09:15:20 [phila]
close issue-76
09:15:20 [trackbot]
Closed issue-76.
09:15:26 [eparsons]
Coffee break back at 10:30 local - 15mins form now
09:23:23 [chunming]
09:26:15 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
09:32:36 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
09:32:44 [eparsons]
Slowly returning...
09:33:02 [frans]
frans has joined #sdw
09:33:54 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
09:34:58 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
09:35:04 [kerry]
scribe: kerry
09:35:18 [RaulGarciaCastro]
RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdw
09:35:20 [kerry]
scribenick: kerry
09:35:24 [billrobe_]
billrobe_ has joined #sdw
09:35:36 [RaulGarciaCastro]
I’ll come back after lunch
09:35:51 [ByronCinNZ]
09:36:01 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:36:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
09:36:09 [jtandy]
BTW: the summary of SDW bps is here -
09:36:47 [phila]
present+ BernaLoscio
09:36:57 [jtandy]
agenda for the BP session is here
09:38:06 [kerry]
jtandy: topic: best practice
09:38:09 [hadleybeeman]
hadleybeeman has joined #sdw
09:38:12 [dmckenzie]
dmckenzie has joined #sdw
09:38:52 [kerry]
jtandy: we don't hve time toi cover all 17 issues. please help to priorities
09:39:21 [kerry]
...thankyou for all the expert opinion so far -- but tricky to distil into workable bps
09:39:36 [kerry]
...linda nad I have bben working hard on this but it is harder than we expected
09:39:53 [kerry]
... abd we have less time to devote going forward
09:40:15 [phila]
q+ to talk about engagement
09:40:19 [kerry]
...we can still do edit and style and steer and rank, but we need WG members to own sections of the doc (a BP)
09:40:28 [eparsons]
ack next
09:40:29 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about engagement
09:40:43 [kerry]
.... think of this as you can volunteer for a BP topic
09:41:17 [kerry]
phila: people read the doc getting close to publication , as i have on the plane here
09:41:47 [kerry]
... see kadvice from bernadette
09:42:29 [kerry]
bernadette: one person read the whole doc at a very late point and made a *lot* of comments which were helpful but took a long time to process
09:42:48 [kerry] is really important if people read the details before the last minute ..
09:43:04 [kerry]
... we had text that had been there right through that then got questioned right at the end.
09:43:33 [kerry]
...we had to have meetings on specific points that were raised, the doc got much better
09:43:48 [kerry]
...but it is important to read t he details asap is better
09:44:05 [jtandy]
09:44:10 [kerry]
jtandy: and specific targeted meetins with the person raising the issue
09:44:32 [kerry]
bernadette: also good was f2f to foucs
09:45:09 [kerry]
jtandy: and you got the WG to comment on particular BPs, but it all comes in a rush at the end
09:45:26 [kerry]
phila: in theory we need to every thing finalised right now -- time is running out
09:46:37 [kerry]
jtandy: until 12:30 need to shake down best practices -- whic are the least clear and/or mist important?
09:46:46 [kerry]
09:47:13 [kerry]
.... linda is preparing a tally -- whoc has top priority to nominate of the 17?
09:47:18 [AndreaPerego]
s/whic /which /
09:47:59 [AZ]
09:48:21 [sangchul]
sangchul has joined #sdw
09:48:53 [kerry]
clemens: bp 1, bp 7, a missing one on using complex iso models and how to translate to rdf json and others -- how do we advise data publishers on this?
09:49:34 [BernadetteLoscio]
BernadetteLoscio has joined #sdw
09:49:37 [kerry]
ClemensPortele: is there a simple solution? Needed for inspire.
09:49:43 [kerry]
billrobe_: 4, 7, 8
09:49:47 [BernadetteLoscio]
present+ BernadetteLoscio
09:49:58 [kerry]
eparsons: 4, 7 ,14
09:49:59 [hadleybeeman]
present+ hadleybeeman
09:50:23 [kerry]
BartvanLeeuwen: 4,7,14
09:51:23 [kerry]
AndreaPerego: terminology: spaatail thing, features, and its effect on the draft ontology
09:51:32 [eparsons]
Note hadleybeeman
09:51:34 [kerry]
09:51:50 [kerry]
09:52:03 [jungbin]
jungbin has joined #sdw
09:52:19 [kerry]
AndreaPerego: 7
09:52:24 [ahaller2]
09:52:26 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
09:52:26 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
09:52:35 [ahaller2]
09:52:43 [kerry]
frans: 8 and 9
09:52:52 [kerry]
Linda: 4, 7, 8
09:53:31 [eparsons]
09:53:46 [kerry]
jtandy: 9 (fuzzy boundaries),, 7, something on crowdsourcing
09:54:11 [Linda]
any voters on webex?
09:54:12 [kerry]
hadleybeeman: process question: are you planning implementations?
09:54:42 [kerry]
jtandy: we plan to point to implementations in the wild -- but we may have trouble finding some
09:54:58 [kerry]
hadleybeeman: are you separating existing form not yet existing?
09:55:28 [kerry]
jtandy: we expect to indicate that -- things will not be "proper best practices" if not implemented in the wild
09:56:08 [kerry]
ByronCinNZ: 3, 4, 9 but if we a re doing 3 anyway i vote for formats (8)
09:56:23 [kerry]
s/a re/ are/
09:56:47 [ByronCinNZ]
Yes 8
09:57:07 [kerry]
AZ: 7
09:57:31 [kerry]
jtandy: so we will do top 4.
09:57:51 [kerry]
Linda: 7, 4, 8, 9
09:58:07 [kerry]
jtandy: 20 minutes on each
09:58:20 [jtandy]
09:58:20 [phila]
-> BP7
09:58:21 [kerry]
jtandy: pls read the bp for number 7 now
09:58:49 [kerry]
jtandy: there is also a meeting thread
09:59:09 [jtandy]
see email summary for BP 7:
09:59:56 [jtandy]
ahh - that was the top of the thread ... I'm finding the summary now
10:01:12 [jtandy]
summary =
10:01:55 [eparsons]
10:02:16 [ClemensPortele]
q+ to talk about "Reuse identifiers when you can"
10:02:40 [chu]
chu has joined #sdw
10:02:48 [eparsons]
ack next
10:03:36 [kerry]
topic: BP number 7
10:04:10 [kerry]
eparsons: need some context, e.g. explaining that now you need to publish stuff at a finer granularity that you are used to
10:04:43 [kerry]
... when we publish we need that every thing/feature/atomoc piece needs an identifier
10:04:50 [jtandy]
10:05:17 [kerry]
jtandy: I was trying to to unpack that conecept here
10:05:38 [kerry]
... so here's your starting point
10:05:49 [ByronCinNZ]
Lost audio
10:05:59 [kerry]
[phone dropped out ... messing around trying to fix]
10:06:07 [ByronCinNZ]
10:06:34 [jtandy]
and the identifiers context is provided here:
10:07:21 [AZ]
audio back
10:07:35 [ByronCinNZ]
10:08:06 [kerry]
jtandy: ... in irs is link to what are u talking about -- context for identifying -- is that the context we need?
10:08:12 [Linda]
10:09:00 [kerry]
eparsons: yes, but we need bits of it restated again within the relevant bp presenation: this will be very new for SDI audience although old hat for web people
10:09:37 [kerry]
eparsons: will laso apply to other BPs where a fundamental change is recommended
10:09:39 [eparsons]
ack next
10:09:40 [Zakim]
ClemensPortele, you wanted to talk about "Reuse identifiers when you can"
10:10:02 [kerry]
ClemensPortele: reuse identifiers when you can -- how is this going to work?
10:10:55 [kerry]
e.g using dppedia or geonames for the uir, but i want to publish something else -- if you retirve the uri you will not come to my information that i am publishing
10:11:12 [kerry]
10:11:19 [billrobe_]
10:11:25 [eparsons]
ack next
10:11:33 [kerry]
ClemensPortele: so my publishing will still be dark becuase noone will come to it
10:11:55 [kerry]
Linda: responding to ed -- is the "why" section of bp not good enough?
10:12:12 [kerry]
...e.g. BP 7 starts with heading "Why". What is missing?
10:12:53 [kerry]
eparsons: the granularity in particular, not just and enpoint for a wfs, but every object there
10:13:13 [kerry]
Linda: so if you are used to using wfs -- this is how it is different
10:13:40 [kerry]
eparsons: addressed to particular users -- highlght how this is going to be different for you.
10:13:48 [ByronCinNZ]
10:13:51 [kerry]
jtandy: examples will help with this
10:13:55 [eparsons]
ack next
10:14:14 [kerry]
billrobe_: on ClemensPortele point about identifiers,
10:14:54 [kerry]
.... it depends on your data model and say you are doing datacube you do want someeone else's identifier so that you can interoperate
10:15:10 [eparsons]
ack next
10:15:17 [kerry]
... one very useful case is the n-ary relations wheret ehe place is the object of the statement
10:15:34 [danbri]
hmm "Smeaton's Tower is the third and most notable Eddystone Lighthouse." -> 50°21'51.8"N, 4°8'30.5"W vs -> 50°10'48"N, 4°16'12"W
10:16:19 [kerry]
ByronCinNZ: in realtion to data on the we bp, in our case we need the spatial things themselves
10:16:45 [kerry]
jtandy: dwbp has 2 cases, , thes second is item-level
10:17:09 [kerry]
phila: adwbp a lot of the examples use it as well
10:17:52 [kerry]
... noone is going to store full uris as a wate of space -- it may not be stored as a uri but must be translatable to one easily
10:17:54 [AndreaPerego]
10:18:00 [kerry]
10:18:15 [eparsons]
ack next
10:18:33 [kerry]
ericP: could be a relative URI so properly managed
10:19:01 [danbri]
q+ to ask about syntax (e.g. json-ld would allow foo:bar qualified names, other contexts allow gzip, ...)
