IRC log of sdw on 2018-02-19

Timestamps are in UTC.

08:37:23 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sdw
08:37:23 [RRSAgent]
logging to
08:37:25 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sdw
08:37:31 [tidoust]
RRSAgent, make logs public
08:38:34 [tidoust]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web IG F2F - Day 1/2
08:38:44 [tidoust]
12:16:21 [tidoust]
tidoust has joined #sdw
12:17:05 [tidoust]
Present+ BillRoberts, ClemensPortele, ChrisLittle, MichaelGordon, RobSmith, JeremyTandy, LindaVanDenBrink, FrancoisDaoust
12:17:31 [tidoust]
scribe: tidoust
12:17:36 [tidoust]
Chair: Jeremy, Linda
12:17:52 [tidoust]
Topic: Informal discussions
12:19:40 [tidoust]
Several informal discussions took place in the morning. Discussions have not been minuted. Some topics that appeared in discussions: Best practices, tiling issues of all kinds, map representations, progressive "rendering" (à la JPEG, not only for rendering)
12:20:22 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
12:20:28 [tidoust]
Goal is to stick to Web-specific problems, not to solve all the world's problems
12:20:42 [MichaelGordon]
MichaelGordon has joined #sdw
12:24:28 [ClemensPortele]
ClemensPortele has joined #sdw
12:24:41 [ClemensPortele]
present+ ClemensPortele
12:25:11 [tidoust]
tidoust has changed the topic to: Spatial Data on the Web IG F2F - Amersfoort - see
12:25:14 [billroberts]
present+ billroberts
12:25:15 [brinkwoman]
brinkwoman has joined #sdw
12:26:04 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
12:26:32 [tidoust]
Topic: Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
12:27:02 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
12:27:17 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLittle
12:28:21 [MichaelGordon]
present+ MichaelGordon
12:29:13 [tidoust]
Michael: I want to get to a state where we have defined activities to encourage adoption of the best practices
12:31:09 [tidoust]
Rob: I'm very focused here. I want to understand the process in W3C to take a concept from early stages to a standard. Been involved with CCSTS in a previous life. Worked on CFTP, sort of FTP in space, non chatty version of FTP.
12:31:37 [tidoust]
s/Topic: Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices/Topic: Objectives
12:33:26 [tidoust]
... Took 6 years of my life. Some of it was ditched away for lack of support. Back to W3C, I wonder how to prgress my idea I'm thinking about, get some feedback on whether that's a brilliant idea or just something that is of no interest to others.
12:34:46 [tidoust]
... Focus on implementations to make sure that features in the spec are useful.
12:35:00 [tidoust]
[similar to OGC testbed approach and W3C's standardization process]
12:36:08 [tidoust]
Linda: I like the fact that we have an impact on OGC and improve their standards. Want to continue in that direction. Another thing I'd like to figure out is the impact we could have on W3C.
12:36:20 [tidoust]
... I know what I want from OGC. Not sure what I want from W3C yet.
12:36:33 [tidoust]
... Still interested in Best Practices, adoption.
12:37:23 [tidoust]
Jeremy: Want to make sure that we're clear on the purpose of the group. What we want to achieve, how we're going to do that. Do we have the right people engaged. Are we doing the right stuff.
12:37:38 [sdw]
sdw has joined #sdw
12:37:54 [sdw]
sdw has left #sdw
12:38:00 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
12:38:00 [tidoust]
Francois: Same as Jeremy. Nothing to add
12:38:31 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrrisLittle
12:38:35 [tidoust]
Bill: I want the Stats on the Web BP to move forward. Understand the scope of the group. What we will do or not.
12:38:53 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLittle
12:39:09 [ChrisLittle]
present- ChrrisLittle
12:39:16 [tidoust]
Clemens: Largely interested in the Best Practices. How we can promote adoption. How the IG works, what directions we're taking.
12:39:26 [RobSmith]
RobSmith has joined #sdw
12:39:41 [tidoust]
Chris: Getting answers to statistical use cases that I proposed.
12:39:48 [tidoust]
... Standard vocabularies to express these things.
12:40:06 [tidoust]
Clemens: Also wondering how this is web-related.
12:40:33 [tidoust]
Chris: I would like to have practical statisticians involved in the process.
12:41:01 [tidoust]
... Follows how the RDF Data Cube originated from SDMX, statisticians.
12:41:18 [tidoust]
... Couldn't agree on how to do aggregates, etc.
12:41:51 [tidoust]
Jeremy: Scott will join the 3-5pm slot to talk about process. We can go on beyond 5 if needed.
12:41:56 [tidoust]
... Everybody's happy with the agenda?
12:42:16 [tidoust]
Topic: Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
12:42:58 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: Within this subgroup, we started to look at what activities we could be doing to maintain these best practices and activities we could be doing to encourage the adoption of these best practices.
12:43:09 [tidoust]
... We want to get feedback on the best practices
12:43:25 [tidoust]
... Working on where the most important gaps are.
12:43:45 [tidoust]
... That seems like a reasonable plan to take things to the next level.
12:44:06 [tidoust]
... On the last call, we discussed encouraging adoption. We started to come up with a rough plan of taking a domain focused approach.
