IRC log of sdw on 2016-10-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

19:54:51 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sdw
19:54:51 [RRSAgent]
logging to
19:54:53 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
19:54:53 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sdw
19:54:55 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SDW
19:54:55 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
19:54:56 [trackbot]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
19:54:56 [trackbot]
Date: 19 October 2016
19:55:02 [kerry]
kerry has joined #sdw
19:55:30 [eparsons]
Present+ eparsons
19:56:00 [phila]
regrets+ Rachel, Lars, SimonCox, Clemens, Frans, Payam, Danh, Jon
19:57:13 [phila]
19:57:23 [phila]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:57:33 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:57:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
19:57:37 [kerry]
chair: kerry
19:57:38 [phila]
chair: Kerry
19:57:49 [phila]
scribe: phila
19:57:53 [phila]
scribeNick: phila
19:58:41 [ScottSimmons]
ScottSimmons has joined #sdw
19:59:24 [phila]
present+ Kerry
19:59:32 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
19:59:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
19:59:44 [ScottSimmons]
present+ ScottSimmons
20:00:24 [roba]
roba has joined #sdw
20:00:41 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
20:00:44 [ByronCinNZ]
ByronCinNZ has joined #sdw
20:02:08 [phila]
Topic: Last week's minutes
20:02:09 [roba]
present+ roba
20:02:14 [kerry]
20:02:22 [ByronCinNZ]
present+ ByronCinNZ
20:02:23 [kerry]
present+ kerry
20:02:24 [phila]
PROPOSED: Accept last week's minutes
20:02:27 [eparsons]
Not there sorry
20:02:27 [kerry]
20:02:28 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
20:02:35 [phila]
20:02:42 [ScottSimmons]
20:02:46 [joshlieberman]
joshlieberman has joined #sdw
20:02:48 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #sdw
20:02:54 [joshlieberman]
present+ me
20:02:57 [roba]
20:03:12 [AndreaPerego]
present+ AndreaPerego
20:03:14 [billroberts]
20:04:10 [joshlieberman]
20:04:14 [jtandy]
present+ jtandy
20:04:24 [kerry]
20:04:28 [jtandy]
20:04:32 [phila]
RESOLUTION: Accept last week's minutes
20:04:36 [billroberts]
0 - missed last call
20:04:36 [AndreaPerego]
20:04:44 [phila]
s/present+ me/present+ joshlieberman /
20:04:54 [phila]
Topic: Patent Call
20:04:59 [kerry]
20:05:02 [joshlieberman]
20:05:04 [phila]
-> Patent Call
20:05:31 [phila]
20:06:05 [phila]
Topic: Change of season
20:06:09 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #Sdw
20:06:17 [phila]
kerry: Spring in the south, autumn in the north
20:06:33 [ChrisLittle]
Present+ ChrisLittle
20:06:54 [phila]
kerry: This willbe the consistent plenary time as defined by UTC
20:07:06 [phila]
Topic: UCR next publication
20:07:07 [kerry]
topic: Vote for next PWD of Use Cases and Requirements
20:09:25 [phila]
kerry: Please have a look at the UCR
20:10:08 [phila]
kerry: Any comments? I don't think there have been any changes for a while
20:10:18 [phila]
... We don't have Frans here
20:10:36 [phila]
... But it was brought to everyone's attention 2 weeks ago and Frans has made it clear that he's happy.
20:10:56 [phila]
ChrisLittle: I did pass some comments to Frans and he has incorpoirated them
20:11:05 [phila]
... They w ere minimal typos etc.
20:11:17 [phila]
jtandy: Thanks to Frans for excellent work!
