See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: phila
<scribe> scribeNick: phila
<SimonCox> +1
<ahaller2> +1
<ClausStadler1> +1
<kerry_> +1
RESOLUTION: lAst meeting's minutes approved https://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-sdwssn-minutes
<SimonCox> SOrry - they are just testing the alarm - I'm still here
ahaller2: In Friday's F2F we were
supposed to vote on the WD which we didn't manage. We agreed
that Danh would approve pull requests for the Ed Draft so that
we can work towards a vote on 4 Jan
... We need to find a process. Perhaps creating a new branch
etc?
... But let's look at the remaining pull requests
<ahaller2> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pulls
ahaller2: These are PRs. There
was an e-mail from kerry saying that she was still working on
the alignmente section formatting?
... But there is a PR lefty from Kerry, no. 473
<SimonCox> Should I repeat the pull request to swap the sequence of the SSN/SOSA sections?
ahaller2: I've been looking at these, they look OK to me but Danh, you're in charge
[NOTUC] to pulling into the merge PR 473
<SimonCox> @phila - nah, you are just sanding behind a curtain
ahaller2: So there are no remaining pull requests
SimonCox: On the process, when I
looked at the SSN PRs, you had to read the titles to detect
those.
... It's probably helpful when creating a PR, prefix it with
'SSN'
ahaller2: That's a good idea
<ahaller2> +1 for SSN prefix in pull request
<RaulGarciaCastro> You can use labels
kerry_: I sent an e-mail late
last night. You wanted me to do the layout without spaces. I
took another run at it as people can't always maintain spaces
when they edit docs (which I don't agree with)
... I tried and failed, but if you'd like me to solve that
problem then I'm happy to take another go at it.
ahaller2: Sorry, that was too
late for me to see.
... It's cut off a little in my browser. It's beyond the
bounding box of the div container
... we can fix it.
... I think it's enbough if we fix it for the next version. I'd
think it's OK as it is now.
SimonCox: First thing I want to
do is to offer my apologies for lack of understanding with GH
and for the ensuing problem. All to do with me working on OWL
Time and it all got into the same PR. Apologies.
... That said... the change that the PR made, I think most
people were happy with, which was swapping the order of the
SOSA and SSN chapters
... Is it appropriate to bring it up now
ahaller2: I discussed this with
Kerry. My concern was not around changing the order. Logically
it makes sense. My concern is that it's such a big diff - the
diff doesn't track the changes and just sees two new
blocks
... I was suggesting that an editor made that change
... Personally, I'm happy with the change.
... I think Jano is too.
I'm happy to have it done. My only potential objection... it should be done by an editor... but I'd like it done cleanly, i.e. a standalone change.
<SimonCox> Can someone make a motion to do clean swap?
scribe: I'd have concerns if it got wrapped up in other things.
ahaller2: Can you make that change?
DanhLePhuoc: Yes, I'll do that and then assign it to you
laurent_oz: About SOSA and SSN order. I'm OK too, but my general position, is that we should hide the division as much as possible, but it's a step in the right direction.
ahaller2: What do you mean by hiding?
laurent_oz: Making the change not
so prominent as it is now.
... Much more about blending the SOSA and SSN
... It could look too complicated if we're not careful
ahaller2: Are there any other
changes?
... Are we ready to freeze?
PROPOSED: That the order of the SOSA and SSN chapters be swapped
<kerry_> +1
<SimonCox> +1
<RaulGarciaCastro> +1
<ahaller2> +1
<laurent_oz> +1
RESOLUTION: That the order of the SOSA and SSN chapters be swapped
<DanhLePhuoc> +1
kerry_: Aggh!
<SimonCox> did the mouse eat her?
kerry_: Two other things. No fuss
to be made.
... Backward compatibility with old SSN... not sure about what
I proposed about this
... I did something that I'm happy with but I'm not sure it's
enough.
... Also the change log, I wrote that. I'm not sure other
editors have recorded their changes there. That might need
looking at.
<ahaller2> https://www.w3.org/ns/ssn-bc
ahaller2: The 1st comment that Kerry made, was that this URI was used to make the alignment. But I think once these ...
phila: Didn't undertand the 1st point
kerry_: There are 2 new
ontologies - 3 new ontologies with this draft.
