08:14:39 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwg
08:14:39 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-irc
08:15:39 <Caroline_> Caroline_ has joined #DXWG
08:15:50 <Caroline_> Present+
08:16:16 <LarsG> LarsG has joined #dxwg
08:16:22 <LarsG> present+
08:16:34 <Caroline_> Introductions...
08:16:41 <roba> roba has joined #dxwg
08:16:47 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
08:17:58 <SimonCox> Can't hear :-(
08:18:28 <AndreaPerego> AndreaPerego has joined #dxwg
08:18:33 <dsr> rrsagent, set logs public
08:18:38 <AndreaPerego> present+ AndreaPerego
08:18:43 <alejandra> present+
08:18:48 <newton> present+
08:18:52 <dsr> meeting: DXWG Oxford Face to Face
08:19:26 <SimonCox> Can hear you reasonably well Karen, but it dropped out past danbri
08:19:43 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
08:19:43 <dsr> chair: Karen
08:19:50 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwg
08:19:55 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> present+
08:19:55 <dsr> present+ Dave_Raggett
08:20:04 <annette_g> Present+ annette_g
08:20:18 <LuizBonino> LuizBonino has joined #dxwg
08:20:29 <riccardoAlbertoni> present+
08:20:37 <dsr> scribenick: caroline_
08:20:42 <roba> * agenda says check IRC for pw ...  IRC says see todays agenda...
08:21:17 <Caroline_> Scribe: Caroline_
08:21:52 <dsr> Topic: Introductions
08:21:52 <Caroline_> kcoyle: the main goal for our F2F is to discuss the UCR
08:22:18 <roba> present Rob Atkinson
08:22:44 <roba> s/present/present+/
08:22:45 <Caroline_> ... Caroline and I tried to categorize them. If we get to a Use Case and think it is in another category we just move it
08:22:48 <dsr> present+ Rob_Atkinson
08:23:31 <Caroline_> ... the idea is to get through all of them even though if we don't get resolutions about all we have listed
08:23:48 <danbri> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Main_Page#Working_Documents -> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space & https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Cases_and_Requirements
08:23:56 <Caroline_> ... if we need we may finish some of them afterwords
08:24:07 <Keith> Keith has joined #dxwg
08:24:13 <AndreaPerego> s/afterwords/afterwards/
08:24:34 <Caroline_> Topic: DCAT and "dataset"
08:24:49 <SimonCox> q+
08:24:51 <Caroline_> kcoyle: the first one we are going to discuss is https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID8
08:24:53 <kcoyle> q?
08:25:11 <kcoyle> ack SimonCox
08:25:48 <Caroline_> SimonCox: looking the version one of DCAT there is no ??
08:26:14 <Caroline_> ... to the extended DCAT part of what we are looking at is part of dublincore
08:26:21 <danbri> https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#introduction """Data can come in many formats, ranging from spreadsheets over XML and RDF to various speciality formats. DCAT does not make any assumptions about the format of the datasets described in a catalog. Other, complementary vocabularies may be used together with DCAT to provide more detailed format-specific information."""
08:27:20 <Caroline_> ... what is the scope for DCAT descriptions?
08:27:22 <Caroline_> ... also dataset
08:27:43 <Caroline_> ... we recommend the use of existing DCAT recommendations
08:27:51 <danbri> DCAT alludes to http://dublincore.org/documents/2003/02/12/dcmi-type-vocabulary/ """(Dataset) A dataset is information encoded in a defined structure (for example, lists, tables, and databases), intended to be useful for direct machine processing."""
08:28:15 <Caroline_> ... the original dublicore metadata
08:28:32 <kcoyle> q?
08:28:38 <Caroline_> ... the description of the use case is above
08:29:07 <Caroline_> ... it is clear as well as the requirements "Guidance on use of dc:type or similar for DCAT records. Recommendation on content-type vocabularies."
08:29:19 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
08:29:24 <Makx> q+
08:30:04 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: Is this still a dataset or is any resource which is not anymore a dataset?
08:30:13 <Caroline_> ... I support the dataset
08:30:19 <AndreaPerego> About the different resource types in different metadata standards, I prepared a summary table (incomplete): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nlAgLUGQcBe40oTk5WNCVz-6rud1JtLwjoYyyqAT45U/edit?usp=sharing
08:30:24 <kcoyle> q?
08:30:24 <Caroline_> ... it should be more than separetaly
08:30:41 <AndreaPerego> s/separetaly/separately/
08:30:47 <kcoyle> ack Makx
08:30:48 <Caroline_> s/separetaly/separately
08:31:01 <annette_g>  Q+
08:31:38 <Caroline_> Makx: I am against of limiting the scope of what DCAT dataset is
08:31:39 <kcoyle> q?
08:31:42 <LuizBonino> q+
08:31:42 <AndreaPerego> +1 to Makx
08:31:43 <antoine> q+
08:31:46 <kcoyle> ack annette_g
08:31:49 <Caroline_> ... I am in favor of using vocab to say what dataset is
08:32:09 <Caroline_> annette_g: I think the use case approach should come down to actual use cases
08:32:24 <riccardoAlbertoni> s/here/hear
08:32:25 <Caroline_> ... some of the use cases are questions
08:32:41 <kcoyle> q?
08:32:48 <Caroline_> ... we may consider those as separate questions
08:32:53 <alejandra> q+
08:33:06 <Caroline_> LuizBonino: I like the idea to be able to describe diferent types of information as assets
08:33:20 <kcoyle> q?
08:33:26 <kcoyle> ack LuizBonino
08:33:29 <kcoyle> ack antoine
08:34:10 <Caroline_> antoine: it seems this use case is to describe what is the dataset but it can also be understood about the context
08:34:19 <kcoyle> q?
08:34:21 <danbri> q+ to suggest that ANY collection of 0s and 1s (including empty collection) can be treated as a dataset; "dataset" is about how the data is handled/treated/managed, not an intrinsic property.
08:34:25 <kcoyle> ack alejandra
08:34:40 <Caroline_> alejandra: I think it is important to discuss the scope of the use cases
08:34:50 <Caroline_> ... make sure that we provide guidance on the type
08:35:03 <Caroline_> ... I agree with the Use Case and I think we need to consider it
08:35:06 <Makx> q+
08:35:08 <Keith> the problem with using 'type' is that 'type' may be made up of many different attributes
08:35:23 <kcoyle> q?
08:35:26 <antoine> Keith++
08:35:48 <kcoyle> q?
08:35:52 <kcoyle> ack danbri
08:35:52 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to suggest that ANY collection of 0s and 1s (including empty collection) can be treated as a dataset; "dataset" is about how the data is handled/treated/managed,
08:35:55 <Zakim> ... not an intrinsic property.
08:35:59 <kcoyle> q?
08:36:07 <kcoyle> ack Makx
08:36:19 <Caroline_> Makx: the definition of dataset
08:36:37 <Caroline_> ... has to be cured
08:36:42 <alejandra> curated
08:36:42 <roba> seems to me the main thing is not to try to define it now - but to decide if we will maintain (or adopt) a list of types
08:36:44 <dsr> s/cured/curated/
08:36:58 <Caroline_> ... I think it is important to clear it up
08:37:00 <kcoyle> q?
08:37:04 <Caroline_> danbri: I think we agree
08:37:13 <Caroline_> ... is about the curation of the process around data
08:37:19 <Thomas> +1 for makx and dan
08:37:24 <alejandra> maybe this is useful: software vs data https://github.com/danielskatz/software-vs-data
08:37:24 <Makx> accept
08:37:41 <danbri> [I agree with Makx that being a dataset is around the social context surrounding data, not the data itself]
08:37:41 <Caroline_> kcoyle: can we accept the use case ID8 as it is?
08:38:02 <antoine> q+
08:38:25 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
08:38:27 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we can just accept it
08:38:40 <annette_g> +1 to Jaroslav
08:38:45 <Caroline_> ... there are questions that are not stated on the use case
08:39:05 <Thomas> q?
08:39:08 <annette_g> S/can/can't/
08:39:18 <Caroline_> ... maybe we could check others use case related to see the requirements and descriptions to see if they complete themselves
08:40:00 <Caroline_> kcoyle: let's check the use case ID20 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID20
08:40:09 <Caroline_> kcoyle: we ante to be able to specify a type
08:40:24 <Caroline_> ... we are probably going to have to point to a small number of recommended vocabs
08:40:38 <kcoyle> q?
08:40:49 <Caroline_> ... given that, could we vote on the ID8 and ID20 at the same time?
08:40:52 <SimonCox> The link to parse.insight in the use-case description was unhelpful - I've corrected it
08:40:54 <Caroline_> antoine: I think it would be all right
08:41:08 <Caroline_> ... maybe SimonCox could explain
08:41:38 <PWinstanley> PWinstanley has joined #dxwg
08:41:51 <Caroline_> SimonCox: there are a lot of diferent file types
08:41:55 <PWinstanley> present+ PWinstanley
08:42:07 <Caroline_> ... they call content type
08:42:11 <roba> dataset type != encoding type  - dataset may be exposed in many encodings
08:42:21 <Caroline_> ... there are diferent formats of media type
08:42:46 <Caroline_> antoine: on the web context content type uses media type
08:42:46 <danbri> [media type could be .Z (application/x-compress, LZW) in the case of the Web History collection https://www.w3.org/History/1992/timbl-floppies/TimBerners-Lee_CERN/hype.tar.Z ]
08:42:48 <Keith> a problem with the concept of dataset concerns streaming data because of its continuity: is the dataset the whole thing or a defined 'window'
08:42:49 <AndreaPerego> s/diferent/different
08:42:55 <Caroline_> SimonCox: I am talking about semantic oriented
08:43:08 <kcoyle> q?
08:43:11 <Caroline_> ... the language chosen is certain conflicted
08:43:14 <kcoyle> ack an
08:43:20 <Caroline_> ... talking about content type
08:43:22 <roba> should definitely change "content-type" wording in Use Case
08:43:51 <roba> we are talking about the range of dc:type
08:43:51 <LuizBonino> Is it the "nature" of the dataset instead of how it is serialised, right?
08:44:08 <Thomas> Right; that's how I perceive it also
08:44:09 <Caroline_> ... the dublincore descriptions from 20 years ago recognize datasets chich are images, maps, etc
08:44:24 <Caroline_> s/etc/spreadsheets, et
08:44:27 <Caroline_> s/et/etc
08:44:31 <kcoyle> q?
08:44:40 <Caroline_> ... there is a strong sense the images are different
08:44:40 <AndreaPerego> s/datasets chich/datasets which/
08:44:52 <Caroline_> antoine: I accept it
08:45:01 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
08:45:02 <antoine> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTTP_header_fields
08:45:10 <Caroline_> ...as someone suggested to put a small note saying it
08:46:03 <roba> q+
08:46:09 <Caroline_> kcoyle: we have mentioned something that was not discussed on the use cases
08:46:17 <Caroline_> SimonCox: it says that in the use case
08:47:28 <Thomas> q+
08:47:29 <Caroline_> kcoyle: are we at a point that caould we vote on this
08:47:35 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we should merge them
08:47:41 <AndreaPerego> s/caould/could/
08:47:42 <alejandra> +1 to merge them
08:48:10 <AndreaPerego> Sorry, merge what?
08:48:12 <Caroline_> Makx: reminded us that we could merge only the requirements
08:48:16 <Makx> +1 to merging reqs
08:48:24 <Caroline_> the uses cases ID8 and ID20, AndreaPerego
08:48:30 <antoine> +1 to keeping the use case separated (they were contributed separately) but having the requirements consolidated.
08:48:37 <roba> q-
08:48:41 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
08:48:51 <AndreaPerego> q+
08:49:04 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
08:49:14 <SimonCox> +1 to merge reqs - this will drive DCAT 1.x - keep use cases separate for record keeping
08:49:27 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: if we are looking for audiences we have differents
08:49:43 <Caroline_> ... they were not in the discussions. That was my motivation to merge them
08:49:56 <LarsG> q+ to ask if it's just about to accept or decline use cases
08:50:00 <Caroline_> ... it might be interesting for researchers to see them merged
08:50:27 <Caroline_> ... if we talk about access the question is if are we talking about datasets
08:50:32 <Ine_> Ine_ has joined #dxwg
08:50:47 <Caroline_> ... we should be talking always about digital access resources
08:51:00 <Caroline_> ... the access would be only by protocols
08:51:32 <Caroline_> ... the definition of data maybe also about non digital data. It can be anything. So we must be sure to be talking about data accessible
08:51:38 <kcoyle> ack Thomas
08:51:48 <danbri> [is there anything DCAT can't describe? :]
08:51:53 <Caroline_> Thomas: these two use cases coul be anout anything
08:52:18 <Caroline_> ... the discussion about content type and so on is part of content negotiation
08:52:18 <AndreaPerego> s/coul be anout /could be about /
08:52:31 <kcoyle> q?
08:52:53 <Caroline_> ... agree with Jaroslav_Pullmann to merge the requirements
08:52:55 <SimonCox> +1 danbri
08:53:22 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: is the purpose is to have a history we should merge only the requirements
08:53:32 <Caroline_> q+
08:54:02 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: sometimes the use cases are very valueable
08:54:22 <LarsG> s/valueable/valuable/
08:54:23 <Caroline_> ... it is important to have reports of what we are missing
08:54:35 <Caroline_> kcoyle: if you feel there is a use case missing, please create it
08:54:38 <kcoyle> ack AndreaPerego
08:55:08 <annette_g_> annette_g_ has joined #dxwg
08:56:38 <Caroline_> AndreaPerego: we should consider include descriptions or resources that are not data
08:56:43 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
08:56:45 <kcoyle> ack LarsG
08:56:45 <Zakim> LarsG, you wanted to ask if it's just about to accept or decline use cases
08:57:08 <Caroline_> LarsG: I have a metaquestion. are we discussin the merging and how to proceed?