10:19:18 [kerry]
AndreaPerego: responding to phila , in geospatail catalogues we have unique uids, these can be added to a base uri, is this ok?
10:19:21 [eparsons]
ack next
10:19:22 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to ask about syntax (e.g. json-ld would allow foo:bar qualified names, other contexts allow gzip, ...)
10:19:49 [kerry]
danbri: what syntax ? can have different abbreviations depending on sytax
10:20:21 [kerry]
... can rely on storage tool
10:20:52 [danbri]
another e.g. if you're in an XHTML regime you could use entities; in JSON-LD qnames or however JSON-LD calls qualified names.
10:20:54 [kerry]
eparsons: so the best approach is syntax-specific, but the gneral idea is the same and we need to force the issue
10:21:05 [kerry]
jtandy: content we are heading the right direction
10:21:18 [ahaller2]
10:21:19 [kerry]
jtandy: billrobe_ waht are you specific issues?
10:21:24 [hadleybeeman]
10:21:45 [ahaller2]
10:22:30 [kerry]
billrobe_: BP mostly covers it ... item 3 "stable identifiers" is a complex modelling problem to decide if it does change (e.g. boundaries change and sometimes that is critical) but this is covered in bp as it is
10:23:07 [phila]
q+ to panic a little
10:23:22 [kerry]
BartvanLeeuwen: agree with clemes becuase need a uri that resolves to what I want to say about it, an d the way I want it resolved
10:23:52 [ahaller2]
s/an d/and
10:24:39 [eparsons]
ack next
10:24:40 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to panic a little
10:24:42 [kerry]
AZ: bp 7 is very important but i do not have a specific concern
10:25:10 [AndreaPerego]
10:25:12 [kerry]
Linda: we discussed indirect identifiers in mailing list which was almost resolved and should go here
10:25:33 [kerry]
phila: want to hear from dan, erric, hadley on this
10:25:55 [kerry]
phila: you do not want to use a goenames uri as the subject in your rdf?
10:26:46 [kerry]
ClemensPortele: yes, but not necessarily rdf -- i want my representation to be the target of resolultion
10:27:20 [ericP]
10:27:30 [kerry]
phila: ok, so you don't want geonames to be the response -- so should we recomment owl:sameas?
10:27:54 [kerry]
phila: can we use owl:sameAs?
10:28:06 [danbri]
q+ re owl:sameAs being a very strong claim
10:28:06 [eparsons]
10:28:12 [kerry]
10:28:17 [eparsons]
ack next
10:28:28 [kerry] maybe 3 people all point to anne frank's house
10:29:07 [ClemensPortele]
10:29:14 [kerry]
AndreaPerego: the point is also about provenance to know who is saying what, maybe this solves that
10:29:15 [eparsons]
ack next
10:29:44 [eparsons]
ack next
10:29:45 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to discuss owl:sameAs being a very strong claim
10:29:46 [kerry]
ericP: don;t want sameas as as it is not the same tihng just in the same place
10:29:52 [hadleybeeman]
10:30:04 [AZ]
10:30:15 [kerry]
...want to addreess use case of a location and you need to make a decision -- you invent more predicates
10:30:23 [AZ]
10:30:23 [kerry]
danbri: what eric just said
10:30:39 [eparsons]
ack next
10:30:44 [kerry]
danbri: sameas is almost like swearing
10:31:17 [kerry]
danbri: e.g. whiioch poland? and smeaton's tower is it hte same as edystone lighthouse?
10:31:54 [kerry]
phila: but there is aconnection and we want that reoirded
10:32:29 [AndreaPerego]
Wonder wheter rdfs:seeAlso could to the job instead o owl:sameAs?
10:32:44 [AndreaPerego]
10:33:05 [AndreaPerego]
s/o owl:sameAs/of owl:sameAs/
10:33:10 [kerry]
eparsons: so anne franks house in my database (BP 14 and 15) linking my datababse of houses in amsterdam with bart's database of fires in amsterdam
10:33:30 [danbri]
seeAlso is pretty weak, owl:sameAs is super strong, there are things also like skos mappings that sit along the spectrum between those
10:33:34 [kerry]
... I need to say that I have a consistent uri within my database (reuse is elsewhere)
10:33:46 [ericP]
10:33:48 [kerry]
hadleybeeman: but "reuse identifiers" is in here!
10:33:48 [ericP]
10:34:03 [kerry]
ClemensPortele: we have a different understanding of reuse
10:34:41 [eparsons]
ack next
10:35:23 [eparsons]
kerry : duty to create predicate "sameplace"
10:35:25 [ericP]
kerry: i believe it is our duty to construct a predicate that captures samePlaceAs
10:35:28 [eparsons]
ack next
10:35:31 [BartvanLeeuwen]
10:35:35 [kerry]
.. bp 14 is establishing the links,, and that is different from...
10:36:11 [frans]
sameplace could be one of the spatial relationships we need to have defined
10:36:16 [jtandy]
10:36:21 [kerry]
ClemensPortele: we shouln't just look at OWL e.g. geosjson, e.g. sameAs
10:36:38 [kerry]
eparsons: call for wap of scribes
10:37:02 [kerry]
phila: please read DWBP best practice 10 as it contradicts us
10:37:03 [eparsons]
ack next
10:37:09 [billrobe_]
10:37:10 [kerry]
hadleybeeman: yes!
10:37:11 [phila]
scribe: phila
10:37:16 [phila]
scribeNick: phila
10:37:50 [phila]
hadleybeeman: If I understand you correctly, people are asying that they don't want to use other people's identifiers because you want to make your own statements about things
10:38:01 [eparsons]
ack next
10:38:10 [phila]
BartvanLeeuwen: One of the issues we have is, are we too RDF-centric
10:38:29 [phila]
BartvanLeeuwen: If you put a spatial thing on a map, and people want to click it, then people can find out more.
10:39:00 [ericP]
q+ to say that reuse identifiers is always great. also complicated, also worth reminding people, but creating the abstract relationships ducks the controversy.
10:39:10 [phila]
... I want to create a page that says Anne Frank's house is on fire that it has interesting shutters etc.
10:39:44 [phila]
hadleybeeman: But you're saying you want an ID for the fire at Anne Frank's House
10:40:25 [eparsons]
ack next
10:40:27 [phila]
jtandy: So Bart describes an incident that happens and Ed is describing the shutters..
10:40:48 [phila]
hadleybeeman: Draws diagram of the house, its fire and its shutters
10:41:08 [phila]
... But they're both about the same place
10:41:09 [danbri]
q+ AV
10:41:32 [jtandy]
10:41:56 [ByronCinNZ]
Yes I am here
10:42:18 [eparsons]
10:42:35 [phila]
hadleybeeman: You need diff IDs for the incident and the shutters but they're both about the same thing and for that we say use the same URI
10:42:53 [ahaller2]
10:43:30 [phila]
billrobe_: Agrees with hadleybeeman and gives example. Also, we're not only in the RDF world, so the majrity of use cases work well with using some definitive ID for Anne Frank's House
10:43:51 [ClemensPortele]
10:44:06 [phila]
billrobe_: I can deliver my info about Amsterdam as HTML and RDF...
10:44:19 [eparsons]
ack next
10:44:19 [hadleybeeman]
10:44:20 [Zakim]
ericP, you wanted to say that reuse identifiers is always great. also complicated, also worth reminding people, but creating the abstract relationships ducks the controversy.
10:44:21 [phila]
jtandy: And then maybe use schema:sameAs
10:44:51 [phila]
ericP: Some perspective... every BP in every environment says use URIs as IDs but the zeroth law is don't lie
10:45:20 [phila]
... A little bit of ontology that allows you to say 'same location as' - people get to reuse IDs there. They're not encouraged to reuse IDs where they shouldn't
10:45:28 [phila]
... Also get to avoid complex converdsations...
10:45:45 [phila]
... Coming up with hard and fast rules about saying two incidents are the same is very hard
10:46:04 [hadleybeeman]
10:46:16 [phila]
... You don't want to get into worrying about why two things are the same
10:46:34 [eparsons]
ack next
10:46:48 [jtandy]
10:46:48 [danbri]
10:46:49 [eparsons]
ack next
10:47:17 [phila]
ahaller2: Eric said what I wanted to say. Same location as is the only predicate we need.
10:47:38 [jtandy]
10:47:41 [jtandy]
10:47:44 [eparsons]
ack next
10:47:44 [frans]
10:48:50 [kerry]
10:48:56 [phila]
ClemensPortele: I'm worried about this strong 'same'. Many things in a map will have IDs, and finding 'the canonical identifier' is nigh on impossible and no one will do it.
10:49:13 [eparsons]
ack next
10:49:15 [phila]
... A more relaxed linkage is good
10:49:48 [phila]
jtandy: I think we're concluding that we need a more relaxed relationship for this. Maybe this is a missing BP
10:50:08 [eparsons]
10:50:31 [phila]
... We're saying that if you want to relate two things as being in the same place, we should show how to do it without necessarily using the same ID.