12:44:30 [tidoust]
... [looking at the audience section in the Best Practices document]
12:45:04 [tidoust]
-> Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
12:45:33 [tidoust]
-> Audience section in Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
12:47:07 [tidoust]
Jeremy: 14 best practices which cover specific stuff on spatial data [going through main best practices]
12:47:49 [tidoust]
... Ends with metadata, because that's scary. Now using data description not to scare people away.
12:48:24 [tidoust]
... Clemens, can you explain Web-related?
12:48:50 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: Not sure how to define it. The whole way in which the Web is used is evolving. Looking at that is what we should be doing.
12:49:03 [tidoust]
... We all work with spatial and temporal data. Been doing that for a long time.
12:49:21 [tidoust]
... Best practices was looking at how the Web was used and trying to improve it.
12:49:41 [tidoust]
... Need to look at evolving things.
12:49:54 [tidoust]
... Not only about looking at use cases.
12:50:56 [tidoust]
... For instance, WPS does not have any notion of "spatial". There is often a will to do too generic things. We need to keep some stronger focus.
12:51:15 [tidoust]
... Need to look at what other groups are doing at W3C, e.g. Web components, etc.
12:52:22 [tidoust]
Jeremy: We've all put data on the Web for some time, but "you don't want to use the Web as a gigantic USB drive" (copyright Phil Archer)
12:52:41 [tidoust]
... One of the ways is to make sure we publish linked data
12:53:03 [tidoust]
... Another way is to say that we're willing to process data in a Web browser.
12:53:26 [tidoust]
... Linked data approach is not necessarily RDF. RESTful web services.
12:54:59 [tidoust]
ChrisLittle: Having looked at cross-domain usage of data, I see that control vocabularies and exposure of that is useful for cross-domain usage.
12:55:24 [tidoust]
billroberts: No need to have specific domain knowledge in software to process data
12:56:11 [tidoust]
Jeremy: But, first, you need to agree on a set of use cases that are common
12:56:54 [tidoust]
ChrisLittle: Not necessarily about specifying a new vocabulary, probably more about identifying an existing vocabulary, and possibly reducing it for usage on the Web.
12:57:47 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: From the audience section, web-related is also around the need to understand the possible usage of your data once published on the Web.
12:58:56 [tidoust]
Linda: Is there a definition of the Web somewhere at W3C?
12:59:07 [tidoust]
Francois: Architecture of the World Wide Web, volume 1. That's basically it.
13:00:20 [tidoust]
Clemens: In practice, we also see other developments than on the Web. How do we come up with decisions on directions so that developers can continue to use spatial data in an easy way?
13:01:24 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: What is messaging around Spatial Data on the Web best practices and cutting edge ideas that are being explored here and there (e.g. MapML)
13:02:34 [tidoust]
Jeremy: Previously, we focused more on the architecture of the WWW. But now, there are a bunch of APIs that obscure the URLs. Developers need to process data at a more pragmatic level. So we need to understand that and adjust the best practices accordingly.
13:02:41 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: That was my point.
13:03:52 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: In the best practices document, we're looking at people familiar with the web and people familiar with publishing spatial data (and perhaps less so with the web)
13:04:07 [tidoust]
... Plan is to look at different kinds of domains.
13:04:40 [tidoust]
... Spatial Data publishers, or Web developers. Need to craft a different messaging for different audiences.
13:05:11 [tidoust]
-> Work items and activities for SDW BP
13:06:54 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: Thought we could exchange ideas on post-it notes. Spend a few minutes on identifying different domains. And then dig deeper into who can be behind them.
13:08:00 [tidoust]
... Example: let's take land registration / cadastral. Variety of publishers. Land registry in the UK. Various groups of users. People trying to build businesses around taking land registration data and doing risk analysis. Financial institutions.
13:08:18 [tidoust]
... Some of them may have different levels of webiness.
13:08:47 [tidoust]
... Some may need to know about the Best Practices to help them approach the data.
13:09:46 [tidoust]
... Example of an application that mashes registration data and data from local authorities and give information to farmers about how to optimize their farmland.
13:10:40 [tidoust]
... Easier to focus on the publisher side than on the users.
13:11:13 [tidoust]
billroberts: Tricky to divide this up. Starting point is people publishing data, I think you're right about that. Not exclusively government, but lots of government data.
13:12:53 [tidoust]
... Chicken and egg element. Usually, the response is along the lines of "this is going to cost money, people don't ask for it"
13:13:37 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: Approach is, when you're considering publishing data on the Web, here are best practices that we recommend in doing so.
13:13:46 [tidoust]
... Not mandatory.
13:14:13 [tidoust]
... Being aware of best practices.
13:14:25 [tidoust]
... More appealing than mandating.
13:16:28 [tidoust]
RobSmith: Does it not boil down to business cases? Some entrepreneur would come up with an idea to streamline something, making money down the line. It's a way of us helping you to deal with your area of expertise.
13:16:54 [tidoust]
... Publishers are surely looking at who their audience are, otherwise what's the point of publishing.
13:18:14 [tidoust]
Jeremy: To summarize, we've identified a gap that publishers don't do anything unless there's a large demand for it. The technologists themselves are not going to make money directly from it. It's chicken and egg. Need to have data flowing from the publishers to the Web before developers can leverage it.
13:18:45 [tidoust]
... We need to proxy the users in some way, for people who work in the community. I can achieve this business goal if I can access the data in that way.
13:19:16 [tidoust]
... We have a limited number of resources. I wonder if there are particular success stories that we could identify, or places where we have inside knowledge
13:19:36 [tidoust]
... so that we could promote success after following best practices.