... The expectation is that W3C will upload them into the right
namespace, when the doc is published/
phila: You're asking for 3 namespaces
kerry_: There's SOSA, which is new in this doc
<ahaller2> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/ssn.owl
<ahaller2> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/rdf/sosa.ttl
<ahaller2> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/ssn_equivalences.owl
<ahaller2> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/blob/gh-pages/ssn/ssn_separated/dul-alignment.owl
kerry_: There's the old SSN
alignment that is new in this release
... added to this, I'm not sure that this is the right URI
<ahaller2> these are the ontology files that are used in the document
<SimonCox> Do we actually need namespaces for alignments? Are any new resources named??
phila: Would rather not over-use
/ns space
... Can we use dated space
<ahaller2> +1 for a dated space for the alignments or use /ssn/ssn-bc
kerry_: These are meant to be normative
phila: Don't care. Are they intended to be used for 30+ years?
kerry_: How about /ns/ssn/foo?
phila: Better
ahaller2: So it would be /ns/ssn/bc/
<laurent_oz> maybe ssn-ssnx?
kerry_: Notes that /ssn/dul is there already
<laurent_oz> sssn being the xg X for XG
<SimonCox> is it a namespace or is it a graph name?
<laurent_oz> and also potentially, we will have to change the namespace for the old ssn to ssnx
SimonCox: On this issue..
... regarding these namespaces - are any new resources defined,
or is it a bunch of equivalent, sub classes etc?
... Because if it is just those, it's not so much a namespace
as much as anamed graph.
ahaller2: We just want to give
the graph a name that is different from SSN. I don't think any
new terms are declared
... It's just to avoid people loading this into a triple store
and getting them confused
SimonCox: Hearing that, does that
affect W3C's view?
... It sounds to be as if it should have ssn at the
beginning
phila: How about /2017/01/ssn-alignment?
<laurent_oz> Tried to load all these ontologies into Protege yesterday: need a owl:Ontology with a rdf:about finishing with a different name (also we should start to revert to a dated URI for the old SSN).
phila: I won't object/stand in the way, but it feels to me as if you're looking at a transitional thing, then I prefer dated space
kerry_: The doc itself will need
to be changed to adapt to that.
... I also liked Lauren't alternative name for the doc
... Changing from bc to...
ahaller2: So we have 2 proposals
for ...
... for the alignment with the old namespace, we use the dated
space
laurent_oz: In Protege, the conflict is between the old and new SSN
In Protege, you see the last make after the last slash
SimonCox: That's a tool problem
laurent_oz: Yes, but we know about it so perhaps we can avoid it.
kerry_: It's painful, but I don't
think there's a better option.
... Neither imports the other. You put yourself in that
position if you want to.
SimonCox: You may have noticed
that I've been working on an alignment with SOSA and
O&M
... I hadn't gone as far as imagining the w3 URI to be used for
that
... The lists and lists of alignment axioms - will we see those
in the end or will we be referring out to an RDF alignment
graph?
<Zakim> kerry_, you wanted to comment on the previous topic to conside the name laurent proposed for ssn-bc and to remind on changes section
kerry_: We discussed that last
week. There were suggestions made - not able to do it before
now.
... I'll certainly havea another go.
SimonCox: So should I do something similar for O&M alignment in a future release?
ahaller2: I think kerry_ you were adressing he formatting preoblem?
kerry_: No...
ahaller2: Do we want the alignment in the file as they appear now?
SimonCox: It's just an alignment of all the axioms?
ahaller2: We need a formal semantics section
<laurent_oz> And a figure!
SimonCox: I remember some discussion about the formal semantics
laurent_oz: That's what we'll need to discuss.
<scribe> ACTION: laurent to prepare a graphical representation of the alignment [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/12/20-sdwssn-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-246 - Prepare a graphical representation of the alignment [on Laurent Lefort - due 2016-12-27].