10:50:50 [phila]
eparsons: I think that's BP 14 or 15, not 7
10:50:52 [eparsons]
ack next
10:50:58 [hadleybeeman]
q+ to ask if "best practice" (vs normative spec) allows for this kind of fuzziness already
10:51:06 [danbri]
danbri has joined #sdw
10:51:32 [danbri]
proposal: (too long for IRC :)
10:51:35 [phila]
frans: Spatial same as - in spatial data, we talk about spatial things and geometries. You have a well established system for saying geometries are the same
10:51:56 [kerry]
+1 to frans remark
10:51:57 [phila]
frans: Maybe we need a set of relationships for spatial things
10:52:01 [eparsons]
ack next
10:52:18 [phila]
jtandy: So the predicate that Kerry suggested... some sort of geometric calculus?
10:52:22 [BernadetteLoscio]
10:52:31 [phila]
kerry: No, some sort of (non-computable) spatial relations.
10:53:03 [danbri]
10:53:04 [jtandy]
10:53:08 [phila]
zakim, close queue
10:53:08 [Zakim]
ok, phila, the speaker queue is closed
10:53:22 [eparsons]
ack next
10:53:23 [Zakim]
hadleybeeman, you wanted to ask if "best practice" (vs normative spec) allows for this kind of fuzziness already
10:53:24 [phila]
kerry: You know we talked about backlinks? This is where I think it's relevant
10:54:11 [phila]
hadleybeeman: I hear you discussing this BP and it sounds as if you agree but you're looking for edge cases where it doesn't work. Does this being a Note help to allow some fuzziness?
10:54:39 [phila]
jtandy: In GeoSPARQL - OGC is creating an ontology for this
10:54:57 [phila]
hadleybeeman: Butr you're writing BPs which doesn't need to be as precise as a Rec
10:55:12 [eparsons]
ack next
10:55:15 [phila]
kerry: I don't think they're edge cases, they're normal
10:55:46 [phila]
BernadetteLoscio: When you're talking about datasets and the items within them, the item is Anne Frank's house? Not stuff within it?
10:56:01 [phila]
jtandy: Anne Frank's house could have a point, 2 or 3 D polygon
10:57:59 [phila]
[More discussion of IDs for Anne Frank's House]
10:58:14 [hadleybeeman]
[and assertions about Anne Frank's House]
10:58:52 [phila]
-> Anne Frank's House
10:59:17 [eparsons]
zakim, open queue
10:59:17 [Zakim]
ok, eparsons, the speaker queue is open
10:59:32 [phila]
10:59:49 [phila]
10:59:55 [billrobe_]
11:00:26 [danbri]
"Search engines should receive a metadata response to a HTTP GET when dereferencing the link target URI." … what is a link target URI?
11:00:37 [phila]
billrobe_: We spent a lot of time talking about creating precise machine readable data about things that, AFAIK, search engines are ignoring.
11:00:53 [phila]
... might be a route to providing something useful for search?
11:01:21 [phila]
billrobe_: Is there sometehing already in place that we can use in our BPs?
11:01:23 [ClemensPortele]
11:01:23 [danbri]
11:01:27 [phila]
ack b
11:02:20 [ByronCinNZ]
11:02:21 [phila]
jtandy: We've suggested that provides a vocab that helps search engines index things like schema:Place
11:02:44 [phila]
jtandy: Does that help search engines answer questions like find coffee shops near here?
11:02:48 [phila]
danbri: Potentially
11:02:56 [eparsons]
11:03:02 [phila]
danbri: works because it sits on top of what was in place already.
11:03:23 [phila]
danbri: RDF tried to build a parallel Web that ignored the existing billions of pages.
11:03:48 [frans]
11:03:49 [phila]
... If you express your data in, there's no guarantee it'll be used.
11:04:11 [phila]
danbri: I don't understand what a link target URI is?
11:04:22 [eparsons]
11:04:32 [phila]
jtandy: For a URL, if you defref a URL, you should get back an HTML page that might have embedded data
11:05:05 [phila]
... but the granularity might change. You want a URL for everything in a WFS
11:05:10 [phila]
ClemensPortele: That exists already
11:05:17 [phila]
jtandy: But it's not crawlable
11:05:27 [eparsons]
11:05:35 [phila]
danbri: A lot of sites used to hide things behind HTTP POST
11:06:14 [eparsons]
ack next
11:06:16 [phila]
... I think the same thing happened around SDIs - things are hidden. You need to make a Web page, make sure robots.txt doesn't exclude it etc.
11:06:29 [phila]
danbri: Don't treat it as a special universe.
11:06:42 [phila]
billrobe_: Makes sense, but it's not often practiced.
11:06:57 [phila]
danbri: Content negotiation is a tricky one. Se Web loves it
11:07:04 [phila]
ericP: JSON likes it
11:07:22 [phila]
... It's a problem if the data is too large
11:07:27 [eparsons]
11:07:55 [phila]
ClemensPortele: In the Geonovum test, what we did was what we said here. We ctreated an HTML paghe for every resource that we had and included in that.
11:08:01 [phila]
... the tricky part
11:08:15 [phila]
... theoretically it's a BP, in the real world it's not exploited.
11:08:21 [danbri]
q+ re w3c instruments
11:08:25 [phila]
... We could't really argue that it made a big impact
11:08:46 [eparsons]
11:09:15 [phila]
ClemensPortele: If we look at reviews, it's definitely a BP. But not really for everything.
11:09:26 [eparsons]
ack next
11:09:44 [phila]
ByronCinNZ: I feel like it's tryiung to say too much
11:10:11 [phila]
... There's a lot in there that I find contentious-ish. A BP on fail metadata, well that's about keeping metadata up to date.
11:10:26 [phila]
... Maybe it could be more succicnt. What actually is the point?
11:10:46 [phila]
... Some BPs have really good examples
11:11:12 [phila]
... could be more direct and more usable.
11:11:32 [jtandy]
11:11:33 [danbri]
for Google's use, see also (opening hours oriented), (events…)
11:11:59 [jtandy]
q+ "is something _on the web_ if search engines can't see it?"
11:12:08 [eparsons]
ack next
11:12:21 [jtandy]
q+ to ask "is something _on the web_ if search engines can't see it?"
11:12:33 [phila]
frans: Should this BP not simply say, make HTML models of the data you provide?
11:12:52 [phila]
... It you at least make HTML pages you've made progress on making your data search engine searchable.
11:13:09 [phila]
... The other thing is linkage between the thing and the metadata
11:13:26 [phila]
... I imagine a SE requests a page, looks for links and then follows those links
11:13:41 [kerry]
rrsagent, draft minutes
11:13:41 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate kerry
11:14:01 [phila]
... What's required is a link from the data to the metadata and then links within that. Maybe to subsets and other subsets
11:14:03 [eparsons]
ack next
11:14:04 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to discuss w3c instruments
11:14:04 [ericP]
-> [media-types] Review request for application/geo+json-seq media type registration
11:14:10 [phila]
Linda: Like a sitemap
11:14:27 [phila]
ClemensPortele: But sitemaps are limited to 25K links
11:14:34 [phila]
... We had 8 million addresses
11:14:47 [eparsons]
11:14:51 [phila]
Linda: It can be paged
11:14:57 [danbri]
11:15:43 [phila]
danbri: Is the word 'Best' correct. W3C likes to attract people to try out new stuff. It seems a lot of what we're talking about is new.
11:16:03 [phila]
... I spend a lot of time trying to get people to make use of data.
11:16:14 [eparsons]
ack next
11:16:16 [ericP]
11:16:23 [ericP]
q+ to propose "Emerging Practices"
11:16:35 [ericP]
11:16:36 [phila]
... If all we can write is BPs then we're limited. If we can say emerging practice we perhaps can go further
11:17:11 [jtandy]
11:17:21 [phila]
eparsons: There's a heirarchy of BPs. There are simple things you can do, like exposing what's behind your WFS. Next step is to create HTML pages, next step is to add in structured data
11:17:40 [ericP]
i believe hierarchies like this are expressed on coffee mugs
11:17:42 [phila]
... i.e. take a stepwise approach. BPs can be incremental.
11:17:45 [phila]
11:17:46 [eparsons]
ack next
11:17:48 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to ask "is something _on the web_ if search engines can't see it?"
11:17:50 [danbri]
I was just reviewing Mobile Web Application Best Practices (2010). A lot of it is both precise and has survived the test of time. It updates even earlier work, from (2008). Earliest I can find is
11:18:17 [phila]
jtandy: Is it on the web only if search engines can't see it? They only look at webpages
11:18:25 [phila]
danbri: Nope, images, etc.
11:18:46 [hadleybeeman]
Q+ to talk about how this works for browser standards
11:19:24 [phila]
jtandy: Is the BP more along the lines of creating a human readable page and then maybe a structured version
11:19:36 [phila]
eparsons: WxS isn't on the Web, it's on the dark Web
11:20:04 [phila]
jtandy: If we want our data to be on the Web, people should be able to find it with a normal browser. Better still using some structured data as well (
11:20:13 [eparsons]
ack next
11:20:14 [Zakim]
hadleybeeman, you wanted to talk about how this works for browser standards
11:20:18 [phila]
... if we can encourage people to do that then the SEs might start to use it.