13:20:14 [tidoust]
... Thinking about specific users, business value that they get
13:20:54 [tidoust]
billroberts: Trying to find examples of where there are people achieving good things with data on the Web. Identify which aspects of the best practices helped people.
13:21:29 [tidoust]
RobSmith: You could also take the opposite approach, looking at something that failed, and identify practices that they did not follow.
13:21:48 [tidoust]
billroberts: Trickier to point out negatively at someone though.
13:22:38 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: The spatial data available from authorities is often not accessible (embedded in PDFs, ...)
13:23:03 [tidoust]
Linda: Would be good to go to publishers and say "look, these users need that and cannot"
13:23:49 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: Is there any potential for utilizing the use cases that were already brought down, for helping finding some specific examples.
13:24:17 [tidoust]
... If we could identify examples of following / not following best practices
13:26:38 [tidoust]
[Some discussion on the use cases & requirements document, and the possibility to reach out to people who submitted the use cases in the first place to collect practical implementation experience]
13:27:48 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: Not enough resources in this group. Need to focus on things we implemented. One thing is promoting, the other is collecting examples of where best practices were implemented.
13:28:36 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: With examples, we can promote something.
13:29:41 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: Everybody will promote the best practices in the environment he's active in, anyhow. I don't think that we can have a big promotion campaign. We don't have a budget for that.
13:30:12 [tidoust]
... Good to have a collection of examples. Needs to be a low effort activity.
13:30:32 [tidoust]
Linda: We can start with examples that are in the document itself. Just need to extract them.
13:30:47 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: We just need to have real examples.
13:31:50 [tidoust]
RobSmith: Picking the brains of people who tried to implement the best practices might help gather examples and possible issues with best practices.
13:33:22 [tidoust]
Jeremy: Another direction is to check with the ODI. Think about other places where we know folks are implementing spatial data. One is INSPIRE. Is there opportunity to engage with JRC to try to understand what directions they are going?
13:33:34 [tidoust]
... Do a case study of what they've done.
13:34:26 [tidoust]
... The other one is OGC testbed. We don't have resources, but OGC testbed is a sponsored thing. Is there an opportunity for us to look at particular activities in testbed 14?
13:34:48 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: They are references to the best practices in different OGC efforts.
13:34:52 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: I'll give an update
13:36:26 [tidoust]
Jeremy: By hooking ourselves in the OGC innovation program, we don't need to set up a full process.
13:37:11 [tidoust]
ChrisLittle: Engineering reports show implementation issues and gaps in standards
13:39:18 [tidoust]
RobSmith: Geovation (OS innovation program) could phrase a competition question such as: how can best practices improve a certain service?
13:39:35 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: Will need to think about it, we tend to focus on domain-specific issues.
13:39:56 [tidoust]
... That said, there could be subchallenges more focused on that.
13:40:30 [tidoust]
... Partners are usually publishers of some kind.
13:40:44 [tidoust]
RobSmith: So you could promote the best practices to the publishers too
13:41:01 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: OK, let me a short update on OGC
13:41:59 [tidoust]
... What I did very early before we finished on the Best Practices work is to start discussing alignment with WFS. We skipped WFS 2.0 and focused on WFS/FES 3.0, focused on following the best practices.
13:42:19 [tidoust]
... Open developer progress (which is not the default in OGC).
13:42:32 [tidoust]
... Some things are straight implementations of the best practices, some more indirectly.
13:42:42 [tidoust]
... For instance, we don't want to be tied to specific schemas.
13:42:58 [tidoust]
... Similar to best practices where we did not mandate some of them, merely listed some.
13:43:10 [ClemensPortele]
13:43:19 [ClemensPortele]
13:43:20 [tidoust]
... See the change request I just pasted
13:44:29 [tidoust]
... We separated the core spec from something that is more of a guide.
13:44:54 [tidoust]
... We hope to have a version ready by the end of this month, and another one at the end of next month.
13:45:40 [tidoust]
... We also get a lot of activities on some of the issues. Very few OGC members, lots of external people. Good that we're reaching a lot of developers that weren't following the OGC process.
13:46:41 [tidoust]
... The version that we'll have at the end of March will be the basis for an ISO standard.
13:47:39 [tidoust]
... WFS hackathon in two weeks in Colorado. We'll work with people there during two days. The idea is to get some developers before we get too far in this. Is it easy enough? Is the use of Open API good?
13:48:08 [tidoust]
... I would like to have people develop a client to show that it is relatively rapid to develop something, much faster than with previous WFS spec.
13:48:23 [tidoust]
... March 6-7 in Fort Collins, Colorado.
13:48:37 [tidoust]
... Another activity is the testbed.
13:49:49 [ClemensPortele]
13:49:51 [tidoust]
... Next generation OGC Web services. Security is involved. It explicitly references best practices that should get tested and implemented there.
13:49:54 [ClemensPortele]
13:50:31 [tidoust]
... That's one activity and there are several others that are actually using the WFS.
13:51:22 [tidoust]
... Another activity is complex feature handling, which is going to the next level. Extension to the core. 3D, solids, complex queries. That's more investigation, no implementation.
13:51:46 [tidoust]
... The third thing is compliance testing for WFS 3.0. Also useful for the whole activity.
