IRC log of sdwssn on 2017-05-02
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:58:25 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #sdwssn
- 19:58:25 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-sdwssn-irc
- 19:58:26 [mlefranc]
- mlefranc has joined #sdwssn
- 19:58:27 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs world
- 19:58:27 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #sdwssn
- 19:58:29 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be SDW
- 19:58:29 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot
- 19:58:30 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
- 19:58:30 [trackbot]
- Date: 02 May 2017
- 19:58:46 [ahaller2]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 19:58:55 [ahaller2]
- present+ ahaller2
- 19:59:23 [DanhLePhuoc]
- DanhLePhuoc has joined #sdwssn
- 19:59:31 [mlefranc]
- present+
- 20:02:39 [KJanowic]
- KJanowic has joined #sdwssn
- 20:02:59 [RaulGarciaCastro]
- RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdwssn
- 20:03:26 [SimonCox]
- SimonCox has joined #sdwssn
- 20:03:45 [KJanowic]
- so 8:00 UTC after all
- 20:03:49 [KJanowic]
- present+
- 20:04:18 [DanhLePhuoc]
- present+ DanhLePhuoc
- 20:04:29 [ClausStadler]
- ClausStadler has joined #sdwssn
- 20:04:34 [SimonCox]
- present+
- 20:04:48 [RaulGarciaCastro]
- present+ RaulGarciaCastro
- 20:05:28 [ahaller2]
- scribe: mlefranc
- 20:05:31 [ahaller2]
- scribenick: mlefranc
- 20:05:45 [ahaller2]
- topic: Approving last meeting's minutes https://www.w3.org/2017/04/25-sdwssn-minutes
- 20:05:52 [ahaller2]
- +1
- 20:05:53 [mlefranc]
- +1
- 20:05:55 [SimonCox]
- +1
- 20:05:55 [RaulGarciaCastro]
- +1
- 20:06:11 [KJanowic]
- +1
- 20:06:19 [DanhLePhuoc]
- +1
- 20:06:22 [ahaller2]
- topic: Patent Call https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Patent_Call
- 20:06:53 [ahaller2]
- topic: Progress on Action 334 to start a wiki page that describes option on aligning new observation with DUL
- 20:07:07 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 20:07:10 [ahaller2]
- https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/334
- 20:07:14 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 20:07:24 [KJanowic]
- https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Events_and_Situations#Events.2C_Actions.2C_and_Situations
- 20:08:27 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: oldssn:Observation subclassof dul:Situation, now ssn:Observation is aligned with dul:event
- 20:08:39 [mlefranc]
- ... dul:situation subclassof event, which is disjoint from event
- 20:08:51 [ClausStadler]
- present+ ClausStadler
- 20:09:00 [mlefranc]
- ... meaning oldssn:Observation equivalent with ssn:Observation cannot hold
- 20:09:08 [mlefranc]
- ... so where do we break ?
- 20:09:25 [mlefranc]
- ... we decided that oldssn would be where we break,
- 20:09:45 [mlefranc]
- ... because ssn is going to be the standard, and withstand longer
- 20:10:27 [mlefranc]
- ... there are now more little subtelties
- 20:10:32 [mlefranc]
- ... for example platform
- 20:11:09 [mlefranc]
- ... about the predicates: sixth bullet point, ...
- 20:11:55 [mlefranc]
- ... alignement of properties with associatedWith don't bring anything, except everything becomes instance of dul:Entity
- 20:12:32 [mlefranc]
- ... solution proposed: we can used general concepts and intuition axioms: we avoid unguarded domain and range restrictions
- 20:12:54 [mlefranc]
- ... so although we can't say oldssn:Observation equivalent with ssn:Observation,
- 20:13:32 [mlefranc]
- ... we could say: for all those things that have some sosa:hasResult property and is not a oldssn:Observation, then it is a sosa:Observation
- 20:13:58 [mlefranc]
- ... so we create local alignments
- 20:13:59 [ahaller2]
- +1 for KJanowic axioms!
- 20:14:02 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:14:37 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:14:46 [KJanowic]
- and Result and Deployment (which are not covered or broken, respectively)
- 20:14:51 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: in favour to add local alignments
- 20:14:59 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:15:05 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 20:15:11 [SimonCox]
- Is it possible that the difficulty with the DUL alignment is (a) a misalignment in the original SSN-DUL design, or (b) an underlying difficulty in DUL?