08:57:10 <Caroline_> q-
08:57:37 <Caroline_> ... we discussed that in a call and agreed to keep the use cases separeted and merge the requirements
08:57:57 <Caroline_> ... alo a catalogue should be considered
08:58:36 <Thomas> Proposal will follow here
08:58:56 <Makx> q+
08:58:59 <SimonCox> I agree that ID20 partly elaborates ID8, but it is only the requirements arising from these that matters in the end!
08:59:16 <Caroline_> PROPOSAL: to accept the use cases ID8 and ID20 as they are
08:59:24 <Makx> q-
08:59:36 <SimonCox> The use-cases stay on the books so that we can check at the end if the products solve the use-cases
08:59:40 <annette_g_> Q+
08:59:48 <Makx> +1 o Simon
08:59:58 <Caroline_> s/o/to
09:00:17 <antoine> +1
09:00:32 <Caroline_> kcoyle: is up to the group to drive requirements
09:00:43 <Caroline_> PROPOSAL: to accept the use cases ID8 and ID20 as they are
09:00:45 <newton> +1
09:00:45 <Thomas> +1
09:00:45 <SimonCox> +1
09:00:47 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
09:00:47 <Caroline_> +1
09:00:47 <alejandra> +1
09:00:48 <kcoyle> +1
09:00:48 <annette_g_> -!
09:00:49 <PWinstanley> +1
09:00:49 <LuizBonino> +1
09:00:50 <AndreaPerego> +1
09:00:50 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
09:00:51 <LarsG> +1
09:00:51 <roba> +1
09:00:52 <Ine_> +1
09:00:52 <Makx> +1
09:00:53 <annette_g_> -1
09:00:53 <Keith> +1
09:00:56 <danbri> +1
09:00:56 <antoine> with or without the requirement part?
09:00:57 <DaveBrowning> +1
09:00:57 <dsr> +1
09:01:14 <Thomas> antoine without for now
09:01:20 <Caroline_> annette_g_: I still have a concern about the ID8 being a use case
09:01:21 <antoine> ok then +1
09:01:26 <Caroline_> ... it is too general
09:01:28 <Philippe> Philippe has joined #dxwg
09:01:35 <Caroline_> ... I feel the use cases should be concrete
09:02:09 <Caroline_> kcoyle: annette_g_ do you volunteer to rewrite it?
09:02:21 <Caroline_> SimonCox: I agree that annette_g_ do it
09:02:57 <Caroline_> PROPOSAL: to accept the use cases ID8 with edits that annette_g_ will provide and ID20 as it is
09:03:09 <Thomas> +1
09:03:10 <Caroline_> +1
09:03:12 <PWinstanley> +1
09:03:12 <newton> +1
09:03:12 <annette_g_> +1
09:03:13 <alejandra> +1
09:03:13 <DaveBrowning> +1
09:03:14 <AndreaPerego> +1
09:03:14 <LarsG> +1
09:03:15 <dsr> +1
09:03:15 <Ine_> +1
09:03:15 <Keith> +1
09:03:16 <kcoyle> +1
09:03:17 <roba> +1
09:03:17 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
09:03:19 <LuizBonino> +1
09:03:19 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
09:03:20 <Philippe> present+philippe_roccaserra
09:03:24 <SimonCox> +1
09:03:32 <danbri> +1
09:03:38 <antoine> +0
09:03:39 <Caroline_> RESOLVED: to accept the use cases ID8 with edits that annette_g_ will provide and ID20 as it is
09:03:56 <Thomas> philippe keep the space after +
09:04:05 <Thomas> sorry; it works
09:04:17 <Thomas> (still getting used to IRC)
09:04:25 <SimonCox> IMO we should be quite generous in accepting use-cases, since these exemplify concerns in the community. The more challenging part is distilling the _requirements_ and consolidating these where they overlap or duplicate. The requirements will drive the design of the products.
09:04:25 <antoine> sorry I've abstained only because I've missed the explanation of how annette_g_ wanted to make the UC more concrete.
09:04:31 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
09:04:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
09:04:39 <Caroline_> THE USE CASE ID36 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID36
09:04:56 <Caroline_> s/THE USE CASE/ the use case/
09:05:43 <roba> q+
09:05:47 <kcoyle> q?
09:05:51 <Caroline_> Makx: Cross-vocabulary relationships is about the need that might be in the dcat about those other type of datasets
09:05:58 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
09:05:58 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1 to Makx ( probably is just a matter of providing some  examples..)
09:06:00 <Keith> agree with Simon, accept all use cases and get on with the work of distilling requirements
09:06:04 <danbri> [q: couldn't I distribute my qb:DataSet in either Turtle or RDF/XML syntaxes, each being a Distribution?]
09:06:11 <annette_g_> Q-
09:06:13 <kcoyle> q?
09:06:17 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: I can reffer to the wikipage
09:06:41 <Caroline_> ... Makx is right. Some schema.org consider the data being abstract
09:06:51 <alejandra> s/reffer/refer
09:06:58 <AndreaPerego> q+
09:07:17 <kcoyle> ack roba
09:07:30 <Caroline_> roba: I think it is an important use case
09:07:35 <Caroline_> ... it is not just a distribuition
09:07:48 <danbri> q+ to mention CSVW too
09:08:10 <Caroline_> ... we should just double check that we create a situtation that can't be a dcat
09:08:13 <AndreaPerego> +1 to roba
09:08:22 <Caroline_> Makx: it is a litle bit more complicate than that
09:08:34 <Caroline_> ... if you have a dataset as a datacube
09:08:47 <Caroline_> ... the concept is almost the same, but now you have 2 implementation
09:08:51 <antoine> q+
09:09:24 <Caroline_> ... one part would be of what dcat call a dataset
09:09:44 <Caroline_> roba: I was saying that description can be a distribution
09:09:49 <AndreaPerego> q-
09:09:55 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
09:10:24 <Caroline_> ... just we don't get confused on describing data
09:10:30 <kcoyle> ack danbri
09:10:30 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to mention CSVW too
09:10:36 <Caroline_> danbri: it is a very important problem
09:10:49 <Keith> dataset/distribution: the problem is DCAT does not use the concepts conceptual, logical, physical - this would help
09:11:11 <Caroline_> ... we have the choice of going of very specific things
09:11:29 <Caroline_> ... seems that we have agreed with evey domain
09:11:33 <Caroline_> ... we have to be pragmatic
09:11:49 <AndreaPerego> s/evey /every /
09:12:04 <Caroline_> ... if we are describing as a distribution then describe it as a distribution
09:12:15 <kcoyle> q?
09:12:19 <Caroline_> ... there is no right answer, but having concrete use cases might help
09:12:37 <kcoyle> ack antoine
09:12:48 <kcoyle> q?
09:12:51 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
09:13:09 <Caroline_> Jaroslav_Pullmann: if this would modif dcat standard
09:13:19 <Caroline_> ... concepts of what this dataset is
09:13:34 <Caroline_> ... if we agree that the dataset is abstract
09:13:52 <Caroline_> ... with this notion in mind we should compare with other standards
09:14:03 <Caroline_> ... these are the differences
09:14:10 <Caroline_> ... comparing to shema
09:14:16 <AndreaPerego> s/situtation/situation/
09:14:24 <danbri> [Dublin Core is scruffy and pragmatic where https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_Requirements_for_Bibliographic_Records#FRBR_entities is overly prescriptive; even scoped to libraries, having 4 mutually exclusive types has been hard. It feels like there's a lesson for describing data here.]
09:14:30 <AndreaPerego> s/comparing to shema/comparing to schema/
09:14:33 <Caroline_> kcoyle: is this a use case we want to address?
09:14:48 <Caroline_> PROPOSAL: accept the use case ID36
09:14:49 <Thomas> +1
09:14:51 <LuizBonino> +1
09:14:52 <AndreaPerego> +1
09:14:52 <Philippe> +1
09:14:52 <Makx> +1 of course
09:14:54 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
09:14:54 <Caroline_> +1
09:14:54 <newton> +1
09:14:55 <alejandra> +1
09:14:56 <PWinstanley> +1
09:14:57 <kcoyle> +1
09:14:59 <LarsG> +1
09:14:59 <Ine_> +1
09:14:59 <danbri> +1
09:15:00 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
09:15:00 <antoine> +1
09:15:01 <DaveBrowning> +1
09:15:02 <SimonCox> +1
09:15:04 <annette_g_> +1
09:15:05 <dsr> +1
09:15:05 <Keith> +1
09:15:07 <danbri> +2
09:15:15 <Caroline_> RESOLVED: accept the use case ID36
09:15:30 <Caroline_> scribe: DaveBrowning
09:15:50 <SimonCox> I vote to accept all use cases. But then we will need to distill, and collate, the *requirements* implied by the use cases.
09:15:58 <dsr> scribenick: dsr
09:15:58 <roba> +1
09:16:02 <dsr> scribe: Dave_Raggett
09:16:37 <dsr> Topic: DCAT data elements
09:16:59 <dsr> We start with ID9, seehttps://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID9
09:17:12 <dsr> which talks about Common requirements for scientific data
09:17:57 <dsr> Andrea: this is a use case based upon experience at JRC
09:18:19 <Caroline_> s/Andrea/AndreaPerego
09:18:38 <dsr> We need to verify requirements for multidisciplinary scientific data
09:18:49 <PWinstanley> q+
09:19:00 <Keith> q+
09:19:20 <annette_g_> annette_g_ has joined #dxwg
09:19:23 <annette_g_> Q+
09:20:37 <dsr> we want to be able to describe the context, inclding authors, lineage, usage, links to publications about the dataset and links to input data
09:21:08 <dsr> s/inclding/including/
09:22:16 <kcoyle> ack PWinstanley
09:22:23 <dsr> we should start with a link to the context, and later work on what we can describe in the context
09:22:35 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
09:23:00 <kcoyle> ack Keith
09:23:13 <dsr> PWinstanley: I would be very hesitant to distinguish scientific in the requirements, although its fine as a use case
09:23:24 <danbri> +1 to Peter's concern about distinguishing "science" from non
09:23:27 <alejandra> +q
09:23:40 <Thomas> q+
09:23:56 <dsr> Keith: I would like to go further with a complex set of role bound properties
09:24:00 <AndreaPerego> q+ to comment on the use of "scientific" in the use case
09:24:24 <dsr> We need this additional layer if intelligent software is to make use if it effectively
09:24:54 <kcoyle> ack annette_g_
09:25:25 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
09:25:27 <danbri> q+ to note that data citation metadata is critical for data(set) discovery (+maybe "scholarly" can substitute for "science" in some places?)
09:25:31 <dsr> Annette will extend the use case
09:25:51 <Keith> Keith will generate an extended use case referencing ID9 emphasising relationships of dataset to many other entities with role and temporal limits
09:26:34 <LuizBonino> q+
09:26:39 <dsr> Jaroslav: for scientific datasets, there will be an appropriate set of metadata
09:27:05 <Caroline_> ack alejandra
09:27:14 <dsr> ACTION: Keith to generate an extended use case referencing ID9 emphasising relationships of dataset to many other entities with role and temporal limits
09:27:14 <trackbot> Error finding 'Keith'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/users>.
09:27:27 <kcoyle> q?
09:27:39 <kcoyle> ack tho
09:28:31 <dsr> Thomas: we don’t want to scare people off with long lists of metadata which may be optional
09:28:34 <kcoyle> ack AndreaPerego
09:28:34 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to comment on the use of "scientific" in the use case
09:29:02 <AndreaPerego> Data lineage: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#Modeling_data_lineage
09:29:10 <annette_g_> annette_g_ has joined #dxwg
09:29:31 <Caroline_> ACTION: annette_g_ to make the UC ID8 more concrete
09:29:31 <trackbot> Error finding 'annette_g_'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/users>.
09:29:36 <danbri> [what is the unique content of this usecase, beyond those it covers? e.g. I just noticed data citation is also in UC10 also from AndreaPerego]
09:30:03 <annette_g_> S/annette_g_/annette_g/
09:30:21 <dsr> AndreaPerego: you put a link to the original dataset, but it could also be interesting to describe the processing involved in the lineage
09:30:24 <Caroline_> ACTION: annette_g to make the UC ID8 more concrete
09:30:25 <trackbot> Created ACTION-14 - Make the uc id8 more concrete [on Annette Greiner - due 2017-07-24].
09:30:43 <dsr> It would be very useful to have two levels
09:30:50 <LarsG> [Do use cases need to be unique? I thought we just decided that they are only there to be hooks for unique _requirements_]
09:32:07 <dsr> AndreaPerego:  it is useful to have a link to a specific community where the metadata is relevant
09:32:12 <kcoyle> ack danbri
09:32:12 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to note that data citation metadata is critical for data(set) discovery (+maybe "scholarly" can substitute for "science" in some places?)
09:32:24 <LarsG> q+ to ask if scientific/scholarly dataset description cannot modeled as a specific profile extending DCAT-AP
09:32:49 <dsr> danbri: I wanted to speak up for search indexing, we love text rather than numbers
09:32:52 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
09:32:57 <kcoyle> ack LuizBonino
09:33:22 <danbri> AndreaPerego, is there anything unique in UC9 not in your other related UCs?
09:33:38 <LarsG> q-
09:33:41 <dsr> LuizBonino talks about different roles of authors
09:34:01 <AndreaPerego> danbri, it's more a "meta" use case, giving the general context
09:34:09 <SimonCox> +1 to danbri "what is the extra requirement from this use case" - we should spend our time on extracting requirements. There will be a lot of overlaps, but I'm not sure that chugging through votes on each uc is good use of time?
09:34:42 <LarsG> q?
