IRC log of sdwssn on 2016-12-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

20:51:25 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sdwssn
20:51:25 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-irc
20:51:27 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
20:51:27 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sdwssn
20:51:29 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SDW
20:51:29 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
20:51:30 [trackbot]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
20:51:30 [trackbot]
Date: 06 December 2016
20:56:57 [kerry]
kerry has joined #sdwssn
20:57:08 [kerry]
present+ kerry
20:57:17 [ahaller2]
present+ ahaller2
21:01:23 [phila]
phila has joined #sdwssn
21:02:35 [joshlieberman]
joshlieberman has joined #sdwssn
21:02:52 [ClausStadler]
ClausStadler has joined #sdwssn
21:03:01 [ClausStadler]
present+ ClausStadler
21:03:10 [phila]
present+ phila
21:03:21 [joshlieberman]
present+
21:03:52 [KJanowic]
KJanowic has joined #sdwssn
21:04:19 [ahaller2]
scribe: kerry
21:04:41 [kerry]
scribenick: kerry
21:04:55 [roba]
present+
21:04:56 [KJanowic]
present+ kjanowic
21:05:12 [phila]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:SSN-Telecon20161206
21:05:27 [ahaller2]
Approving last meeting's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/11/29-sdwssn-minutes
21:05:36 [KJanowic]
+1
21:05:37 [ahaller2]
+1
21:05:38 [ClausStadler]
+1
21:05:41 [roba]
+1
21:05:42 [kerry]
topic: Approving last meeting's minutes
21:05:45 [phila]
s/Working Group/SSN Sub Group/
21:05:46 [kerry]
+1
21:05:49 [ahaller2]
Patent Call https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
21:05:58 [joshlieberman]
+!
21:06:21 [kerry]
[no response to patent call]
21:06:27 [ahaller2]
topic: Remaining meeting schedule for 2016
21:06:29 [kerry]
topic: Remaining meeting schedule for 2016
21:06:50 [kerry]
plan for 2 more meetings: f2f 15 & 16 December
21:07:05 [kerry]
plus a meeting next week just before f2f and also 19 dec
21:07:07 [KJanowic]
I cannot do the 19th Dec
21:07:10 [kerry]
26th is out of the question
21:07:15 [ahaller2]
q?
21:07:22 [kerry]
armin: what do we do next week/
21:07:25 [KJanowic]
Can't we break for the holidays after next week?
21:07:32 [roba]
probably away next week
21:07:36 [phila]
+1 to KJanowic
21:07:46 [phila]
q+
21:07:52 [kerry]
joshlieberman: contingent on agreement on all issues?
21:08:00 [KJanowic]
Not really about progress but about family
21:08:46 [joshlieberman]
That was wrt a 12/13 call, not all of December! I'll be out 12/19-1/4
21:08:51 [kerry]
armin: when is last day to publish fpwd before voting?
21:09:05 [kerry]
kerry: could be stretched to monday.... at a pinch
21:09:09 [KJanowic]
I will be out 12/18--1/4
21:09:29 [kerry]
phila: hope is that at f2f it will be resolved to publish
21:09:38 [kerry]
...but will not come out until new year
21:09:45 [kerry]
q+
21:10:09 [kerry]
... if resolved to publish at f2f will be published first week of Jan
21:10:14 [phila]
ack me
21:10:17 [kerry]
....for review Mponday is good enough
21:10:18 [ahaller2]
q?
21:10:33 [kerry]
armin:we should aim to have it ready by Monday
21:11:07 [ahaller2]
kerry: it is ok to have a lot of issues in the WD
21:11:14 [kerry]
q?
21:11:22 [ahaller2]
s/armin: /armin:
21:11:32 [kerry]
q?
21:11:32 [ahaller2]
s/armin:/armin:
21:11:34 [phila]
kerry speaks truth wrt issues flagged in the doc- that's fine and better than not publishing
21:11:36 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:11:47 [kerry]
joshlieberman: I meant we could avoid a meeting next week if all issues are resolved
21:11:54 [kerry]
armin:
21:12:07 [kerry]
armin: a lot of people are away on 19th?
