kcoyle: missing action item - to propose some wording .. possible types for versioning.
<kcoyle> That's the link to Peter's suggested changes
roba: questions state of UCR accept change to line 21, not reflecting discussion in the minutes.
Caroline: proposes to accept minutes and revisit this issue of recorded agreement later
<Caroline_> +0 (absent)
Resolved: minutes approved https://www.w3.org/2017/10/16-dxwg-minutes.html
Caroline_: please indicate if attending
Caroline_: 12 votes for Tuesday starting at 8pm UTC
Action: Caroline_ to contact Lars via email to see if can do an hour later at 9pm UTC
<trackbot> Created ACTION-46 - Contact lars via email to see if can do an hour later at 9pm utc [on Caroline Burle - due 2017-10-23].
alejandra: availability recorded is for after daylight time changes
Caroline_: meeting times to change immediately however
kcoyle: problem with tracker - closed actions reopened - support unable to resolve
… need to manually re-close
Caroline_: can perform closing
Jaroslav_Pullmann: open action is look at prov and void vocabularies
alejandra: open action is #44
<AndreaPerego> --> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/44
kcoyle: Ixchel reports all requirements into spreadsheet - should be complete
<Caroline_> roba: I will take a look at it now that it is completed
Action: roba to look at providing draft naming of groups for rest of requirements
<trackbot> Created ACTION-47 - Look at providing draft naming of groups for rest of requirements [on Rob Atkinson - due 2017-10-23].
kcoyle: asks that small group take this offline and bring back a coherent set of version requirements.
… we dont seem to be able to decide on version definition - we need to address this requirement first, and then inform the rest
Jaroslav_Pullmann: should UCR editors do this
kcoyle: editors would be good but do we have a concensus
alejandra: relates to open action and willing to participate - keep on mailing list?
<Jaroslav_Pullmann> We might use a common email subject to drive the discussion (and details) in the group
<Caroline_> roba: we have a recording of a discussion on version
<Caroline_> ... if we need a version definition then we need to jump ahead and start resolving that
<Caroline_> ... it is a question of if do the requirements make sense
<Caroline_> ... the version definition maybe could go to the dcat group
<Caroline_> ... there is a question wheather version is something to negotiate like profiles
Jaroslav_Pullmann: Use Cases is not very clear yet on what versions apply to - need to edit the Use Cases here so they drive the requirements
… speciifically how prescriptive they need to be, e.g. ordering
+1 if any argument need to go back to Use Case drivers
kcoyle: shall we move onto other requirements and come back to versioning
Jaroslav_Pullmann: yes - and keep on discussing in background
<Caroline_> roba: could we go to a triage about different use cases?
roba: Can we look at which remaining requirements are really the same - mechanism to add finer-grained description of various aspects?
<Stijn_Goedertier_AIV> I would like to contribute as well to the version sub-group.
<Caroline_> great Stijn_Goedertier_AIV
Caroline_: who to delegate versioin discussion to, and try to get proposal by F2F
Jaroslav_Pullmann: shall I generate graphical analysis of versioning aspects
<PWinstanley_> +1 to Jaroslav's idea
<annette_g> I am willing to help with the version subgroup
<PWinstanley_> I will work on versioning in the group
please record volunteers to work on Versioning..
I can take lead to capture/edit agree outcomes of discussion vi mailing list
<Jaroslav_Pullmann> I'll contribute trying to recap/summarize the discussions in a wiki page, is it ok
Caroline_: PROPOSE: continue discussion on version via mailing list
Resolved: continue discussion on version via mailing list
Action: Jaroslav_Pullmann to generate graphical representation of the version definition problem space
<trackbot> Created ACTION-48 - Generate graphical representation of the version definition problem space [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2017-10-23].
<Caroline_> roba: I can do the first grouping
roba: so far i see two main groups: finer grained semantics and "range" against various dimensions
… please indicate any other key groups people see
<alejandra> thanks and bye!
Caroline_: remids us same time next week.
<Stijn_Goedertier_AIV> thanks all
<Caroline_> bye! thank you!
Succeeded: s/RESOLVED: Accepte minutes//