09:34:46 <dsr> Karen: can we vote on ID9, and how it relates to profiles
09:34:47 <danbri> +0 then (it seems a useful aggregation of the others, but if it has no unique content, seems an administrative/editorial matter)
09:34:57 <kcoyle> PROPOSAL: accept id9, and consider this also when we discuss profiles
09:35:07 <danbri> +1
09:35:12 <antoine> +1
09:35:13 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
09:35:16 <SimonCox> +1
09:35:18 <alejandra> +1
09:35:19 <LuizBonino> +1
09:35:19 <Ine_> +1
09:35:19 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
09:35:19 <newton> +1
09:35:20 <Philippe> +1
09:35:24 <Caroline_> +1
09:35:24 <Keith> +1 accept all use cases and get on with requirements
09:35:26 <dsr> +1
09:35:27 <LarsG> +1
09:35:28 <annette_g_> +1
09:35:36 <PWinstanley> +1 but with the caveat that we remove 'scientific' from it
09:35:39 <Thomas> +1 and +2 to Keith
09:35:40 <kcoyle> +1
09:35:47 <DaveBrowning> +1
09:35:53 <Makx> +1
09:36:06 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: accept id9, and consider this also when we discuss profiles
09:36:31 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID10
09:36:45 <dsr> We look at ID10 Requirements for data citation
09:36:49 <Thomas> q+
09:37:06 <dsr> Karen invites Andrea to introduce ID10
09:38:10 <dsr> AndreaPerego: this is about being able to cite bibliographic information and to associated related resources with persistent identifiers
09:38:20 <kcoyle> Q?
09:38:29 <Keith> q+
09:38:30 <danbri> "Being able to specify the basic mandatory information for data citation" suggests a relation to using SHACL/SHEX or similar c.f.  https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID41 .  I don't see the word mandatory in https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/
09:38:53 <dsr> DCAT doesn’t yet provide the means to distinguish these identifiers sufficiently
09:40:28 <AndreaPerego> q+
09:40:42 <dsr> Karen summarises the wording in the DXWG charter. We want to describe what is meant by an application profile, but not to define domain specific vocabularies for profiles
09:41:31 <LarsG> q+
09:41:34 <dsr> AndreaPerego: the use case is not about that as such, but rather about enabling citations
09:42:00 <kcoyle> q?
09:42:01 <dsr> so ID10 is about DCAT rather than app profiles
09:42:15 <alejandra> +q
09:42:27 <AndreaPerego> q-
09:43:00 <dsr> Thomas: the title of this use case is a little misleading
09:43:12 <danbri> [i.e. If a DCAT-based description is going to be useful for data citation, we'll need to at least show how it would be modeled i.e. in terms of vocabulary not mandatory-ness. Someone else's problem to represent that profile using shex/shacl/etc.]
09:43:27 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
09:43:31 <kcoyle> ack Thomas
09:43:52 <kcoyle> ack Keith
09:44:03 <kcoyle> ack LarsG
09:44:10 <dsr> Keith: one of the big thing with citation is being able to reference a specific version and section of a data set, and this is best handled in terms of a query expression
09:44:39 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
09:45:10 <dsr> LarsG asks for clarification about the target of the use case
09:45:13 <kcoyle> ack alejandra
09:45:17 <dsr> AndreaPerego: this is about DCAT
09:46:12 <dsr> alejandra: I think this is an important use case for DCAT, and we need to clarify the requirements as it overlaps with ID9
09:46:17 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
09:46:22 <LarsG> q+
09:47:08 <dsr> Jaroslav: we need to consider the query parameters for referencing the distribution
09:47:36 <dsr> Keith: this can get really complicated with some data stores
09:48:10 <dsr> LarsG: I am still not sure if this is about DCAT or DCAT-AP
09:48:20 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
09:48:38 <kcoyle> ack LarsG
09:48:45 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
09:48:51 <dsr> are we here to extend DCAT or to support some form of profile of DCAT usage
09:48:52 <alejandra> +q
09:48:55 <AndreaPerego> q+
09:49:02 <annette_g_> annette_g_ has joined #dxwg
09:49:29 <dsr> Jaroslav: we seem to missing a use case on data identification
09:50:13 <AndreaPerego> I wonder whether "data identification" could not be too abstract. I see it more as a requirement.
09:50:29 <alejandra> isn't that kind of described in ID11?
09:51:01 <kcoyle> ack alejandra
09:51:10 <dsr> ACTION: Jaroslav_Pullmann to work with Keith on a use case on data identification
09:51:11 <trackbot> Created ACTION-15 - Work with keith on a use case on data identification [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2017-07-24].
09:51:32 <kcoyle> ack Andr
09:52:08 <kcoyle> PROPOSAL: accept ID10
09:52:13 <annette_g_> +1
09:52:16 <alejandra> +1
09:52:17 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
09:52:18 <Caroline_> +1
09:52:19 <LuizBonino> +1
09:52:20 <Keith> +1
09:52:24 <Philippe> +1
09:52:24 <Ine_> +1
09:52:29 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
09:52:30 <newton> +1
09:52:34 <annette_g_> Q+
09:52:35 <Thomas> Meaning some core citation info is essential for DCAT VOC
09:52:39 <Thomas> +1
09:52:40 <antoine> +1
09:52:40 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
09:52:41 <PWinstanley> +1
09:53:45 <DaveBrowning> +1
09:53:57 <dsr> annette_g: every scientific domain has its own list of metadata for its data sets
09:54:20 <LuizBonino> q?
09:54:39 <dsr> what is the level that a profile sits at?
09:55:09 <Makx> +1 to Karen
09:55:33 <dsr> Karen: we will define how to express a dataset profile, but we won’t work on specific profiles which will be left to the relevant communities
09:56:30 <dsr> annette_g: we do need to provide guidance to communities as to what we’re expecting them to do
09:57:47 <dsr> XXX talks about how to define profiles
09:58:12 <dsr> how to provide a consistent set of extensions
09:58:23 <Caroline_>  s/XXX/Thomas
09:58:40 <dsr> Karen: we can look at how Dublic Core tacked this
09:58:45 <Makx> +1
09:58:47 <dsr> s/tacked/tackled/
09:58:57 <AndreaPerego> +1
09:58:58 <annette_g_> +1
09:59:23 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: accept ID10
09:59:25 <SimonCox> +1 to accept all use cases ...
09:59:34 <Makx> +1
09:59:36 <Thomas> +1
09:59:40 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
09:59:42 <newton> +1
09:59:43 <LarsG> ]1
09:59:49 <antoine> +1
09:59:50 <LarsG> +1
09:59:51 <Ine_> +1
09:59:52 <Keith> +1 accept use cases and get to requirements
09:59:52 <LuizBonino> +1
10:00:02 <LarsG> s/]1//
10:00:46 <kcoyle> q?
10:00:47 <dsr> We move onto ID11 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID11 Modeling identifiers and making them actionable
10:00:53 <danbri> +1
10:00:55 <kcoyle> ack annette_g_
10:01:08 <Thomas> +1
10:01:10 <dsr> Karen: this is similar to others, can we just vote on accepting it?
10:01:19 <Keith> q+
10:01:30 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
10:01:35 <dsr> dsr has left #dxwg
10:01:41 <kcoyle> ack Keith
10:01:56 <dsr> dsr has joined #dxwg
10:01:56 <alejandra_> alejandra_ has joined #dxwg
10:02:31 <dsr> Keith: many identifiers are role based, and we need to be general in supporting them
10:02:46 <annette_g_> Q+
10:03:32 <dsr> Karen: you need to say what kind of identifier it is to enable search
10:03:36 <kcoyle> ack annette_g_
10:03:59 <LuizBonino> q+
10:04:17 <alejandra_> it also says alternative identifiers
10:04:24 <dsr> Annette_G: we need to void limiting people to a single de-referenceable link
10:04:33 <kcoyle> ack LuizBonino
10:05:09 <dsr> LuizBonino: people need to state their identifier and the schema it belongs to
10:05:20 <kcoyle> PROPOSED: Accept ID11
10:05:24 <Thomas> +1
10:05:25 <annette_g_> +1
10:05:26 <LarsG> +1
10:05:27 <Philippe> +1
10:05:27 <Caroline_> +1
10:05:28 <LuizBonino> +1
10:05:29 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
10:05:29 <SimonCox> +1
10:05:29 <Keith> +1
10:05:30 <PWinstanley> +1
10:05:30 <alejandra_> +1
10:05:32 <newton> +1
10:05:32 <Makx> +1
10:05:33 <dsr> +1
10:05:34 <kcoyle> +1
10:05:40 <Ine_> +1
10:05:52 <antoine> +1
10:05:53 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: Accept ID11
10:05:55 <danbri> +1
10:05:55 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
10:05:57 <DaveBrowning> +1
10:06:14 <danbri> q+ to propose we accept all usecases
10:06:19 <Makx> the question should be: is the UC clear?
10:06:32 <danbri> PROPOSAL: We accept all use cases.
10:06:34 <SimonCox> +1
10:06:39 <LuizBonino> +1
10:06:39 <Keith> +1
10:06:40 <Makx> accept them unless osmeone objects
10:06:45 <danbri> No objections so far
10:06:46 <Makx> +1
10:06:53 <AndreaPerego> +1
10:06:53 <dsr> danbri proposes we accept all of the use cases so we can discuss requirements
10:06:54 <danbri> ack me
10:06:54 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to propose we accept all usecases
10:07:07 <antoine> -1
10:07:08 <DaveBrowning> +1
10:07:34 <danbri> antoine, can you repeat?
10:07:51 <SimonCox> notuc = no objection to unanimous consent
10:08:13 <antoine> I am co-chairing a group where people actually submitted UCs that were out of scope
10:08:19 <antoine> so I have to flag this
10:08:41 <antoine> That said, I will not strongly object if the WG here decides to just move on!
10:09:02 <antoine> Maybe this is a better group :-)
10:09:45 <dsr> Karen: we want to decide whether the use cases are in or out scope
10:10:19 <dsr> danbri: has anyone some ideas as to which use cases should be out of scope
10:11:06 <dsr> ID9 needs some rewriting to avoid being specific to scientific datasets
10:11:52 <dsr> Out of scope, means that we won’t address the use case in DCAT
10:11:55 <AndreaPerego> q+ about ID9
10:12:16 <dsr> ack about
10:12:20 <dsr> ack ID9
10:12:36 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1 to AndreaPerego
10:13:15 <dsr> AndreaPerego: it is better to be concrete in the use cases and then generalise the requirements
10:13:31 <dsr> Karen agrees
10:14:14 <dsr> Do we want to go through each of the use cases to resolve whether they are in or out of scope?
10:14:39 <dsr> We won’t be able to get a full list of requirements from the use cases today.
10:14:56 <SimonCox> q+
10:14:56 <Makx> what time come back?
10:14:58 <dsr> Our purpose today is to determine what is the scope of DCAT 1.1
10:15:08 <danbri> [Maybe we can get away with a 'bulk' resolution that we believe all UCs submitted are in-scope to *consider* as reasonable asks of DCAT 1.1]
10:15:09 <annette_g_> annette_g_ has joined #dxwg
10:15:09 <dsr> … we break for 15 minutes …
10:15:09 <Caroline_> in 15min we will come back
10:15:27 <SimonCox> I won't come back. Getting late here and I'm still nursing pneumonia
10:15:47 <Caroline_> hope you get better soon SimonCox
10:16:00 <danbri> goodnight, SimonCox!
10:17:01 <danbri> resolved: SimonCox to get well soon
10:17:11 <SimonCox> :-)
10:28:56 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
10:37:24 <Thomas> on a pause her, makx/andrea
10:37:34 <Thomas> starting within a few minutes
10:37:42 <Thomas> (I think)
10:37:56 <alejandra> alejandra has joined #dxwg
10:38:22 <Makx> My apologies, will have to disconnect at 13:00 my time/noon Oxford for another call.
10:38:58 <Makx> Hope we'll get through Quality by the top of the hour
10:40:01 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
10:40:08 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
10:40:18 <Thomas> scribe Thomas
10:40:52 <dsr> scribenick: Thomas
10:41:08 <dsr> rrsagent, make minutes
10:41:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html dsr
10:41:10 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #dxwg
10:41:44 <Thomas> kcoyle: next two use cases - similar to identifiers
10:42:15 <Thomas> id28 & id29 parallel
10:42:17 <kcoyle> q?
10:42:18 <Caroline_> Caroline_ has joined #DXWG
10:42:21 <Thomas> are these out of scope?
10:42:23 <Caroline_> Present+ Caroline_
10:42:30 <AndreaPerego> q+
10:42:31 <kcoyle> present+
10:42:54 <riccardoAlbertoni> present+
10:43:25 <danbri> q+
10:43:27 <danbri> q-
10:43:29 <kcoyle> ack Si
10:43:44 <Thomas> AndreaPerego: relationship id28-29
10:43:49 <Thomas> both about spatial aspect of data
10:43:52 <Thomas> not related otherwise
10:44:25 <Thomas> 28 is about specifying reference systems that the data use (coordinate systems)
10:44:42 <Thomas> 29 is about the spatial coverage
10:45:00 <LuizBonino> present+
10:45:05 <Thomas> 29 is more literal by nature
10:45:08 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID28
10:46:31 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID38
10:46:35 <Thomas> kcoyle: talking about 28 and 38
10:46:38 <Thomas> 29 later
10:47:35 <roba> these are both cases of ID26
10:48:10 <Thomas> looking at id28 and id38 now
10:48:21 <Caroline_> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID28
10:48:26 <Caroline_> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID38
10:48:29 <Thomas> any objections against 28?
10:48:38 <roba> 28 and 27 are basically the same pattern
10:48:40 <kcoyle> q?
10:48:48 <kcoyle> ack AndreaPerego
10:48:58 <roba> q+
10:49:00 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
10:49:20 <kcoyle> ack roba
10:49:30 <danbri> Noting that https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/ is in Candidate Recommendation review re time-related aspects in ID38
10:49:34 <LuizBonino> Again, it is seems that both 28 and 38 are suitable for extensions/profiles
10:49:39 <alejandra> can we update the agenda to have the correct name if ID28?
10:49:55 <Thomas> roba: 27 and 28 are alike and go about the modelling aspects of semantics
10:50:09 <PWinstanley> q+
10:50:20 <Thomas> general set of requirements will have to be extracted from there
10:50:26 <Thomas> and then discussed
10:50:29 <AndreaPerego> I would say UC27 (temporal coverage) is related to UC29 (spatial coverage), not UC28 (reference systems).