11:20:30 [eparsons]
zakim close queue
11:20:58 [eparsons]
zakim, close queue
11:20:58 [Zakim]
ok, eparsons, the speaker queue is closed
11:21:30 [phila]
jtandy: I think we've made progress with BP4, yes
11:21:57 [phila]
phila: It's consistent with DWBP's advice on making (meta)data human and machine readable
11:22:06 [eparsons]
zakim, open queue
11:22:06 [Zakim]
ok, eparsons, the speaker queue is open
11:22:13 [phila]
Topic: Best Practice 8: Provide geometries on the Web in a usable way
11:22:21 [phila]
-> BP8
11:22:34 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
11:22:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
11:23:06 [phila]
jtandy: Proposes to take 60 mins for lunch
11:23:13 [phila]
... Then we can pick up BP8
11:23:22 [phila]
... Rather than try and rush it in 8 mins
11:23:32 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
11:23:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
11:23:56 [phila]
hadleybeeman: On Best/Emerging practices...
11:24:10 [eparsons]
Lunch at 12:30 - will be back at 13:30
11:24:15 [phila]
... We've been discussing this a lot in the TAG and whether W3C is where standards are created or ratified
11:24:32 [phila]
... What the HTML Web Browser world is that for any new idea, they want it hammered out in a Community Group.
11:25:01 [phila]
... They'll form a group within the Web Incubator Community Group
11:25:11 [phila]
... So that by the time it's in a WG it's already in the wild
11:25:20 [phila]
... Then WGs aren't working from scratch
11:26:55 [phila]
[Discussion around future work, life of the WG etc.]
11:29:51 [phila]
Discussion of difference between OGC and W3C in terms of end of work for WGs. OGC's carry on indefinitely, even in dormant, W3C has to start again
11:30:02 [phila]
danbri: Can it transition to a CG
11:30:05 [phila]
phila: Yes of course
11:31:03 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
11:31:03 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
11:31:12 [eparsons]
Lunchtime everyone
11:31:14 [phila]
[Adjourned for lunch]
12:07:48 [jungbin]
jungbin has joined #sdw
12:10:14 [sangchul]
sangchul has joined #sdw
12:11:04 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw
12:19:25 [newton]
newton has left #sdw
12:28:42 [eparsons]
eparsons has joined #sdw
12:30:55 [frans]
frans has joined #sdw
12:31:00 [ByronCinNZ]
ByronCinNZ has joined #sdw
12:34:16 [ClemensPortele]
ClemensPortele has joined #sdw
12:34:21 [eparsons]
Slowly returning from lunch...
12:34:46 [ClemensPortele]
present+ ClemensPortele
12:35:04 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
12:35:21 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
12:36:54 [ByronCinNZ]
present+ ByronCinNZ
12:36:56 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
12:38:16 [AndreaPerego]
present+ AndreaPerego
12:40:16 [Linda]
Linda has joined #sdw
12:40:16 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
12:40:23 [billroberts]
present+ billroberts
12:40:27 [Linda]
present+ Linda
12:42:42 [ByronCinNZ]
ByronCinNZ has joined #sdw
12:43:47 [jtandy]
so ... we're just restarting ...
12:44:02 [phila]
phila has joined #sdw
12:44:09 [phila]
phila has joined #sdw
12:44:39 [jtandy]
in the room we've decided to try to complete the discussion on BP7 about "indirect identification" ... see summary of email thread at
12:45:13 [eparsons]
Webex back I hope - can you hear us ByronCinNZ ?
12:45:20 [ByronCinNZ]
12:45:44 [eparsons]
Perfect thx
12:46:23 [ByronCinNZ]
Will be jumping over to Orlando shortly for the DCAT metadata OGC. Will return after
12:46:44 [jtandy]
for ref, see
12:47:05 [billroberts]
12:47:09 [billroberts]
12:47:28 [billroberts]
Topic:Indirect Identifiers
12:47:54 [BartvanLeeuwen]
BartvanLeeuwen has joined #sdw
12:48:03 [BartvanLeeuwen]
present+ BartvanLeeuwen
12:48:10 [DanhLePhuoc]
DanhLePhuoc has joined #sdw
12:48:14 [dmckenzie]
dmckenzie has joined #sdw
12:48:19 [DanhLePhuoc]
pressent+ DanhLePhuoc
12:48:32 [billroberts]
jtandy: summarises the ideas of 'Indirect Identification' based on the link above
12:49:02 [BernadetteLoscio]
BernadetteLoscio has joined #sdw
12:49:15 [eparsons]
12:49:15 [BernadetteLoscio]
present+ BernadetteLoscio
12:49:20 [billroberts]
jtandy: do people recognise this practice as useful and something that happens a lot?
12:49:43 [danbri]
danbri has joined #sdw
12:50:05 [kerry]
kerry has joined #sdw
12:50:38 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
12:50:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
12:51:52 [eparsons]
billroberts Has not experienced any issues with indirect identification
12:52:21 [eparsons]
billroberts metadata solves Last updated problem
12:52:45 [danbri]
q+ to say two things: forcing thing vs page-about-it distinction everywhere comes with costs (for publishers and consumers); muddling up things with their descriptions also have costs. Secondly, that the entities+properties model is a kind of spectrum
12:53:22 [billroberts]
danbri: has a vocabulary that is quite agnostic. You could use that rigorously in terms of differentiating identifiers and documents about them
12:53:34 [eparsons]
ack danbri
12:53:34 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to say two things: forcing thing vs page-about-it distinction everywhere comes with costs (for publishers and consumers); muddling up things with their
12:53:37 [Zakim]
... descriptions also have costs. Secondly, that the entities+properties model is a kind of spectrum
12:53:40 [billroberts]
...but you can also use it 'scruffily', using a web page about say Brad Pitt as a way of referring to Brad Pitt
12:54:40 [billroberts]
danbri: it was found to be hard to get the idea of distinguising web address and identifier to developers. It would be possible if there was a distinct benefit, but that probably isn't hte case. There isn't the incentive at the moment
12:54:43 [roba]
roba has joined #sdw
12:55:11 [billroberts]
danbri: there is a cost to enforcing the distinction, and there is a cost to mixing them up. So you have to weigh up the pros and cons
12:55:41 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
12:56:00 [roba]
hi - joined via webex but its behaving differently - not hearing anything and it offering a video session, no mic mute option.
12:56:29 [billroberts]
jtandy: can we say that it's common practice to conflate the identifier and the document, and that's ok?
12:56:32 [frans]
12:56:34 [AndreaPerego]
12:56:40 [billroberts]
eparsons: we can say it's common practice for sure
12:56:47 [billroberts]
kerry: but should we endorse it?
12:56:47 [danbri]
12:57:16 [billroberts]
phila: it becomes a problem to use an indirect reference, if you use it in the wrong way
12:57:43 [billroberts] to say the mountain is 374kb, but if you are saying something sensible in that context, then it causes no problems
12:57:49 [eparsons]
ack next
12:57:56 [danbri]
q+ to suggest a paradox
12:58:07 [RaulGarciaCastro]
RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdw
12:58:17 [billroberts]
phila: this is a widely used approach and it generally doesnt' cause problems
12:58:23 [frans]
12:58:31 [billroberts]
12:58:37 [eparsons]
ack next
12:59:17 [billroberts]
AndreaPerego: if your use case doesn't need the distinction, then don't do it
12:59:31 [frans]
12:59:35 [danbri]
12:59:55 [eparsons]
ack next
13:00:18 [kerry]
13:00:37 [danbri]
All I was going to say: at this relatively early stage, when a given thing doesn't have a lot of machine readable Web descriptions, strict separation of thing-vs-description identifier is overkill. But once we have more adoption it may prove increasingly valuable.
13:00:43 [eparsons]
billroberts depends upon context - relies on human - but thats ok
13:00:44 [phila]
billroberts: We're agreeing that it depends on context and we're relying on the human operator to apply that context
13:00:49 [roba]
13:00:52 [roba]
13:00:56 [eparsons]
13:01:31 [eparsons]
ack next
13:02:05 [DanhLePhuoc]
13:02:10 [eparsons]
ack next
13:02:16 [phila]
q+ to talk about dumb strings
13:02:26 [billroberts]
frans:we can probably assume that people won't generally be confused about spatial things - i.e. they won't think it's a document
13:02:52 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: but we then may need to distinguish Spatial Thing and Feature?
13:03:09 [eparsons]
13:03:47 [billroberts]
kerry:how do we convey to a user of the data what we mean by a URI?
13:04:01 [eparsons]
ack next
13:04:48 [sangchul]
sangchul has joined #sdw
13:05:04 [billroberts]
roba: one use case is citing an object. In that case you want an identifier for the thing, not a representation of it. If the data provider wants his representation to be cited, then you might have to make the distinction
13:05:31 [jtandy]
13:05:32 [billroberts] possible way to do that is the URI redirection approach.
13:05:54 [billroberts]
jtandy: do you mean something like a 303 redirect to a WFS endpoint?
13:06:18 [billroberts]
roba: doesn't matter too much what you redirect to, you can just use the test on whether it is redirected or not
13:06:35 [billroberts]'s like referencing a geometry not a feature
13:06:40 [billroberts]
13:06:52 [kerry]
13:07:08 [eparsons]
zakim, close queue
13:07:08 [Zakim]
ok, eparsons, the speaker queue is closed
13:07:31 [billroberts]
jtandy: tries to summarise and play back Rob's point. If you do redirect, you've separated out the thing and the representation
13:07:53 [billroberts]
roba: not quite as strong as that.
