Dataset Exchange Working Group Teleconference

03 April 2018

Meeting Minutes

approval of last week minutes

kcoyle: reminder that starting today we will be meeting every two weeks
… next meeting will be 17th April
… any comments about last meeting minutes?
… no comments, so approved

Resolved: approve minutes of March 27

kcoyle: two big things to cover today
… where we are with the FPWD of DCAT
… F2F meeting on 8-9 May in one of 3 locations

<kcoyle> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌wiki/‌F2f3

kcoyle: which location people prefer?
… Frankfurt Deutsche Bibliotek
… Zurich-Baar Thomson Reuters
… or Genoa, CNR
… please indicate your preference in that page
… for people travelling, we need to know fairly soon
… questions?

Jaroslav_Pullmann: further option of meeting close to Cologne
… the logistics is a bit complicated
… we are sitting a bit far from the city
… so people may need to take taxis
… it is 10 km outside of Bonn
… not immediately in the city

kcoyle: it is convenient if it is near a train station


<SimonCox> ED is here https://‌w3c.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat/

SimonCox: at the last DCAT meeting we agreed to move this forward to this plenary
… and recommend to publish as FPWD
… however, there has been a discussion in the last couple of days in terms of the version
… the draft refers to DCAT 1.1.
… latest public version has a URL that ends up with DCAT_1_1
… which I made up
… in collaboration with Alejandra as a placeholder
… but it's been raised in the last few days that 1.1. might be a strong claim w.r.t. the changes we have
… so I prepared a Pull Request (PR) revising the versions
… when we mention the old DCAT version we refer to it as DCAT 2014
… we don't want to prejudge

<roba> belated comment - the concept of profiles is sprinkled through the document, but i dont see the working definition we agreed on included anywhere.

SimonCox: this document as it stands has been approved by the DCAT team to be issued as FPWD
… but there is this issue to resolve on how versions are referred

<AndreaPerego> The relevant GH issue: https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌184

SimonCox: with the suggestion to refer to the old one as DCAT 2014 and the new one as DCAT revised

phila: this is up to DaveR to decide
… I've seen some of the discussion, so I guess it will come down to as the nature of the changes
… you can provide an edited recommendation
… where the name doesn't change at all
… for that to be the case, it should be compatible
… the answer is 'I don't know'
… how big the changes are?

SimonCox: it is unclear at the moment
… members of the team are making it clear that we should be backward compatible
… so that old DCAT rdf wouldn't be inconsisten with the revised one
… however, we agreed to add some classes in last week minutes
… how these classes are going to be linked it is not clear

phila: are you deprecating terms?

SimonCox: I don't think so

phila: then you could still could call it DCAT
… HTML 5.2 is backward compatible with HTML 1.0

<phila> alejandra: With the changes we've discussed, we might keep the name

<phila> ... there are things I ave in mind. For e.g. even it's name, focuses on the catalogue. I want to describe datasets not in a catalogue

<phila> ... I don't mind keeping the name, but even expanding the defn of Dataset to outside a catalogue...

<phila> ... Does the name restrict future changes?

<AndreaPerego> Just to note that DCAT does not require datasets being linked to a catalogue.

<phila> ... I agree that we should be backwards compatible if possible

roba: the catalogue perspective suggets a number of use cases that we want to support
… there is no inconsistency at the moment
… but we might have different profiles in the future
… I don't find that the document provides a clear way of the profiling mechanism
… my feeling is that we could provide more guidance on the implications

<SimonCox> audio p[roblems

<kcoyle> we hear you

<SimonCox> Oh dear - wrong moment

<SimonCox> audio back

kcoyle: it sounds to me that Simon's solution will be fine

SimonCox: we've been unsuccessful to engage with the profiles group for a number of weeks
… we've been pushing for the target release of the FPWD
… I'm reluctant to delay the release
… so readers of the FPWD will be aware that the intention is to add more material
… but the document is pretty honest that more work is needed
… you're jumping ahead assuming that there won't be a new version needed
… I agree but I think it's best to wait until the dicussion happens

roba: a line about understanding about scopes
… the profile group hasn't met due to logistic challenges
… it doesn't have much to say about DCAT profiles
… some work we did do is the description of profiles that could be used cross-subgroups

<SimonCox> This is what we have https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌wiki/‌Application-profiles

roba: there is more to say that we can say
… I don't wish to hold up the release

AndreaPerego: for the time being (FPWD), the main issue is to decide what URI to use
… we might not be able to come up today what version we name it to be
… this can probably be decided later
… we need to decide today about the URI for the TR

<SimonCox> Here is my proposal to 'kick the can down the road" - https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌187/‌files

AndreaPerego: maybe DCAT-rev

kcoyle: we may need to get hold of DaveR for that

<Zakim> phila, you wanted to offer a get out of jail card https://‌www.w3.org/‌TR/‌2017/‌WD-odrl-vocab-20170223/

<phila> FPWD of ODRL vocab

phila: yes, definitely
… for some comfort, the FPWD we called it vocab-odrl and then the WG decided to change it to odrl-vocab

<AndreaPerego> +1 to phila. Sounds like a good idea.

yes, that's good to know that it can be changed later

kcoyle: I wonder if having the date in the TR is fine

phila: yes, that's for the permanent version

SimonCox: look at the PR
… I believe that implements what we are talking about

kcoyle: I'm going to propose a vote

<AndreaPerego> The relevant PR: https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌187

SimonCox: we still have this issue that Roba raised
… the discussion on profiles is insufficient

<SimonCox> https://‌w3c.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat/#profiles

<roba> i am happy yo propose an edit or raise an issue (add a pink box in motivation section?)