10:50:41 <Thomas> lot of people are using these things differently
10:50:45 <antoine> AndreaPerego++
10:50:59 <Thomas> kcoyle: grandfather in related aspects to 26
10:51:48 <roba> q+
10:51:49 <Thomas> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we're going to look into requirements - we have to ask of the requirement in UC28 is enough?
10:52:05 <Thomas> kcoyle: are there other requirements - they can be added to the UC
10:52:19 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
10:52:25 <Caroline_> ack PWinstanley
10:52:53 <Thomas> PWinstanley: spatial and temporal - have a 'scaling'-property
10:53:07 <danbri> q+ to ask whether time series period/schedule is covered (e.g. IoT carbon monoxide sensor readings)
10:53:53 <Thomas> Maybe some 'superclass'-object for scaling?
10:54:59 <Thomas> Describe a reference system where the scaling info originates to
10:55:04 <Thomas> some ontology etc
10:55:32 <LarsG> q?
10:55:38 <kcoyle> q?
10:55:40 <LarsG> q+
10:55:49 <roba> UC1 is such even more general UC  in https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Cases_and_Requirements
10:55:59 <Thomas> dsr: what are we up to here?
10:56:35 <Thomas> describing conventions or validating consistency to a reference system
10:57:18 <danbri> q- in the interests of time
10:57:21 <Thomas> PWinstanley: do we need a place for this in DCAT? We shouldn't miss out on flexibility
10:57:21 <danbri> q-
10:57:41 <Keith> q+
10:57:44 <Thomas> PWinstanley: keep a future-proof architecture
10:58:29 <Thomas> dsr: do we need to check on integrity?
10:58:43 <Thomas> PWinstanley: yes, but we need a chunck to make that possible
10:58:54 <Thomas> kcoyle: can we make a use case for this?
10:59:07 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
10:59:08 <Thomas> PWinstanley: action: Peter W will do a use case for this
10:59:30 <Thomas> q?
10:59:33 <LarsG> q-
10:59:42 <annette_g> Present+ annette_g
11:00:23 <Philippe> Philippe has joined #dxwg
11:00:29 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Cases_and_Requirements#UC1_Consistent_use_of_summary_properties_and_extension_points_with_more_detailed_domain_specific_information_models
11:00:31 <Thomas> roba: general use case-attempt for that one
11:00:46 <Thomas> feel free to edit this one
11:00:55 <kcoyle> ack roba
11:00:57 <kcoyle> q?
11:01:28 <AndreaPerego> q+ to point also to UC14 and ID16
11:01:49 <Thomas> roba: job of just describing a reference is really not easy
11:02:04 <Thomas> a simple property defining the reference is just not enough
11:02:22 <Thomas> especially within spatial world
11:02:40 <AndreaPerego> s/to point also to UC14 and ID16/to point also to UC14 and UC16/
11:02:52 <Thomas> look at the spatial data on the web WG for that
11:02:58 <Thomas> not overspecify within DCAT
11:02:59 <kcoyle> ack Keith
11:03:23 <Thomas> Keith: don't forget astronomical and microscopical coordinate systems
11:03:53 <Thomas> AndreaPerego: in the UC there is a reference to the SDW-WG
11:04:11 <Thomas> review the work from there and follow the best practices might be an option
11:04:12 <kcoyle> ack AndreaPerego
11:04:12 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to point also to UC14 and ID16
11:04:47 <Thomas> AndreaPerego: related to UC14 and UC 16
11:05:21 <Thomas> kcoyle: let's stick with the spatial and temporal for the time being
11:05:26 <Thomas> objections for having these?
11:05:46 <kcoyle> PROPOSED: Accept ID28 and ID38
11:05:47 <AndreaPerego> Relevant SDWBP, linked from UC28: https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-bp/#bp-crs
11:06:06 <annette_g> +1
11:06:07 <Thomas> +1
11:06:09 <antoine> +1
11:06:10 <alejandra> +1
11:06:12 <LarsG> +1
11:06:12 <Caroline_> +1
11:06:13 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
11:06:14 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
11:06:14 <Philippe> +1
11:06:14 <DaveBrowning> +1
11:06:14 <roba> +1
11:06:14 <dsr> +1
11:06:15 <Ine_> +1
11:06:16 <kcoyle> +1
11:06:17 <Keith> +1
11:06:18 <AndreaPerego> +1
11:06:18 <PWinstanley> +1
11:06:21 <danbri> +1
11:06:27 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: Accept ID28 and ID38
11:06:58 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID14
11:06:59 <Thomas> kcoyle: data quality; UC14-15
11:07:12 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID15
11:07:36 <alejandra> ID14 is related to ID43
11:07:45 <dsr> I note that XBRL supports hypercubes as an abstract coordinate space for financial reporting data
11:07:54 <kcoyle> Q?
11:08:10 <Thomas> kcoyle: 14 about data quality and 15 about precision and accuracy
11:08:16 <Thomas> q?
11:08:18 <PWinstanley> q+
11:08:19 <AndreaPerego> alejandra, yep, it is.
11:08:28 <kcoyle> ack PWinstanley
11:08:33 <danbri> q+ to ask what "Provide patterns for " means here; e.g. is it showing some examples using other vocabs?
11:08:34 <Thomas> q+
11:08:46 <Thomas> PWinstanley: 15 is a subset of 14
11:08:58 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
11:09:00 <Thomas> And constraints on useability come into that
11:09:32 <dsr> q+
11:09:41 <Thomas> PWinstanley: What are the things that restricts the re-use of the data?
11:09:55 <Thomas> Partly the data-quality and partly the collection-process
11:11:05 <Thomas> Maybe we should use another pluggable container alike reference systems
11:11:31 <kcoyle> q?
11:12:09 <Thomas> PWinstanley: we shouldn't focus on the things that we directly see at hand
11:12:12 <kcoyle> ack danbri
11:12:12 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to ask what "Provide patterns for " means here; e.g. is it showing some examples using other vocabs?
11:12:12 <Thomas> all the time
11:12:55 <Thomas> danbri: should we provide examples of other vocabularies
11:13:42 <Thomas> AndreaPerego: what is missing was a recommendation to follow
11:13:48 <kcoyle> ack Thomas
11:14:24 <danbri> Thomas: what I saw in these 2 use cases is another case of using reference systems. We shouldn't make lots and lots of reference system classes, but have some common modelling structure.
11:14:45 <danbri> ... we shouldn't go further than that in defining DCAT. Anything going deeper is up to the profiles.
11:14:48 <kcoyle> q?
11:15:16 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
11:15:51 <Thomas> Jaroslav_Pullmann: in a commercial PoV, in order to express quality of service levels, we need that information also
11:16:10 <Thomas> Jaroslav_Pullmann: they ought to be valid use cases for us
11:16:23 <dsr> Can we enable profiles with annotations covering:
11:16:23 <dsr> * Where the estimates of precision/accuracy come from
11:16:24 <dsr> * When a data point has been interpolated (e.g. lost data, broken sensor)
11:16:25 <kcoyle> ack dsr
11:16:25 <dsr> * When a sensor is no longer trusted, despite what it says
11:16:34 <danbri> [ AndreaPerego - do you think the topic of modeling caveats would fit in these UCs? https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2017Jul/0041.html ]
11:17:15 <AndreaPerego> [ danbri, possibly, but need to look at it more closely ]
11:17:15 <danbri> q?
11:17:25 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
11:17:38 <Thomas> dsr: a question is how to enable profiles to allow the reason/connotation on data quality issues
11:17:47 <kcoyle> PROPOSED: Accept ID14 and ID15
11:17:51 <Thomas> broken sensors vs fawl data
11:17:56 <Thomas> +1
11:17:58 <alejandra> +!
11:17:59 <alejandra> +1
11:17:59 <annette_g> +1
11:17:59 <Caroline_> +1
11:17:59 <Philippe> +1
11:18:01 <antoine> +1
11:18:01 <LuizBonino> +1
11:18:02 <roba> +1
11:18:03 <dsr> +1
11:18:03 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
11:18:05 <Ine_> +1
11:18:05 <Keith> +1
11:18:07 <LarsG> +1
11:18:07 <DaveBrowning> +1
11:18:07 <danbri> +1
11:18:09 <newton> _1
11:18:11 <PWinstanley> +1
11:18:11 <newton> +1
11:18:13 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
11:18:21 <Caroline_> s/!/+1
11:18:39 <Caroline_> s/_1/+1
11:18:43 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: Accept ID14 and ID15
11:19:02 <Thomas> kcoyle: go to ID12 and then have lunch
11:19:32 <Thomas> kcoyle: ID12 - data lineage
11:19:44 <Thomas> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID12
11:20:12 <Thomas> kcoyle: we probably need a place to denote the source of the data
11:20:13 <Keith> does data lineage = provenance?
11:20:16 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
11:20:21 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
11:20:27 <Thomas> Is PROV an option?
11:20:40 <Thomas> Jaroslav_Pullmann: provenance is important
11:20:50 <Thomas> Textual of structured?
11:20:59 <kcoyle> q?
11:21:05 <Thomas> we need a structured, machine-readable way for this
11:21:07 <Thomas> q?
11:21:21 <AndreaPerego> Keith, indeed, there may be related (lineage / provenance), but it depends on the definition of provenance.
11:21:36 <AndreaPerego> Thomas, PROV is mentioned as an option in the UC.
11:21:43 <Keith> q+
11:21:47 <Thomas> alejandra: is'nt this too generic
11:21:49 <Thomas> thx, andrea
11:21:57 <AndreaPerego> q+
11:22:05 <Thomas> s/is'nt isn't
11:22:07 <kcoyle> ack Keith
11:22:30 <Caroline_> s/is'nt/isn't
11:22:34 <Thomas> Keith: vertical vs horizontical provenance including the relationship between those two
11:22:41 <Thomas> goes beyond PROV VOC
11:22:43 <Caroline_> s/s/is'nt isn't/
11:23:02 <kcoyle> ack AndreaPerego
11:23:07 <Thomas> AndreaPerego: comment on provenance lineage
11:23:16 <Thomas> sometimes 'who did the job'?
11:23:17 <alejandra> s/horizontical/horizontal
11:23:29 <dsr> Keith: the ability to reconstruct the state at a specified time
11:23:31 <PWinstanley> q+
11:24:15 <Thomas> you have provenance on the dataset-level and provenance on the agent roles, workload, ...
11:24:27 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
11:24:27 <kcoyle> ack PWinstanley
11:24:30 <Thomas> s/you AndreaPerego :/
11:24:56 <Thomas> PWinstanley: you have also instances where the data is being used etc
11:25:10 <Thomas> don't strictly belong to the provenance of the dataset
11:25:16 <AndreaPerego> Quoting from the DC definition of dct:provenance: "A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation."
11:25:57 <Thomas> kcoyle: we don't have anything that goes beyond the strict provenance
11:26:44 <Thomas> PWinstanley: when a dataset is used in different contexts, the meaning/nature of the dataset might change but the dataset itself isn't
11:27:07 <roba> q+
11:27:27 <Thomas> PWinstanley: we could have an 'event' and a 'transition' (transition = change; event = not changed)
11:27:40 <Thomas> all can adhere to 'provenance'
11:28:14 <Thomas> kcoyle: are we describing another requirement
11:28:24 <AndreaPerego> q+
11:28:25 <danbri_> danbri_ has joined #dxwg
11:28:46 <Thomas> PWinstanley: want to leave that to be decided
11:28:47 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
11:29:26 <Thomas> Jaroslav_Pullmann: UC 'funding sources' is another related aspect - that UC is linked to this one
11:29:36 <Thomas> also very strong related to versioning
11:29:55 <kcoyle> ack roba
11:30:03 <Thomas> ACTION: Jaroslav_Pullmann will link these
11:30:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-16 - Will link these [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2017-07-24].
11:30:54 <Thomas> roba: what is the goal for bringing extra properties into DCAT?
11:31:14 <kcoyle> ack AndreaPerego
11:32:26 <kcoyle> PROPOSED: Accept ID12
11:32:31 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
11:32:40 <Thomas> AndreaPerego: we should also take into account the goal to which the dataset should be used
11:32:51 <Thomas> (andrea: correct me if I'm wrong please)
11:33:17 <Thomas> Jaroslav_Pullmann: we should understand why provenance should be modeled
11:33:30 <Thomas> it isn't clear this time
11:33:47 <Thomas> kcoyle: that's what happens when we pull the requirements out of the use cases
11:33:49 <AndreaPerego> Thanks, Thomas. The 2 purposes I see are: data reproducibility and fitness for purpose.
11:34:01 <Thomas> thx
11:34:12 <Caroline_> +1
11:34:12 <roba> +1
11:34:15 <alejandra> +1
11:34:16 <newton> +1
11:34:17 <danbri_> +1
11:34:17 <LuizBonino> +1
11:34:17 <Thomas> +1
11:34:17 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
11:34:18 <LarsG> +1
11:34:19 <PWinstanley> +1
11:34:20 <DaveBrowning> +1
11:34:21 <dsr> +1
11:34:21 <Philippe> +1
11:34:22 <Ine_> +1
11:34:23 <annette_g> +1
11:34:36 <Keith> +1
11:34:49 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: Accept ID12
11:34:58 <Thomas> kcoyle: declares lunch
11:35:00 <antoine> +1
11:35:01 <Thomas> resume in one hour
11:35:05 <AndreaPerego> +!
11:35:12 <Thomas> s/! 1/
11:35:15 <AndreaPerego> s/+!/+1/
11:35:19 <roba> bye
11:35:22 <AndreaPerego> Bye.
11:36:44 <roba> have other commitments tomorrow eve - so will be joining later in your morning for a bit.
11:37:21 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
11:42:31 <Makx> Makx has joined #dxwg
11:47:00 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
12:26:38 <Makx> present+ Makx
12:29:44 <Makx> Where are we on the agenda?
12:30:32 <LarsG> LarsG has joined #dxwg
12:31:10 <Makx> OK so I just missed the whole item on Quality. Pity.