13:08:36 [billroberts]
roba: if it doesn't redirect, you could tell that the URL is not safe to be an identifier
13:08:43 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
13:09:13 [billroberts]
jtandy: how much context do we need? how to express it?
13:09:45 [billroberts]
roba: one approach is to get the context by dereferencing it, but I don't think we can say that is a best practice
13:10:01 [eparsons]
ack next
13:10:04 [billroberts]
jtandy: so, as Dan says, we're all blundering around
13:11:35 [billroberts]
DanhLePhuoc: a data snippet can be valid and useful without having an http URI
13:12:03 [billroberts] could use non-http identifiers (URNs eg)
13:12:32 [billroberts]
jtandy: I think we want to recommend HTTP identifiers, even if they don't resolve on the web
13:13:30 [billroberts]
DanhLePhuoc: using identifiers that are not HTTP means that you don't have the cost of setting up a web server to allow dereferencing
13:13:32 [eparsons]
ack next
13:13:33 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about dumb strings
13:13:40 [jtandy]
13:14:08 [billroberts]
phila: URIs should be treated as dumb strings, you can't infer any meaning from them
13:14:35 [eparsons]
ack next
13:15:53 [roba]
13:15:53 [eparsons]
billroberts redirects not practical for mass market users
13:16:02 [eparsons]
ack next
13:16:23 [eparsons]
zakim, open queue
13:16:23 [Zakim]
ok, eparsons, the speaker queue is open
13:16:51 [billroberts]
kerry: also uncomfortable about using the redirect behaviour as a way of inferring context
13:17:21 [chunming]
chunming has joined #sdw
13:17:50 [billroberts]
roba: I think that's ok, but a best practice should be to use redirects. If you are using a representation URL you need to be clear it's not an identifier
13:18:28 [billroberts]
jtandy: trying to summarise - you shouldn't be obliged to separate identifier and document, unless you see a good reason to do so
13:19:16 [billroberts]
roba: a good reason to do so is to make it clear to users
13:21:46 [billroberts]
jtandy: will park the discussion on Spatial Thing and Feature
13:23:02 [billroberts]
Topic: Bart's demonstration of linking to WFS
13:23:41 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: we're working for emergency services in cross-border or cross-discipline contexts
13:24:07 [billroberts]
...there is more and more spatial data being shared between these partners in ad hoc ways
13:24:29 [billroberts]
...For example, water boards collaborating with fire departments on flood evacuation plans
13:24:48 [billroberts]
...The water board is opening up its SDI for the fire department
13:25:20 [billroberts]
...For example the fire department comes across information about a critical section of a dike (i.e. high risk of a flood)
13:26:04 [billroberts]
...misinterpretation between the two organisations of what was meant by 'critical'. Water board had a different idea to the fire department
13:28:51 [billroberts]
...[Bart shows a GIS WFS system with attributes of objects on the map]
13:29:13 [billroberts] we suggest having a rdf:seeAlso attribute on all WFS systems, to link to a place to store more information
13:29:33 [billroberts]
...Fire department is happy with an extra column in their system, but don't want to worry about supporting all kinds of formats
13:30:32 [billroberts]
...following the seeAlso link goes to a Linked Data page about the thing, which in turn can link to definitions of concepts and other terminology
13:31:09 [billroberts] this is a simple and generic way of linking a WFS to a Linked Data representation of the objects
13:31:46 [billroberts]
...We use standard linked data principles for dereferencing the URIs to get data
13:31:50 [jungbin]
jungbin has joined #sdw
13:33:07 [billroberts]
...Example showing a map of an incident, with icons to represent different situations, (eg a flaming icon to indicate a fire)
13:33:22 [billroberts]
...this approach allows icons to be connected to definitions of what they mean
13:34:11 [billroberts]
...and makes it possible to swap in different sets of icons for the same meaning, to make it familiar to someone from a different organisation
13:34:21 [sangchul]
sangchul has joined #sdw
13:35:33 [billroberts]
... From the opposite perspective, there is currently no standard way to link from the Linked Data representation to the feature on the map
13:35:51 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: there could be just a WFS request that returns the feature
13:36:17 [phila]
13:36:18 [jtandy]
13:36:18 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: Jeremy and I have discussed this as a possible best practice
13:37:00 [billroberts]
jtandy: so in essence, you are supplementing an existing SDI by putting one column in the database that links to a Linked Data representation, where all the semantic integration can take place - but you can still display it on a map
13:37:10 [billroberts]
jtandy: beautiful in its simplicity
13:37:10 [danbri]
q+ to say yay
13:37:35 [billroberts]
jtandy: (1) (maybe controversial) web mapping is explicitly out of scope - is this web mapping?
13:37:42 [eparsons]
ack next
13:37:47 [billroberts]
consensus: no this isn't web mapping, it's about linkability
13:38:29 [billroberts]
jtandy: (2) I'm minded of discussions back in Amersfoort, where billroberts mentioned some hybrid approaches using triple stores alongside other things
13:39:20 [billroberts]
...Bart's work seems a similar kind of thing
13:39:23 [frans]
13:40:23 [roba]
re embedding a link, of course the issue is whether the uri should be for a specific information resource or for an id which should dereference :-) There's your use case to consider
13:40:26 [phila]
q- later
13:40:26 [eparsons]
ack next
13:40:27 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to say yay
13:40:27 [billroberts]
jtandy: this seems to fit under the heading of data access - different ways of getting to the info
13:40:36 [Linda]
13:40:38 [jungbin]
jungbin has joined #sdw
13:41:38 [eparsons]
ack next
13:41:39 [billroberts]
danbri: many examples that we were talking about earlier were very sparse, so not much benefit for the effort. This seems much more obviously beneficial as you can link together lots of things all at once
13:41:46 [phila]
q- later
13:42:09 [roba]
13:42:55 [phila]
q- later
13:43:00 [ClemensPortele]
13:43:20 [billroberts]
frans: can understand the perspective of the water boards on not wanting to do lots of work on detailed definition. But there is software that makes setting up a WFS pretty easy. If people act on our BPs then maybe publishing the supporting data will be easy in future too
13:43:53 [eparsons]
ack next
13:44:08 [phila]
q- later
13:44:29 [billroberts]
Linda: thinking about how to fit this into the document. Is this a new BP, or a possible approach to implementing an existing BP?
13:44:39 [billroberts]
...could maybe fit in BP11 about convenience APIs?
13:44:51 [billroberts]
eparsons: this is more about the linkability best practice
13:45:56 [eparsons]
ack next
13:45:59 [billroberts]
13:46:13 [phila]
q- later
13:46:42 [billroberts]
roba: although I couldn't see the demo, I think I got the idea: this is a general use case of embedding a link to information about an object in another context
13:46:50 [eparsons]
13:47:02 [eparsons]
zakim, close queue
13:47:02 [Zakim]
ok, eparsons, the speaker queue is closed
13:47:12 [billroberts] what kind of link do you embed in your data? a link to an identifier or another resource?
13:48:44 [billroberts]
roba: probably need a standard practice here so that people know what to expect. It should probably be the identifier
13:49:00 [billroberts]
13:50:44 [billroberts]
roba: in that case the identifier can then link to various representations. Otherwise the implementer has to make a choice of which kind of representation to link to
13:53:41 [eparsons]
ack next
13:53:51 [billroberts]
phila: points out that in Bart's example, there is both information about the thing and information about the document about the thing. So this example makes the distinction between thing and representation
13:54:50 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: this example is mainly about easy data access. In QGIS you just have a string about the attribute. In the LD version, you can link off to definitions of the terminology
13:54:50 [roba]
do you want t force all WFS to use exactly the same set of choices as to how to link to different resources and additional information - or make that the URI dereferencing practice?
13:55:29 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: it doesn't naturally fit in one of the existing best practices
13:56:35 [billroberts]
...not sure if it's 'best' or 'common' or 'emerging'
13:57:10 [eparsons]
ack next
13:57:32 [jtandy]
13:57:47 [roba]
best does not imply common, but if common works its probably "best". Where "common" is missing or doesnt meet identified needs best is closer to "good"
13:58:32 [eparsons]
ack next
13:58:56 [billroberts]
billroberts: I think it probably fits into our existing best practices on linkability and on making links
13:59:21 [billroberts]
ClemensPortele: it's important to make it self-descriptive
13:59:30 [billroberts]
Linda: maybe there is a DWBP we could link to
13:59:59 [billroberts]
phila: point of process. Is there anything proprietary in Bart's work?
14:00:05 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: no
14:00:11 [roba]
its obviously about linkability - and if the practice link is to something via a URI that dereferences to a document that provides metadata, then it meets several BP cases
14:00:13 [eparsons]
zakim, open queue
14:00:13 [Zakim]
ok, eparsons, the speaker queue is open
14:00:58 [ByronCinNZ]
ByronCinNZ has joined #sdw
14:01:34 [billroberts]
BartvanLeeuwen: would like documentation of which attribute to use for this, to try to make it more standardised
14:01:57 [billroberts]
jtandy: different applications might require different data models
14:02:10 [billroberts] not sure we should specify always rdf:seeAlso or whatever
14:02:20 [BernadetteLoscio]
I think is this one:
14:02:53 [billroberts]
eparsons: this is good because you don't need to do anything difficult but has many benefits
14:03:27 [ClemensPortele]
scribe: ClemensPortele
14:03:33 [ClemensPortele]
scribenick: ClemensPortele
14:05:45 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: next topics: General BP issues, Narrative, Plan for next draft
14:06:33 [ClemensPortele]
TOPIC: Are we meeting the needs of practitioners- if not, how can we improve?
14:06:59 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: not writing BPs for managers, but for those doing the work
14:07:00 [Linda]
14:07:01 [eparsons]
14:07:03 [ByronCinNZ]
14:07:11 [ClemensPortele]
... are we meeting the needs?
14:08:17 [ClemensPortele]
frans: No. Related to BP on geometry, etc. Many options to choose from, but no real guidance how to do things
14:09:00 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: agrees, we don't say how to make the choice
14:09:34 [sangchul]
sangchul has joined #sdw
14:09:35 [ClemensPortele]
... Unlikely there is a single choice that fits everywhere. Example: GeoJSON.
14:10:15 [Linda]
14:10:17 [ClemensPortele]
... Struggles how to introduce the questions to ask yourself in the BP text.
14:11:07 [billroberts]
14:11:31 [ClemensPortele]
frans: Can we also identify the characteristics a good format has?
14:12:03 [eparsons]
ack next
14:12:11 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: Probably difficult, depends on the perspective and use case. Support for one or multiple CRS is an example.
14:12:47 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: We may be meeting the needs of the wrong partitioners, ie. the GIS community, less the "Web community"
14:12:55 [frans]
14:13:46 [ClemensPortele]
... distinguish implementation recommendations / options based on the specific needs
14:14:22 [ClemensPortele]
... what meets the 99% of the cases, let's make that the default
14:14:31 [eparsons]
ack next
14:14:48 [ClemensPortele]
Linda: are Web developers still in the audience, not so clear from the current text
14:14:56 [ClemensPortele]
(yes they are)
14:15:48 [ClemensPortele]
ByronCinNZ: A couple of things that may be missing:
14:16:35 [ClemensPortele]
... wider meaning of spatial beyond geospatial (but not really addressed in the text)
14:18:35 [ClemensPortele]
... clarify gaps that are relevant for bridging between SDI and Web developer community, e.g. spatial accuracy depending on the CRS/projection
14:19:19 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: I.e., provide more help on how to pick the right datum/projection?
14:19:25 [ClemensPortele]
ByronCinNZ: Yes
14:19:35 [eparsons]
ack next
14:19:35 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: Any similar topics?
14:20:02 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: Publish a raster or vector data?
14:20:20 [kerry]
kerry has joined #sdw
14:20:22 [eparsons]
ack next
14:21:51 [ClemensPortele]
billroberts: responds to frans "what is a good format" question: what will likely be used. So probably providing multiple options, e.g. GeoJSON for Leaflet and Shapefile for their GIS
14:22:17 [eparsons]
ack next
14:22:20 [ClemensPortele]
... publish once, use many times
14:23:16 [ClemensPortele]
frans: happy to read in the current BP to focus on the use of the data and keep the users in mind
14:24:07 [ClemensPortele]
... points to limited choice of data types, which is currently missing for geometry
14:24:24 [ClemensPortele]
... we should work towards a single way of expressing geometry
14:24:55 [phila]
q+ to pick up on non-geo spatial
14:25:03 [BartvanLeeuwen]
14:25:18 [ClemensPortele]
... Also, current text is too much about geospatial data, less useful for use cases like architecture / BIM etc.
14:25:35 [eparsons]
ack next
14:25:36 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to pick up on non-geo spatial
14:26:38 [ClemensPortele]
phila: content depends on contributors. Asks Chris from the BIM domain ...
14:27:26 [sangchul]
sangchul has joined #sdw
14:28:17 [ClemensPortele]
Chis(?): Welcomes guidance. CRS guidance relevant and different CRSs will be used (e.g. inside the building). There are open questions how to do this best.
14:29:01 [eparsons]
ack next
14:29:22 [ClemensPortele]
phila: Probably GeoFencing group did not consider the case where the CRS changes between two different polygons.
14:29:29 [jtandy]
14:30:08 [ClemensPortele]
BartvanLeeuwen: Have we outreached to the "Web developer" community and asked them, if it is useful what we are doing?
14:30:50 [ClemensPortele]
phila: Trying to reach as many people and communities as possible
14:31:18 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: Yes, what we do depends on the people who turn up
14:32:24 [phila]
q+ to talk about this evening
14:32:29 [eparsons]
ack next
14:32:31 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about this evening
14:32:37 [ClemensPortele]
dmckenzie: We need to identify and contact the communities where we want feedback. Can use OGC communications channels.
14:32:37 [phila]
-> Dev Meetup this evening
14:33:29 [ClemensPortele]
phila: that might have been an opportunity to pitch our work and get feedback
14:34:00 [ClemensPortele]
dmckenzie: many of these will be very regional, so hard to cover this broadly
14:34:42 [ClemensPortele]
billroberts: the extra day at Amersfoort may be a good example to follow
14:35:36 [ClemensPortele]
dmckenzie: OGC University DWG may be a channel for outreach
14:36:09 [ClemensPortele]
... or other DWGs that link to larger communities
14:36:40 [eparsons]
coffee break until 14:50
14:36:48 [eparsons]
coffee break until 15:50 sorry
14:53:13 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
14:54:29 [frans]
frans has joined #sdw
14:55:30 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
14:56:54 [jtandy]
14:56:54 [ClemensPortele]
TOPIC: "How do we kick the RDF habit?"
14:56:58 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
14:58:08 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: you can use Linked Data in many representations, not just using RDF
14:58:25 [kerry]
14:58:53 [ClemensPortele]
frans: since SDWBP is an extension of DWBP, how is DWBP?
14:59:00 [ByronCinNZ]
audio please. Sounds like an interesting conversation
14:59:00 [eparsons]
ack next
14:59:06 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: not heavy, but many of the examples use RDF
14:59:51 [AndreaPerego]
14:59:57 [jtandy]
14:59:59 [ClemensPortele]
kerry: use of link type registry is one example that can help as it is general
15:00:59 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: yes, publish semantics in the registry of IANA
15:01:06 [kerry]
15:01:20 [ClemensPortele]
... temporal relationships there is a proposal discussed with Simon Cox
15:01:34 [kerry]
15:01:54 [ClemensPortele]
... spatial relationships - there has been no feedback on which of the options to use
15:02:36 [ClemensPortele]
... on topology, direction, distance
15:02:38 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
15:02:46 [kerry]
+1 in principle
15:02:48 [ClemensPortele]
(general agreement)
15:02:55 [AndreaPerego]
IANA Link Relations:
15:02:55 [kerry]
15:02:59 [ClemensPortele]
Linda: but we need to agree on the list
15:03:04 [eparsons]
ack next
15:03:23 [ClemensPortele]
AndreaPerego: have checked, if anything is there?
15:03:31 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: Yes, nothing there
15:04:11 [frans]
15:04:14 [ClemensPortele]
AndreaPerego: May introduce overhead on the publisher side. But has advantage that it can also be used directly in HTML
15:05:16 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw
15:05:20 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: Whatever we do, there will be some burden on the publisher, currently it simply is just no option that a publisher could use
15:05:38 [BernadetteLoscio]
BernadetteLoscio has joined #sdw
15:05:44 [eparsons]
ack next
15:05:47 [eparsons]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:05:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate eparsons
15:05:51 [ClemensPortele]
AndreaPerego: maybe the profile link relation could be an option
15:06:40 [ClemensPortele]
kerry: it is important to capture the more informal spatial relationships that are used on the social level
15:07:11 [AndreaPerego]
Definition of the "profile" link relation (from IANA registry): "Identifying that a resource representation conforms to a certain profile, without affecting the non-profile semantics of the resource representation."
15:07:14 [ClemensPortele]
... ie the topological ones are not the most important ones
15:07:57 [ClemensPortele]
... focus on those that are used in common language
15:07:58 [eparsons]
ack next
15:09:05 [ClemensPortele]
frans: why do we want to "kick the RDF habit"?
15:09:46 [AndreaPerego]
q+ to comment on Fransis's point
15:09:57 [ByronCinNZ]
audio please
15:10:03 [RaulGarciaCastro]
RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdw
15:10:07 [AndreaPerego]
15:10:14 [BartvanLeeuwen]
15:10:24 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: if we focus on RDF people would quickly conclude the document does not apply to them
15:11:13 [ClemensPortele]
Linda: we have a link to the Linked Data BP this document becomes very RDF centric
15:11:43 [roba]
RDF is a practice - perhaps best for some things but not the only option.
15:12:09 [roba]
s/RDF/using RDF/
15:12:23 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: two schools of people, a) Linked Data must use RDF and b) takes a more relaxed position. Like the BP document...