13:52:44 [tidoust]
... Implementation-wise, currently we have two. CubeWerx, and interactive instruments.
13:53:00 [tidoust]
... Government agency is hosting these things.
13:53:44 [tidoust]
... [demoing Flurstück]
13:54:16 [tidoust]
... Developed for a hackathon, because last time, people complained that SDIs were too hard to use.
13:54:33 [tidoust]
... Much easier to browse and use the data
13:55:04 [tidoust]
... Even people who are in the geo business see it's easier to use, if they're ready to restrict features.
13:55:20 [tidoust]
... So lots of activities there, and implementations are ongoing.
13:55:58 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: Regarding INSPIRE, we wrote a document for JRC, analysis of all the best practices (Data on the Web Best Practices and Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices)
13:56:03 [tidoust]
... and how they related to INSPIRE
13:56:45 [ClemensPortele]
13:56:59 [tidoust]
... The next meeting for this plans a one-day discussion on best practices
13:57:09 [ClemensPortele]
13:58:25 [tidoust]
[Clemens reads through document parts that best practices impacted]
13:59:34 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: People seem more interested at looking at the best practices than at looking at RDF vocabularies. That's my impression at least.
14:00:00 [tidoust]
... There will be two webinars next week on spatial data and INSPIRE. Tuesday and Thursday. The one on Tuesday is about the document I just mentioned.
14:00:10 [tidoust]
... Preparation for the April meeting, open to the public.
14:00:27 [ScottSimmons]
ScottSimmons has joined #sdw
14:00:33 [tidoust]
... The second one is focused on user feedback.
14:01:02 [tidoust]
... How do we move forward with the metadata topic in INSPIRE.
14:01:56 [ClemensPortele]
14:02:41 [ScottSimmons]
* thanks, Jeremy - same Webex details?
14:03:04 [ScottSimmons]
I have audio, thanks
14:06:17 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: Capturing practical examples of usage of best practices to help with promoting them.
14:06:37 [tidoust]
... I'll extract examples from the best practices document itself
14:06:50 [tidoust]
... I'll have a talk internally with our Geovation people.
14:07:31 [tidoust]
billroberts: I have good connections with ODI. They do these Friday lunch talks every couple of weeks. One of use could offer to go and give a talk about the best practices.
14:07:41 [tidoust]
... I can raise that with them.
14:08:20 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: [going through list of actions to get examples]
14:10:38 [tidoust]
Jeremy: When you're talking to start-ups, you might tie that to what other web technologies they're using. Progressive Web applications, Web Components, etc.
14:11:07 [tidoust]
RobSmith: Possibly will give us some indication of what they see coming next.
14:11:22 [tidoust]
Jeremy: OK, some concrete activity going on there.
14:11:58 [tidoust]
... Based on the participation in the group, we have a strong European perspective. Through testbed 14, USGS.
14:12:16 [tidoust]
... That's two different regions. We don't have anything in Asia. We don't have something specific in Australia.
14:12:48 [tidoust]
billroberts: Lots of interesting things going in New Zealand. Quite some interest in OGC members in New Zealand.
14:13:19 [tidoust]
ClemensPortele: We may need to talk to Jo about it.
14:13:24 [tidoust]
MichaelGordon: Will do.
14:15:59 [tidoust]
Francois: Museum on the Web CG might be a place where we could be promote best practices. Originates from Chinese community.
14:17:29 [tidoust]
... Also got contacted by the Samvera project, more US-based, university libraries.
14:18:48 [tidoust]
[short coffee break]
14:18:55 [tidoust]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
14:18:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate tidoust
14:18:56 [billrobe_]
billrobe_ has joined #sdw
14:27:19 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
14:27:49 [billrobe_]
billrobe_ has joined #sdw
14:30:04 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
14:31:23 [tidoust]
Topic: Purpose and operation of SDW IG
14:31:33 [tidoust]
scribe: MichaelGordon
14:32:19 [MichaelGordon]
JTandy: understand the function of the group, bridge between W3C and OGC, incubation of ideas and progression to standards agencies
14:34:02 [MichaelGordon]
JTandy: first thing on agenda, understanding purpose of group
14:34:04 [tidoust]
-> SDW IG Charter
14:34:12 [MichaelGordon]
...set up as interest group, does not make standards
14:34:38 [MichaelGordon]
...which means we need to know where to direct things to become standards
14:34:54 [MichaelGordon]
...functions as bridge between w3c and ogc for issues around spatial data
14:35:23 [MichaelGordon]
...from perspective w3c and ogc areas what are the key areas you think we need to look at
14:35:59 [MichaelGordon]
Tidoust: W3C - understand what we need to do next for you, what standards, best practices etc need to be looked at
14:36:44 [MichaelGordon]
...we see spatial data as important topic because it touches on some many domains, and another dimension to convergence on web. For example AR / VR
14:37:08 [MichaelGordon]
...what's next from a standardisation perspective
14:37:55 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: From an OGC perspective, we have some fairly fundamental changes in how we're approaching developing standards because of this group
14:38:17 [MichaelGordon]
....critically important that BP contribute to OGC standards
14:38:41 [MichaelGordon] an interest group, we can coordinate joint work items
14:39:11 [MichaelGordon] past recommendations didn't progress through OGC. This structure will alleviate that problem and help align projects
14:39:48 [MichaelGordon]
JTandy: to summarise - w3c which things need to be spun up next and where
14:39:51 [RobSmith]
RobSmith has joined #sdw
14:40:14 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: which standards make sense to be developed by w3c or ogc
14:41:08 [MichaelGordon]
JTandy: role of IG is to flush things out and act as a gatekeeper to ensure things that are ready go to the right place and to say that things that aren't ready need to develop more and how
14:41:38 [MichaelGordon]
RobSmith: that's my interest, that's how / why I approached
14:43:01 [MichaelGordon]
JTandy: summarising - from ogc perspective, make sure that ogc standards fit within the web. There's an activity to say that a problem raised by OGC is wider. Also a focus on spatial for W3C and contibute that
14:43:29 [ClemensPortele]
ClemensPortele has joined #sdw
14:44:23 [MichaelGordon]
....contrasting with a working group, IG allows us to direct work in various ways. From my perspective this group is important as provides oppurtunity to support OGC and W3C members who want to publish spatial data on the web
14:45:09 [MichaelGordon]
Brinkwoman: Question - suppose we do this, assess whether topics are ready to go to a standards track - OGC, W3C or both jointly - will OGC or W3C listen to us?