20:11:21 [AndreaPerego]
20:11:25 [phila]
eparsons: here here
20:11:25 [kerry]
20:11:29 [joshlieberman]
20:11:33 [joshlieberman]
20:11:37 [ChrisLittle]
+1 to Frans
20:11:52 [phila]
RESOLUTION: Vote of thanks for Frans
20:11:57 [AndreaPerego]
20:11:59 [ChrisLittle]
20:12:05 [eparsons]
20:12:06 [ByronCinNZ]
20:12:07 [jtandy]
20:12:11 [ScottSimmons]
20:12:30 [kerry]
20:12:35 [phila]
PROPOSED: That the current editors' draft of the UCR be published as a new Note/Discussion paper, noting that we believe this will be the last iteration of this document
20:12:47 [phila]
PROPOSED: That the current editors' draft of the UCR be published as a new Note/Discussion paper, noting that we believe this will be the last iteration of this document
20:12:51 [roba]
20:12:53 [eparsons]
20:12:54 [ChrisLittle]
20:12:54 [AndreaPerego]
20:12:56 [joshlieberman]
20:12:56 [kerry]
20:12:57 [ScottSimmons]
20:12:58 [ByronCinNZ]
20:13:06 [billroberts]
20:13:11 [jtandy]
20:13:19 [jtandy]
20:13:22 [jtandy]
20:13:39 [phila]
RESOLUTION: That the current editors' draft of the UCR be published as a new Note/Discussion paper, noting that we believe this will be the last iteration of this document
20:13:47 [kerry]
20:14:18 [phila]
phila: Just checking, this now becomes R2
20:14:33 [phila]
ScottSimmons: Confirms that it the next one in the sequence
20:15:13 [ScottSimmons]
confirmed that R2 is the next one in the sequence
20:15:15 [jtandy]
20:15:37 [kerry]
20:16:24 [kerry]
ack jtandy
20:16:38 [kerry]
20:16:59 [phila]
jtandy: I would be keen to make sure that someone who put effort in for early drafts is still credited
20:17:05 [phila]
phila: +1 That will happen.
20:17:10 [jtandy]
20:17:24 [phila]
... My suggestion is to say Alejandro Llaves, formerly of UPM (early drafts)
20:17:42 [jtandy]
20:17:48 [phila]
Topic: BP Next publication
20:17:48 [kerry]
topic: vote for next PWD of Best Practices
20:18:12 [eparsons]
Kudos to the editors !
20:18:16 [AndreaPerego]
20:18:18 [phila]
kerry: Thanks the editors for all the work to get to this stage. I believe AndreaPerego had a comment
20:18:19 [kerry]
20:18:24 [ByronCinNZ]
20:18:39 [phila]
jtandy: AndreaPerego Put in a suggestion a few days ago and I've only just merged that.
20:18:53 [AndreaPerego]
Just an editorial change.
20:18:55 [phila]
jtandy: I thought that was editorial only so I added it.
20:19:02 [kerry]
20:19:08 [ChrisLittle]
20:19:09 [phila]
phila: You said that there are some current 404 URLs
20:19:18 [kerry]
phila: are there 404 urls? they have to go
20:19:36 [phila]
phila: Can't have 404 links from a doc in /TR space
20:19:48 [phila]
AndreaPerego: It's code snippets in spatial representation type
20:20:06 [phila]
... But they're in code snippets, not links
20:20:22 [phila]
jtandy: So in BP1, you have a code block that isn't an anchor. Just a URL, not a clickable link
20:20:53 [phila]
phila: e.g.
20:21:06 [phila]
phila: Asks for status of these
20:21:20 [jtandy]
q+ to note that I've tried to convert to US-en and the glossary wasn't updated
20:21:27 [phila]
AndreaPerego: These are ISA code lists, not yet added to the INSPIRE registry. Not yet added but are expected to be
20:21:46 [phila]
phila: The note makes that clear
20:21:54 [phila]
phila: Sop no problem, thank you
20:22:02 [kerry]
20:22:03 [phila]
20:22:04 [kerry]
20:22:08 [phila]
ack j
20:22:08 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to note that I've tried to convert to US-en and the glossary wasn't updated
20:22:09 [kerry]
ack jtandy
20:22:10 [AndreaPerego]
The note: "The URIs in the example, denoting the spatial representation type, are part of a register yet to be added to the INSPIRE Registry. Therefore, they currently do not resolve.".
