19:55:29 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwgdcat
19:55:29 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/04/18-dxwgdcat-irc
19:55:41 <SimonCox> rrsagent: make logs public
19:56:07 <SimonCox> meeting: DCAT team 2018-04-18
19:57:43 <NicholasCar> NicholasCar has joined #dxwgdcat
19:57:50 <NicholasCar> present+
19:58:47 <NicholasCar> Morning, can hear but will limit speach - sleeping kids
19:59:33 <PWinstanley> PWinstanley has joined #dxwgdcat
19:59:51 <PWinstanley> present+
19:59:55 <SimonCox> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:DCAT-Telecon2018.04.18
20:01:17 <SimonCox> regrets: Alejandra
20:01:21 <SimonCox> present+
20:01:53 <SimonCox> regrets: Makx
20:03:18 <DaveBrowning> DaveBrowning has joined #dxwgdcat
20:04:16 <riccardoAlbertoni> riccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwgdcat
20:05:16 <DaveBrowning> present+
20:05:59 <SimonCox> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:DCAT-Telecon2018.04.18
20:06:43 <riccardoAlbertoni> present+
20:06:59 <roba> roba has joined #dxwgdcat
20:07:08 <SimonCox> Problem with webex DaveBrowning ?
20:08:19 <DaveBrowning> Will join soon
20:08:28 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> stijn_goedertier_AIV has joined #dxwgdcat
20:08:39 <roba> present+
20:08:43 <NicholasCar> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/114
20:09:02 <NicholasCar> issue above is license/ODRL
20:09:02 <trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
20:09:45 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> present+
20:10:05 <PWinstanley> scribe: PWinstanley
20:10:30 <SimonCox> topic: confirm agenda
20:10:43 <SimonCox> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:DCAT-Telecon2018.04.18
20:11:49 <AndreaPerego> AndreaPerego has joined #dxwgdcat
20:12:20 <SimonCox> confirmed
20:12:35 <SimonCox> Topic: approve minutes of last meeting
20:12:44 <SimonCox> https://www.w3.org/2018/04/11-dxwgdcat-minutes
20:12:44 <AndreaPerego> present+ AndreaPerego
20:12:48 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:12:51 <riccardoAlbertoni> 0 ( i was absent)
20:12:58 <DaveBrowning> 0 also absent
20:13:01 <SimonCox> 0 (absent)
20:13:06 <PWinstanley> +1
20:13:10 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> +1
20:13:11 <NicholasCar> +1
20:13:27 <PWinstanley> resolved: approve minutes of last meeting
20:13:36 <SimonCox> topic: licenses and rights
20:13:48 <SimonCox> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/114
20:14:12 <SimonCox> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/114#issuecomment-382298577
20:14:40 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: drawing attention to this topic of discussion.  Makx providing clarification as per comments
20:15:55 <PWinstanley> ... in earlier conversations best practice would be to refer to existing, but we need to have the possibility of coping with new options and other elements that ODRL allows.
20:16:10 <NicholasCar> q+
20:16:18 <PWinstanley> ... An informal use case has been added.  Other contributions are welcomed
20:16:19 <SimonCox> ack NicholasCar
20:17:05 <SimonCox> Should we add odrl:hasPolicy as an additional property recommended for use on a dcat:Distribution?
20:17:08 <PWinstanley> NicholasCar: is it sensible to have policy associations?  Anything that retains flexibility is a good thing
20:17:55 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: OWL/RDFS constraints are not there, it is simply a recommendation
20:18:16 <PWinstanley> ... but do we formally include ODRL as a suggestion in the spec?
20:18:28 <PWinstanley> NicholasCar: I think that is helpful
20:18:34 <SimonCox> q?
20:18:40 <DaveBrowning> q+
20:18:44 <AndreaPerego> q+
20:19:10 <SimonCox> ack DaveBrowning
20:19:11 <PWinstanley> ... it is a useful pointer to developers/catalogue managers
20:20:27 <NicholasCar> q+
20:20:31 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: I agree with NicholasCar .  ODRL provides scope for wide coverage within the publishing industry and provides economies of scale - it is a one-stop shop
20:20:31 <SimonCox> ack AndreaPerego
20:20:38 <SimonCox> q?
20:22:02 <roba> if we need a machine readable validation around use of a recommended vocabulary then we have a formal profile..
20:22:08 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: we need to clarify the use cases where ODRL is helpful.  We already have dct:rights and others.  I don't recall any use case not covered by the generic
20:22:49 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: we are aware that there is no documented use case and hence NicholasCar has added a full additional use case specifically using ODRL
20:22:57 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> q+ on licensing use case
20:23:03 <PWinstanley> ... there needs to be proper guidance in the doc
20:23:52 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> Andrea refers to the ODRS http://schema.theodi.org/odrs/
20:24:04 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: We still need to discuss the the ODI vocabulary - ODRS
20:24:41 <PWinstanley> ... it is worth looking at this because they found a way to use a standard license and determine the text for the attribution.
20:24:54 <PWinstanley> ... this is dependent on the dataset that one is licensing
20:25:03 <SimonCox> ack NicholasCar
20:25:10 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: AndreaPerego can you please add to #114
20:26:06 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> q- (also wanted to comment on attribution URL / attribution text)
20:26:15 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> q-
20:26:31 <PWinstanley> NicholasCar: Am aware of ODRS.  Have used.  Next question is do we need both, or will ODRL do everything?  I'm implementing a license register in a project and will have an ODRL test case in Linked Data using real data
20:27:13 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: It is premature to consider the agenda proposal but that conversation provided issues that we add to the discussion
20:27:25 <SimonCox> topic: Consequences of expanded scope of dcat:Catalog
20:28:18 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: 2-3 weeks ago we agreed that DCAT would explicitly cover data services, but we haven't considered specific proposals for new properties
20:28:21 <SimonCox> specific or general property for catalog contents - https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/116
20:28:44 <PWinstanley> ... a long thread on issue 116 is about the range of dcat:Dataset.