12:31:38 <dsr> dsr has joined #dxwg
12:33:25 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #dxwg
12:33:29 <danbri> danbri has joined #dxwg
12:34:12 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
12:35:13 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
12:35:32 <Caroline_> Caroline_ has joined #DXWG
12:35:37 <Caroline_> chair: Caroline_
12:37:10 <LuizBonino> LuizBonino has joined #dxwg
12:37:11 <Caroline_> Topic: Data Quality
12:37:14 <alejandra> Topic: data quality
12:37:23 <Caroline_> Use Case https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID16
12:37:24 <alejandra> ID16: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID16
12:38:27 <alejandra> is it a duplicate of ID43?
12:38:35 <AndreaPerego> q+
12:38:59 <dsr> (we break for lunch)
12:39:13 <dsr> q?
12:39:24 <Caroline_> ack antoine
12:39:37 <Caroline_> s/antoine/AndreaPerego
12:39:47 <dsr> ack Andr
12:39:49 <alejandra> antoine: wondering if Andrea was joking, there was a lot of discussion about this use case
12:39:52 <Caroline_> s/AndreaPerego/antoine
12:39:55 <Thomas> Thomas has joined #dxwg
12:39:56 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwg
12:39:59 <alejandra> ... in the DWBP WG
12:40:18 <alejandra> ... test wether a dataset complies with a given standard, one wants to record this
12:40:27 <alejandra> ... this was a use case in the data quality vocabulary
12:40:37 <alejandra> ... we ended up not being able to implement what Andrea wanted
12:41:12 <alejandra> ... should I reformulate the discussion or confirm that the use case it is still relevant?
12:41:24 <Caroline_> q?
12:41:25 <alejandra> Caroline_: do people think it is out of scope or relevant?
12:41:28 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
12:41:35 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
12:41:52 <LarsG> q+
12:41:53 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: expression of quality is hard to express or assess without reference to an evaluation criteria
12:41:54 <LuizBonino> q+
12:42:06 <alejandra> kcoyle: same as ID14
12:42:07 <Caroline_> q?
12:42:11 <Caroline_> ack LarsG
12:42:25 <alejandra> LarsG: same question about providing a hook in DCAT core to provide these things?
12:42:37 <alejandra> ... or is it outside of DCAT core?
12:42:47 <Caroline_> ack LuizBonino
12:42:51 <annette_g> Q+
12:43:06 <alejandra> LuizBonino: my understanding is about compliance with something (standard, quality parameter, etc)
12:43:15 <alejandra> ... then there will be a validator to check the compliance
12:43:23 <alejandra> ... compliance is context dependence
12:43:23 <danbri> q+ to note that lots of UCs have this structure - a reasonable usecase that may likely be beyond core and addressed by dcat + another vocab. Will we make a collection of the other vocabs?
12:43:24 <antoine> For the record here is the part about it in DQV, with a note about our resolution in DWBP: https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dqv/#ExpressConformanceWithStandard
12:43:27 <Caroline_> ack annette_g
12:43:31 <alejandra> annette_g:
12:43:43 <alejandra> annette_g: there is a lot of overlap with the data quality vocabulary
12:43:45 <AndreaPerego> Thanks, Antoine.
12:44:10 <kcoyle> q+
12:44:13 <Caroline_> ack danbri
12:44:13 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to note that lots of UCs have this structure - a reasonable usecase that may likely be beyond core and addressed by dcat + another vocab. Will we make a
12:44:14 <alejandra> ... maybe we need to discuss how to address that with DCAT and at this point, not how to deal with it
12:44:16 <Zakim> ... collection of the other vocabs?
12:44:19 <AndreaPerego> q+ to explain about the specificity of this UC
12:44:32 <Caroline_> q?
12:44:36 <alejandra> danbri: a lot of the UCs indicate that we can grow the DCAT core very quickly
12:44:53 <LuizBonino> q+
12:44:53 <alejandra> ... should we collect a list of useful extras?
12:44:56 <Makx> +q
12:45:02 <Caroline_> ack kcoyle
12:45:13 <Keith> can we get requirements from UCs and then decide what is core and what not?
12:45:27 <Makx> -q
12:45:55 <alejandra> kcoyle: we need a document advising about what fits in
12:46:05 <danbri> alejandra, ... sorry I meant to say the opposite. Rather that we keep getting UCs where we could make a small change to the core but not address the full usercase.
12:46:15 <alejandra> sorry!
12:46:19 <antoine> Also for the record, I could dig the issue about Andrea's suggestions: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/202
12:46:24 <Caroline_> ack AndreaPerego
12:46:24 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to explain about the specificity of this UC
12:46:28 <dsr> The charter makes provision for work on  a primer
12:46:40 <kcoyle> q+
12:46:41 <danbri> ... and that we don't have a repeatable answer, such as "we'll add this to our 'useful multi-vocabularies cookbook' page/document"
12:47:00 <PWinstanley> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public.../att.../DCAT-APimplementationguide.pdf
12:47:04 <alejandra> AndreaPerego: this UC is not included in data quality 1 because we came across when using DCAT for spatial metadata
12:47:36 <alejandra> ... you should be able to express conformity and non-conformity
12:47:43 <alejandra> ... important for discovery purposes
12:47:58 <alejandra> ... what are the data that needs to be modified to be conformant
12:48:15 <alejandra> ... general UC wasn't explaining these specific issues
12:48:47 <PWinstanley> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dwbp-wg/2015Jul/att-0010/DCAT-APimplementationguide.pdf
12:48:50 <alejandra> ... we identified this in the implementation of DCAT
12:48:58 <alejandra> ... in some cases, we found a solution, not in others
12:49:08 <alejandra> ... 90% of these use cases are meta-UCs
12:49:17 <alejandra> ... use of DCAT for supporting cross-domain interoperability
12:49:24 <alejandra> ... there is always a reference to other standards
12:49:36 <alejandra> ... we want to support interoperability across metadata standards
12:49:50 <alejandra> ... we had to address this problem on how data standards are modeling things
12:49:58 <Caroline_> ack LuizBonino
12:50:17 <alejandra> LuizBonino: the majority of the use cases we discussed seem suitable for extensions around datasets
12:50:27 <alejandra> ... other parts may interfere on the structure of DCAT as it is now
12:50:49 <alejandra> ... if you have an approach for versioning, you have a version and a distribution, the distribution should not be attached to the dataset anymore but to the version
12:50:49 <Makx> @PWinstanley https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat-ap_implementation_guidelines/description are based on actual problems brought forward by implementers.
12:51:18 <Caroline_> ack kcoyle
12:51:24 <alejandra> ... we need to define the profile description method to define how people are going to use this
12:51:42 <alejandra> kcoyle: I edited some UCs related to this
12:51:57 <alejandra> ... e.g. in ID42
12:52:02 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
12:52:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
12:52:10 <alejandra> ... this is about the dataset itself and not about the data itself
12:52:22 <Caroline_> q?
12:52:26 <alejandra> ... I don't know if it needs to be brought to the level of DCAT
12:52:41 <alejandra> LuizBonino: we have the dataset and the distribution, and we have the metadata about the semantics
12:53:14 <alejandra> ... each distribution matches to the generic concept
12:54:07 <alejandra> ... the constraints on what you have to provide is what I would consider a profile
12:54:22 <alejandra> kcoyle: a picture would be good
12:54:30 <Caroline_> q?
12:56:33 <alejandra> PROPOSAL: accept ID16
12:56:43 <annette_g> +1
12:56:44 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
12:56:46 <antoine> +1
12:56:46 <newton> +1
12:56:46 <Caroline_> +1
12:56:48 <Ine_> +1
12:56:48 <Makx> +1
12:56:50 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
12:56:53 <PWinstanley> +1
12:56:57 <danbri> +1
12:56:58 <LarsG> +1
12:57:06 <Caroline_> +1
12:57:09 <Keith> +1
12:57:10 <DaveBrowning> +1
12:57:17 <dsr> +1 - yes to in scope as a use case
12:57:24 <antoine> I agree it is very similar to 43
12:57:25 <alejandra> is this overlapping with ID43?
12:57:32 <alejandra> +1
12:57:50 <Makx> @antoine French headphone level limit?
12:57:51 <annette_g> Overlap is okay, no?
12:58:02 <AndreaPerego> Yes
12:58:15 <Thomas> +1
12:58:22 <alejandra> LuizBonino: explaining diagram
13:00:05 <alejandra> diagram here also useful: https://www.w3.org/TR/hcls-dataset/
13:00:49 <danbri> see https://twitter.com/danbri/status/886933651178573824
13:00:58 <Makx> can't you share a screen on Webex?
13:01:39 <alejandra> LuizBonino: dataset can extended with any profile
13:01:54 <alejandra> ... distinction between dataset, version/release, distribution
13:01:54 <Makx> q+
13:02:09 <Caroline_> ack Makx
13:02:39 <alejandra> Makx: this is a substantial model change to DCAT
13:02:50 <alejandra> kcoyle: this is LuizBonino's current model
13:02:58 <alejandra> ... it doesn't mean that we will follow this model
13:03:09 <alejandra> Makx: we need to be very careful in making substantial model changes
13:03:12 <Caroline_> q?
13:03:19 <alejandra> ... as it can break current implementations
13:03:24 <riccardoAlbertoni> q+
13:03:29 <AndreaPerego> +1 to Makx
13:03:36 <alejandra> RESOLVED: accepted ID 16
13:03:45 <antoine> +1
13:04:05 <Caroline_> q?
13:04:06 <alejandra> Caroline_: now discussing ID23: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID23
13:04:11 <Caroline_> ack riccardoAlbertoni
13:04:34 <alejandra> riccardoAlbertoni: I'll give some context to this UC that we collected from the DQV
13:04:55 <alejandra> ... Antoine, other people and I contributed
13:05:10 <alejandra> ... meta-use case, data quality is very important for any reuse of data
13:05:20 <alejandra> ... data collected in the past is considered also in this group
13:05:38 <alejandra> ... it seems that there is some overlap in the use cases that Andrea proposed
13:05:51 <alejandra> ... even though from a different perspective
13:07:03 <alejandra> ... some concrete case studies, how to identify integrity constraints (e.g.)
13:07:30 <alejandra> ... depending on how far we want to go in data quality within DCAT, there is some DQV housekeeping
13:07:38 <alejandra> ... DQV was released last December
13:07:57 <alejandra> ... it would be great for us to have the possibility to make small changes
13:08:01 <Caroline_> q?
13:08:39 <alejandra> antoine: general question on what should be the position of the DQV WG in terms of the core and profiles for DCAT
13:08:44 <Makx> q+
13:08:53 <alejandra> riccardoAlbertoni: it is quite difficult to define how far we have to go in data quality
13:09:03 <antoine> s/DQV WG/DQV
13:09:13 <alejandra> ... this discussion should consider the UCs presented by AndreaPerego
13:09:24 <Caroline_> ack Makx
13:09:52 <alejandra> Makx: two comments on DQV
13:10:06 <alejandra> ... it makes sense to use UCs as a good point to see how DQV can be attached to DCAT
13:10:27 <alejandra> ... the one that danbri came up in the last couple of days w.r.t caveats on statistical data
13:10:35 <danbri> Caveats discussion: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2017Jul/0041.html (caveat/footnotes even at data item level)
13:10:42 <alejandra> ... I've got a use case I forgot to put it
13:10:56 <danbri> statDCAT AP, https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/node/147940
13:10:59 <alejandra> ... people have included annotations of DQV to datasets
13:11:07 <alejandra> ... I will write that UC
13:11:16 <alejandra> ... and danbri can write the other UC
13:11:29 <alejandra> Caroline_: yes, please write more use cases
13:11:43 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
13:11:50 <AndreaPerego> Just to note that another case for the use of DQV in DCAT is UC15, where DQV is indicated in the existing approaches, and mentioned also in SDWBP: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID15
13:11:57 <Caroline_> q?
13:12:02 <danbri> action: danbri write UC for data-item level caveat annotations
13:12:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-17 - Write uc for data-item level caveat annotations [on Dan Brickley - due 2017-07-24].
13:12:28 <alejandra> PROPOSAL: accept ID23 (https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID23)
13:12:30 <Thomas> +1
13:12:38 <AndreaPerego> +!
13:12:38 <danbri> +1
13:12:40 <LuizBonino> +1
13:12:41 <newton> +1
13:12:44 <alejandra> +1
13:12:45 <DaveBrowning> +1
13:12:48 <AndreaPerego> s/+!/+1/
13:12:49 <annette_g> +1
13:12:52 <PWinstanley> +1
13:12:52 <Makx> will you give me an action for DQV annotiation?
13:12:58 <antoine> +1
13:12:59 <Caroline_> +1
13:12:59 <Ine_> +1
13:13:02 <alejandra> kcoyle: there will be a need to tease out lots of requirements
13:13:09 <dsr> +1
13:13:13 <LarsG> +1
13:13:29 <Keith> +1
13:13:33 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
13:13:36 <alejandra> ACTION: Makx to create a UC for DQV annotation
13:13:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-18 - Create a uc for dqv annotation [on Makx Dekkers - due 2017-07-24].
13:14:03 <alejandra> RESOLVED: accepted ID23
13:14:27 <Caroline_> q?
13:14:29 <alejandra> Next UC ID19: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID19
13:15:04 <alejandra> AndreaPerego: this is a general or meta UC
13:15:17 <alejandra> ... modelling different types of information
13:15:40 <alejandra> ... e.g. input data
13:15:56 <alejandra> ... property linking a dataset with the publisher and the author
13:16:08 <alejandra> ... you may need to attach to these relationships some additional information
13:16:15 <alejandra> ... such as the temporal context
13:17:44 <alejandra> ... general use case where we need some guidance on how to provide this information
13:17:59 <alejandra> ... it can be applied for any type of information to be attached to a relationship
13:18:31 <Caroline_> q?