SimonCox: That shoud be a plural?
laurent_oz: Yes.
ahaller2: So we have a proposal to change the alignment namespace URI to a dated space
<ahaller2> PROPOSED: Dated URI for the SSN-SSSNX alignment and change name to SSN-SSSNX
<laurent_oz> 2 s
<ahaller2> PROPOSED: Dated URI for the SSN-SSSNX alignment and change name to SSN-SSNX
<ahaller2> PROPOSED: Dated URI for the SSN-SSNX alignment and change name to SSN-SSNX
<kerry_> +1
<ahaller2> +1
<laurent_oz> +1
<RaulGarciaCastro> +1
kerry_: Noting that that requires changes in the doc before publication
ahaller2: You can only do that after DanhLePhuoc has swapped SOSA and SSN sections
DanhLePhuoc: I'm doing it
now
... So give it a few hours
ahaller2: I'll look at it right after the meeting
<SimonCox> ANd don't forget https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table !
RESOLUTION: Dated URI for the SSN-SSNX alignment and change name to SSN-SSNX
<ahaller2> The namespace for SSN terms is http://www.w3.org/ns/ssn/
<ahaller2> The suggested prefix for the SSN namespace is ssn
<ahaller2> The SSN ontology itself is available here.
ahaller2: We need something
similar at the beginning of the SOAS section. Simon mentioned
it a while back.
... I propose making that cnage in the doc
laurent_oz: In terms of reaching to the user, showing them these namespaces. It makes sense to have the O&M alignment prominent
ahaller2: So the alignment with O&M should be more prominent than with SOSA
laurent_oz: (off mike)
ahaller2: Can that be in the next version, not this version
<laurent_oz> Phil asks if everything can go in a single graph name.
<SimonCox> PROPOSED: Insert a NS block at top of SOSA section
[No, we need separate graph names]
<SimonCox> +1
<kerry_> +1
ahaller2: Do we all agree?
<ahaller2> +1
<laurent_oz> +1
<roba> +1
RESOLUTION: Insert a NS block at top of SOSA section
ahaller2: That change to be made after the SOSA and SSN section order swap
kerry_: The changes
section...
... It's good enough but it's not that good. Can it be
improved?
ahaller2: From what we proposed
omn Monday evening, I think we've only made editorial changes.
Are there other changes that need to be highlighted. There were
som esignificant changes
... There are 2 new chapters which aren't mentioned. The
vertical integration isn't in the change log
SimonCox: Adding sections is more than just editorial, I agree
ahaller2: Are you volunteering to
made those additions, Kerry?
... Talks about changes before and after the freeze
<laurent_oz> Phil The change log have to reflect the changes between the published versions
phila: Points out that change log needs to reflect changes between previous and this published version.
kerry_: I did it for the changes I was aware of, which I'm not sure is all of them.
SimonCox: I'll review that if you
have a go Armin.
... But I don't feel able to make actual changes
ahaller2: If you have a couple of spare minutes in the morning
SimonCox: I'll do it right after the end of this call, but after the current PRs have been accepted.
<ahaller2> PROPOSED: Adding changes to change history in document in section B
<ahaller2> +1
<SimonCox> +1 - I will work on it this afternoon
<kerry_> +1
<laurent_oz> +1 - Simon can you cc me with your original list of changes (to help me to catch up)?
+1
<DanhLePhuoc> +1
phila: (it's essential)
RESOLUTION: Adding changes to change history in document in section B
<RaulGarciaCastro> +1
ahaller2: So can we freeze the doc after these changes, no more after that
<kerry_> +1 subject to consistency /typo check
<SimonCox> +1
<ahaller2> PROPOSED: Freeze document after approved proposed changes from this meeting are made
<roba> +0
<SimonCox> +1
<RaulGarciaCastro> +1
<ahaller2> +1
<kerry_> +1 subject to consiusteny/typo check
RESOLUTION: Freeze document after approved proposed changes from this meeting are made
<laurent_oz> +1
ahaller2: We'll have to take this
topic on the mailing list as we're out of time
... We may want to open a new doc or a new branch
<laurent_oz> * Simon, I'll need the O&M ontology you want to align with (if not available)
ahaller2: AOB? If not, we have a frozen doc before Christmas
<SimonCox> Thanks for very productive meeting all.
<SimonCox> Happy Holidays
SimonCox: I was just reminding people that the diagram existed which might be helpful
<RaulGarciaCastro> Bye! Enjoy these days!
[Adjourned]
phila: Use http://www.w3.org/2017/01/ssn-ssnx