21:12:22 [joshlieberman]
-1
21:12:24 [phila]
0
21:12:24 [roba]
-0
21:12:26 [KJanowic]
-1
21:12:28 [kerry]
armin: are you avail on 19th?
21:12:29 [kerry]
+1
21:12:34 [ClausStadler]
probably -1
21:12:49 [ahaller2]
january 2nd?
21:12:50 [kerry]
resolution: cancel ssn meeting on 19th December
21:12:55 [roba]
+1
21:12:58 [kerry]
-1
21:12:58 [KJanowic]
-1
21:13:00 [ClausStadler]
-1
21:13:00 [joshlieberman]
0
21:13:02 [ahaller2]
-1
21:13:14 [ahaller2]
january 9th
21:13:14 [phila]
it's Tue 3rd for most of us
21:13:16 [ClausStadler]
+1
21:13:18 [kerry]
+1
21:13:19 [joshlieberman]
+1
21:13:19 [roba]
+0
21:13:33 [phila]
q+
21:13:49 [phila]
q-
21:13:56 [kerry]
armin: xmas break will be... come back 9th Jan (8th Jan for most)
21:14:13 [ahaller2]
topic: Progress Report on current WD
21:14:26 [kerry]
phila: points out importance of approving pub at f2f
21:14:33 [kerry]
q?
21:14:38 [phila]
s/8th/10th/
21:15:08 [kerry]
first meeting after Xmas will be 10th Jan
21:15:25 [kerry]
resolved: first meeting in new year will be 10th Jan
21:16:09 [ahaller2]
https://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn-usage/
21:16:10 [kerry]
armin: raul analysed usage of ssn but did not find a lot of datasets, he did find some ontologies
21:16:22 [kerry]
... encourage all to add to this
21:16:39 [kerry]
..if you know of any others please add to this table
21:17:07 [ahaller2]
q?
21:17:21 [kerry]
armin: you can see the list of ontolgies here
21:17:35 [ClausStadler_]
ClausStadler_ has joined #sdwssn
21:17:43 [kerry]
q+
21:17:47 [ahaller2]
q?
21:17:52 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:18:28 [KJanowic]
Our trajectory ontology is also an implementation in that it uses SSN. I can add it to the list.
21:19:17 [kerry]
action: raul to be asked to put out a general call for exiustimg implementations
21:19:17 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-228 - Be asked to put out a general call for exiustimg implementations [on Raúl García Castro - due 2016-12-13].
21:19:53 [ClausStadler_]
A collegue of mine is working on a project where they analyse log and possibly sensor data from printing machines and I suggested to have a look at SSN, but I am not sure on when there will be an update of whether SSN is applicable to it and whether they would model the data according to it, as they made some ad-hoc implementation a while ago
21:19:57 [ahaller2]
q?
21:20:30 [kerry]
topic: Progress Report on current WD
21:21:04 [kerry]
armin: lots of work with specgen -- had some problems, not entirely solved, output is now consistent but not complete
21:21:06 [kerry]
q+
21:21:24 [kerry]
....so we will have the new sosa in t he WD and sos works ok with specgen
21:21:33 [kerry]
s/sos/sosa/
21:21:50 [kerry]
....specgen does produce clean validated html so it is better that way
21:21:59 [ahaller2]
q?
21:22:05 [kerry]
...tried also to update the figure but not in doc yet
21:22:11 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:23:37 [SimonCox]
SimonCox has joined #sdwssn
21:23:55 [SimonCox]
present+ SimonCox
21:24:01 [kerry]
kerry: what about dul alignment?
21:24:17 [ahaller2]
q?
21:24:30 [kerry]
armin: we can work together on that
21:24:54 [kerry]
armin: [sumarises for simon who just joined]
21:25:04 [kerry]
s/sumarises/summarises/
21:25:11 [ahaller2]
q?