14:46:34 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: this has been set up to allow this, and part of the triage process is to understand whether there is enough support for a direction, charters then would have to be drafted and ratified by W3C or OGC which would need to be passed by relevant governance
14:47:08 [MichaelGordon]
...lots of details which will need to be assessed by a case by case basis but we are positive about this
14:48:32 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: OGC membership has for 20 years had ISO as relationship but latest revision to Policies and Procedures opens that up to other organisations including W3C, because we understand that other communities are important and valuable
14:49:32 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: W3C - currently 5% of membership (20/30 members) would be required to vote yes to approve a new group etc
14:50:46 [MichaelGordon]
...usually people won't vote if it's not their domain. Only objections if they are interested and don't like it. But 20 organisations is not that easy still.
14:51:49 [MichaelGordon]
Jtandy: How much time do we take in looking at potential standards activity? Given we have two group represented today - stats and BPs plus another possible.
14:52:46 [MichaelGordon]
BillRoberts: Currently stats not likely to need a working group, non-normative note likely but possible that work like datacube work might need to progress to standards work
14:53:19 [MichaelGordon]
ChrisLittle: another possible outocme is to provide some possible concrete examples that could be attached to best practices
14:53:29 [ChrisLittle]
ChrisLittle has joined #sdw
14:53:44 [ChrisLittle]
present+ ChrisLittle
14:54:07 [ChrisLittle]
* sorry timed out.
14:54:47 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: Not seeing either Stats or Spatial BPs needing standards tracks - more an activity of triaging outside ideas to see if there's enough weight behind them, if they're developed enough, direct them as needed. So more likely that standards activity will come from outside (other than possibly from identified BP gaps area)
14:56:23 [MichaelGordon]
ClemensPortele: From a spatial BP perspective, will need to have a mechanism to update the note, but an interest group can do that - a note is good enough, no burning need to push up to normative recommendation. Therefore spatial BP updates are a low maintenance - mainly update to including more examples and look at gaps as appropriate
14:56:49 [MichaelGordon]
...personally I see this group in preparing something and full IG to approve changes
14:57:46 [MichaelGordon]
JTandy: so other than outside activity triages to rec tracks or advise them, you (Clemens, Bill) see purpose of group as updating / publishing BP note / discussion paper as need
14:58:42 [MichaelGordon]
BillRoberts: I see that we could make it clear to outside world that part of our role is the triaging role - however we have success already - Rob here and two others tomorrow so already showing that it could be a valuable one
14:59:05 [MichaelGordon]
jidoust: Can give examples of how we could triage and tell the world how we're doing it
14:59:44 [MichaelGordon]
JTandy: we can move to proposal for triage process now, if that suits?
14:59:53 [tidoust]
-> Strategy funnel description
14:59:53 [MichaelGordon]
+1s from everyone
15:00:27 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: strategy team at w3c are trying to follow funnel approach - assess where they are on way to standardisation
15:00:36 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
15:00:57 [ChrisLittle]
15:01:20 [ChrisLittle]
* sorry just trying to remember IRC commands
15:01:40 [MichaelGordon]
....first stage is exploration - an idea. 2) investigation - who is interested, has it been shared, do we need to incubate it somewhere 3) incubate - spec and use cases to identify gaps and refine
15:01:57 [MichaelGordon] we have a technical solution that could work
15:02:37 [MichaelGordon]
....4) evaluation does this have everything it needs 5) charter - draft charter and which body it should go to
15:03:10 [MichaelGordon]
....ideas we will evaluate will be at different levels of maturity and we don't need to push it to charter right away
15:03:59 [MichaelGordon]
....evaluation will look at things like (from w3c side) - do we have the right participants, do we have an ecosystem around it, will it add value to the web etc
15:04:09 [tidoust]
-> Strategy funnel
15:04:46 [MichaelGordon]
....that's the process I had in mind for IG - currently w3c use the project view in github, internally it works but externally it might not make sense
15:05:56 [MichaelGordon]
...tried many ways for groups to advertise what they're working on or their vision (vision docs), use cases and requirements (good for concrete work but takes a lot of time, updates etc)
15:06:11 [tidoust]
-> Mobile roadmaps
15:06:16 [MichaelGordon] trying to balance it we're trying roadmaps
15:07:13 [MichaelGordon]
...visual doc, not a spec, trying to list different technologies and where there are standards, working groups, inncubated somewhere or technical gaps
15:08:27 [MichaelGordon]
....first one shows set of roadmaps for areas, then each area shows these different techs
15:09:23 [MichaelGordon]
...maintenance is quite easy as you can work on each area and show groups of technologies and timeline
15:09:38 [MichaelGordon]
....tidoust happy to help
15:10:00 [MichaelGordon]
...good document to advertise the vision that the IG is considering to the outside world
15:10:09 [tidoust]
-> WG Charter template
15:10:31 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
15:10:40 [MichaelGordon] document that IG might have to deal with from w3c perspective is charters for new working groups if one topic is mature enough to go to standardisation
15:11:41 [MichaelGordon] from w3c side these are tools IG has, can be as simple of github issues and tracking as project, roadmap or indeed drafting charter at end (but unlikely to be main work)
15:12:30 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: so essentially roadmap and funnel / project view, provide a visible mechanism to show people what we are working on
15:13:00 [MichaelGordon]
...question - talked about work from bp notes etc - how does that work fit into funnel?
