– DRAFT –
Dataset Exchange Working Group Teleconference

<annette_g> present, but not having luck with webex

<kcoyle> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌11/‌21-dxwg-minutes

approval of minutes of Nov 21st

Resolved: approve minutes of Nov 21

Reminder: questionnaire for people to fill in

<kcoyle> https://‌www.w3.org/‌blog/‌2017/‌10/‌questionnaire-on-practices-tooling-for-web-data-standardisation/

dsr: this is an opportunity to gather data to help shape the future on how we develop data standards in W3C

dsr: working on a report based on questionnaire results
… hoping to have a report by January
… sponsored by Innovate UK
… please, fill in the questionnaire as soon as possible
… anyone with an interest in data standardisation can fill it in

kcoyle: before we vote on the draft, there is a comment on versioning
… listed as 6.2.2.

<roba> pushed change with status comment for 6.8.2,3 to UCR

<kcoyle> "Provide clear guidance on conditions, type and severity of a resource's update that might motivate the creation of a new version in scenarios such as dataset evolution, conversion, translations etc, including how this may assist change management processes for consumers (e.g. semantic versioning techniques)"

kcoyle: rewording came from Dave and other comments by Makx and others

<roba> I can make change when voted on :-)

<annette_g> "might motivate"

alejandra: does the text include Makx change too?

kcoyle: yes

<Makx> +1 of course

<annette_g> +1 to the might

<PWinstanley_> +1

<PWinstanley_> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

<kcoyle> PROPOSED: accept changes to 6.2.2 as posted here

<LarsG> +1

<antoine> +1

<riccardoAlbertoni> +1

<roba> +1

<annette_g> +1

+1

<dsr> +1

Resolved: accept changes to 6.2.2 as posted here

kcoyle: do we issue this version of the UCR as FPWD?

<kcoyle> PROPOSED: issue first public working draft of UCR

Jaroslav_Pullmann: the document as it is now, or can it be changed e.g. in terms of the labelling of some requirements
… making IDs referenceable

kcoyle: if it can be done in a day or two
… then yes

alejandra: same question, would like to submit some modifications

<antoine> http://‌lists.w3.org/‌Archives/‌Public/‌public-dxwg-wg/‌2017Nov/‌0117.html

antoine: I sent my question via email (see link above)
… I sent a use case for Europeana and I still see it as it used to be, missing a few requirements

<roba> yes - as editor i was waiting for a definitive statement re updating it.

antoine: on the email discussion roba pointed out that there were a missing links to the use cases

kcoyle: what is missing? link to requirements or the use cases?

antoine: we had the discussion on the wording, have you seen them?

kcoyle: the changes don't seem to be in

roba: the first thing I've done was to reorder the UCs and Requirements so that they match the grouping
… the plan was to wait for the numbers to settle down
… and then fix all the links
… then, that's a piece of work that needs to be done
… identification and links processing
… I won't have time to do it myself, but I've tried to process the content changes

kcoyle: the profile requirements that came out of Europeana were pasted in the spreadsheet after 6.1
… row 38

kcoyle: there are additional requirements

roba: I can add those as additional requirements

kcoyle: they won't get separate numbers anyway

spreadsheet link: https://‌docs.google.com/‌spreadsheets/‌d/‌16JmtNCz_aCWtTCSntriDWLvyPY2x-Y9dZFhAHFl55r0/‌edit#gid=0

kcoyle: put them in the document so that we don't loose them and we'll concentrate on the profile requirements in the next version

roba: there was a note saying that these could be pulled out as requirements if necessary

kcoyle: mark the section as being under revision

<Zakim> LarsG, you wanted to disccuss if the abstract is too DCATy

Action: roba to add requirements for profiles from spreadsheet to UCR

<trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - Add requirements for profiles from spreadsheet to ucr [on Rob Atkinson - due 2017-12-05].

<roba> +1

LarsG: I wanted to talk about the abstract that talks about DCAT vocabulary, application but ignore the other deliverables we have

Action: alejandra to provide info for introduction

<trackbot> Created ACTION-65 - Provide info for introduction [on Alejandra Gonzalez Beltran - due 2017-12-05].

riccardoAlbertoni: I am going to support the publication of the draft as it is
… I have a comment related to the kind of feedback that we want from the readers
… what kind of comments we expect?
… we should add some notes at the end of the document

kcoyle: dsr is there a boilerplate text that we could use?

dsr: there is a boilerplate text about what the document is about
… and its status

This is what the document says:

"This document was published by the Dataset Exchange Working Group as an Editor's Draft. Comments regarding this document are welcome. Please send them to public-dxwg-comments@w3.org (subscribe, archives)."