13:18:37 <kcoyle> q+
13:18:40 <Caroline_> ack kcoyle
13:19:08 <alejandra> kcoyle: in our UCs we have mixed up UCs about the dataset and the data in the dataset
13:19:15 <alejandra> ... we need to tease those apart
13:19:24 <alejandra> ... as we may want to address them differently
13:19:47 <alejandra> ... there may be statements that we may want to make about the data / data semantics
13:19:59 <Caroline_> q?
13:20:01 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
13:20:04 <alejandra> ... we haven't made that distinction in the discussion
13:20:30 <alejandra> AndreaPerego: when we talk about dataset and when we talk about the data itself
13:20:42 <alejandra> ... do we have this in DCAT already? DataRecord and Dataset
13:20:55 <AndreaPerego> s/DataRecord/CatalogRecord/
13:21:09 <alejandra> kcoyle:
13:21:20 <LuizBonino_> LuizBonino_ has joined #dxwg
13:21:28 <alejandra> kcoyle: are we ok in mixing those or do we need to keep them separately?
13:21:47 <alejandra> ... if we need to say something about quality, we need to say quality about what
13:22:05 <alejandra> AndreaPerego: we had these discussions in the DQV and we concluded that in most cases we are talking about data
13:22:14 <alejandra> ... we can use the same approach in data or metadata
13:22:24 <alejandra> ... this is a topic that may need further discussion
13:22:27 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:22:47 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
13:22:56 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: I didn't make this difference
13:23:03 <alejandra> ... dataset is about whatever data is behind
13:23:12 <alejandra> ... I think this is related to what Rob was proposing
13:23:13 <annette_g> q+
13:23:30 <alejandra> ... atomic properties and specific descriptions
13:23:52 <alejandra> ... I think this is a general approach of modelling
13:24:13 <alejandra> ... atomic properties and complex descriptions, which the UC says qualified descriptions
13:24:23 <alejandra> ... what does it mean qualified form?
13:24:30 <alejandra> AndreaPerego: this is from PROV-O
13:25:12 <alejandra> ... different ways of representing the same information: the core, the extended and, the qualified
13:25:22 <alejandra> ... reified representation of a relationship
13:25:33 <alejandra> ... where you can attach additional information to a relationship
13:25:45 <AndreaPerego> PROV properties with qualified forms: https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#inverse-names-table
13:26:20 <alejandra> ... e.g. prov:qualifiedAssociation
13:26:47 <alejandra> ... I don't know if there is a better term, but the idea is to have another relationship to add more information
13:27:01 <alejandra> ... bridge between the dataset and the source data
13:27:16 <alejandra> ... where you can attached more information on when the data was processed and so on
13:27:31 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: simple atomic properties and qualified properties
13:27:31 <Caroline_> q?
13:27:42 <alejandra> ... is there a concrete suggestion on when this patterns applies?
13:27:52 <alejandra> ... e.g. for quality, accuracy
13:28:05 <alejandra> ... how would you restrict the application of this pattern?
13:28:16 <annette_g> Q-
13:28:26 <alejandra> AndreaPerego: personally I would stick to what we define as concrete requirements
13:28:40 <alejandra> ... I would rely on what the community used in DCAT to identify what is relevant
13:29:26 <alejandra> ... the point is to have concrete use cases where people want to specify concrete information and either they can't do it or they do it differently every time
13:29:39 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: would this be an extensibility pattern for DCAT?
13:30:05 <alejandra> AndreaPerego: yes, I think so - but you cannot be sure if the proposal is universally applicable
13:30:12 <alejandra> ... unless you collect use cases
13:30:32 <Caroline_> q?
13:31:01 <alejandra> PROPOSAL: accept ID19 as relevant use case https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID19
13:31:09 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
13:31:11 <Caroline_> +1
13:31:14 <Philippe> +1
13:31:15 <danbri> +1
13:31:17 <Thomas> +1
13:31:18 <Ine_> +1
13:31:19 <Keith> +1
13:31:19 <dsr> +1
13:31:19 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
13:31:19 <DaveBrowning> +1
13:31:19 <newton> +1
13:31:20 <alejandra> +1
13:31:21 <annette_g> +1
13:31:25 <LarsG> +1
13:31:25 <PWinstanley> +1
13:31:56 <LuizBonino> +1
13:31:59 <alejandra> RESOLVED: ID19 accepted
13:31:59 <antoine> +1
13:32:15 <Caroline_> Topic: DCAT general
13:32:52 <alejandra> Next UC: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID26
13:32:57 <alejandra> ID26
13:33:23 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:33:38 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: this is a meta UC
13:34:06 <alejandra> ... I consider DCAT as a core where one would attach properties with specific standards/vocabularies
13:34:06 <Caroline_> q?
13:34:18 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
13:34:33 <Thomas> UTC :-)
13:34:55 <kcoyle> q+
13:35:00 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: identify what are the specific aspects that need an extension
13:35:05 <Caroline_> ack kcoyle
13:35:07 <alejandra> ... and identify a property for each of them
13:35:33 <alejandra> kcoyle: are you anticipating that there will be particular vocabularies that DCAT needs to consider?
13:35:41 <danbri> q+ to suggest UC bakes in a specific kind of solution
13:35:57 <alejandra> kcoyle: how open should we be?
13:36:11 <alejandra> ... should we decide for each element whether there are recommended vocabularies?
13:36:24 <Makx> +q
13:36:31 <LarsG> q+
13:36:32 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: what should happen is an analysis of what is there
13:36:45 <alejandra> ... and have simple properties for describing simple stuff
13:36:46 <Caroline_> q?
13:36:53 <alejandra> ... and attach further descriptions
13:37:08 <Caroline_> ack danbri
13:37:08 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to suggest UC bakes in a specific kind of solution
13:37:20 <alejandra> danbri: I like the general intent
13:37:34 <alejandra> ... the current formulation of the UC assumes a specific technical approach
13:37:51 <alejandra> ... LuizBonino diagram includes a release structure
13:38:10 <alejandra> ... Makx's pointed out on being careful on changing the structure
13:38:22 <alejandra> ... maybe it would be good to rephrase not to consider specific implementation
13:38:38 <alejandra> ... we shouldn't assume that a specific property is the solution
13:38:38 <Caroline_> ack Makx
13:38:40 <danbri> q?
13:39:02 <alejandra> Makx: I have difficulties understanding how this would work
13:39:22 <alejandra> ... danbri indicates that we shouldn't mention properties, but in an RDF world we need to speak about properties
13:39:35 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
13:39:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
13:39:38 <alejandra> ... these 6 bullet points seem to imply that there are separate properties for separate extensions
13:39:46 <alejandra> ... but we already have a potential provenance one
13:40:00 <alejandra> ... we already have specific ones for temporal and spatial coverage
13:40:03 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
13:40:30 <danbri> Makx, my point was that in some extreme/complex important cases the WG might actually restructure DCAT's overall pattern with new types (e.g. Release/Version as in Luiz's diagram)
13:40:30 <alejandra> ... I'm not quite sure on what the proposal is
13:40:38 <alejandra> ... if a catch-all approach
13:40:44 <alejandra> ... with loose semantics
13:40:52 <alejandra> ... or identifying what extensions are needed
13:41:01 <alejandra> ... I prefer the latter
13:41:05 <Caroline_> ack LarsG
13:41:23 <alejandra> LarsG: I'm pro having extension points in DCAT, I don't think we should mandate which vocabularies to use
13:41:31 <Makx> +q
13:41:38 <alejandra> ... here you can put provenance, you may want to use PROV
13:41:42 <annette_g> Q+
13:41:58 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:42:09 <alejandra> ... but we shouldn't say 'you must use PROV', as this is getting into the area of profiles
13:42:27 <alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann: benefit of this use case is to identify the important aspects that should not be forgotten
13:42:39 <alejandra> q+
13:43:01 <antoine> q+
13:43:21 <alejandra> ... there should be a dedicated property that relates to whatever specification of this aspect
13:43:26 <Caroline_> ack Makx
13:43:30 <alejandra> Makx: I wanted to react to what LarsG was saying
13:43:44 <alejandra> ... we are absolutely not in a position to recommend vocabularies
13:44:06 <alejandra> ... we can only provide a property where people can put whatever they think it is relevant
13:44:08 <Caroline_> ack annette_g
13:44:23 <alejandra> annette_g: I agree with LarsG, it would be the role of a profile to define what extensions to use
13:44:40 <alejandra> ... we can say in a profile 'we will use PROV-O'
13:44:43 <alejandra> ... but not in the core
13:45:13 <riccardoAlbertoni> +q
13:45:17 <alejandra> kcoyle: we can provide guidance
13:45:28 <AndreaPerego> s/Topic: Data Quality/scribe: alejandra/
13:45:30 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
13:45:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
13:45:31 <riccardoAlbertoni> -q
13:45:34 <Caroline_> ack alejandra
13:45:57 <LarsG> alejandra: for each element listed in the UC there are specific use cases
13:45:57 <Caroline_> alejandra: there are other use cases that are not specific
13:46:08 <Caroline_> s/alejandra: there are other use cases that are not specific/
13:46:35 <LarsG> ... there are areas that might not be relevant for DCAT but for profiles
13:46:52 <Caroline_> q?
13:46:59 <LarsG> Jaroslav_Pullmann: it's about grouping the other UCs
13:47:11 <LarsG> ... we have extension points where we can hook that in
13:47:21 <alejandra> so, this UC is for grouping the other UCs
13:47:23 <AndreaPerego> s/scribe: alejandra/scribenick: alejandra/
13:47:25 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
13:47:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
13:47:31 <Caroline_> scribe: LarsG
13:47:35 <LarsG> Thomas: It would be useful for clients to know how to handle that
13:47:43 <Caroline_> ack antoine
13:47:56 <LarsG> antoine: wants to continue on alejandra 's point
13:48:11 <LarsG> ... UCs are not very specific, but more meta
13:48:38 <LarsG> ... every property in DCAT can be seen as an extension point
13:48:40 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:48:56 <LarsG> Jaroslav_Pullmann: it wasn't ment to be implemented in the model
13:48:59 <Makx> good point Antoine
13:49:04 <antoine> q+
13:49:11 <LarsG> ... more a hint that we need to consider this in the model
13:49:14 <AndreaPerego> s/ment to/meant to/
13:49:32 <LarsG> ... it's a meta use case listing what I think is important
13:49:39 <Caroline_> ack antoine
13:49:55 <LarsG> antoine: so it's more like a design principle
13:50:08 <Makx> +q
13:50:14 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:50:19 <LarsG> ... "if I want to extend DCAT this is what I should consider"
13:50:49 <LarsG> Jaroslav_Pullmann: if we agree on accepting this UC, Jaroslav_Pullmann would have a task
13:50:51 <antoine> q+
13:50:53 <Caroline_> ack Makx
13:50:55 <LarsG> ... to think about this
13:51:31 <LarsG> Makx: when we worked on the European profile this is exactly what we did (describing extension points)
13:51:53 <LarsG> ... if there is a large group of people that want the same thing, we could go back to DCAT and add it
13:52:29 <LarsG> ... so the six bullet points in the UC, there might be 200, but in the end we need to figure
13:52:41 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
13:52:50 <Caroline_> ack antoine
13:52:50 <LarsG> ... out which ones we want: what goes into DCAT core and what is profile
13:53:07 <LarsG> antoine: agrees with Makx, would be in favour of accepting the UC
13:53:19 <LarsG> ... suggests that Jaroslav_Pullmann focuses on the meta aspect
13:53:33 <LarsG> ... should phrase it as a methodological point
13:53:50 <Makx> +100 to antoine
13:53:53 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:53:54 <LarsG> ... "if you have own needs, we have a methodology for creating profiles"
13:54:17 <LarsG> Jaroslav_Pullmann: The UC was a first shot. Compared to the ISO standards there is an aspect
13:54:26 <LarsG> ... of maintenance that isn't covered in DCAT
13:54:49 <LarsG> ... DCAT needs a reference to that
13:55:06 <LarsG> ... those are aspects that are usually covered by specific vocabularies
13:55:38 <LarsG> PROPOSED: Accept ID26
13:55:44 <Makx> +1
13:55:45 <antoine> +1
13:55:47 <annette_g> +1
13:55:49 <AndreaPerego> +1
13:55:53 <antoine> with editing!
13:55:54 <PWinstanley> +1
13:55:57 <LuizBonino> +1
13:56:02 <Ine_> +1
13:56:04 <PWinstanley> with editing
13:56:08 <Thomas> +1
13:56:11 <LarsG> PROPOSED: Accept ID26 with editing by Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:56:11 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
13:56:13 <dsr> +1 subject to editing the text
13:56:14 <Caroline_> +1 with editing
13:56:15 <annette_g> W/e
13:56:17 <newton> +1
13:56:19 <Keith> q+
13:56:24 <DaveBrowning> +1
13:56:32 <Caroline_> ack Keith
13:56:34 <danbri> Jaroslav_Pullman, suggested edit: "extension points (properties) " -> "extension points (typically properties)"
13:56:36 <danbri> +1
13:57:10 <AndreaPerego> s/scribe: LarsG/scribenick: LarsG/
13:57:13 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
13:57:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
13:57:29 <dsr> q?
13:57:30 <LarsG> ACTION: Jaroslav_Pullmann to edit ID26
13:57:33 <trackbot> Created ACTION-19 - Edit id26 [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2017-07-24].
13:58:09 <LarsG> [discussion about how to get from Use Cases to Requirements...]
13:58:34 <Caroline_> q?
