20:56:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #sdwssn
20:56:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/09/27-sdwssn-irc
20:56:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
20:56:44 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #sdwssn
20:56:46 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SDW
20:56:46 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
20:56:47 <trackbot> Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
20:56:47 <trackbot> Date: 27 September 2016
20:56:53 <kerry> chair: kerry
20:57:11 <kerry> regrets: rob_atkinson
20:57:20 <kerry> present+ kerry
20:57:51 <kerry> rrsagent, make logs public
20:59:16 <DanhLePhuoc> DanhLePhuoc has joined #sdwssn
20:59:25 <ClausStadler> ClausStadler has joined #sdwssn
20:59:45 <JoelRamsay> present+ JoelRamsay
21:00:20 <JoelRamsay> Nope
21:00:53 <ClausStadler> the link only points to a booking for Tuesday, October 4, 2016 | 5:00 pm Eastern Daylight Time (GMT-04:00) | 1 hour
21:01:26 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #sdwssn
21:02:03 <ChrisLittle> ChrisLittle has joined #Sdwssn
21:02:21 <SimonCox> webex says 5th October ...
21:02:26 <ChrisLittle> Present+ ChrisLittle
21:02:46 <KJanowic> KJanowic has joined #sdwssn
21:03:05 <DanhLePhuoc> present+ DanhLePhuoc
21:03:29 <KJanowic> is the webex link not working or is it just me?
21:04:04 <RaulGarciaCastro> RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdwssn
21:04:32 <ChrisLittle> Webex host needs to start meeting
21:04:38 <KJanowic> Yes
21:05:01 <KJanowic> I cannot join because the button is grayed out
21:05:58 <RaulGarciaCastro> present+ RaulGarciaCastro
21:06:04 <SimonCox> I'm trying to set up a webex at CSIRO
21:06:06 <RaulGarciaCastro> Neither can I
21:06:36 <SimonCox> https://csiro.webex.com/csiro/j.php?MTID=mcdfa211646185968673e2ee094f941fb
21:06:41 <ClausStadler> present+ ClausStadler
21:08:12 <SimonCox> Chris and I are on the CSIRO webex - everyone welcome
21:08:18 <ChrisLittle> Simon and I now on  Cairo Webex
21:08:20 <SimonCox> linke above
21:08:30 <kerry> ok, thanks simon letts try that!
21:08:36 <SimonCox> that would be 'CSIRO' of course
21:08:44 <ChrisLittle> S/Cairo/csiro/
21:09:18 <ChrisLittle> * Curse on Mac splell checkers
21:10:17 <ClausStadler> does not appear to load for me
21:10:50 <KJanowic> Thanks Simon!
21:11:07 <SimonCox> we have 7 on webex so far
21:11:08 <joshlieberman> joshlieberman has joined #sdwssn
21:11:17 <ChrisLittle> Kerry - we are all there on Simon's session
21:12:26 <ClausStadler> restarted and now it works... strange
21:13:00 <SimonCox> @josh - join CSIRO webex instead https://csiro.webex.com/csiro/j.php?MTID=mcdfa211646185968673e2ee094f941fb
21:13:14 <kerry> scribe: simon
21:13:16 <joshlieberman> thanks
21:13:21 <kerry> scribenick: SimonCox
21:14:11 <SimonCox> present+ SimonCox
21:14:16 <kerry> topic: f2f summary
21:14:47 <SimonCox> Feedback on f2f: no comment from Raul of Danh
21:15:05 <SimonCox> s/of/or/
21:15:33 <SimonCox> Kerry summary:
21:15:58 <SimonCox> 1. Core + alignments is goal of modularization - no more modularization
21:16:24 <SimonCox> Core = SSN as it was, decoupled from DOLCE
21:16:42 <KJanowic> q+
21:16:45 <SimonCox> ACTION: name for SOSA-core
21:16:45 <trackbot> Error finding 'name'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.
21:17:19 <kerry> action:  kerry to determin determine sosa-core name going forward
21:17:19 <trackbot> Created ACTION-205 - Determin determine sosa-core name going forward [on Kerry Taylor - due 2016-10-04].
21:17:46 <KJanowic> But it was agreed and understood that SOSA-core is not SSN minus DOLCE, right?
21:18:05 <KJanowic> q+
21:18:11 <kerry> q?