15:13:46 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: wouldn't really fit into funnel - ideas only on way to standards track - bps have already gone through this so don't really fit in the funnel, Stats BP could appear in there as don't exist yet
15:14:10 [MichaelGordon]
BillRoberts: whole IG went through funnel
15:14:45 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: funnel is mainly for new ideas, roadmap however is there for ideas already done and underway so could fit in existing WG / IG deliverables
15:15:05 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: so we would not expect to see all work on funnel but would on roadmap
15:15:19 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: would it make sense to make our own funnel?
15:15:41 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: it's a way to organise some items - works for some but not for others
15:16:17 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: could see it helping us, but perhaps things we're discussing should go to w3c strategy funnel?
15:17:19 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: existing question for strategy funnel - do we take ideas from all groups or select them? Don't know but could as IG could decide to utilise strategy funnel though might be messy as ideas mixed with other groups
15:17:48 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: could just tag them. If we just create our own then it would be less visible than strategy funnel
15:18:05 [ScottSimmons]
15:18:25 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: one of problems is maintaining that strategy funnel so it would actually help
15:19:25 [MichaelGordon]
...strategy team maintain funnel so could theorectically drop items from it
15:19:38 [jtandy]
Ack ScottSimmons
15:19:42 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: we might need to decide it's ogc
15:19:57 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: at which point it could be dropped off
15:20:05 [ScottSimmons]
15:20:54 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: if you show me your funnel, i'll show you mine....maintained by George Percivall. Might be a good action for group to take to review both funnel and tech trends from w3c and ogc and identify common areas of interest
15:21:15 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: one of the hardest things is maintaining the funnel
15:21:37 [MichaelGordon]
RobSmith: what happens to things that drop out of the funnel?
15:21:57 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: these are issues that are closed in github so can be tracked
15:22:12 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: also a parking lot area - where ideas go to die?
15:22:39 [MichaelGordon]
robsmith: groups could come back with an idea that was looked at several years ago
15:22:57 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: and that's why all the ideas are tracked even whilst closed
15:24:30 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: can see where roadmap is useful for showing work that already exists and work underway. In terms of a funnel, can see value in IG maintaining it's own funnel - as work might go to w3c or ogc...also might have less phases
15:25:31 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust:can investigate internally whether strategy team are happy with IG using strategy funnel and filter it on issues
15:25:45 [MichaelGordon]
robsmith: allows ideas to exist in multiple streams and groups
15:26:19 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: likes idea of reusing strategy funnel as other groups would then see SDW IG ideas
15:26:34 [MichaelGordon]
robsmith:also saves duplication of effort
15:27:02 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: should I look into this or should it be seperate?
15:29:24 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: can see it both ways, now have seen tags and bring out only those, that is useful and benefit of not having ideas in multiple places. It might be a bit complicated but it's just a ticket being moved. Scott - if we put things on the w3c strategy funnel and we move things to the ogc space, we could put them in the strategy work concluded and put an ogc tag on that?
15:29:55 [MichaelGordon]
liked idea to have regular action to look at w3c funnel and ogc tech trends, what's your (scott) thoughts on using w3c infrastructure for this?
15:30:11 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: its the better tool for this
15:31:02 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: there may be practical issues that stop this - assignment issues - but could just assign them to tidoust to track
15:31:12 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: as staff contact that does make sense
15:31:35 [MichaelGordon]
...looking at one at random, the level of info is relatively low and easy to work with
15:31:57 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: main difficulty is maintentance, and occasionally topics can be sensitive
15:32:30 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: three proposals so vote
15:32:56 [tidoust]
PROPOSED: The SDW IG will regularly the OGC trends and W3C funnel for common threads
15:32:58 [jtandy]
jtandy has joined #sdw
15:33:56 [MichaelGordon]
ChrisLittle: how frequent?
15:34:18 [MichaelGordon]
ClemensPortele: Every face to face? a bit more time to discuss
15:35:17 [MichaelGordon]
Billrobe_: and what do we do with it then? recommend additions to funnell? progressing and assessing?
15:35:25 [jtandy]
15:35:31 [MichaelGordon]
RobSmith: would there be actions then?
15:36:00 [ChrisLittle]
15:36:24 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: identify something that's common, there's a piece of work that's out there?