<Zakim> riccardoAlbertoni, you wanted to propose a note in the document making explicit the kind of feedback we want from the readers

BTW, it seems that there is a need to change to FPWD document

<roba> @alejandra - you may find merging changes difficult after so much moving around - if so sent me sections to insert/update by email.

Jaroslav_Pullmann: I support making our request for comments more complete
… and how are the comments going to be processed?

kcoyle: in some cases, the editors of the document are tasked with gathering the comments making sure that all of them are answered
… and bringing the comments to the group so that we can be sure that there are answered correctly (through votes, etc)
… we should reply politely to every comment that we received

<roba> Pushed change to profiles definition sub-requirements list :-)

great: -)

Jaroslav_Pullmann: there are questions on the search working correctly
… there are some requirements/use cases that are empty
… there are some lengthy requirements
… I would provide a more harmonised text

kcoyle: I rather like to have verbs there

kcoyle: these are editorial questions and it is up to you

Jaroslav_Pullmann: we should discuss the IDs of requirements
… given the changes in the groups
… do we give them an alphanumeric identifier pointing to the topic?

kcoyle: is the question for this particular draft or for the later ones

?

... if you can hold off on that for this draft, it might be better, or make take too much time

kcoyle: when is the last date to get this version done?

dsr: publication auditorium starts 13th Dec
… so last date to publish this would be 12th Dec
… thus we have to have it ready before
… we need to have it approved
… so we need to have it ready within a few days from today
… good news: if it is just the first draft, we can publish an updated draft after that

kcoyle: subsequent updates go through very quickly
… should we say we need everything ready for Monday?

dsr: I will be at a workshop on 6th and 7th
… Monday should be ok
… I will give a heads up that we want to do this

kcoyle: whatever it is available on Monday morning 4th Dec will be in the first draft

kcoyle: we have a drafty draft of DCAT (including DCAT 1.0 stuff)

<kcoyle> alejandra: for edits, do pull requests with review

<PWinstanley_> +1 to alejandra on the DCAT group GitHub approach

roba: I did most merges for the UCR group but we interacted with Jaroslav_Pullmann

<AndreaPerego> I think new need to have the comments in the mailing list, since it is persistent, and can be used to track whether we have answered or not. GH issues can be modified - they are not persistent.

alejandra: we agreed on the process using branches on the repository and the github review functionality

<riccardoAlbertoni> +1 to AndreaPerego about the use of mailing list

alejandra: happy to merge other peoples PRs and I will assign others in the DCAT group to merge my changes

<annette_g> I'm interested in working on profiles

I agree on the comments on the mailing list

this is what the boilerplate text says

kcoyle: document on profile guidelines
… and content negotiation on profiles is a third deliverable

<antoine> I'm happy to help too

I'm also interested on profiles

<kcoyle> Guidance on publishing application profiles of vocabularies.

roba: I have two questions: interim set of deliverables was a best guess
… there are different perspectives
… guidance on profiles, and other issue is what are profiles
… DCAT profile should follow, but it does strike me as an additional deliverable
… general view on profiles, where a DCAT profile guideline would be straightforward to follow
… I'm interested on the general case

kcoyle: Phil intended to have a general guidance, not just DCAT guidance
… it should be possible to follow it in creating DCAT profiles
… I don't think there was a specific document around DCAT profiles

antoine: it matches my interest

<Zakim> LarsG, you wanted to say I'm interested

<PWinstanley_> - can I contribute but not as 'editor'?

alejandra: I'm interested in contributing, and DCAT profiles provide lots of use cases

<AndreaPerego> I'm interested as well, but still have to see whether / how much I can contribute.

roba: also interested

LarsG: also interested

<Makx> I am also interested to contribute from experience with DCAT profiles in Europe

<Caroline> I think it is important to contribute PWinstanley_, don't need to be an editor :)

roba: I'm not going to offer to coordinate the group
… I've got time guaranteed until June
… offer to work on reference implementations but not to coordinate the group

<Makx> Google Hangout?

<AndreaPerego> What's the issue with WebEx?

kcoyle: not sure if we can use WebEx but we can use IRC

dsr: I can set up webex calls for you

<AndreaPerego> For IRC, we just need to create a new channel for each subgroup - as we did in SDWWG.

alejandra: it could be useful to send a message to the list with the deadline for Monday

kcoyle: I'll do that

<roba> @Jaroslav_Pullmann - i will be travelling from Thursday eve your time

<PWinstanley_> yes, Many thanks to Rob - lots of work went into that UCR

<Caroline> +1

many thanks to the UCR group!

<LarsG> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

<Makx> +1

<annette_g> thanks all!

<Caroline> bye!

thanks and bye!

<PWinstanley_> bye!

<kcoyle> bye!

<LarsG> bye all

<AndreaPerego> Thanks, and bye!