21:19:12 <SimonCox> What is core? Much confusion - was used for two different things
21:19:22 <SimonCox> (a) SSN (minus DOLCE)
21:19:28 <SimonCox> (b) SOSA-core
21:20:29 <KJanowic> Very unhappy with somebody 'deciding' this....(wrt modules)
21:20:35 <SimonCox> Decision was: core = simple, cut-down SSN, with similar scope to SOSA-core
21:20:53 <SimonCox> No more modules in SDWWG project
21:21:13 <KJanowic> q+
21:21:21 <kerry> ack KJanowic
21:22:06 <SimonCox> KJanowic: will be (SOSA-core), no more alignments?
21:23:03 <kerry> q?
21:23:58 <SimonCox> KJanowic: still unsure about alignments
21:24:10 <SimonCox> kerry: explain about alignments -
21:25:35 <kerry> q?
21:25:44 <SimonCox> concept of alignments of SSN with other modules, none promised
21:26:06 <joshlieberman> joshlieberman has joined #sdwssn
21:26:43 <SimonCox> KJanowic: what wrong with name SOSA-core
21:26:47 <SimonCox> ?
21:26:53 <kerry> q?
21:27:43 <kerry> https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes
21:28:13 <joshlieberman> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4#Minutes
21:28:16 <kerry> q?
21:28:18 <joshlieberman> top of the page
21:29:02 <joshlieberman> day 1 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4#Minutes
21:29:15 <KJanowic> I just would like to express my dissatisfaction here in writing to the fact that we discuss something for months and months and there is a single meeting in which some sub group decides to turn all this on its head and decide that we will do something completely different.
21:29:24 <joshlieberman> Day 2: https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes
21:30:28 <SimonCox> kerry: there is time pressure on SSN deliverable
21:30:47 <SimonCox> kerry: that governed decisions at TPAC f2f
21:31:17 <SimonCox> kerry: if don't deliver rec-track document by 2016-12-31 then won't get standard
21:31:30 <SimonCox> kerry: will only get 'technical note'
21:31:52 <SimonCox> kerry: charter said to 'standardize SSN not something else'
21:32:00 <SimonCox> q+
21:32:06 <DanhLePhuoc> +q
21:32:18 <kerry> ack DanhLePhuoc
21:32:48 <SimonCox> DanhLePhuoc: we need a lightweight core that can be copied into schema.org
21:33:33 <SimonCox> kerry: web-of-things group also talking to schema.org
21:33:50 <SimonCox> kerry: wot may be opportunity missed ...
21:34:00 <kerry> ack SimonCox
21:35:10 <kerry> q?
21:35:48 <SimonCox> SimonCox: time-pressure is not necessarily a good reason to issue a product which does not do a good job
21:36:10 <SimonCox> kerry: risk of having nothing from W3C
21:36:25 <KJanowic> But what happens with all our discussions and votes on modularization that we discussed in March 2016?
21:36:49 <SimonCox> kerry: OGC does not have timing issue, but kerry not keen to drop SSN Rec Track document
21:37:02 <ChrisLittle> Q+
21:37:07 <kerry> q?
21:37:21 <SimonCox> kerry: should we drop rec-track goal?
21:38:08 <SimonCox> ChrisLittle: OGC is geospatial silo - whole point of joint WG was to to get out of silo, and remains an important goal
21:38:08 <DanhLePhuoc> q+
21:38:10 <kerry> q?
21:38:25 <kerry> ack DanhLePhuoc
21:38:32 <SimonCox> ... OK to sacrifice academic purity in order to get rec out of the door
21:39:07 <SimonCox> ack ChrisLittle
21:39:45 <KJanowic> I feel that we waited (for some reasons) for weeks despite having actual code to be discussed and now we are pushed with the argument that we are out of time.
21:40:37 <kerry> q?
21:41:35 <KJanowic> We had sosa-core on the table for months and we have the code and alignments in our repositories for weeks
21:42:02 <SimonCox> DanhLePhuoc: f2f participants (who mostly had not been on SSN calls) were unclear about relationship between SSN and SOSA
21:42:27 <KJanowic> *(who mostly had not been on SSN calls)*
21:42:58 <kerry> correction to minutes: not "were unclear about relationship between SSN and SOSA"  but were confused by the use of the word "core" referring to BOTH ssn and to SOSA-core
21:43:23 <KJanowic> I still do not hear a clear answer. Will sosa-core be part of our official work and recommendation.
21:43:24 <SimonCox> DanhLePhuoc: goal is to provide a rec that can be widely used, including schema.org
21:44:05 <kerry> for the minutes: correction at the f2f meeting there were 4 people who participate very regularly in ssn calls  -- armin, myself, danh and raul
21:44:13 <kerry> q?