13:58:48 <LarsG> RESOLVED: Accept ID26 with editing by Jaroslav_Pullmann
13:59:18 <Caroline_> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID33
13:59:20 <Caroline_> ack alejandra
13:59:46 <LarsG> alejandra: we need a way to provide an overview of data
13:59:49 <kcoyle> q+
13:59:53 <Caroline_> ack kcoyle
13:59:56 <LarsG> ... could be statistics
14:00:08 <LarsG> .. and might go into a profile
14:00:12 <Ixchel> Ixchel has joined #dxwg
14:00:27 <danbri> https://www.w3.org/TR/hcls-dataset/#s6_6 (mentioned by alejandra) seems to use VoID for rdf triple stats
14:00:29 <LarsG> kcoyle: danbri said that search engines are better at text than at numbers
14:00:44 <alejandra> +q
14:00:56 <LarsG> ... so like an abstract in a paper, an overview could improve discovery
14:01:00 <LarsG> ... can DCAT help there
14:01:05 <Caroline_> ack alejandra
14:01:17 <danbri> (text and also entities that can be found via textual queries, rather than raw decontextualized numbers)
14:01:26 <LarsG> alejandra: it's more than just a description, but telling potential users of how much data to expect
14:01:32 <LarsG> ... ten patients or 1000
14:01:47 <LarsG> ... also how many triples etc
14:01:53 <Makx> +q
14:02:01 <LarsG> ... but hard to generalise so might go into a profile
14:02:12 <LarsG> PWinstanley: so it won't be text
14:02:29 <LarsG> kcoyle: if it's not in a particular format, is it for dieplay?
14:02:40 <LarsG> LuizBonino: it might be for validation
14:02:57 <LarsG> ... if you use a profile you want to check
14:03:11 <Caroline_> s/dieplay/display
14:03:16 <antoine> q+
14:03:26 <LarsG> ... in the profile you need to attach the vocabulary that describes how many patients
14:03:46 <Caroline_> ack Makx
14:03:52 <LarsG> ... and then you can validate: does the metadata contain this statistical information?
14:04:36 <LarsG> Makx: we tried some of that. DCAT only has byteSize (not clear to everybody). When you start talking about how many things are in your DS, there are many
14:04:56 <LarsG> ... different ways to define that and that is specific to the use of the DC
14:05:02 <LarsG> s/DC/DS/
14:05:30 <LarsG> ... so this is community-specific and can hardly be generalised => profile
14:05:31 <Caroline_> ack antoine
14:05:44 <alejandra> I agree Makx - maybe to consider for AP guidelines
14:05:48 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
14:05:59 <antoine> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/164
14:06:04 <antoine> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/189
14:06:05 <LarsG> antoine: sends around a cople of pointers from the data quality work.
14:06:14 <LarsG> ... there statistical information was very important
14:06:33 <LarsG> ... they point to initiatives about statistics that were considered relevant
14:06:37 <riccardoAlbertoni> riccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwg
14:06:49 <LarsG> ... agrees with Makx that counting is very difficult
14:06:50 <antoine> https://www.w3.org/TR/void/#statistics
14:06:53 <riccardoAlbertoni> present+
14:07:16 <alejandra> +q
14:07:23 <LarsG> ... void has somie counting properties, and even if we don't incorporate
14:07:28 <Caroline_> ack alejandra
14:07:41 <LarsG> ... void into DCAT there are similarities that might satisfy this DCAT
14:07:59 <LarsG> alejandra: void is specific to RDF so could be more a guidance
14:08:06 <antoine> q+
14:08:19 <PWinstanley> q+
14:08:29 <LarsG> ... but this UC could be about a generic pattern how to count things
14:08:51 <Caroline_> ack antoine
14:08:55 <LarsG> Thomas: if you leave semantics behind you can count anything, so we need to stay within the domain
14:09:17 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:09:35 <danbri> q+ to report a bioschemas discussion on "Data record" structures that relates
14:09:41 <Caroline_> ack PWinstanley
14:09:42 <LarsG> antoine: we should at least be able to say why we didn't look at these issues
14:10:25 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:10:34 <LarsG> PWinstanley: if we were to put the summary as an XMLLiteral the search engines could pick that up and leave a hook for people to provide structured data
14:11:07 <danbri> q?
14:11:20 <LarsG> Jaroslav_Pullmann: usually it's important to provide the range of a property to give hints: Do we plan to do that in our ontologies?
14:11:40 <kcoyle> q+
14:11:42 <LarsG> PWinstanley: we're not obliged to, it's an additional layer of modelling
14:11:55 <Caroline_> ack danbri
14:11:55 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to report a bioschemas discussion on "Data record" structures that relates
14:11:56 <LarsG> Jaroslav_Pullmann: but that's an important part of modelling
14:12:44 <LarsG> danbri: It depends on how static your ontology is. schema keeps changing so they are very conservative with domains and ranges
14:13:12 <Caroline_> ack kcoyle
14:13:23 <danbri> http://bioschemas.org/
14:13:34 <LarsG> ... Bioschemas do much typing (rows/columns) and it would be good if DXWG do the same
14:14:06 <LarsG> kcoyle: domains and ranges could be part of a profile, not necessarily DCAT
14:14:23 <danbri> ... we saw value in having a DataRecord view into contents of a datset, but even a simple multi-table dataset has two obvious representations as a set of records (1. entities 2. table rows). Either or both may be useful.
14:14:26 <Caroline_> q?
14:14:29 <LarsG> ... profiles can not only add new elements but also add constraints to existing ones
14:15:38 <LarsG> alejandra: much of it could be put into a profile
14:15:59 <LarsG> ... healthcare data is important because it's often not freely available
14:16:50 <LarsG> PROPOSED: Accept ID33
14:16:56 <alejandra> +1
14:16:57 <annette_g> +1
14:16:59 <Caroline_> +1
14:17:00 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
14:17:01 <LuizBonino> +1
14:17:02 <dsr> +1
14:17:02 <danbri> +1
14:17:02 <PWinstanley> +1
14:17:02 <antoine> +1
14:17:02 <LarsG> +1
14:17:04 <Ine_> +1
14:17:07 <newton> +1
14:17:09 <DaveBrowning> +1
14:17:12 <Thomas> +1; curious about the requirement here
14:17:23 <LarsG> RESOLVED: Accept ID33
14:17:27 <Keith> +1
14:17:41 <Makx> +1
14:17:53 <LarsG> next: UC35
14:18:10 <Caroline_> ack Makx
14:18:20 <Caroline_> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID35
14:19:04 <LarsG> Makx: we have had this discussion before: There is a dataset and a description of it but no designated catalogue (or no catalogue at all)
14:19:18 <LarsG> ... like people creating datasets of their own.
14:19:21 <alejandra> +q
14:19:22 <Caroline_> q?
14:19:25 <danbri> q+ to suggest RDF vocabs don't do 'mandatory'
14:19:26 <Keith> q+
14:19:27 <LuizBonino> q+
14:19:30 <Caroline_> ack alejandra
14:19:40 <antoine> q+
14:19:43 <LarsG> ... Is DCAT the data _catalogue_ or about datasets, too
14:19:46 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
14:19:47 <Caroline_> ack danbri
14:19:49 <Zakim> danbri, you wanted to suggest RDF vocabs don't do 'mandatory'
14:20:21 <LarsG> ... you could use DCAT to describe a dataset before it's made part of a catalogue
14:20:43 <LarsG> danbri: doesn't see a big problem. Vocabularies just provide useful terms
14:20:56 <Caroline_> ack Keith
14:21:02 <LarsG> ... can provide some statistics from google
14:21:31 <Caroline_> ack LuizBonino
14:21:31 <LarsG> Keith: catalogues are create by manual creation or by harvesting from other catalogues, so it's not a proble
14:21:52 <LarsG> LuizBonino: the focus of DCAT is the dataset and not the catalogue
14:22:16 <Thomas> q+
14:22:17 <antoine> q-
14:22:26 <LarsG> ... the model isn't clear, though. It should be possible to have datasets without a catalogue, so we need to fix the cardinality
14:22:28 <Caroline_> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
14:23:07 <Caroline_> ack Thomas
14:23:39 <LarsG> Jaroslav_Pullmann: one issue could be that the concepts/topics are part of the catalogue and would be lost for datasets without it
14:24:12 <alejandra> dcat:Dataset definition: A collection of data, published or curated by a single agent, and available for access or download in one or more formats.
14:24:19 <Keith> and of course the catalogs are themselves all datasets
14:24:25 <alejandra> doesn't mention catalogue
14:24:46 <AndreaPerego> First sentence from DCAT does: "DCAT is an RDF vocabulary designed to facilitate interoperability between data catalogs published on the Web."
14:24:47 <LarsG> PROPOSED: Accept ID35
14:24:50 <LuizBonino> +1
14:24:53 <newton> +1
14:24:53 <Thomas> +1
14:24:56 <Ine_> +1
14:24:56 <AndreaPerego> +1
14:24:56 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
14:24:56 <Keith> +1
14:24:57 <LarsG> +1
14:24:57 <Caroline_> +1
14:24:58 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
14:24:58 <PWinstanley> +1
14:24:58 <Makx> +1
14:24:58 <Philippe> +1
14:24:58 <alejandra> +1
14:24:58 <dsr> +1
14:25:01 <antoine> +1
14:25:01 <danbri> Interesting - https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#class-dataset is quite restrictive. Whereas https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#introduction is quite general about data.
14:25:02 <danbri> +1
14:25:05 <annette_g> +0
14:25:13 <DaveBrowning> +1
14:25:36 <Makx> Section 1 is non-noramtive
14:27:27 <LarsG> kcoyle: Yes, since it's called IFLA-LRM now ;-)
14:27:45 <danbri> What does "published or curated by a single agent" mean? If two people publish something together must we treat them as an Organization to meet this semantic?
14:27:53 <LarsG> s/kcoyle: Yes, since it's called IFLA-LRM now ;-)//
14:28:22 <LarsG> RESOLVED: Accept ID35
14:28:23 <Thomas> I agree, Lars
14:29:14 <Makx> OK
14:29:22 <LarsG> Caroline_: we're discussing more than the chairs had planned
14:29:44 <antoine> q+
14:29:55 <LarsG> LuizBonino: What with the people who participate remotely in specific timeslots?
14:30:32 <Caroline_> ack antoine
14:30:52 <LarsG> kcoyle: it's specifically about profile negotiation wher Ruben wanted to call in, but LarsG s here to cover that
14:31:26 <LarsG> antoine: would want to have ID37 moved up since he can only join until 3pm
14:31:47 <LarsG> Coffee break until 4pm
14:31:59 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
14:31:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
14:32:25 <AndreaPerego> ^^ 5PM CEST
14:32:30 <Makx> when will you be back from breack
14:32:38 <LarsG> in 30 minutes
14:32:54 <AndreaPerego> scribe: alejandra
14:32:58 <AndreaPerego> scribe: LarsG
14:33:03 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
14:33:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
14:36:47 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
14:39:23 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
14:48:16 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
14:51:45 <LarsG> LarsG has joined #dxwg
14:52:42 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
15:01:54 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
15:04:10 <Caroline> Caroline has joined #DXWG
15:04:46 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
15:04:49 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #dxwg
15:04:53 <Caroline> Present+
15:04:57 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
15:04:59 <kcoyle> present+
15:05:18 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwg
15:05:26 <antoine> present+
15:07:23 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Topic: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID40
15:07:31 <annette_g> Present+ annette_g
15:07:37 <Caroline> scribe: Jaroslav_Pullmann
15:07:44 <Caroline> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID40
15:07:46 <AndreaPerego> scribenick: Jaroslav_Pullmann
15:07:56 <riccardoAlbertoni> present +
15:08:06 <riccardoAlbertoni> present+
15:08:42 <Caroline> reading the use case ID40
15:10:19 <Caroline> q?
15:10:25 <kcoyle> q+
15:10:33 <Caroline> ack kcoyle
15:10:48 <Keith> q+
15:10:53 <PWinstanley> PWinstanley has joined #dxwg
15:11:05 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> kcoyle: what part of dcat should be aligned with Schema.org?
15:12:01 <AndreaPerego> kcoyle, I made a comment on this topic here http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2017Jul/0052.html
15:12:12 <danbri> danbri has joined #dxwg
15:12:19 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
15:12:27 <Makx> q+
15:13:03 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> danbri: summarizing about the evolution approach of Schema.org
15:13:59 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> kcoyle: the question remains - how do we get both aligned (via sameAs etc.)?
15:14:17 <Makx> can we please respect speaker queue?
15:15:08 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> kcoyle: all the properties are in dcat/dct namespace ..
15:15:09 <Caroline> kcoyle was on her turn :)
15:15:14 <Caroline> ack Keith
15:15:59 <danbri> view-source:http://schema.org/Dataset
15:16:07 <danbri>   <link property="owl:equivalentClass" href="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#Dataset"/> <link property="owl:equivalentClass" href="http://www.w3.org/ns/dcat#Dataset"/>
15:16:10 <danbri> q+
15:16:36 <Caroline> ack Keith
15:16:40 <Caroline> ack Makx
15:17:20 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Keith: suggestion to use an Schema-annotated HTML page to make catalog/datasets accessible (~ landing page)
15:17:35 <dsr> How are data catalogues discovered?  One idea is to embed schema.org tags in web pages as a means to discover catalogues, and then use the DCAT vocabulary for further queries
15:18:24 <kcoyle> q?
15:18:55 <kcoyle> q+
15:18:56 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Makx: rewrite the use case to exemplify the publishing process
15:18:59 <Caroline> ack danbri
15:19:08 <dsr> Keith: we need a way to expose DCAT to schema.org
15:20:10 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
15:20:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
15:20:37 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> danbri: there are mutliple classes in Schema.org that might fit the individual Dataset notion like Product, CreativeWork
15:21:26 <Caroline> q?
15:21:37 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
15:22:46 <Makx> are we talking about the use case or arguing dumping DCAT in favour of schema.org?
15:22:59 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> danbri: describes how the metadata is being extracted and processed out of the web pages, there should be ampping to this Schema.org subset from DCAT
15:24:09 <AndreaPerego> s/ampping/mapping/
15:24:46 <Caroline> ack kcoyle
15:24:50 <dsr> q+
15:25:08 <danbri> see https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/datasets and associated blog post
15:25:30 <danbri> i.e. https://research.googleblog.com/2017/01/facilitating-discovery-of-public.html
15:25:43 <Makx> +1 to kcoyle
15:25:46 <Caroline> q?
15:26:00 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> kcoyle: approach to be best found by search engines via web pages annotated with Schema.org metadata?