15:37:14 [MichaelGordon]
...looking at work coming through ogc and w3c - w3c side tagging the ticket then saying why it's of interest to us, if it's ogc then adding a new ticket?
15:38:06 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: +1 ideally cross reference organisation lists, on ogc side, george would listen to group, appropriately reference and ensure dialoge
15:39:25 [tidoust]
PROPOSED: The SDW IG will regularly review the OGC trends and W3C funnel for common threads during F2F meetings with a view to tracking progress and identifying new topics of interest for the W3C funnel
15:39:29 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: outcome is that we've flagged that we're tracking the item
15:39:45 [jtandy]
15:39:48 [ClemensPortele]
15:39:48 [MichaelGordon]
15:39:49 [ChrisLittle]
15:39:49 [brinkwoman]
15:39:50 [tidoust]
15:39:50 [billrobe_]
15:39:54 [ScottSimmons]
15:39:56 [RobSmith]
15:40:05 [jtandy]
15:40:12 [jtandy]
15:40:17 [tidoust]
RESOLUTION: The SDW IG will regularly review the OGC trends and W3C funnel for common threads during F2F meetings with a view to tracking progress and identifying new topics of interest for the W3C funnel
15:42:59 [tidoust]
PROPOSED: The SDW IG will have a monthly review of the SDW tagged item in the W3C funnel (during plenary calls)
15:43:18 [jtandy]
15:43:22 [tidoust]
15:43:26 [brinkwoman]
15:43:27 [ScottSimmons]
15:43:28 [MichaelGordon]
15:43:30 [RobSmith]
15:43:30 [ClemensPortele]
15:43:31 [billrobe_]
15:43:37 [ChrisLittle]
15:43:52 [tidoust]
RESOLUTION: The SDW IG will have a monthly review of the SDW tagged item in the W3C funnel (during plenary calls)
15:45:21 [tidoust]
PROPOSED: Pending agreement from W3C strategy team, the SDW IG will use the W3C strategy funnel to monitor relevant concepts and ideas tagged with an "sdw" tag, to be managed by the w3c staff contact
15:45:29 [brinkwoman]
15:45:30 [jtandy]
15:45:32 [ScottSimmons]
15:45:32 [RobSmith]
15:45:32 [tidoust]
15:45:35 [MichaelGordon]
15:45:35 [billrobe_]
15:45:39 [ClemensPortele]
15:45:44 [ChrisLittle]
15:47:19 [tidoust]
PROPOSED: Pending agreement from W3C strategy team, the SDW IG will use the W3C strategy funnel to monitor relevant concepts and ideas tagged with an "geospatial" tag, to be managed by the w3c staff contact (actual tag name might need to be adjusted)
15:47:31 [MichaelGordon]
15:47:36 [jtandy]
15:47:38 [tidoust]
15:47:39 [ClemensPortele]
15:47:40 [ScottSimmons]
15:47:41 [billrobe_]
15:47:41 [brinkwoman]
15:47:51 [tidoust]
RESOLUTION: Pending agreement from W3C strategy team, the SDW IG will use the W3C strategy funnel to monitor relevant concepts and ideas tagged with an "geospatial" tag, to be managed by the w3c staff contact (actual tag name might need to be adjusted)
15:48:05 [ChrisLittle]
15:48:29 [tidoust]
ACTION: François to check with W3C strategy team whether the SDW IG can reuse the Strategy funnel
15:48:32 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-381 - Check with w3c strategy team whether the sdw ig can reuse the strategy funnel [on François Daoust - due 2018-02-26].
15:51:52 [tidoust]
PROPOSED: The SDW IG will develop and maintain a Spatial Data on the Web roadmap with initial draft ready for next F2F. Linda to act as main editor with help from François
15:52:01 [jtandy]
15:52:01 [billrobe_]
15:52:03 [ScottSimmons]
15:52:04 [brinkwoman]
15:52:04 [MichaelGordon]
15:52:04 [RobSmith]
15:52:06 [ClemensPortele]
15:52:06 [tidoust]
15:52:07 [ChrisLittle]
15:52:16 [tidoust]
RESOLUTION: The SDW IG will develop and maintain a Spatial Data on the Web roadmap with initial draft ready for next F2F. Linda to act as main editor with help from François
15:54:33 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: How will we decide whether something goes to w3c or ogc?
15:54:59 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: membership is one criteria, expertise might be another
15:55:34 [MichaelGordon]
...and where we think the work should happen data exchange might be a example
15:55:51 [MichaelGordon]
ChrisLittle: what if we think the work should go to another organisation? OASIS for example
15:56:36 [MichaelGordon]
RobSmith: would it not just be that we've tagged the work and can then direct any questions there?
15:57:17 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: so if it was in the work concluded column and then tagged "ietf" etc.
15:58:38 [MichaelGordon] criterion - 1) membership 2) do we think this is specially spatial therefore OGC thing, noting what ScottSimmons said earlier that this group helps focus spatial into the wider web and OGC curates that work. Scott do you have any thoughts?
15:58:48 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: not sure about curate...
15:59:24 [MichaelGordon]
...maybe this group is best suited to recommend possible or best homes..curate might be strong word
15:59:50 [MichaelGordon]
...also think that we should focus on items that would likely go to w3c, ogc or both
16:00:36 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: think that what you're saying is obvious criterion is that support coming from ogc or w3c then obvious where it goes. If not then we'd debate with TC at OGC and on w3c....