SimonCox: the document hasn't got many changes but just a list of points referring to the discussions we are having
… I've been insisting to people that we need the content to the document

kcoyle: I'd suggest that it doesn't need to be done for the FPWD

<AndreaPerego> +1

kcoyle: in the upcoming F2F meeting we are going to look at profiles

<kcoyle> PROPOSED: Accept FPWD of DCAT, with "DCAT rev" as its designation for now

kcoyle: and we can look at the content for profiles

<SimonCox> The DCAT team already voted to released this content

<SimonCox> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2018/‌03/‌28-dxwgdcat-minutes#x03

<SimonCox> +1

<riccardoalbertoni> +1

<DaveBrowning> +1


<AndreaPerego> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

<roba> +0 (i would add a single issue reference with the profile definition we have also agreed on)

<Ixchel> +1

AndreaPerego: we can consider PhilA's proposal as plan B
… we can consider the option to use the version URL for the FPWD

phila: formally, short URLs are decided by the director

<Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to say that we consider phila's proposal as plan B - in case vocab-dcat-rev won't be accepted for any reason.

<phila> alejandra: I believe we still need to add a couple of changes like removing mentions of 1.1 that are still in the doc?

<phila> ... But we can sort that out later

<phila> SimonCox: I thought I'd done it

<AndreaPerego> So the long URL should be something like: FPWD-vocab-dcat-201804XX

Resolved: Accept FPWD of DCAT, with "DCAT rev" as its designation for now

I would mention DCAT-rev whenever we refer to the new version

Action: kcoyle - get DaveR involved

<trackbot> Created ACTION-99 - - get daver involved [on Karen Coyle - due 2018-04-10].

<phila> PROPOSED: Thanks to the DCAT team

<AndreaPerego> +1 :)

<SimonCox> ... if you accept https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌187 all 1.1 will go away including title

+1 (especially Simon!)

<riccardoalbertoni> +1

<kcoyle> https://‌lists.w3.org/‌Archives/‌Public/‌public-dxwg-comments/‌2018Mar/‌0003.html


kcoyle: we need to reply back to this comment on the UCR

Jaroslav_Pullmann: we had a request to look at Øystein message

Ixchel: I looked at his most recent one and it is extremely detailed
… I haven't been involved in the subgroup meetings
… so it might be helpful to get an idea from them on how to respond

Jaroslav_Pullmann: we should look internally about the implications
… and prepare a response/ action on how to incorporate in the DCAT spec
… UCR editors could make a proposal for discussion with the DCAT group

Action: Jaroslav_Pullmann and UCR editors to take this to DCAT group

<trackbot> Created ACTION-100 - And ucr editors to take this to dcat group [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2018-04-10].

Jaroslav_Pullmann: can we spend some time in tomorrow's DCAT meeting

SimonCox: let's add it to the agenda

kcoyle: there will be many things that might not be resolved immediately
… can someone answer saying that we are looking at it in detail?

Action: Ixchel to respond at Øystein indicating that we are looking at the comments

<trackbot> Created ACTION-101 - Respond at Øystein indicating that we are looking at the comments [on Ixchel Faniel - due 2018-04-10].

SimonCox: Jaroslav_Pullmann there are a number of threads in this email from Øystein that would be more than one topic in the agenda tomorrow
… could you send me a suggestion on what to include in the agenda for tomorrow?

Jaroslav_Pullmann: next to Ixchel response we should say how we are dealing with the suggestions

<roba> Comments all seem to be about open issues not yet discussed in DCAT - but AFAICT will come down to profile mechanisms to choose common options around using additional properties - its all about finer grained description.

kcoyle: we will meet again in two weeks
… any other discussion topics?

kcoyle: we'll go ahead and publish the DCAT FPWD
… we can make a table of contacts of contacts. to distribute the info about the publication

kcoyle: talk to you in two weeks!

<riccardoalbertoni> bye, good night/day !

thanks, and bye!

<kcoyle> AndreaPerego: you still here? zakim is acting weird

Summary of Action Items

  1. kcoyle - get DaveR involved
  2. Jaroslav_Pullmann and UCR editors to take this to DCAT group
  3. Ixchel to respond at Øystein indicating that we are looking at the comments

Summary of Resolutions

  1. approve minutes of March 27
  2. Accept FPWD of DCAT, with "DCAT rev" as its designation for now
Minutes formatted by Bert Bos's scribe.perl version 2.41 (2018/03/23 13:13:49), a reimplementation of David Booth's scribe.perl. See CVS log.


Succeeded: s/lick/kick/

Succeeded: s/vcab-/vocab-/

Succeeded: s/a table/ a table of contacts.

Succeeded: s/a table/ a table of contacts/