Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference -- 27 Sep 2016

<JoelRamsay> Nope

<ClausStadler> the link only points to a booking for Tuesday, October 4, 2016 | 5:00 pm Eastern Daylight Time (GMT-04:00) | 1 hour

webex says 5th October ...

<KJanowic> is the webex link not working or is it just me?

<ChrisLittle> Webex host needs to start meeting

<KJanowic> Yes

<KJanowic> I cannot join because the button is grayed out

I'm trying to set up a webex at CSIRO

<RaulGarciaCastro> Neither can I

https://csiro.webex.com/csiro/j.php?MTID=mcdfa211646185968673e2ee094f941fb

Chris and I are on the CSIRO webex - everyone welcome

<ChrisLittle> Simon and I now on Cairo Webex

linke above

<kerry> ok, thanks simon letts try that!

that would be 'CSIRO' of course

<ChrisLittle> S/Cairo/csiro/

<ChrisLittle> * Curse on Mac splell checkers

<ClausStadler> does not appear to load for me

<KJanowic> Thanks Simon!

we have 7 on webex so far

<ChrisLittle> Kerry - we are all there on Simon's session

<ClausStadler> restarted and now it works... strange

@josh - join CSIRO webex instead https://csiro.webex.com/csiro/j.php?MTID=mcdfa211646185968673e2ee094f941fb

<kerry> scribe: simon

<joshlieberman> thanks

<kerry> scribenick: SimonCox

f2f summary

Feedback on f2f: no comment from Raul or Danh

Kerry summary:

1. Core + alignments is goal of modularization - no more modularization

Core = SSN as it was, decoupled from DOLCE

<scribe> ACTION: name for SOSA-core [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/09/27-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Error finding 'name'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.

<kerry> ACTION: kerry to determin determine sosa-core name going forward [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/09/27-sdwssn-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-205 - Determin determine sosa-core name going forward [on Kerry Taylor - due 2016-10-04].

<KJanowic> But it was agreed and understood that SOSA-core is not SSN minus DOLCE, right?

What is core? Much confusion - was used for two different things

(a) SSN (minus DOLCE)

(b) SOSA-core

<KJanowic> Very unhappy with somebody 'deciding' this....(wrt modules)

Decision was: core = simple, cut-down SSN, with similar scope to SOSA-core

No more modules in SDWWG project

KJanowic: will be (SOSA-core), no more alignments?
... still unsure about alignments

kerry: explain about alignments -

concept of alignments of SSN with other modules, none promised

KJanowic: what wrong with name SOSA-core

<kerry> https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes

<joshlieberman> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4#Minutes

<joshlieberman> top of the page

<joshlieberman> day 1 https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:F2F4#Minutes

<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.

<joshlieberman> Day 2: https://www.w3.org/2016/09/20-sdw-minutes

kerry: there is time pressure on SSN deliverable
... that governed decisions at TPAC f2f
... if don't deliver rec-track document by 2016-12-31 then won't get standard
... will only get 'technical note'
... charter said to 'standardize SSN not something else'

<DanhLePhuoc> +q

DanhLePhuoc: we need a lightweight core that can be copied into schema.org

kerry: web-of-things group also talking to schema.org
... wot may be opportunity missed ...

SimonCox: time-pressure is not necessarily a good reason to issue a product which does not do a good job

kerry: risk of having nothing from W3C

<KJanowic> But what happens with all our discussions and votes on modularization that we discussed in March 2016?

kerry: OGC does not have timing issue, but kerry not keen to drop SSN Rec Track document
... should we drop rec-track goal?

ChrisLittle: OGC is geospatial silo - whole point of joint WG was to to get out of silo, and remains an important goal
... OK to sacrifice academic purity in order to get rec out of the door

<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.

<KJanowic> We had sosa-core on the table for months and we have the code and alignments in our repositories for weeks

DanhLePhuoc: f2f participants (who mostly had not been on SSN calls) were unclear about relationship between SSN and SOSA

<KJanowic> *(who mostly had not been on SSN calls)*

<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

<KJanowic> I still do not hear a clear answer. Will sosa-core be part of our official work and recommendation.

DanhLePhuoc: goal is to provide a rec that can be widely used, including schema.org

<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

<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

<KJanowic> re-track or not is not the question

<KJanowic> rec

<KJanowic> we can do sosa-core and rec-track

kerry: no-way we could get sosa-based doc in rec-track
... correction: we cannot re-write SSN to get into rec-track
... we can get it through by simplifying

<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?

kerry: simple core of SSN that makes it easire to use
... closely aligned with goals, direction, purpose of SOSA as it standds
... primary challenge is implementations

<KJanowic> sosa-core has an implementation

KJanowic: sosa-core does have an implementation

kerry: no, that's not an implementation. We need a process by which we establish that every term has been used twice
... every term in the ontology
... this is a low bar - really need >2
... demonstrated by a survey
... survey literature - would be easy for SSN
... can build more implementations
... e.g. through WOT

DanhLePhuoc: make list about what is old, what is new, what needs to be changed

<kerry> +1

<kerry> +1 we need someone to preare that list of new temrs and what old terms need implementations

KJanowic: name is important? do we continue on sosa-core and find new name?

<KJanowic> will we continue our sosa-core work or not? and will it be part of our rec?

(SOSA not good in Spanish!)

<KJanowic> So, can I go on record that the answer is 'yes'.

kerry: yes - we do continue sosa-core, but be careful about rec-track requirements, esp timing and implementations

<KJanowic> thanks kerry

kerry: larger sdwwg group was clear that simpler + ssn both valued on rec-track
... do need a name-change
... 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

correction: phila would check *if*

<KJanowic> what could be more important?

SimonCox: is the sosa-core vs ssn-core naming the problem? also problem with name sosa.

<KJanowic> wrt to 'sosa': almost any term means something in some language.

kerry: no - the problem was more about 'core' than sosa vs ssn
... many more issues from TPAC f2f that need to be discussed.

<joshlieberman> There is a possible issue re: decision making since most OGC members were at the conflicting TC and could not even attend remotely.

- DRAFT -

Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference

27 Sep 2016

Attendees

Contents

f2f summary

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output