16:00:52 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: w3c management first for review
16:01:46 [MichaelGordon]
....criteria will be reviewed on case by case basis and organisations scope might affect this as well, however not sure of objective critieria to decide that
16:02:13 [MichaelGordon]
robsmith: could also be something that neither want
16:02:34 [ScottSimmons]
looks like the room hung up the phone
16:02:42 [brinkwoman]
sorry we got cut off
16:02:50 [brinkwoman]
16:03:52 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: so tidoust internal review goes through w3cM internally first
16:04:12 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: correct and evaluate whether it makes sense and share it wider with advisory committee
16:04:42 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: triggers thought that on ogc side we said TC but that is wider group. Would it be OAB or PC or something else?
16:04:48 [tidoust]
16:05:23 [tidoust]
16:05:53 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: best for joint new work then best to go to whole TC, updating pipeline and moving stuff through funnel then OAB
16:06:38 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: candidate work item fits in OGC - TC, within W3C then W3M for review and only charter for membership?
16:06:59 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: normally would draft charter that would go to W3M
16:07:26 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: for joint work would expect that Scott and I would review it before taking it to relevant groups
16:08:11 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: for W3C then membership at the end, but case by case to decide where it should go, some internal review and then take it to relevant groups
16:09:38 [ChrisLittle]
+1 to blah blah
16:12:41 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: forgot a step - we do send a notice to AC to say we are thinking about doing something - working on this draft charter etc
16:13:12 [MichaelGordon]
...before W3M approval
16:13:45 [MichaelGordon]
...then go back to W3M and then AC when draft charter is ready
16:15:24 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: not sure the process needs to be resolved - when you are going to work on a W3C WG draft charter you will send a notice anyway, likely to be on a case by case basis and the process question will not really be a major one to solve
16:15:51 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: ok lets not tie ourselves in knots on process
16:16:58 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: moving items through pipeline will be reviewed by OGC OAB
16:17:03 [tidoust]
PROPOSED: The SDW IG will informi the OGC Architecture Board when it moves an item forward in the funnel
16:17:09 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: is informed a better word?
16:17:11 [tidoust]
16:17:19 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: yes
16:17:29 [jtandy]
16:17:32 [brinkwoman]
16:17:33 [MichaelGordon]
16:17:34 [RobSmith]
16:17:35 [tidoust]
16:17:37 [ClemensPortele]
16:17:37 [ScottSimmons]
16:17:38 [ChrisLittle]
16:17:48 [tidoust]
RESOLUTION: The SDW IG will informi the OGC Architecture Board when it moves an item forward in the funnel
16:19:12 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: so the only area we haven't discussed is community engagement? But happy that the areas being worked on are doing this themselves
16:19:33 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: and that this would be a criteria for new work
16:20:00 [MichaelGordon]
tidoust: and we can discuss who is missing from this table for any new work to make this more applicable to the wider world
16:20:33 [MichaelGordon]
robsmith: which is why I was keen to get involved here, would be hard pressed to miss someone once you've got that community
16:21:24 [tidoust]
16:21:33 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: think what I think I'm hearing is that this group is set up with mandate from w3c and ogc to recommend when something should move forward? If people want to bring that forward they can get involved and as more stuff gets involved then this will be a self generating process
16:21:52 [MichaelGordon]
robsmith: and if someone complains about not being included they can be invited in
16:22:20 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: so should be arrange some time at next OGC TC to tell members we are working this way?
16:22:28 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: yes absolutely
16:22:57 [MichaelGordon]
brinkwoman: feel like it should be action for someone to arrange some time at OGC TC
16:23:05 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: 4 weeks from today
16:23:51 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: are we then asking for some time to speak in the TC plenary to inform people on how we are progressing
16:24:35 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: scott, can we ask for 5 mins in opening plenary?
16:24:47 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: already got this on the list
16:25:11 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: drafting some slides
16:26:01 [MichaelGordon]
ACTION: brinkwoman to draft 2 slides for OGC Orleans TC opening plenary
16:26:04 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-382 - Draft 2 slides for ogc orleans tc opening plenary [on Linda van den Brink - due 2018-02-26].
16:26:44 [brinkwoman]
16:26:58 [MichaelGordon]
jtandy: AOB?
16:27:00 [brinkwoman]
16:27:08 [tidoust]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
16:27:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate tidoust
16:27:23 [MichaelGordon]
ScottSimmons: nothing from me, dialing in tomorrow
16:28:52 [MichaelGordon]
ChrisLittle: thanks to brinkwoman for hosting
16:29:59 [ChrisLittle]
16:33:02 [tidoust]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
16:33:02 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate tidoust
17:03:45 [tidoust]
tidoust has joined #sdw
17:31:15 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
19:01:03 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
19:34:35 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #sdw
19:35:44 [billroberts]
billroberts has joined #sdw
21:23:05 [tidoust]
tidoust has joined #sdw
22:30:59 [tidoust]
tidoust has joined #sdw
23:10:33 [tidoust]
RRSAgent, bye
23:10:33 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in :
23:10:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: François to check with W3C strategy team whether the SDW IG can reuse the Strategy funnel [1]
23:10:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
23:10:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: brinkwoman to draft 2 slides for OGC Orleans TC opening plenary [2]
23:10:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in