21:25:24 [kerry]
armin: KJanowic did you do anything for the intro/
21:25:33 [kerry]
KJanowic: [missed]
21:25:41 [kerry]
armin: can you do for monday next week?
21:25:46 [kerry]
KJanowic: yes
21:26:20 [ahaller2]
q?
21:26:28 [kerry]
armin: that is it for update
21:26:32 [kerry]
q+
21:26:33 [kerry]
+
21:26:35 [kerry]
q+
21:26:52 [kerry]
armin: new ssn and new sos should be in doc today
21:26:52 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:28:55 [SimonCox]
q+
21:29:01 [ahaller2]
kerry: posted to the mailing list the mapping between old ssn and new ssn, including equivalence relations
21:29:15 [ahaller2]
ack SimonCox
21:29:56 [kerry]
simon: mapping table have responded to Kerry's comments and added the properties
21:30:08 [ahaller2]
topic: Annotations in mapping table https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table
21:30:10 [SimonCox]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table
21:30:10 [kerry]
simon: could also be used for the allignments
21:30:49 [kerry]
armin: this table is the mapping between sosa and ssn --- will not get in doc yet -- will be too ambitious to get sos/ssn alignment done
21:30:58 [kerry]
s/sos/sosa/
21:31:04 [KJanowic]
the mapping table is not an alignment, it is a comparison of textual definitions
21:31:17 [kerry]
...we can work to resolved the differences in here and eventually that will be reflected in ontology
21:31:29 [kerry]
...but cannot see how we can get this in the next draft
21:31:46 [kerry]
...simon and i have both started on this but I don't expect to get it ready
21:32:06 [kerry]
simon: I don't have time either
21:32:35 [kerry]
armin: yes mapping table will be a resource for that
21:32:57 [kerry]
simon: kerry picked some nits on the mapping to ssn and I think have clarified it now
21:33:09 [kerry]
...also added the properties which is essentially the same...
21:33:44 [kerry]
....armin had talked about tracing and feature of interst clss but this may be confusng the propery and classes of the same name
21:34:05 [kerry]
....textual materila from rdfs comments is all there, alos have o&mlite and ogc uml model
21:34:22 [kerry]
armin: thanks simon
21:34:37 [KJanowic]
s/materila/material
21:34:53 [KJanowic]
s/confusng/confusing
21:34:54 [kerry]
..... pls have a loook at that table of annotations and make comments
21:35:07 [KJanowic]
q+
21:35:21 [kerry]
.... also have split into multiple comments to pull out examples as separate comments
21:35:22 [kerry]
+1
21:35:49 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:35:52 [kerry]
...maybe have a separate property for examples but this is good for now ... pls havea look!
21:36:07 [kerry]
KJanowic: why have multiple comments?
21:36:47 [KJanowic]
q+
21:36:47 [kerry]
SimonCox: the question in my mind is do we need to have a special property for the examples and other things? or drop the examples?
21:37:17 [kerry]
SimonCox: it was pointed that there was a mixture and it could be cleaner than all embedded withing a single text field
21:37:33 [kerry]
...so I have split them up but maybe they do not all belong there
21:37:35 [ahaller2]
q?
21:37:40 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:37:54 [kerry]
KJanowic: from a tool perspective if we use a tool which comment should they use?
21:37:55 [ahaller2]
q+
21:38:12 [kerry]
KJanowic: sequence is not important
21:38:30 [kerry]
...so tools may show some arbitrary comment first, maybe not the right one
21:38:42 [kerry]
...so examples are so much more important
21:38:51 [kerry]
...multiple comments may backfire
21:39:00 [kerry]
q+
21:39:01 [ClausStadler_]
-1 to multiple comments for the reason KJanowic mentioned
21:39:24 [kerry]
SimonCox: we could use skos or dc:description properties
21:39:27 [KJanowic]
+1 to what simon just said
21:39:41 [ahaller2]
ack ahaller
21:39:44 [ahaller2]
+1
21:39:45 [kerry]
SimonCox: editorial decision
21:40:01 [phila]
q+
21:40:09 [phila]
q-
21:40:19 [kerry]
armin: what does phila recommend?