- 20:15:40 [KJanowic]
- This is the axiom: \exists old-ssn: observationResult.T \sqcap \not old-ssn:Observation \sqsubseteq SOSA:Observation
- 20:15:44 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:15:50 [mlefranc]
- mlefranc: would like to see implementation
- 20:15:53 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 20:16:02 [SimonCox]
- If either of these is true, then I am not so interested in DUL 'getting in the way' of SSN/SOSA moving forward ...
- 20:17:21 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: because we don't have domain and range axioms for properties, we can say: if someone uses a property that links x to y
- 20:17:50 [ahaller2]
- q+
- 20:18:05 [mlefranc]
- ... and x is not asserted to be a oldssn: something,
- 20:18:29 [mlefranc]
- ... then we could align x and y to the proper dul class
- 20:18:31 [ahaller2]
- ack ahaller
- 20:18:40 [mlefranc]
- * please check my minutes
- 20:18:55 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 20:19:23 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: would be a partial alignment
- 20:19:44 [mlefranc]
- ... users of oldssn would need to remove part of their triples
- 20:20:32 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 20:20:36 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 20:20:38 [ahaller2]
- ack mlefranc
- 20:20:41 [DanhLePhuoc]
- q+
- 20:21:22 [KJanowic]
- +1 to that!!!
- 20:22:00 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 20:22:22 [ahaller2]
- ack DanhLePhuoc
- 20:22:56 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: we can have a note in the old observation class that says: instances of oldssn:Observation should migrate to ssn:Observation
- 20:23:15 [mlefranc]
- mlefranc: there may be side effects, we will have to wait for the wide review.
- 20:23:31 [ahaller2]
- q+
- 20:23:42 [mlefranc]
- ... don't really know actual oldssn implementations that heavily rely on the alignment to dul
- 20:24:09 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 20:24:15 [mlefranc]
- DanhLePhuoc: I don't know if we addressed all the communities that have used ssn so far
- 20:24:25 [mlefranc]
- ... we need to wait for people to speak up
- 20:25:09 [DanhLePhuoc]
- +q
- 20:25:15 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: I think it's better to help people to migrate
- 20:25:48 [mlefranc]
- ... three options for alignment: 1 no alignemnt 2 partial alignment, 3 migration
- 20:26:08 [ahaller2]
- ack ahaller
- 20:26:27 [SimonCox]
- so KJanowic suggest that it is OK to say 'these parts can be aligned, but those can't'
- 20:26:44 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: if we don't align to dul anymore,
- 20:26:54 [KJanowic]
- I agree!
- 20:27:05 [KJanowic]
- Yes, this is why I favor breaking the old not the new
- 20:27:20 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:27:24 [ahaller2]
- ack DanhLePhuoc
- 20:27:42 [mlefranc]
- ... then for people that use the old ssn - dul alignment, it may happen that instance of new ssn:Observation becomes instance of dul:Situation
- 20:28:05 [KJanowic]
- +1 to Danh
- 20:28:09 [ahaller2]
- +1 to some note to tell you how to migrate
- 20:28:11 [mlefranc]
- DanhLePhuoc: let's do the alignment that is safe, and write a note about the gray area
- 20:28:56 [mlefranc]
- ... current alignment covers 70% of terms,
- 20:29:02 [KJanowic]
- This is exactly the partial alignment that the axiom does
- 20:29:16 [mlefranc]
- ... for the rest, people can use rules, or do something else
- 20:29:22 [mlefranc]
- +1
- 20:29:52 [KJanowic]
- Okay
- 20:30:44 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: Implement the proposed axiom to partially align observationResults of oldSSN to new SSN in the ontology files
- 20:30:44 [trackbot]
- Error finding 'Implement'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.
- 20:30:47 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:30:57 [ahaller2]
- topic: Progress on Action 335 and work plan for separate Note with Examples
- 20:31:12 [ahaller2]
- https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/335
- 20:31:44 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: removed that from the document, wanted to discuss that here
- 20:32:16 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 20:32:26 [mlefranc]
- ... few mistakes spotted after the document was published in the TR space
- 20:32:35 [ahaller2]
- close ACTION-335
- 20:32:35 [trackbot]
- Closed ACTION-335.
- 20:32:40 [mlefranc]
- ... about figures for instance
- 20:32:40 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 20:32:46 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 20:33:14 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: aren't all alignemnt non-normative ?