15:12:57 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: Need to use examples that not other approaches, GML, GeoJSON, maybe OData, etc
15:13:11 [eparsons]
ack next
15:13:12 [Zakim]
AndreaPerego, you wanted to comment on Fransis's point
15:13:18 [BernadetteLoscio]
15:13:24 [ClemensPortele]
s/not other/are based on other/
15:13:51 [dmckenzie]
dmckenzie has joined #sdw
15:13:56 [eparsons]
ack next
15:14:16 [ClemensPortele]
AndreaPerego: (sorry, missed that)
15:15:27 [eparsons]
ack next
15:15:29 [ClemensPortele]
BartvanLeeuwen: Mention of RDF is a religious thing. People reject something just based on the reference to RDF
15:15:43 [danbri]
q+ re RDF
15:16:01 [AndreaPerego]
s/(sorry, missed that)/Just to say that link relations are already used in HTML documents, e.g., to link to stylesheets. So, this makes it easier to use them to express also other relationships./
15:16:07 [phila]
phila has joined #sdw
15:16:47 [ClemensPortele]
BernadetteLoscio: DWBP had similar discussion. Introduction has discussion of the relationship and avoid specific focus. But many examples are in ttl.
15:16:57 [eparsons]
ack next
15:16:58 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to discuss RDF
15:17:08 [frans]
15:17:11 [jtandy]
15:17:55 [eparsons]
ack next
15:18:28 [ClemensPortele]
danbri: Have used RDF in other groups, but without making a big fuss about it
15:18:45 [eparsons]
15:18:49 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:18:49 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
15:18:50 [billroberts]
15:19:14 [eparsons]
ack next
15:19:15 [jtandy]
BP doc tries to present no bias to RDF here:
15:19:27 [ClemensPortele]
frans: having other examples is a good idea and the Linked Data text should state that it is not abut RDF
15:19:50 [DanhLePhuoc]
DanhLePhuoc has joined #sdw
15:19:55 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: Chapter 7 already does this, see link above
15:20:17 [ClemensPortele]
15:20:18 [eparsons]
ack next
15:20:43 [eparsons]
15:20:51 [ClemensPortele]
billroberts: you want web identifiers and you want linking, then you are nearly at RDF
15:20:52 [eparsons]
ack next
15:21:30 [eparsons]
ClemensPortele : RDF point was mine - current draft better
15:21:44 [eparsons]
ack next
15:21:45 [phila]
present+ DanhLePhuoc
15:22:10 [phila]
present- BernaLoscio
15:22:19 [phila]
present+ newton
15:22:47 [eparsons]
15:22:51 [eparsons]
ack next
15:22:53 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: Both the GIS and Web developer communities consider RDF a "nasty beast". So not highlighting RDF will help communicating the BP
15:23:13 [AndreaPerego]
present+ AndreaPerego
15:23:23 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: general consensus and going in the right direction
15:23:29 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:23:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
15:23:39 [ClemensPortele]
present+ ClemensPortele
15:24:54 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: how can we address kerrys point about the spatial relations. Can someone propose a list of spatial relationships?
15:25:01 [kerry]
15:25:11 [BernadetteLoscio]
present+ BernadetteLoscio
15:25:28 [ericP]
q+ to ask about wikipedia infoboxes
15:25:46 [ClemensPortele]
phila: can we just register the ones from GeoSPARQL?
15:25:56 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: Which of the three sets?
15:26:08 [ClemensPortele]
... and these are only the topological ones
15:26:26 [phila]
15:26:35 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: The directional and distance related ones are more of a challenge
15:26:53 [eparsons]
ack next
15:27:01 [ClemensPortele]
kerry: Some of them are context dependent (near/far)
15:27:07 [phila]
q+ to talk about IANA Links don't need to be in a W3C standard, and to ask DanBri whether he can help
15:27:11 [eparsons]
ack next
15:27:12 [Zakim]
ericP, you wanted to ask about wikipedia infoboxes
15:27:35 [ClemensPortele]
ericP: could the wikipedia boxes provide any insight?
15:27:41 [ClemensPortele]
15:27:55 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: is there a link to more information?
15:28:14 [kerry]
15:28:17 [frans]
15:28:26 [eparsons]
ack next
15:28:27 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about IANA Links don't need to be in a W3C standard, and to ask DanBri whether he can help
15:28:28 [billroberts]
q+ to ask about progress on relating things to geometry
15:29:06 [ClemensPortele]
phila: topological ones could easily be added by contacting IANA / Mark Nottingham to add them
15:29:16 [frans]
15:29:34 [ClemensPortele]
... for the others, is there something that we can point to?
15:29:49 [frans]
15:30:14 [eparsons]
15:30:15 [ClemensPortele]
danbri: we could also add them to
15:30:36 [frans]
15:31:25 [ClemensPortele]
phila: how widely implemented are the relationships?
15:32:05 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: typically widely implemented by GIS, so we would need to analyse what has been implemented in tools
15:32:13 [frans]
15:32:26 [eparsons]
ack next
15:32:27 [Zakim]
billroberts, you wanted to ask about progress on relating things to geometry
15:33:07 [ericP]
+1 to dim[B(a)∩I(b)]=1&<arg(x∨x_) ˚͜˚
15:33:08 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: and how do we identify the directional / distance-related ones? any sources to use as a basis?
15:33:19 [frans]
15:34:05 [frans]
15:34:07 [ClemensPortele]
billroberts: related to the work on the spatial ontology
15:35:08 [ClemensPortele]
billroberts: can help?
15:35:31 [frans]
15:35:32 [ClemensPortele]
danbri: there are existing properties that relate objects to geometries
15:37:06 [frans]
15:37:13 [eparsons]
ack next
15:37:13 [ClemensPortele]
PROPOSED: submit topological GeoSPARQL Simple Feature relations to the IANA link relation registry.
15:37:47 [ClemensPortele]
frans: there could a difference between the spatial relation of spatial things or their geometries
15:38:24 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: the topological ones depend on the existence of geometries
15:38:55 [ericP]
15:39:17 [ericP]
15:39:42 [DanhLePhuoc]
15:40:09 [eparsons]
ack next
15:40:17 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: ... the topological ones are always computable from the geometries
15:40:49 [ericP]
ack me
15:41:09 [eparsons]
ack next
15:41:23 [phila]
q+ to talk about Young's Calculus
15:41:26 [ClemensPortele]
ericP: and how about the more fuzzy relationships
15:41:47 [eparsons]
ack next
15:41:48 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to talk about Young's Calculus
15:41:49 [jtandy]
15:41:53 [ClemensPortele]
DanhLePhuoc: (sorry, I missed that)
15:42:10 [kerry]
15:42:31 [danbri]
RRSAgent, pointer?
15:42:31 [RRSAgent]
15:42:46 [ClemensPortele]
phila: if we have the list of well-defined relationships for topo ones, should we do this for the temporal ones (Allan's calculus), too?
15:42:56 [eparsons]
ack next
15:43:20 [DanhLePhuoc]
there is some relationship can be calculate without geometric information, for instance, located in, part of, can be computed via transitive reasoning
15:43:41 [danbri]
q+ to mention 'equals'
15:44:17 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: I can make topologial assertions without geometry.
15:44:20 [eparsons]
ack next
15:44:20 [danbri]
phila, see "We don't nitpic about whether they're alive, dead, real, or imaginary. " in
15:44:31 [ClemensPortele]
eparsons: but you cannot prove them
15:45:04 [ClemensPortele]
kerry: the informal ones are more valuable to the formal ones
15:45:20 [eparsons]
+1 tp both
15:45:36 [eparsons]
ack next
15:45:37 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to mention 'equals'
15:46:19 [kerry]
q+ to mention
15:46:26 [ClemensPortele]
DanhLePhuoc: only one seems only useful in a mathematical sense (equal), the others also make sense in a colloquial sense
15:46:41 [ClemensPortele]
15:46:45 [eparsons]
ack next
15:46:46 [Zakim]
kerry, you wanted to mention
15:48:25 [ClemensPortele]
jtandy: It would be a well-defined topic to make a proposal for the link relations. Any volunteers?
15:49:28 [ClemensPortele]
phila: where to put, in, W3C space? Should it also go to the BP, too?
15:49:57 [ClemensPortele]
... IANA wants to reference something stable
15:50:28 [eparsons]
15:50:35 [ericP]
q+ to propose email
15:50:44 [eparsons]
ack next
15:50:46 [Zakim]
ericP, you wanted to propose email
15:51:12 [ClemensPortele]
ericP: simplest could be an email to the mailing list
15:51:31 [ericP]
ack next
15:51:44 [eparsons]
q+ kerry
15:51:47 [eparsons]
ack next
15:52:26 [ClemensPortele]
kerry: this might be a starting point:
15:52:50 [Linda]
And has I saw
15:53:44 [RaulGarciaCastro]
15:54:45 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: we want to include: computable relationships and assertive relations (not necessarily based on computations)
15:54:54 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: … who can take the lead for doing that?
15:55:20 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: what has to be done?
15:55:45 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: name + description
15:56:19 [phila]
-> An excellent example of a namespace document
15:56:26 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: I take the lead
15:56:37 [ericP]
-> An adequate example of a namespace document
15:57:11 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: there is no best practice for these relationships; there is a gap there
15:57:11 [ericP]
(though it does introduce some convention for properties of a class)
15:59:12 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: … could this be part of the namespaces work?
15:59:14 [RaulGarciaCastro]
16:00:19 [kerry]
16:00:31 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: how to use spatial relationships for uncertain boundaries? There is a common practice to do it
16:00:38 [phila]
ack k
16:00:39 [eparsons]
ack next
16:01:18 [roba]
16:01:37 [eparsons]
action eparsons to work with chairs to define spatial relations namespace document
16:01:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-198 - Work with chairs to define spatial relations namespace document [on Ed Parsons - due 2016-09-26].