21:40:37 [joshlieberman]
joshlieberman has joined #sdwssn
21:40:39 [ClausStadler_]
+1 to using alternate comments (possibly annotating cases of multiple comments such that it is possible to single each out)
21:40:40 [kerry]
phila: I could look bu just label, dened-by, comment that I know
21:40:46 [ahaller2]
q?
21:40:46 [SimonCox]
could use skos:definition dc:description skos:note skos:scopeNote etc for various purposes, but no clear convention
21:40:47 [KJanowic]
as you wish sounds great
21:40:51 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:41:06 [ClausStadler_]
s/alternate comments/alternative modeling of comments
21:41:11 [phila]
s/dened-by/isDefinedBy/
21:41:25 [KJanowic]
+1 to kerry's 'make your own convention'
21:41:28 [ahaller2]
kerry: want to see them separated, but use a different property for the example
21:41:48 [KJanowic]
lets avoid multiple comment blocks as we have no control over their order, i.e., priority
21:42:07 [ahaller2]
q?
21:42:14 [ahaller2]
topic: sosa:Platform vs. ssn:Platform, why is it different? ISSUE 88
21:42:14 [kerry]
armin: we will do this -- find an annotation propoprty to use
21:42:37 [KJanowic]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/88
21:42:41 [ahaller2]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/88
21:42:43 [kerry]
resolved: use some approriate new annotation properties to record different kinds of comments in the ontology
21:43:00 [KJanowic]
q+
21:43:13 [kerry]
issue-88?
21:43:13 [trackbot]
issue-88 -- Why is a sosa-core platofrm completely different to an ssn:platform? -- raised
21:43:13 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/88
21:43:22 [KJanowic]
https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/ssnx/ssn#Platform
21:44:05 [KJanowic]
q+
21:44:37 [ahaller2]
kerry: in SOSA the Platform is closer to a Device, Platform in SSN is widely used, for example in Sensor-ML
21:44:50 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:45:47 [ahaller2]
s/approriate/appropriate
21:46:03 [KJanowic]
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/w3c/sdw/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa.ttl
21:46:15 [ahaller2]
or use the mapping table: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table
21:46:42 [ahaller2]
q?
21:49:18 [ahaller2]
KJanowic: Platform in SOSA is essentially the same as in SSN, it includes Actuation and Humans
21:49:50 [SimonCox]
q+
21:49:50 [KJanowic]
I have to strongly disagree here for all the arguments I made
21:50:04 [KJanowic]
subclass
21:50:32 [ahaller2]
q?
21:50:36 [joshlieberman_]
joshlieberman_ has joined #sdwssn
21:50:46 [ahaller2]
ack SimonCox
21:51:05 [ahaller2]
q+
21:51:39 [KJanowic]
Both capture the same semantics but the SOSA text is more explicit and also allows for virtual sensors to be mounted
21:51:44 [KJanowic]
+1 to simon
21:52:12 [KJanowic]
why not subclassing?
21:52:29 [ahaller2]
q?
21:52:41 [kerry]
q+
21:53:00 [ahaller2]
ack ahaller
21:53:02 [joshlieberman]
joshlieberman has joined #sdwssn
21:53:12 [KJanowic]
there is just the hostedby relation, noting more. and this is just like old ssn:attachedSystem
21:53:14 [KJanowic]
q+
21:53:21 [joshlieberman]
Sticking point may be "virtual platform"
21:54:17 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:54:18 [kerry]
q+
21:54:28 [joshlieberman]
q+
21:55:03 [KJanowic]
Very happy to do that
21:55:20 [kerry]
q?
21:55:47 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:55:57 [kerry]
armin: suggests an example sould be helpful showing how sensors, devices and platforms interact
21:56:34 [ahaller2]
q?