15:26:29 <LuizBonino> q+
15:27:39 <alejandra> q+
15:27:45 <Caroline> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
15:28:39 <Caroline> Jaroslav_Pullmann: in the level of a dataset which may be dynamic we don't need a API endpoint
15:29:05 <Caroline> we can annotate with some of the schema.org elements
15:30:27 <Caroline> which of these propoerties could be exported to schema.org?
15:30:36 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
15:30:48 <Caroline> danbri: shared the documentation see https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/datasets and associated blog post i.e. https://research.googleblog.com/2017/01/facilitating-discovery-of-public.html
15:30:51 <Caroline> q?
15:30:59 <Caroline> ack dsr
15:31:08 <danbri> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-csvw-html-20160225/
15:31:19 <danbri> ... is the CSVW WG's note on JSON-LD in HTML
15:32:32 <Caroline> q?
15:32:33 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> dsr: asking for use cases for seraching of particular type of resources (datatsets, services) ..
15:32:40 <Caroline> ack LuizBonino
15:33:00 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> LuizBonino: 2 differents ways considered
15:33:12 <Makx> can LuizBonino speak louder please
15:33:38 <Caroline> is it better Makx ?
15:33:53 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> 1) we generate HTML pages annotated by Schema.org metadata for dataset
15:33:56 <Makx> a bit bvetter yes
15:34:43 <dsr> users typing informal queries to discover catalogues and data sets, intent based search involving hidden APIs for quick added value results, or back end use cases where a service initiates a query and generates a composition of services as a design for later instantiation or a dynamically instantiated composition for immediate use.
15:34:52 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> the dcat:Dataset is described as schema:Dataset as well
15:35:36 <Caroline> LuizBonino was showing on the figure he draw what he is explaining. He is talking about DCAT:dataset in the figure
15:35:59 <dsr> s/and data sets/and data sets and linking to pages offering a richer more structured search/
15:36:37 <Caroline> q?
15:36:40 <Caroline> ack alejandra
15:36:49 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> 2) the findability is further supported by indicating a dcat:theme
15:39:02 <Caroline> q?
15:39:05 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> alejandra: might Google support DCAT natively,  in contrast to mapping to Schema.org?
15:39:23 <dsr> rrsagent, make minutes
15:39:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html dsr
15:40:01 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
15:40:17 <Caroline> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
15:41:06 <Makx> European Data Portal 750.000, data.gov 160.000 data sets
15:41:42 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Jaroslav_Pullmann: What woud be the taret of such an indexing by search engines?
15:42:14 <Caroline> s/taret/target
15:43:00 <LarsG> s/woud/would/
15:43:01 <Caroline> Jaroslav_Pullmann: what to do if you are searching for data and are given 200.000 datasets?
15:43:56 <Thomas> Thomas has joined #dxwg
15:44:06 <Makx> +q
15:44:38 <Caroline> ack Makx
15:45:00 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Makx: comming back to the use case..
15:46:22 <annette_g> Q+
15:46:22 <Caroline> q?
15:46:23 <kcoyle> +1
15:46:28 <Caroline> ack annette_g
15:46:29 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> assuming the approach to define such a landing page of a dataset, what is the guidance of how to epxose it in terms of Schema.org annotation?
15:46:58 <Caroline> q?
15:47:32 <Makx> cookbooks are good
15:47:47 <alejandra> +1
15:47:55 <danbri> cookbook feels the right level to me; DCAT-shaped structures...
15:48:00 <Makx> +1
15:48:02 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> PWinstanley: suggesting a cook book with examples
15:48:11 <danbri> ... with extras from other vocabs, and in schema case maybe mappings
15:49:14 <Caroline> q?
15:49:28 <dsr> +1 to separate cookbook + alignment on terms where possible
15:49:32 <danbri> (prefer "cookbook" to "best practice" given that these things are still in flux)
15:49:37 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> danbri: in effect, this is mostly about mapping DC terms to Schema, which has been done already
15:50:28 <danbri> see also http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/Schema.org_Alignment/MappingIssues
15:50:33 <newton> danbri would the cookbook be like a primer?
15:52:29 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> PWinstanley: what is the (tool) support for creating these annotations?
15:52:41 <Philippe> Philippe has joined #dxwg
15:53:58 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> dsr: what is our adivse on choosing and using such tools?
15:54:49 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
15:55:37 <Caroline> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
15:56:34 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> PWinstanley: there is a commercial potential for creation and  provision of such tools and services
15:56:35 <Caroline> q?
15:57:24 <danbri> +1
15:57:28 <kcoyle> PROPOSED: accept ID40 as a use case for a non-normative document
15:57:35 <Ine_> +1
15:57:35 <Thomas> +1
15:57:36 <annette_g> +1
15:57:37 <danbri> +1
15:57:37 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
15:57:38 <LuizBonino> +1
15:57:38 <newton> +1
15:57:39 <alejandra> +1
15:57:39 <dsr> +1
15:57:40 <LarsG> +1
15:57:41 <kcoyle> +1
15:57:43 <Keith> +1
15:57:43 <Caroline> +1
15:57:50 <DaveBrowning> +1
15:58:25 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: accept ID40 as a use case for a non-normative document
15:58:49 <dsr> We should consider how open source projects could help with building both DCAT and schema.org markup
15:59:02 <antoine> belated +1
15:59:10 <riccardoAlbertoni>  /me sorry  I have to leave.. Thanks for the interesting discussion, See you tomorrow!
15:59:24 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> bye
15:59:37 <Caroline> thank you for participating riccardoAlbertoni
15:59:55 <danbri> [PWinstanley talking about https://twitter.com/nwplanet ]
16:01:04 <danbri> dsr, I did have a conversation with someone in CKAN community about getting schema.org dataset markup into CKAN per-dataset landing pages. Idea would be to improve and publicise the existing DCAT addon rather than make a rival addon.
16:01:10 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> PWinstanley: suggesting to create a wiki on tooling support
16:01:21 <AndreaPerego> q+
16:01:48 <Caroline> ack AndreaPerego
16:02:17 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Caroline: we will create an informal document on topic (cook book)
16:02:46 <antoine> +1 for discussing it now.
16:03:27 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
16:03:33 <kcoyle> scribenick: kcoyle
16:03:39 <Caroline> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID18
16:03:43 <LarsG> scribe: kcoyle
16:03:57 <kcoyle> andrea: ID18; there are three other use cases that mention same problem
16:04:18 <kcoyle> ... problem is that in many cases your distribution is not a direct file download
16:04:24 <kcoyle> ... could be an api or another service
16:04:36 <danbri> [q: (Makx?) how would I find DCAT from a page like view-source:https://www.europeandataportal.eu/data/en/dataset/air-pollution-monitoring-data-dublin-city ?]
16:04:49 <kcoyle> ... the issue is that both machines and humans what happens when you follow the link
16:05:04 <kcoyle> ... the response from the api may be an error or doesn't make sense to you
16:05:10 <dsr> q?
16:06:09 <kcoyle> ... this is a main issue left open by DCAT 1.0
16:06:32 <kcoyle> ... there was once a subclass of distribution -> service, but this was dropped
16:06:56 <kcoyle> ... this is a big problem that users have - when they don't get the data back they are confused
16:07:22 <kcoyle> ... a sparql endpoint, they get multiple datasets back
16:07:55 <kcoyle> dsr: this is about what people expect from a search
16:08:00 <danbri> q?
16:08:01 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> q+
16:08:08 <kcoyle> ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
16:08:52 <kcoyle> Jaroslav_Pullmann: dynamic distribution - let the data be pushed
16:09:21 <Caroline> q?
16:09:33 <AndreaPerego> s/distribution -> service/dcat:Distribution -> dcat:WebService/
16:09:39 <kcoyle> danbri: does the group consider finding commercial datasets? find out that it exists and how much you pay for it
16:10:20 <LarsG> q+
16:10:23 <kcoyle> Jaroslav_Pullmann: there could be domain-specific solutions
16:10:27 <kcoyle> ... or templated urls
16:10:37 <Caroline> ack LarsG
16:10:47 <AndreaPerego> q+ to say that it may be worth finding a domain-independent solution
16:10:55 <dsr> where we need to give the url parameters some kind of semantics
16:10:58 <kcoyle> LarsG: We are not limiting ourselves only to open datasets; it's about finding
16:11:08 <Makx> q+
16:11:20 <kcoyle> ... this is how Europeana works; you can find things but they may be behind a firewall
16:11:23 <DaveBrowning> +1 for Lars
16:11:25 <antoine> q+
16:11:27 <Keith> q+
16:11:45 <Caroline> ack antoine
16:11:58 <Caroline> s/antoine/AndreaPerego
16:12:20 <Makx> q-
16:12:23 <kcoyle> AndreaPerego: find a way to model the info in a domain-independent way, a minimal set
16:12:53 <kcoyle> ... 2 main things: 1) distribute is not direct, uses API / service
16:13:15 <kcoyle> ... 2) type of service - specify with a code type of endpoint/service
16:13:34 <kcoyle> ... even this small amount of info would be helpful to people
16:13:46 <Caroline> q?
16:13:49 <kcoyle> ... and could be used by software engines if know the code
16:13:53 <Ine_> +1 for Andrea
16:13:54 <Caroline> ack AndreaPerego
16:13:54 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to say that it may be worth finding a domain-independent solution
16:14:13 <kcoyle> ... what is missing is that minimal info
16:14:15 <Caroline> ack Keith
16:14:31 <kcoyle> Keith: 1) searching an individual dataset
16:14:46 <dsr> q+
16:14:46 <kcoyle> ... worst case 2) complex API with distributed data
16:14:58 <kcoyle> ... are we going to describe APIs or datasets?
16:15:07 <AndreaPerego> Yep, the API description is the complex bit.
16:15:12 <Caroline> ack dsr
16:15:33 <danbri> suggesting that https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/ covers some of Keith's (1.).
16:15:37 <LarsG> q+ to say that antoine was accidentally kicked out of the queue...
16:15:43 <kcoyle> dsr: links to goals of WoT in W3C - links to general services and domain-specific situations
16:16:01 <kcoyle> ... dcat needs to say - the type of this is an api. beyond that is outside of dcat
16:16:08 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
16:16:12 <Caroline> q?
16:16:23 <LarsG> q+ antoine
16:16:31 <kcoyle> LuizBonino: in health area, data is electronic, access process is offline
16:16:36 <Caroline> ack LarsG
16:16:36 <Zakim> LarsG, you wanted to say that antoine was accidentally kicked out of the queue...
16:16:39 <Caroline> so sorry antoine
16:17:10 <Caroline> ack antoine
16:17:45 <kcoyle> antoine: asking Andrea if his use case includes sparql endpoints, because dcat has that solution
16:17:59 <kcoyle> AndreaPerego: ? dcat has a solution for sparql end points?
16:18:09 <Makx> q+
16:18:14 <kcoyle> antoine: there is a dcat access url that could be used for sparql endpoints
16:18:50 <Caroline> ack Makx
16:19:16 <kcoyle> Makx: it's true that dcat says that this could be used with sparql end points but never says how
16:19:17 <dsr> DCAT should provide information about where to get further information about an API and if this is machine interpretable, what formats are supported, e.g. thing descriptions for the Web of Things, or schema languages for RESTful APIs
16:19:28 <antoine> https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/ , search for 'SPARQL' and this eventually gives dcat:accessURL
16:19:32 <Makx> q-
16:19:34 <AndreaPerego> dct:WebService: https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-vocab-dcat-20120405/#Class:_WebService
16:19:38 <antoine> q+
16:20:06 <kcoyle> AndreaPerego: dct:WebService was dropped from the document
16:20:35 <Caroline> ack antoine
16:20:50 <AndreaPerego> s/dct:WebService/dcat:WebService/
16:20:55 <danbri> nearby, sparql, void etc: https://www.w3.org/TR/void/#sparql-sd
16:20:58 <kcoyle> antoine: is sparql included in your use case?
16:21:38 <kcoyle> AndreaPerego: no, not mentioned
16:21:41 <danbri> ... and then there is some literature around SPARQL as interface to data cubes e.g. https://jbiomedsem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13326-017-0112-6
16:22:28 <kcoyle> ACTION: Andrea will add SPARQL endpoint to ID18
16:22:28 <trackbot> Created ACTION-20 - Will add sparql endpoint to id18 [on Andrea Perego - due 2017-07-24].
16:23:41 <danbri> FWIW in last week's IoT/WoT discussions, RAML, Swagger (https://swagger.io/specification/) and JSON-Schema came up a lot.
16:23:57 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
16:24:19 <danbri> Peter: some don't handle both GET and POST params
16:24:41 <annette_g> Q+
16:25:18 <Caroline> ack annette_g
16:25:45 <kcoyle> dsr: as above, what comes back: file or msg? what service/more info do you get.
16:25:51 <kcoyle> ... is it machine-readable?
16:25:53 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
16:25:53 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego
16:26:27 <kcoyle> annette_g: what you get back ... can differ
16:26:44 <AndreaPerego> s/dct:WebService/dcat:WebService/
16:27:26 <Thomas> +1
16:27:27 <kcoyle> PROPOSE: Accept use case ID18 as in scope
16:27:29 <danbri> +1
16:27:31 <newton> +1
16:27:32 <DaveBrowning> +1
16:27:32 <Ine_> +1
16:27:32 <LuizBonino> +1
16:27:33 <antoine> +1
16:27:33 <alejandra> +1
16:27:34 <Caroline> +1
16:27:35 <annette_g> +1
16:27:38 <LarsG> +1
16:27:39 <Philippe> +1
16:27:40 <dsr> +1
16:27:43 <Makx> +1
16:27:43 <PWinstanley> +1
16:27:48 <Keith> +1
16:28:10 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: Accept use case ID18 as in scope
16:28:29 <dsr> rrsagent, make minutes
16:28:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/17-dxwg-minutes.html dsr
16:28:53 <Makx> OK see you tomorrow, signing off -- was a very good meeting, thanks
16:29:22 <AndreaPerego> Thanks, enjoy your dinner! Meet you tomorrow.
16:32:34 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg