13:53:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwg
13:53:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/08/07-dxwg-irc
13:53:12 <kcoyle> rrsagent, make logs public
13:53:20 <kcoyle> present+
13:55:39 <kcoyle> chair: Caroline Burle
13:56:51 <mbruemmer> mbruemmer has joined #dxwg
13:57:00 <RubenVerborgh> RubenVerborgh has joined #dxwg
13:57:09 <RubenVerborgh> present+
13:57:34 <roba> roba has joined #dxwg
13:58:00 <dsr> dsr has joined #dxwg
13:58:13 <Caroline> Caroline has joined #DXWG
13:58:28 <Caroline> Present+
13:58:50 <dsr> present+ Dave_Raggett
13:59:01 <dsr> present?
13:59:44 <dsr> meeting: Data Exchange Working Group teleconference
13:59:53 <dsr> chair: Caroline
14:00:26 <roba> present+
14:01:46 <dsr> scribenick: dsr
14:01:56 <Caroline> scribe: dsr
14:02:01 <dsr> scribe: Dave_Raggett
14:02:12 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #dxwg
14:02:27 <SimonCox> present+ SimonCox
14:03:06 <Caroline> https://www.w3.org/2017/07/31-dxwg-minutes
14:03:09 <SimonCox> I'm very awake - I just played a game of Ultimate!
14:03:11 <dsr> present+ Annette
14:03:20 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
14:03:33 <annette_g> +1
14:03:36 <Caroline> +1
14:03:36 <dsr> Caroline: let’s approave last week’s minutes. Any objections?
14:03:42 <dsr> +1
14:03:44 <roba> +1
14:04:01 <annette_g> Present+ annette_g
14:04:05 <SimonCox> +1
14:04:06 <dsr> Resolve: Approved minutes from 31 July
14:04:28 <kcoyle> s/Resolve/Resolved
14:05:21 <Caroline> dsr: About the Github repository
14:05:45 <Caroline> ... people can send Dave their emails and he will add them as dxwg members there
14:06:00 <Caroline> ... actually send their github usernames
14:06:09 <Caroline> q?
14:06:50 <Ixchel> Ixchel has joined #dxwg
14:06:50 <Caroline> ... about the Webex we discovered that the system could be used for other people and there was an abuse of the system
14:06:52 <Ixchel> present+ Ixchel
14:06:59 <alejandra> alejandra has joined #dxwg
14:07:06 <Caroline> ... because of that we are not suppose to share the links
14:07:15 <riccardoAlbertoni> riccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwg
14:07:15 <alejandra> present+
14:07:21 <DaveBrowning> DaveBrowning has joined #dxwg
14:07:30 <Caroline> ... I sent an email to everyone witht the Webex link
14:07:58 <DaveBrowning> present+ DaveBrowning
14:08:01 <Caroline> ... those who have members access maybe access it and the invited experts must go throgh the link I sent by email
14:08:15 <newton> newton has joined #dxwg
14:08:15 <dsr> scribenick: dsr
14:08:33 <newton> present+
14:08:40 <dsr> topic: group report
14:08:58 <riccardoAlbertoni> present+
14:09:34 <dsr> We were discussing whether to use github or the wiki for the use cases
14:09:44 <Caroline> q?
14:09:48 <alejandra> q+
14:09:55 <Caroline> ack alejandra
14:11:11 <dsr> alejandra: I am okay with either option, but it would be harder to update both places. I suggest that we use github issues for tracking contributions.
14:11:28 <kcoyle> q+
14:11:38 <dsr> My question is when we need to discuss something in the group versus just with the document editors?
14:11:39 <Caroline> ack kcoyle
14:12:23 <dsr> kcoyle: what we’ve been doing so far, is to discuss new use cases as a group and as a group to decide whether it is in scope, in which case it is added by the editors to the document
14:12:52 <Caroline> q?
14:12:58 <Caroline> ack roba
14:13:39 <dsr> roba: using github issues makes sense for new use cases and pull requests for later modifications to the github document
14:13:47 <Caroline> ack Caroline
14:13:54 <kcoyle> q+
14:14:25 <Caroline> ack kcoyle
14:14:39 <dsr> Caroline: I agree that using github issues is the way to go. I don’t think everyone needs to generate pull requests, as the editors may find that easiest to do based upon the feedback they get
14:15:06 <dsr> kcoyle: Is there a way to duplicate the wiki template for people to use in the github issues?
14:15:37 <Caroline> s/to generate pull requests/to be preocupied about the respec but can use the github
14:15:40 <dsr> roba: you can point to the wiki for the templae
14:15:46 <alejandra> It is possible to create an ISSUE_TEMPLATE: https://github.com/blog/2111-issue-and-pull-request-templates
14:16:16 <alejandra> +1 to dsr, that is described in the document I linked to
14:16:28 <SimonCox> [I just transferred the GitHub Etiquette proposal to https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/GitHub_etiquette]
14:16:32 <dsr> dsr: we could use a markdown template given that markdown is allowed in github issues
14:17:01 <dsr> roba: given the need to transcribe the use cases, I don’t think this is too big an issue
14:17:20 <dsr> Caroline: we need to clearly document the process for people to follow
14:17:35 <dsr> rrsagent, set logs public
14:17:50 <dsr> kcoyle: I volunteer to write up the github process
14:17:52 <kcoyle> PROPOSED: use github issues to add new use cases to the list
14:18:06 <alejandra> +1
14:18:10 <roba> +1
14:18:13 <Caroline> +1
14:18:14 <annette_g> +1
14:18:15 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
14:18:15 <dsr> +1
14:18:16 <SimonCox> +1
14:18:16 <kcoyle> +1
14:18:23 <DaveBrowning> +1
14:18:26 <Ixchel> +1
14:19:15 <kcoyle> RESOLVED: use github issues to add new use cases to the list
14:19:32 <dsr> dsr: suggests writing the process as a markdown document in the repository, as github renders this automatically as rich text
14:20:02 <Caroline> q?
14:20:27 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1 to dsr
14:20:28 <Caroline> ack roba
14:20:42 <dsr> s/group report/use cases group report/
14:21:20 <Caroline> q?
14:21:37 <dsr> Ixchel: provides a quick status report and will be in touch with roba about her progress
14:22:07 <dsr> What process are we using here for decisions, is it a simple majority vote?
14:22:23 <kcoyle> q+
14:22:36 <dsr> Caroline: we’re using votes to gauge whether we have a rough concensus
14:23:10 <roba> q+
14:23:13 <dsr> We first need to agree on adding the use case to the one’s we’ve accepted, and we then need to agree on the requirements that emerge from the accepted use cases
14:23:26 <SimonCox> q+
14:23:35 <Caroline> ack kcoyle
14:24:42 <dsr> kcoyle: the voting process is W3C specific, where we use +1 for yes, 0 for don’t care and -1 for disagree. If someone disagrees we need to discuss the issue as a group, and if it can’t be resolve the chairs need to decide on how to progress
14:25:10 <Caroline> ack roba
14:26:03 <dsr> roba: I just want to reitterate that there will be a fair bit of work to identify the requirements and link them back to the use cases.  We will need to work carefully on the wording of the requirements.
14:26:23 <dsr> This will involve some de-duplification
14:26:58 <Caroline> ack SimonCox
14:27:02 <dsr> Caroline: thanks for pointing that out
14:27:36 <dsr> SimonCox: Each W3C group has a certain amount of latitude to determin the details of its process, but the important point is to be transparent
14:27:54 <Caroline> dsr: W3C focus on consensus
14:28:04 <Caroline> ... we try to understand the objections and resolve them
14:28:19 <Caroline> ... if it is not possible to resolve them we can document them as part of the report as a group
14:28:46 <Caroline> ... ex. the 1st public WG draft can note it
14:29:29 <dsr> dsr: W3C works on a rough consensus basis, and there is a provision to record minority opinions in our reports when these can’t be resolved within our discussions
14:29:34 <Caroline> ack alejandra
14:29:55 <SimonCox> It ain't summer holidays here!
14:30:36 <dsr> alejandra: several people are away currently so let’s keep the discussion in this call for now
14:30:55 <SimonCox> q+
14:31:05 <Caroline> ack SimonCox
14:31:56 <alejandra> q+
14:32:09 <dsr> SimonCox: as one of the nominated editors, I have a certain level of reluctance until the discussion of the use cases and requirements is a little further along.  The spreadsheet has been helpful
14:32:40 <Caroline> ack alejandra
14:32:45 <dsr> If we find some holes, filling them will require further discussion
14:33:37 <dsr> alejandra: I will be away as well towards the end of August, so we may find it better to defer starting separate meetings until next month.
14:34:18 <dsr> I have started a google doc, and can give people write access if they send me an email to that effect
14:34:34 <alejandra> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12t6a9seTmCi47p6k8HH1Mz4k2CedhZSZ9sbUpaRrQO8/edit#gid=0
14:35:12 <dsr> dsr: the url for the document
14:35:34 <dsr> alejandra: public has the ability to read and add comments, but not to update
14:35:39 <Caroline> q?
14:35:49 <Caroline> q?
14:35:55 <dsr> Caroline: any other comments ?
14:35:58 <dsr> [no]
14:36:09 <dsr> Topic: Open actions
14:36:26 <Caroline> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/open
14:37:29 <Caroline> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/24
14:37:48 <SimonCox> Scribe: dsr
14:37:55 <dsr> We can close 24 now given Dave’s report earlier
14:38:06 <alejandra> for the DCAT application profiles document (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12t6a9seTmCi47p6k8HH1Mz4k2CedhZSZ9sbUpaRrQO8/edit?userstoinvite=dr.shorthair@gmail.com&ts=59887a50&actionButton=1#gid=0), do send me request for access if you wish
14:39:00 <dsr> In respect to action 29, Dave needs further details before he can ask Ivan
14:39:43 <dsr> kcoyle: we may not need that the real work will be taking the existing use cases and consolidating them.
14:40:10 <dsr> kcoyle: we can therefore close action 29
14:40:22 <Ixchel> q+
14:40:31 <Ixchel> what about those pending review
14:40:40 <Caroline> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID3
14:40:43 <dsr> We’re missing the people for the other open actions on this call.
14:40:44 <RubenVerborgh> q+
14:40:50 <Caroline> ack Ixchel
14:41:55 <dsr> Ixchel: I noticed from the minutes that some of the use cases are still open for pending review. Who has the responsibility for closing actions the related actions - the chairs or the editors?
14:42:48 <dsr> kcoyle: actions 4, 6 and 7 I can close, but there are several others relating to specific use cases.
14:42:52 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/pendingreview
14:44:19 <dsr> Caroline: we didn’t decide that, and the idea is to discuss them during the meeting. I think the editors can decide when to close specific actions on use cases pending review, Karen is that okay with you?
14:44:57 <dsr> kcoyle: I would like to have some time to review the comments. Let’s talk about this amongst ourselves and aim for a resolution next Monday
14:45:03 <Caroline> q?
14:45:09 <Caroline> ack RubenVerborgh
14:45:43 <dsr> RubenVerborgh: in respect to use case 3, this is about that a single response can correspond to multiple profiles
14:45:59 <dsr> Caroline: can you explain further?
14:46:41 <dsr> RubenVerborgh: a document could conform to both specific and generic profiles
14:47:04 <dsr> Use case 3 says we should have a means to indicate this
14:47:05 <alejandra> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#Responses_can_conform_to_multiple.2C_modular_profiles_.5BID3.5D
14:47:05 <kcoyle> q+
14:47:11 <Caroline> ack kcoyle
14:47:26 <RubenVerborgh> q+ on serialization and contetn
14:47:33 <annette_g> Q+
14:47:39 <dsr> kcoyle: I think we need to be careful to avoid mixing up serialisation and content, as it does seem to right now
14:47:47 <Caroline> ack RubenVerborgh
14:47:47 <Zakim> RubenVerborgh, you wanted to comment on serialization and contetn
14:47:53 <dsr> RubenVerborgh: I agree, that was just an example
14:47:55 <roba> q+
14:48:21 <Caroline> ack annette_g
14:48:35 <alejandra> q+
14:48:37 <RubenVerborgh> q+ to explain problem we're solving
14:48:41 <dsr> annette_g: what is the problem we’re trying to solve here?
14:49:07 <dsr> I am not sure that this is something that uses will want to ask for
14:49:15 <dsr> s/uses/users/
14:49:25 <Caroline> q?
14:49:42 <Caroline> ack RubenVerborgh
14:49:42 <Zakim> RubenVerborgh, you wanted to explain problem we're solving
14:50:34 <dsr> RubenVerborgh: one possible example is where a request is in one profile and the response also conforms to a more specific profile, we want to ensure interoperability
14:50:55 <dsr> annette_g: so this is a case with a nested profile?
14:51:11 <Caroline> q?
14:51:18 <dsr> RubenVerborgh: it could be, but doesn’t need to be hierarchical and could be a combination instead
14:51:35 <dsr> annette_g: I want to push back on hierarchal profiles
14:51:59 <RubenVerborgh> q-
14:52:03 <Caroline> ack roba
14:52:04 <dsr> RubenVerborgh: being able to name the profiles could avoid a combinatorial explosion
14:53:29 <dsr> roba gives some examples of parallel, polymorphism and deep nesting …
14:53:58 <RubenVerborgh> Just want to emphasize here that UC3 is independent of nesting, i.e., agreeing on UC3 does not mean agreeing/disagreeing on nesting.
14:54:02 <dsr> We need to be able to declare multiple profiles for each catalogue
14:54:39 <dsr> annette_g: I was thinking of the rationale for using content negotiation
14:55:04 <Caroline> q?
14:55:16 <Caroline> ack alejandra
14:55:17 <dsr> roba: content negotiation should be pretty easy to handle
14:56:03 <dsr> alejandra: I am in agreement with the use case, but we could clarify it
14:56:28 <RubenVerborgh> q+
14:56:34 <Caroline> ack RubenVerborgh
14:56:37 <roba> q+
14:56:48 <dsr> I like the idea for a server to indicate conformance to a profile. Do we want to make this specific in terms of Linked Data shape rules?
14:56:49 <Caroline> ack roba
14:57:22 <annette_g> q+
14:57:39 <Caroline> ack annette_g
14:57:46 <dsr> roba: I am reasonably comfortable that the issues have been addressed, but we have some more editing to do
14:58:29 <dsr> annette_g: we need to separate the firm requirements based upon what’s needed, we will end up with a better end result
14:59:17 <dsr> i.e. to drive the discussion from the use cases
14:59:47 <Caroline> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID3
14:59:59 <Caroline> PROPOSED: accept the use case ID3 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID3
15:00:00 <dsr> roba: we haven’t had any push back on the use case, so I would recommend we accept this use case
15:00:04 <SimonCox> +1
15:00:06 <Caroline> +1
15:00:06 <roba> +1
15:00:07 <RubenVerborgh> +1
15:00:08 <dsr> +1
15:00:09 <kcoyle> +1
15:00:09 <alejandra> +1
15:00:16 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
15:00:21 <DaveBrowning> +1
15:00:32 <annette_g> +0
15:00:32 <kcoyle> and maybe note particular care needed on requirements editing
15:00:50 <Caroline> RESOLVED: accept the use case ID3 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Use_Case_Working_Space#ID3
15:01:19 <dsr> Caroline:  we will continue with the remaining use cases on the next call
15:01:24 <roba> bye
15:01:26 <alejandra> thanks and bye!
15:01:28 <riccardoAlbertoni> bye thanks
15:01:38 <dsr> rrsagent, make minutes v2
15:01:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/08/07-dxwg-minutes.html dsr
17:10:45 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dxwg