21:44:54 <kerry> q+
21:44:57 <KJanowic> q+
21:46:10 <kerry> for the minutes" simon is saying there is tension between wanting to start again with ssn and wanting to kep it close to what it was
21:46:16 <DanhLePhuoc> q+
21:46:35 <KJanowic> re-track or not is not the question
21:46:38 <KJanowic> rec
21:46:55 <KJanowic> we can do sosa-core and rec-track
21:47:33 <KJanowic> q+
21:47:57 <SimonCox> kerry: no-way we could get sosa-based doc in rec-track
21:48:38 <KJanowic> q+
21:49:34 <SimonCox> kerry: correction: we cannot re-write SSN to get into rec-track
21:49:43 <SimonCox> ... we can get it through by simplifying
21:49:48 <KJanowic> So if we just take the 2012 ssn and move it to the rec-track, what have we been doing for the last year of weekly meetings and hundreds of emails?
21:49:55 <SimonCox> ... simple core of SSN that makes it easire to use
21:50:09 <SimonCox> ... closely aligned with goals, direction, purpose of SOSA as it standds
21:50:19 <SimonCox> ... primary challenge is implementations
21:50:26 <KJanowic> sosa-core has an implementation
21:50:32 <KJanowic> q+
21:50:41 <kerry> ack KJanowic
21:51:03 <SimonCox> KJanowic: sosa-core does have an implementation
21:51:42 <SimonCox> kerry: no, that's not an implementation. We need a process by which we establish that every term has been used twice
21:51:54 <SimonCox> ... every term in the ontology
21:52:04 <SimonCox> ... this is a low bar - really need >2
21:52:14 <SimonCox> ... demonstrated by a survey
21:52:27 <KJanowic> q+
21:52:38 <SimonCox> ... survey literature - would be easy for SSN
21:52:57 <SimonCox> ... can build more implementations
21:53:05 <SimonCox> ... e.g. through WOT
21:53:33 <kerry> ack DanhLePhuoc
21:53:57 <SimonCox> DanhLePhuoc: make list about what is old, what is new, what needs to be changed
21:54:02 <kerry> +1
21:55:43 <KJanowic> q+
21:55:45 <kerry> +1 we need someone to preare that list of new temrs and what old terms need implementations
21:55:48 <kerry> q?
21:55:55 <kerry> q-
21:55:57 <kerry> ack KJanowic
21:56:45 <SimonCox> KJanowic: name is important? do we continue on sosa-core and find new name?
21:57:10 <KJanowic> will we continue our sosa-core work or not? and will it be part of our rec?
21:57:33 <SimonCox> (SOSA not good in Spanish!)
21:58:29 <KJanowic> So, can I go on record that the answer is  'yes'.
21:58:40 <SimonCox> kerry: yes - we do continue sosa-core, but be careful about rec-track requirements, esp timing and implementations
21:58:51 <KJanowic> thanks kerry
21:59:38 <SimonCox> kerry: larger sdwwg group was clear that simpler + ssn both valued on rec-track
21:59:49 <SimonCox> kerry: do need a name-change
21:59:57 <SimonCox> q+
22:00:57 <SimonCox> kerry: phila suggested that some material could be moved out of rec-track dpcument into primer, kerry prefer keep in non-normative section in rec-track document
22:01:00 <kerry> q?
22:01:34 <SimonCox> correction: phila would check *if*
22:01:49 <kerry> ack SimonCox
22:02:29 <KJanowic> what could be more important?
22:03:00 <kerry> q?
22:03:39 <SimonCox> SimonCox: is the sosa-core vs ssn-core naming the problem? also problem with name sosa.
22:03:51 <KJanowic> wrt to 'sosa': almost any term means something in some language.
22:04:07 <kerry> q?
22:04:18 <SimonCox> kerry: no - the problem was more about 'core' than sosa vs ssn
22:04:38 <SimonCox> kerry: many more issues from TPAC f2f that need to be discussed.
22:05:13 <joshlieberman> There is a possible issue re: decision making since most OGC members were at the conflicting TC and could not even attend remotely.
22:05:14 <kerry> rrsagent, draft minutes
22:05:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/27-sdwssn-minutes.html kerry
22:05:17 <KJanowic> thanks and bye bye
22:05:25 <RaulGarciaCastro> Bye
22:05:26 <kerry> rq?
22:05:37 <ChrisLittle> Bye and thanks