- 20:33:21 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: yes, but the one to o&m
- 20:33:40 [mlefranc]
- ... o&m implementation may become ssn implementation evidence
- 20:33:56 [mlefranc]
- ... the graphs must represent that
- 20:34:34 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: but Phil told us that may not help to convince the director
- 20:34:46 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: that's a gray area
- 20:35:21 [mlefranc]
- SimonCox: I can't advise on that
- 20:35:39 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: we need Phil and Francois to help here
- 20:35:42 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:36:09 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 20:36:17 [mlefranc]
- SimonCox: at least things that are marked at risk can be dropped so that we can drop them later without going back to candidaterec track
- 20:36:33 [ahaller2]
- ack mlefranc
- 20:38:02 [mlefranc]
- mlefranc: is it a good idea to have no examples ? recent discussions show that examples are crucial
- 20:38:24 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:38:44 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: examples may be incorporated lated, the goal here is to freeze the change list
- 20:38:46 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 20:39:22 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: asking SimonCox about previous features at risk
- 20:39:33 [ahaller2]
- close Action 334
- 20:39:45 [ahaller2]
- close action-334
- 20:39:45 [trackbot]
- Closed action-334.
- 20:39:57 [mlefranc]
- close ACTION-334
- 20:39:57 [trackbot]
- Closed ACTION-334.
- 20:40:29 [mlefranc]
- SimonCox: new classes and properties in new OWL time ontology have no implementation yet,
- 20:40:54 [mlefranc]
- ... so we needed to mark those that have been discussed and introduced the latest: "at risk"
- 20:41:19 [mlefranc]
- ... to avoid that the whole documents fails passing the implementation evidence test
- 20:41:41 [KJanowic]
- thanks a lot!
- 20:41:45 [ahaller2]
- topic: What are properties/classes at risk (e.g. ssn:qualityOfObservation). Are there others?
- 20:42:32 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: working draft will be early May, so we can start identifying classes and properties that are at risk
- 20:43:14 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:43:20 [RaulGarciaCastro]
- q+
- 20:43:23 [ahaller2]
- ack RaulGarciaCastro
- 20:44:24 [mlefranc]
- RaulGarciaCastro: if ssn:qualityOfObservation is marked at risk and has no implementation evidence, will it be removed, or become non-normative ?
- 20:44:54 [mlefranc]
- SimonCox: bits of the ontology may be non-normative
- 20:44:58 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 20:45:46 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: if it's confusing in the working draft, why would you include them in the ontology ?
- 20:46:03 [mlefranc]
- SimonCox: or provide a second ontology that includes non-normative aixoms ?
- 20:46:09 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: yes
- 20:46:19 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:46:23 [ahaller2]
- ack mlefranc
- 20:47:58 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:48:17 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 20:48:31 [mlefranc]
- mlefranc: let's be optimistic here, if some term that is marked at risk has no implementation evidence, we might be able to move them in a "non-normative" section
- 20:49:16 [DanhLePhuoc]
- +q
- 20:49:23 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: we may mark some term at risk because we did not have enough time to discuss them
- 20:49:34 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 20:50:00 [mlefranc]
- ... we will have to ask Phil and Francois about if we need to remove terms that are dropped from the ontology
- 20:50:57 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: showing that we take wide review comments into account may be actually more important that we supposed yet
- 20:51:21 [mlefranc]
- ... we need to have more reviews, and show the Director that we took them into account
- 20:51:24 [KJanowic]
- sorry for jumping ahead
- 20:52:02 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: maybe send emails to all ssn users individually
- 20:52:47 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:52:59 [mlefranc]
- ... for example recent email triggered issue https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/187
- 20:53:06 [ahaller2]
- ack DanhLePhuoc
- 20:53:13 [mlefranc]
- ...it's very important that we address these issues as fast as possible
- 20:53:43 [mlefranc]
- DanhLePhuoc: I sent review requests to iot.schema.org,
- 20:54:22 [ScottSimmons]
- ScottSimmons has joined #sdwssn
- 20:54:27 [DanhLePhuoc]
- https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sdo-iot-sync/132-dZf0kTU
- 20:54:48 [mlefranc]
- ... and WoT-LD taskforce. Which is very crowded, I hope we will receive reviews soon
- 20:55:03 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: of course reviewing takes some time
- 20:55:44 [mlefranc]
- DanhLePhuoc: in terms of implementation, if a new concept has a equivalentClass/equivalentProperty to the old one,
- 20:55:56 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 20:56:10 [ScottSimmons]
- present+ ScottSimmons
- 20:56:16 [mlefranc]
- ... then old ssn data that used that concept will become implementation evidence for the new term
- 20:56:44 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: we will just mark classes and properties at risk if they had no impelmentation evidence
- 20:56:54 [mlefranc]
- q-
- 20:57:08 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: ahaller2 to mark classes/properties as at risk in the ED
- 20:57:10 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-346 - Mark classes/properties as at risk in the ed [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-09].
- 20:57:48 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: I will send email to original users of SSN
- 20:57:57 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: ahaller2 to invite original users of SSN via personal email to review the document
- 20:57:57 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-347 - Invite original users of ssn via personal email to review the document [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-09].
- 20:58:22 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 20:58:28 [mlefranc]
- ... evidence that we covered public review comments is important
- 20:58:58 [ahaller2]
- topic: Feedback from Sergio José Rodríguez Méndez and https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/187 raised in response
- 21:01:10 [ahaller2]
- https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01467853
- 21:02:15 [mlefranc]
- ahaller2: the SAN ontology is parallel to core SSO in SSN, but for actuators
- 21:02:42 [mlefranc]
- ... we're ok to introduce effect class ?
- 21:02:43 [KJanowic]
- btw,weused san as input for out actuator work in SOSA
- 21:02:48 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:02:57 [roba]
- roba has joined #sdwssn
- 21:02:58 [KJanowic]
- q+
- 21:03:18 [ahaller2]
- ack KJanowic
- 21:03:39 [mlefranc]
- KJanowic: we used that actuator pattern, we have proof for that in the wiki
- 21:04:23 [mlefranc]
- ... do we really want to introduce Effect now, we know that Stimulus can't have instances
- 21:04:52 [mlefranc]
- ... every term needs implementation evidence or discussion to explain why they can't have
- 21:04:58 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:05:05 [KJanowic]
- okay
- 21:05:13 [mlefranc]
- ... if we don't need to have implementation evidence, then ok to introduce them. Else, no
- 21:05:29 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 21:05:54 [KJanowic]
- Can you asign an action to me? also for the dul axiomatization?
- 21:05:56 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: KJanowic to send email to Phil and Francois to clarify the need for implementation evidence for superclasses and documentation classes
- 21:05:57 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-348 - Send email to phil and francois to clarify the need for implementation evidence for superclasses and documentation classes [on Krzysztof Janowicz - due 2017-05-09].
- 21:06:00 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:06:14 [ahaller2]
- ack mlefranc
- 21:06:15 [mlefranc]
- Fig 2. in https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01467853/document ---> Sensor produces Result vs Actuator consumes Input
- 21:07:32 [KJanowic]
- IMHO, it is too late to introduce major changes. we need to move on
- 21:09:01 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:09:09 [KJanowic]
- [I have to leave now]
- 21:09:43 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:10:12 [ahaller2]
- topic: Should ssn:hasProperty and ssn:isPropertyOf be included in SOSA?
- 21:10:58 [ahaller2]
- scribe: roba
- 21:11:01 [ahaller2]
- scribenick: roba
- 21:11:13 [mlefranc]
- https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Linking_Systems_and_Features_of_Interest
- 21:12:27 [roba]
- RaulGarcioCastro: foi is related to system only via Observtion class.
- 21:13:11 [roba]
- ...proposal is to move property to SOSA to allow sensors to be related to features without Observation
- 21:13:59 [mlefranc]
- https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Link_between_FeatureOfInterest_and_xxxProperty#What_is_an_instances_of_ssn:Property_.3F
- 21:14:06 [roba]
- mlefranc: question is whether observableProperty is a "general" property such as speed, or a feature property :"speed of this car"
- 21:15:01 [SimonCox]
- q+
- 21:16:01 [roba]
- ...withous hasProperty SOSA cannot support this,
- 21:16:52 [roba]
- armin: agree - users of SOSA must use the spedific property as documented. This doesnt solve the competency question
- 21:17:04 [SimonCox]
- http://registry.it.csiro.au/def/environment/_property
- 21:17:08 [roba]
- ...naming of properties is "pretty bad"
- 21:17:12 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:17:15 [ahaller2]
- ack SimonCox
- 21:18:25 [roba]
- SimonCox: when looking at sets of properties - are they individuals or properties of classes? QUDT has both.. bigger debate than here
- 21:18:52 [RaulGarciaCastro]
- It is not about moving Property
- 21:18:59 [RaulGarciaCastro]
- Property can stay at SSN
- 21:19:26 [roba]
- ... re move Property to SOSA - judgement re weight of SOSA
- 21:19:44 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 21:20:04 [roba]
- ...too much of a change at this point
- 21:21:26 [roba]
- ...type of property without knowing the feature of interest - but can also use features such as "the World" - properties cannot exist without Features in the OGC reference model.
- 21:21:45 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:21:48 [ahaller2]
- ack mlefranc
- 21:23:12 [roba]
- mlefranc: O&M and SSN were well aligned - the only question is whether hasProperty and isProperty to SOSA would enable SOSA to cover some important cases
- 21:23:47 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 21:24:03 [roba]
- ahaller2: discussion was these names were confusing - would prefer new name
- 21:24:13 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:24:17 [ahaller2]
- ack mlefranc
- 21:25:04 [roba]
- mlefranc: ok to rename, "quality" would be perceived as disjoint from "quantity" - first step is to move, second step is to renames
- 21:25:18 [roba]
- s/renames/rename/
- 21:25:33 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:26:29 [SimonCox]
- BTW - we have some implementation evidence on SOSA samples, sampling, sampler (and sample-sample relationships!) emerging by our friends at Geoscience Australia
- 21:26:34 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:27:15 [roba]
- ahaller2: action item to create a PR - to Raul. - for discussion
- 21:27:35 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: RaulGarciaCastro to issues pull request to move isPropertyOf hasProperty to SOSA, and propose different names/labels
- 21:27:35 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-349 - Issues pull request to move ispropertyof hasproperty to sosa, and propose different names/labels [on Raúl García Castro - due 2017-05-09].
- 21:27:38 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:29:53 [roba]
- discussion of examples - updating PR against feedback (please paste in link to the feddback being discussed)
- 21:31:37 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: mlefranc to aggregate his examples from an earlier pull request and introduce them in the beginning of each section with the Observation/Actuation/Sampling figures
- 21:31:37 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-350 - Aggregate his examples from an earlier pull request and introduce them in the beginning of each section with the observation/actuation/sampling figures [on Maxime Lefrançois - due 2017-05-09].
- 21:31:47 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:31:50 [ahaller2]
- topic: Work plan for implementation evidence http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn-usage/
- 21:32:14 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:32:36 [roba]
- ahaller2: who do we know is doing an implementation?
- 21:32:41 [DanhLePhuoc]
- q+
- 21:33:06 [roba]
- SimonCox: will help GA by review. After Review will be update of an operational system.
- 21:33:10 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: Simon to collaborate with Nicholas Car from Geoscience Australia on the SOSA implementation in their operational system
- 21:33:10 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-351 - Collaborate with nicholas car from geoscience australia on the sosa implementation in their operational system [on Simon Cox - due 2017-05-09].
- 21:33:22 [ahaller2]
- ack DanhLePhuoc
- 21:33:53 [roba]
- DanhLePhuoc: will implement one NOAA dataset
- 21:34:11 [DanhLePhuoc]
- NOAA
- 21:34:27 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: DanhLePhuoc to coordinate one implementation evidence around SOSA/SSN in the NOAA dataset
- 21:34:27 [trackbot]
- Error finding 'DanhLePhuoc'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.
- 21:34:28 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:34:31 [mlefranc]
- q+
- 21:34:37 [roba]
- ...20K+ weather observations
- 21:36:04 [roba]
- ahaller2: will update historical climate dataset - small subset of terms
- 21:36:26 [roba]
- ...timeline is about 6 weeks
- 21:36:46 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: ahaller2 to implement SSN new in lab.environment.data.gov.au
- 21:36:47 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-352 - Implement ssn new in lab.environment.data.gov.au [on Armin Haller - due 2017-05-09].
- 21:37:16 [roba]
- ClausStadler: not sure if my project will be available in time
- 21:37:19 [DanhLePhuoc]
- q+
- 21:37:34 [ahaller2]
- ack mlefranc
- 21:39:08 [ahaller2]
- ack DanhLePhuoc
- 21:40:41 [mlefranc]
- Modules to be covered once or twice: actuations / input-output / systems and subsystems / platforms and deployments / systemcapabilities, operatingranges, survivalranges
- 21:40:57 [ahaller2]
- ACTION: DanhLePhuoc to talk to people in Siemens to have an implementation in one of their Plugfests
- 21:40:57 [trackbot]
- Error finding 'DanhLePhuoc'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/users>.
- 21:41:33 [ahaller2]
- ACTIOn: danh to talk to people in Siemens to have an implementation in one of their Plugfests
- 21:41:34 [trackbot]
- Created ACTION-353 - Talk to people in siemens to have an implementation in one of their plugfests [on Danh Le Phuoc - due 2017-05-09].
- 21:41:43 [roba]
- DanhLePhuoc: will explore possibilities in ioT plugfests
- 21:41:46 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:42:17 [ahaller2]
- q?
- 21:42:51 [RaulGarciaCastro]
- Bye!
- 21:43:01 [mlefranc]
- bye
- 21:43:02 [ahaller2]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 21:43:02 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/02-sdwssn-minutes.html ahaller2
- 21:43:09 [SimonCox]
- make the minutes!
- 21:43:13 [ahaller2]
- done
- 21:57:24 [ahaller2]
- ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn