– DRAFT –
DCAT team 2014-04-04

<SimonCox> rrsagent make logs public

<SimonCox> rrsagent: make logs public

<SimonCox> present?

<SimonCox> zakim: who is present?

<SimonCox> rrsagent: who is present?

<SimonCox> rrsagent: present?

scribe NicholasCar

confirm agenda

<SimonCox> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌wiki/‌Meetings:DCAT-Telecon2018.04.04

<alejandra> could we maybe discuss the pending pull request: https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌183 ?

<alejandra> ok, thanks

<alejandra> SimonCox: we can slot that topic in after we heard from Rob

confirm minutes for last week

confirm minutes

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

<alejandra> 0 (wasn't present)

<SimonCox> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

<DaveBrowning> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

+1

<roba> +0

Resolved: confirm munutes for last week

new chair required next week

<alejandra> I'm on leave and not sure if I will be able to join (depending on wifi availability)

I have nothing particular on

<roba> maybe skip next week?

no!

no!

Action: Simon to contact Peter to chair next week

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

reminder about working spaces

SimonCox: please draft material in wiki spaces

SimonCox: collaboration process will be explained better soon (today)

RobA will report on profiles work

<SimonCox> Please use https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌wiki/‌DCAT-Profiles-Topics

RobA: only a mall group, Reuben, Lars and him, mostly about HTTP headers

<roba> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌tree/‌roba-profile/‌dcat/‌rdf

RobA: has introduced a profile.ttl and profile_examples.ttl ontology and examples of profiling

SimonCox: suggests use of wiki to introduce profiles work not in RDF (accessible)

<Makx> preent+ Makx

<alejandra> NicholasCar: first to say that the profiling work is important for W3C in general to address it

<alejandra> ... I propose to separate out from the DCAT work in its own module

<alejandra> ... I've written out a summary

<alejandra> ... I've sent it to kcoyle and she has sent me comments

<alejandra> ... I haven't read it in detail but she suggests that separating out could be done in the F2F

<alejandra> ... we've proposed a few profiles (e.g. DCAT 2014 as a profile of the revised DCAT)

<alejandra> ... three different implementations happening anyway

<alejandra> ... RobA's ontology

<alejandra> ... I started to write up what is a profile and how to use it

(thanks for scribing Alejandra!)

RobA: profiling is metadata about profiling, not a methodology

<alejandra> is there a link to that ontology?

RobA: doesn't intend to replace a constraints language

<alejandra> is it in the branch you pointed out?

https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌tree/‌roba-profile/‌dcat/‌rdf

link to ont above

<roba> i will put up a wiki page too

I was going to suggest work on a wiki page as next step regardless

Action: RobA to extablish a profiles wiki page

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

address outstanding pull request for ED

<SimonCox> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌183

SimonCox: the pull adds in red boxes to the draft

<SimonCox> https://‌rawgit.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌dcat-catalog-scope-simon/‌dcat/‌index.html

SimonCox: inclusions in document after issue, are these ok?

alejandra: changes to text only and they are useful so should be ok

<AndreaPerego> I think that, formally, we need a resolution from the DCAT group, and after ask a vote (via mail) from the WG

Jaroslav_Pullmann: scope extension is significat, should be included

<SimonCox> Proposed: accept PR 183 for FPWD

<alejandra> +1

<DaveBrowning> +1

0

<AndreaPerego> 0

<roba> 0

<SimonCox> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

<roba> * nick pass scribe baton to me when you wish...

Resolved: accept PR 183 for FPWD

(fine rob, unless you really want to do this!)

license and rights

<roba> * not really :-) thanks

<SimonCox> domain https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌104 - MakxDekkers

Action: SimonCox to report pull req decision to Karen

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

<SimonCox> Makx not on audio?

<SimonCox> do this first then: range https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌114 - NicholasCar

<alejandra> NicholasCar: I had promised to present to the group more thoughts and the outcome of having a relaxed range would be

<alejandra> ... I've looked at ODRL v2

<alejandra> ... no mention of licenses in ODRL v2 but my understanding is that would fall into Agreement

<alejandra> ... I've looked into common licenses and started to break them down into their parts

<alejandra> ... it makes sense to express licenses in ODRL v2 way

<alejandra> NicholasCar: I did a small extension of ODRL 2 to add License

<Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to note POE WG publish BPs which include a section on how to represent standard licences - http://‌w3c.github.io/‌poe/‌bp/

<alejandra> NicholasCar: I was thinking on contacting ODRL people

<SimonCox> (Renato Iannella is in Brisbane!)

<Jaroslav_Pullmann_> Andrea, do you have a link to the mentioned work of the ODRL group?

<AndreaPerego> http://‌w3c.github.io/‌poe/‌bp/

<Jaroslav_Pullmann_> thanks!

SimonCox: this is a test of the completed ODRL2 work

<alejandra> Jaroslav_Pullmann_: what is the objective?

<alejandra> NicholasCar: allow a machine express a license

<alejandra> ... automatically surface certain message that people might need to agree to

<alejandra> ... restrict access to data

Jaroslav_Pullmann: will be meeting ODRL@ colleagues next week in Vienna

<AndreaPerego> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2018/‌vocabws/

<SimonCox> NicholasCar: will be setting up register of common licenses

<SimonCox> ... will allow us to have confidence that there will be something for DCAT predicates to point to

<SimonCox> SimonCox: so we can develop the predicates (use, access, obligations) in DCAT

<SimonCox> makx: development of license details is outside scope of DCAT

AndreaPerego: we should make ODRL2 group aware of our interests since they are preparing a Best Practice document

AndreaPerego: we can delegate relevant work to us to ODRL2 group

AndreaPerego: we have or can do a similar delegation for data quality to DQV

<SimonCox> AndreaPerego: delegate like we also do for data quality

Jaroslav_Pullmann: we need to better cater for different clients (automated clients)

roba: the concern seems to be the attachement point of dataset -> license, not license details

Makx: licenses & rights out of scope for this group, agrees we need to know how to link to them, has laready stated you can use dct:LicenseDocument or odrl:Policy

<alejandra> +1 to Makx's comment

<SimonCox> odrl:hasPolicy is the appropriate super-property, DCAT may need a taxonomy underneath that

<SimonCox> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌104

license domain

SimonCox: we appear to have reached concensus

Makx: (summarising) one SHOULD put it on Distribution, one MAY put it on Datasets but SHOULD NOT put it on Dataset and not Distribution and if there are multiple, there may be a conflict

SimonCox: can close the issue when resulting changes have been made in doc & RDF

Action: Makx will try to do these changes via Pull Request

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

SimonCox: we (editors) will provides notes for this

AndreaPerego: we will need to wait until after the FPWD to accept this PR - SimonCox agrees

<SimonCox> proposed: close issue 104, when makx has completed action

<SimonCox> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

<DaveBrowning> +1

+1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann_> +1

<Makx> +1

Resolved: close issue 104, when makx has completed action

<alejandra> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann_> bye!

thanks Andrea!

<alejandra> thanks, and bye!