16:01:51 [frans]
16:02:02 [ericP]
q+ to ask if time management mechanisms can be used here
16:02:10 [RaulGarciaCastro]
kerry: we can handle it talking about fuzzy relationships
16:02:42 [RaulGarciaCastro]
kerry: … and I don’t even need to knwo the geometry
16:03:28 [eparsons]
ack next
16:03:30 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: sometimes there are things with no geometry associated
16:04:35 [RaulGarciaCastro]
roba: relationships depend on the use case; we need a mechanism to specify what you need in your context
16:04:37 [eparsons]
ack next
16:05:18 [RaulGarciaCastro]
frans: if we relax the relationships to things without geometry, anyone can make a statement about anything
16:05:35 [eparsons]
ack next
16:05:37 [Zakim]
ericP, you wanted to ask if time management mechanisms can be used here
16:06:39 [RaulGarciaCastro]
ericP: you should expect people acting in good faith (a trust issue)
16:07:28 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: some expert should help me with the examples of spatil relationships
16:08:18 [frans]
16:08:22 [phila]
q+ to clarify scope
16:08:38 [phila]
16:08:52 [AndreaPerego]
16:09:29 [phila]
q+ to ask BernadetteLoscio and newton their thoughts on the usefulness of the running example
16:09:40 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: bill, what are your thoughts about producing statistical data?
16:09:43 [eparsons]
ack next
16:10:27 [RaulGarciaCastro]
AndreaPerego: When are we talking about SpatialThing vs Feature?
16:10:44 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: let’s plan now with everyone here
16:11:22 [eparsons]
ack next
16:11:23 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to ask BernadetteLoscio and newton their thoughts on the usefulness of the running example
16:11:42 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: Is narrative important?
16:11:52 [phila]
ack me
16:12:10 [RaulGarciaCastro]
BernadetteLoscio: The running example was useful, even if in some cases it was difficult to come up with it
16:12:40 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: We were thinking on a flooding example, but it is complex
16:13:11 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
16:13:52 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: … I don’t expect the best practices to be used alone, but with other documents
16:14:06 [frans]
16:14:12 [kerry]
regrets+ chris little
16:14:22 [kerry]
regrets+ josh lieberman
16:14:30 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: Maybe we could reduce the scope in the narrative?
16:15:23 [eparsons]
ack next
16:15:31 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: Some answers that the narrative is supposed to answer are already answered in the document
16:16:01 [RaulGarciaCastro]
frans: How about using the narrative in the examples to give coherence? Right now it is separated
16:16:19 [eparsons]
16:16:30 [eparsons]
ack next
16:16:47 [ClemensPortele]
16:16:57 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: Maybe we can prioritize the best practices
16:17:25 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: … trying to include everything makes things complex
16:19:38 [RaulGarciaCastro]
billroberts: have been trying to find population statistics and examples, and this raised a number of questions that can be performed (e.g., is the population data in machine-readable form?)
16:19:40 [BernadetteLoscio]
BernadetteLoscio has joined #sdw
16:20:28 [eparsons]
ack next
16:20:34 [RaulGarciaCastro]
billroberts: … this can give hints to data publishers
16:21:05 [RaulGarciaCastro]
ClemensPortele: If you remove the narrative and put it into the examples it may not be son convincing
16:21:11 [RaulGarciaCastro]
16:21:56 [Linda]
16:22:00 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: how do we plan net steps? (will think on the narrative for tomorrow)
16:22:01 [eparsons]
ack next
16:22:15 [phila]
q+ to be annoying
16:22:30 [RaulGarciaCastro]
Linda: how far is the current document for the next working draft?
16:23:01 [eparsons]
ack next
16:23:02 [Zakim]
phila, you wanted to be annoying
16:23:14 [kerry]
+1 it has moved a lot from previous version
16:23:24 [eparsons]
16:23:42 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: The document is already very good; please publish it as soon as possible
16:23:57 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: … feel free to take things out
16:24:18 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: … right now it is more than expected
16:24:55 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: publishing it is the way of getting more people involved
16:25:58 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: get what you got in a published document (even with open issues) in a week or two
16:27:48 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: Pending things: update the glossary with missing definitions (anyone?), bibliography, open issues, changelog…
16:29:17 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: I will help with the document (formatting, language, etc.)
16:29:39 [danbri] (based on (based on )). Various 'deliberate mistakes' included to check if anyone reads it.
16:29:54 [billrobe_]
billrobe_ has joined #sdw
16:32:19 [RaulGarciaCastro]
AndreaPerego: Do we need the notion of a spatial thing? Not in every case we need to differentiate between real thing, geometry, etc.
16:32:43 [roba]
josh lieberman was working on an abstract spatial ontology - i think we need this to be a lightweight core
16:33:22 [roba]
...updating geosparql may end up with something too complex ?
16:33:34 [danbri]
q+ to re-iterate SpatialThing was from a random chat
16:34:16 [eparsons]
ack next
16:34:17 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to re-iterate SpatialThing was from a random chat
16:34:35 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: In the document we already state that a spatial thing can be different things
16:35:57 [RaulGarciaCastro]
danbri: the origin came due to trying to adopt CYC
16:36:10 [RaulGarciaCastro]
AndreaPerego: And people have used it since them
16:36:15 [RaulGarciaCastro]
16:36:23 [RaulGarciaCastro]
danbri: We can still change it
16:37:51 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: The concept of spatial thing for representing things with extent is good for us
16:38:23 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: the GeoSPARQL ontology is being refactored
16:39:09 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: … anyway, review the document to see if the current use of the term makes you happy
16:39:38 [RaulGarciaCastro]
Linda: we have reviewed the document
16:40:38 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: Ensure that the glossary is consistent with the wiki (anyone?)
16:42:13 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: … it is just a compilation thing, no need to write new content
16:42:47 [BernadetteLoscio]
16:43:44 [danbri]
re basic geo ns, it came from a meeting. which has 404 cyc reference -> - earlier version,
16:43:50 [phila]
-> BP cross ref
16:44:59 [danbri]
so yes, SpatialThing came via Cyc, e.g. #$SpatialThing-Localized
16:45:20 [danbri]
16:45:22 [RaulGarciaCastro]
newton: I made a script to build the cross-reference table for our best practices document; I can help with this document
16:46:30 [danbri]
q+ to confirm SpatialThing was indeed Cyc-inspired, see (also to report  )
16:46:46 [eparsons]
Action billrobe_ to check Glossary for completeness
16:46:47 [trackbot]
Error finding 'billrobe_'. You can review and register nicknames at <>.
16:46:53 [eparsons]
ack next
16:46:54 [Zakim]
danbri, you wanted to confirm SpatialThing was indeed Cyc-inspired, see (also to report
16:46:54 [Zakim]
...  )
16:50:36 [RaulGarciaCastro]
danbri: went through the wikipedia infoboxes for relationships properties and there are proposals in; but nothing has been assessed by experts
16:52:39 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: Regarding bibliography, proper references in ReSpec must be found (in yellow)
16:52:48 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: I can manage that
16:52:54 [phila]
action: phila to help improve the bibliography for the BP doc
16:52:54 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-199 - Help improve the bibliography for the bp doc [on Phil Archer - due 2016-09-26].
16:54:56 [kerry]
q+ to talk about tomorrow agenda before we leave
16:55:06 [eparsons]
ack next
16:55:08 [Zakim]
kerry, you wanted to talk about tomorrow agenda before we leave
16:57:49 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: I can help in placing the icons for the benefits
16:59:02 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: we will try to have a stable release in two weeks from Wednesday (15th October) so it can be published the following week
17:00:13 [danbri]
danbri has joined #sdw
17:00:20 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: Thanks for all the comments
17:00:20 [danbri]
@phila, to answer your process question - my actions fall under project webmaster role documented in 
17:00:21 [AndreaPerego]
q+ to ask about the agenda for the SDW workshop @ INSPIRE 2016 (Sep, 30th)
17:00:41 [eparsons]
ack next
17:00:42 [Zakim]
AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask about the agenda for the SDW workshop @ INSPIRE 2016 (Sep, 30th)
17:01:12 [RaulGarciaCastro]
AndreaPerego: do we want feedback from INSPIRE in the best practices?
17:01:42 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: tell them about the new future draft so they can give feedback
17:01:56 [RaulGarciaCastro]
AndreaPerego: We must highlight what we want feedback on
17:02:11 [RaulGarciaCastro]
AndreaPerego: … the workshop is next week on Friday
17:02:28 [RaulGarciaCastro]
jtandy: We can talk about it
17:03:10 [RaulGarciaCastro]
eparsons: I can present if you give me the content
17:03:25 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:03:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
17:03:28 [RaulGarciaCastro]
topic: Agenda for tomorrow
17:05:14 [RaulGarciaCastro]
kerry: (reviews agenda)
17:06:22 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: There is the AC meeting tomorrow at 15:00
17:07:15 [RaulGarciaCastro]
phila: … it may affect the meeting
17:07:42 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:07:42 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
17:07:49 [RaulGarciaCastro]
meeting closed
17:07:53 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
17:07:53 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
17:09:13 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
17:10:11 [AndreaPerego]
Hotel Vila Gale Opera:
19:03:28 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw
21:09:02 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw
22:03:17 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw
22:24:57 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sdw
22:37:32 [danbri]
danbri has joined #sdw
22:38:37 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdw
23:13:45 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw
23:25:41 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw
23:29:25 [newton]
newton has joined #sdw