20:22:23 [phila]
jtandy: First of all.. I have attempted to convert to simplified English
20:22:36 [phila]
... May be some English but feel frtee to make that change and merge
20:22:38 [phila]
phila: Ack
20:22:58 [kerry]
20:23:20 [phila]
jtandy: We hoped to get an update on the glossary. Looks like Bill has been side-tracked
20:23:22 [AndreaPerego]
s/ISA code lists/ISO 19115 code lists/
20:23:30 [phila]
... That will be in the next iteration
20:23:33 [billroberts]
Yes, sorry on lack of progress on glossary. I am still happy to do it and will aim to have it ready for the next version
20:23:47 [kerry]
20:23:58 [phila]
jtandy: Doesn't affect the gestalt of the working draft
20:24:01 [phila]
ack k
20:24:03 [kerry]
ack kerry
20:24:19 [phila]
kerry: Quick comment - I find this new version of ReSpec doesn't always load properly. Not as stable as the old one
20:24:22 [joshlieberman]
+1 same for me
20:24:29 [AndreaPerego]
It's the GH rendering, I guess.
20:25:00 [AndreaPerego]
20:25:07 [kerry]
20:25:24 [phila]
phila: Yes, some rendering aspects on GH are a pain with the new stylesheet
20:26:03 [phila]
PROPOSED: That the editors draft of the BP doc at be published by W3C and OGC as the next iteration
20:26:07 [jtandy]
20:26:08 [AndreaPerego]
20:26:11 [ByronCinNZ]
20:26:12 [joshlieberman]
20:26:12 [eparsons]
20:26:12 [ChrisLittle]
+1 but change pratice to practice
20:26:13 [kerry]
20:26:19 [billroberts]
20:26:25 [roba]
the doc is looking much better - less detail and more useful scope!
20:26:27 [roba]
20:26:30 [ScottSimmons]
20:26:50 [kerry]
20:26:53 [joshlieberman]
This best pratice extends [DWBP] best practice Descriptive Metadata.
20:27:19 [billroberts]
I had to look that up - US uses 'c' for noun and verb
20:27:27 [billroberts]
according to interwebs
20:28:16 [phila]
RESOLUTION: That the editors draft of the BP doc at be published by W3C and OGC as the next iteration
20:28:23 [jtandy]
thank you all!
20:28:24 [ScottSimmons]
* too late - you are on my list now
20:28:30 [eparsons]
Yay !!!
20:28:39 [eparsons]
20:28:39 [AndreaPerego]
20:28:53 [phila]
ScottSimmons: Checks that the OGC doc number needs to be appended with R1
20:28:54 [kerry]
ack eparsons
20:29:15 [phila]
eparsons: Now that we have reached this milestone, how are we going to actively solicit more comments?
20:29:22 [joshlieberman]
Press release?
20:29:23 [phila]
... Might be useful to let the world know it's here.
20:29:51 [phila]
eparsons: Prob not a press release but we need to get more input
20:30:16 [kerry]
20:30:52 [phila]
ScottSimmons: We would do a press release because it becomes one of our official docs. Apart from that it becomes a question of mentioning it at events etc that we attend
20:31:00 [kerry]
20:31:04 [phila]
... maybe before our next TC
20:31:21 [phila]
eparsons: Also ByronCinNZ and I have been talking about getting non geo people involved
20:31:36 [joshlieberman]
pose a question to stackoverflow that's addressed by the bp doc...
20:32:24 [kerry]
20:32:35 [phila]
phila: No press release but homepage news, tweets etc
20:32:57 [phila]
RESOLUTION: Vote of thanks to the BP editors for huge amount of work done
20:33:00 [ChrisLittle]
+1 !
20:33:01 [kerry]
20:33:02 [AndreaPerego]
20:33:02 [ByronCinNZ]
20:33:03 [eparsons]
20:33:04 [billroberts]
20:33:14 [jtandy]
(still more work to do)
20:33:21 [phila]
kerry: And Jeremy, you had a plan for regular new releases
20:33:23 [roba]
20:33:25 [jtandy]
20:33:29 [phila]
jtandy: If we look at ^^
20:33:56 [phila]
jtandy: One of the things that got us into the situation of not doing a release for nearly a year was that we wanted to get it close to being finished
20:34:24 [phila]
... So maybe a 4-6 week cycle of sprints might be a good idea. We have identified priorities for the first sprint
20:34:33 [phila]
... Startying with points raised at INSPIRE
20:34:52 [phila]
... The adding a consistent example through the doc. Andrea suggested a call for ideas/example
20:35:20 [phila]
... I think we need to continue to develop section 10 that talks you through how you would make decision wert DWBP anda SDW-BP
20:35:39 [phila]
... And we have 2 BPs that we talked about in depth at TPAC, 7 and 4 (global IDs and indexing)
20:35:49 [AndreaPerego]
s/ wert / wrt /
20:35:56 [phila]
... Need to make sure that what we decided in Lisbon makes it into the doc.
20:35:59 [ChrisLittle]
20:36:08 [kerry]
20:36:17 [phila]
... Getting us into the time boxing attitude should help.
20:36:18 [kerry]
20:36:19 [eparsons]
+1 to the idea
20:36:21 [phila]
ack kerry
20:36:22 [AndreaPerego]
+1 from me to the proposal.
20:36:41 [phila]
kerry: I think it's good plan. Prob want to check phil and scott resources for that
20:37:53 [kerry]
20:38:02 [joshlieberman]
so it was never actually on Pending Docs?
20:38:16 [AndreaPerego]
Is this one, phila?
20:38:33 [kerry]
20:38:35 [ScottSimmons]
the Best Practices document is NOT r1, rather it is 15-107
20:38:48 [ScottSimmons]
Josh - yes, the document was reserved, but never posted!
20:39:34 [phila]
Topic: SSN Update
20:39:53 [phila]
kerry: We've been working through implications of implementation requirements, now have a plan for how to handle that.
20:40:17 [phila]
... Other big thing to report is that we've invited Armin Haller to chair the SSN sub group meeting
20:40:21 [phila]
Topic: Coverages
20:40:34 [phila]
billroberts: We had a call last week. There's been decent progress on the docs
20:41:19 [phila]
billroberts: Had some encouraging news of potential implementation of CoverageJSON from Met office and Danh. May even be able to move back to Rec Track
20:41:22 [kerry]
20:41:23 [phila]
20:41:47 [phila]
kerry: Minor correction, Danh was talking about RDF Cube implementation, not CovJSON
20:41:52 [phila]
ack k
20:41:56 [kerry]
20:41:59 [phila]
ack p
20:42:02 [kerry]
ack phila
20:42:47 [phila]
-> CEO-LD Project
20:42:48 [roba]
20:43:36 [kerry]
ack roba
20:44:09 [kerry]
20:44:12 [phila]
roba: JUst to correct your correction. I believe Danh was talking about RDF data Cube descriptions of CoverageJSON so actuyally using both
20:44:23 [phila]
Topic: Time
20:44:34 [phila]
kerry: Chris - any update?
20:44:35 [kerry]
20:44:53 [phila]
ChrisLittle: There's one of these official calls patent claims
20:45:48 [AndreaPerego]
20:45:48 [phila]
phila: Explains W3C patent call process (analogous with OGC Patent Call)
20:46:13 [phila]
kerry: Chairs have some concerns about progress. Wg won't be happy if we can't complete that work
20:46:21 [kerry]
20:46:28 [phila]
ChrisLittle: I've spoken to our Skunk Works devs and try to do both SSN and Time in a demo
20:46:36 [phila]
... Early next year
20:46:42 [phila]
kerry: Excellent.
20:46:49 [phila]
ChrisLittle: But we'll need to learn how to do ontologies
20:46:57 [phila]
kerry: It's easier for Time than for SSN.
20:47:24 [phila]
... For SSN we hope to be able to use old implementations but for Time, need to look for those old implementations
20:47:32 [joshlieberman]
20:47:38 [kerry]
20:47:39 [phila]
ack joshlieberman
20:48:17 [phila]
joshlieberman: This isn't a reference to Time but to SSN. We have a connection to O&M. There's a fairly easy path to implementation evidence by looking for OM evidence
20:48:38 [phila]
kerry: I'm interested but I;m not sure it will work given what an implementation needs to show.
20:48:47 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:48:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
20:49:16 [phila]
Topic: INSPIRE conference
20:49:21 [kerry]
20:49:31 [AndreaPerego]
20:49:38 [phila]
eparsons: Andrea gave us the opportunity to speak at the last day at the Barcelona conference. Got about 40 people in the end
20:49:41 [eparsons]
20:49:45 [phila]
... I presented some slides
20:49:57 [eparsons]
20:50:03 [phila]
... Clemens did a good job of taking minutes while I rambled on
20:50:22 [phila]
eparsons: First 10 mins, I put the work in context once again, what LD is, how the Wg was formed.