21:56:48 [kerry]
KJanowic: properties; attached system and (sometinh) are closely realted, tried to get actuators and sensing devices in there and be explicit about humans etc so [missed] but will provide textual summary of this
21:56:56 [kerry]
q+
21:57:03 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:57:08 [kerry]
armin: pls include an example and send to list
21:57:34 [kerry]
q
21:57:40 [ahaller2]
q?
21:57:47 [kerry]
joshlieberman:
21:57:49 [KJanowic]
https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/documentation_examples/sosa-core_examples.ttl
21:57:51 [ahaller2]
ack joshlieberman
21:57:55 [kerry]
joshlieberman: irc not working for me
21:58:19 [kerry]
... don't have vocabs in front of me --- would be good to have sensorml in mapping table of vocabulary terms
21:58:44 [KJanowic]
platforms carry sensors but platforms do not sense
21:58:46 [kerry]
...sosa:platfom defintion is not clearly distinguished from sosa:platform
21:58:47 [KJanowic]
q+
21:59:02 [kerry]
...insensorml the platform carries the geometry for location etc of sensors
21:59:12 [SimonCox]
joshlieberman: could you add the SensorML column?
21:59:24 [ahaller2]
s/from sosa:platform/from sosa:sensor
21:59:24 [kerry]
....not clear what a platform is other thna a collection of sensors in sosa
21:59:38 [ahaller2]
s/insensorml/in SensorML
21:59:39 [kerry]
....that might result in the idea of virtual platform not being so helpful
21:59:51 [ahaller2]
s/thna/than
21:59:56 [ahaller2]
q?
21:59:58 [kerry]
.... "featureness" that we need may be less appropriate for a computer system
22:00:02 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
22:00:31 [kerry]
KJanowic: def of platform in sosa is the thing on which sensors are mounted... but platforms do not sense and gereate observations
22:00:59 [joshlieberman]
It would be more useful to have a positive distinction, not just a negative one.
22:01:00 [kerry]
....a physical platform with multiple sensors is included
22:01:14 [ClausStadler]
+q
22:01:29 [ahaller2]
ack ClausStadler
22:01:29 [kerry]
... we need to make sure the rest of the ontology [missed] we can simply cut the last sentence if we do not want virtual platforms
22:01:55 [KJanowic]
+1 to Claus' example
22:01:57 [kerry]
ClausStadler: agree with kr e.g simulation with 3d models or a car
22:01:59 [ahaller2]
q?
22:02:07 [kerry]
...think that it could be a virtual entity
22:02:19 [KJanowic]
Yes, I will describe this in detail.
22:02:22 [joshlieberman]
q+
22:02:46 [kerry]
armin: confustion that we do not have a device in sosa --- krs pls work on this explanation over the next week.
22:02:56 [kerry]
s/confustion/confusion/
22:03:03 [kerry]
...we need wd for call next week
22:03:12 [ClausStadler]
I think the main purpose of the platform should be to allow logical grouping of sensors / actuators
22:03:13 [kerry]
.....thks!
22:03:16 [kerry]
bye!
22:03:22 [KJanowic]
thanks, for the productive telcon. bye bye
22:03:23 [kerry]
rrsagent, make logs public
22:03:26 [joshlieberman]
bye
22:03:29 [kerry]
rrsagent, draft minutes
22:03:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes.html kerry
22:03:31 [SimonCox]
bye
22:03:37 [kerry]
bye!
22:04:04 [phila]
RRSAgent, make logs public
22:04:06 [ahaller2]
s/confustion/confusion
22:04:27 [phila]
RRSAgent, make minutes
22:04:27 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes.html phila
22:04:36 [ahaller2]
s/with kr/with KJanowic
22:04:46 [ahaller2]
RRSAgent, make minutes
22:04:46 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes.html ahaller2
22:06:59 [phila]
chair: Armin
22:07:28 [phila]
RRSAgent, make minutes
22:07:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes.html phila