– DRAFT –
Dataset Exchange Working Group Teleconference

+0 (absent)

<Caroline_> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌10/‌09-dxwg-minutes

kcoyle: missing action item - to propose some wording .. possible types for versioning.

<kcoyle> https://‌lists.w3.org/‌Archives/‌Public/‌public-dxwg-wg/‌2017Oct/‌0018.html\

<kcoyle> https://‌lists.w3.org/‌Archives/‌Public/‌public-dxwg-wg/‌2017Oct/‌0018.html

<kcoyle> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌35

<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

<annette_g> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

+0

<alejandra> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

<DaveBrowning> +1

<Caroline_> +0 (absent)

Resolved: minutes approved https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌10/‌16-dxwg-minutes.html

<Caroline_> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌wiki/‌F2f2

Caroline_: please indicate if attending

<Caroline_> https://‌beta.doodle.com/‌poll/‌675y9xb5f4ci455x

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

1am: -)\

<Caroline_> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌open

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

<Caroline_> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌open

<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

<annette_g> +1

<kcoyle> +1

+1

<Caroline_> +1

<DaveBrowning> +1

<Stijn_Goedertier_AIV> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

Resolved: continue discussion on version via mailing list

<alejandra> +1

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.

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> bye!

<Stijn_Goedertier_AIV> thanks all

<AndreaPerego> Bye!

bye

<Caroline_> bye! thank you!