20:50:40 [phila]
... Then focused on what the INSPIRE community wants (SDI for Europe etc.)
20:51:03 [phila]
... SO one topic was how we can reach out beyond the SDI community.
20:51:17 [phila]
... Topic of the terminology (spatial thing, feature etc.)
20:51:19 [phila]
20:51:44 [phila]
eparsons: Don;='t think we need to redefine our terms, The term feature is OK as a modelling term.
20:52:04 [AndreaPerego]
20:52:10 [phila]
... Majority of the time spent on the 4 topics that Andrea asked us to focus on. BP 7 - HTTP URIs as identifiers
20:52:27 [phila]
... How would we manage the minting of URIs, managing life cycle.
20:52:41 [phila]
... Surprised at how little push back there was.
20:53:07 [phila]
... Likewise, BP 4 (indexing) - audience appreciated that. Dutch cadastre supportive
20:53:20 [phila]
... The notes give you good overview of what happened.
20:53:32 [phila]
... How the search engines operate, what SEO means for geo
20:53:52 [phila]
...BP 8 providing geometries in a usable way - boiled down to encoding and CRSs.
20:54:05 [jtandy]
q+ to ask about provision of multiple geometries
20:54:26 [kerry]
20:54:26 [phila]
... Acceptance that multiple CRSs prob good, prob boils down to Web Mercator etc.
20:54:42 [kerry]
ack jtandy
20:54:42 [Zakim]
jtandy, you wanted to ask about provision of multiple geometries
20:54:49 [phila]
... A single encoding might be desirable but I said it's not likely to happen this time.
20:55:22 [AndreaPerego]
s/boils down to Web Mercator etc./boils down to ETRS89, Web Mercator and national CRSs/
20:55:24 [phila]
jtandy: If you're talking about multiple CRSs, one thing we've talked about it giving people multiple representations of the same feature
20:55:40 [phila]
eparsons: Same feature in multiple representations
20:56:04 [phila]
jtandy: Case one might need point, another case might need polygon but they're the same feature.
20:56:08 [joshlieberman]
The polar regions are a good example of absolutely needing different CRS's - Web Mercator just won't do at all.
20:56:15 [phila]
eparsons: It's about what encoding and then what CRS do we present
20:56:21 [phila]
... Remodelling didn't come into it.
20:56:36 [phila]
eparsons: Spatial Semantics of things - again some interest in one ontology to rule them all.
20:56:46 [phila]
... Most people accecpt this as being a good thing to do.
20:56:55 [phila]
... Some focus on topological relationships
20:57:13 [phila]
... But we also recognise non-topological but still spatial relationships.
20:57:25 [phila]
... Then went through the BPs and asked for priorities
20:57:36 [jtandy]
(non-comptutable relationships that don't count as topology?)
20:57:37 [kerry]
20:57:39 [AndreaPerego]
Many thanks, Ed (& Clemens)!
20:57:41 [phila]
... General agreement but that's prob through lack of prior familiarity
20:57:47 [phila]
jtandy: Thanks Ed
20:57:58 [joshlieberman]
nearness is a computable but non-topological relation
20:58:01 [roba]
no worries
20:58:06 [kerry]
20:58:08 [phila]
kerry: Any other commentws on that?
20:58:22 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:58:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
20:58:34 [phila]
jtandy: In terms of the docs we've voted to release - timing?
20:58:36 [phila]
phila: Tuesday
20:58:38 [kerry]
20:58:52 [phila]
eparsons: Kudos once again to the editors [Applause]
20:59:12 [AndreaPerego]
Thanks, and bye!
20:59:13 [roba]
20:59:18 [billroberts]
thanks, bye
20:59:21 [kerry]
20:59:24 [joshlieberman]
20:59:25 [eparsons]
Goodnight all
20:59:34 [phila]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
20:59:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate phila
20:59:36 [ChrisLittle]
Bye and thanks
23:40:41 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sdw