20:29:24 <PWinstanley> ... the dcat:dataset pred has been used to link to things that hitherto would not have been considered as datasets,
20:30:18 <PWinstanley> ... but we are proposing to extend the use of dcat:dataset so that one looks at the items to determine their class rather than inferring from the range
20:31:00 <SimonCox> q?
20:31:04 <PWinstanley> ... Next step is to mint specific predicates for different catalogue contents
20:31:09 <NicholasCar> q+
20:31:16 <SimonCox> ack NicholasCar
20:31:43 <roba> we can hear you nick
20:32:16 <PWinstanley> NicholasCar: isn't this direct predicate minting against the qualified association pattern we are implementing elsewhere?
20:32:26 <PWinstanley> ... isnt' a generic approach better?
20:32:33 <SimonCox> q?
20:32:38 <NicholasCar> present-
20:33:20 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: when modelling the tension between generic and specific is always there.  No 'right' answer.  specific preds are there for 'important' relationships
20:33:47 <PWinstanley> ... The qualified association pattern requires a sideways look to determine the class
20:34:19 <roba> q+
20:34:21 <AndreaPerego> q+ to say that the two approaches (generic vs specific properties) are not mutually exclusive
20:34:33 <SimonCox> ack roba
20:34:42 <PWinstanley> ... in this situation the name of the predicate is unsuitable for classes that are not datasets.  If we are expanding to include services it makes sense to have a service-specific  pred
20:34:59 <SimonCox> Please see https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/wiki/Cataloguing-data-services
20:35:28 <SimonCox> q?
20:36:13 <roba> wonders if we are we talking about data sets exposed by services - or data-less transformation services?
20:36:29 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: the 2nd diagram in the above wiki page shows the most common use case and the relations between the service and the datasets
20:36:30 <SimonCox> q?
20:36:34 <SimonCox> ack AndreaPerego
20:36:34 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to say that the two approaches (generic vs specific properties) are not mutually exclusive
20:38:06 <roba> the proposal does not change the scope of dcat:dataset - it adds finer grained semantics around distribution
20:38:37 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: we have an example taken from different context that include resources that are dcat:Dataset, but we also have events which can be either datasets or physical things like chemical samples.
20:38:54 <SimonCox> q+
20:39:10 <PWinstanley> ... we need to leave the door open for diverse classes, so a generic property can help with this
20:39:13 <SimonCox> ack Si
20:39:16 <SimonCox> ack SimonCox
20:39:20 <roba> but is a data access service a virtualised "set of datasets" ?
20:39:37 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: in some examples in the past AndreaPerego you used dc:terms?
20:39:49 <SimonCox> dcterms:hasPart
20:39:53 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: yes, because  no other was available/suitable
20:40:14 <riccardoAlbertoni> s\dc:terms\dcterms:hasPart
20:40:17 <PWinstanley> ... the point is that this predicate is overused and it has become ambiguous
20:40:40 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: it is from observiing that that the motivation for other predicates originated
20:41:19 <PWinstanley> ... we should allow ourselves to include other predicates than dcat:dataset
20:41:32 <SimonCox> q?
20:41:36 <PWinstanley> ... and this means that we don't need to relax the range of this pred
20:41:48 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwgdcat
20:42:06 <PWinstanley> ... the thinking originates from observing what AndreaPerego has done before
20:42:23 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Hello everybody, I am travelling with no reliable connection.
20:43:04 <PWinstanley> ... this list of predicates will be small in number (<5) but will be specific to the class
20:43:21 <SimonCox> PROPOSED: the range of dcat:dataset shall not be relaxed, and the DCAT backbone shall have specific properties for other types of resource included in a catalog (sub-properties of dct:hasPart)
20:43:25 <SimonCox> q?
20:44:05 <SimonCox> PROPOSED: the range of dcat:dataset shall not be relaxed, and the DCAT backbone shall have specific membership predicates for other types of resource included in a catalog (sub-properties of dct:hasPart)
20:44:11 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> * Hi Andrea!
20:44:22 <AndreaPerego> q+ to ask is this includes a possible super-property for them
20:44:33 <SimonCox> ack AndreaPerego
20:44:33 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask is this includes a possible super-property for them
20:45:18 <SimonCox> PROPOSED: the range of dcat:dataset shall not be relaxed
20:45:21 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: for clasrification - the proposal is for 5 props, or are these to be sub-props of a more generic super-prop?
20:45:22 <SimonCox> issue #116
20:45:22 <trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
20:45:33 <riccardoAlbertoni> +1
20:45:40 <PWinstanley> s/clasrification /clarification /
20:45:59 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:46:02 <SimonCox> +1
20:46:04 <PWinstanley> +1
20:46:10 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1
20:46:11 <DaveBrowning> +1
20:46:13 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> +1
20:46:29 <roba> dataservice as a subtype of dataset that has1+ service distributions and may have multiple other datasets exposed (finer grained semantics?)
20:46:50 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:46:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/04/18-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:46:54 <SimonCox> so we can close  https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/116
20:47:26 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, make logs world
20:48:17 <PWinstanley> roba: I think this comes down to finer grained semantics. I think services look like datasets
20:48:43 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: the boundary between serialised resources and services is blurred
20:49:23 <roba> +1
20:49:40 <PWinstanley> RESOLVED: the range of dcat:dataset shall not be relaxed, and the DCAT backbone shall have specific membership predicates for other types of resource included in a catalog (sub-properties of dct:hasPart)
20:49:46 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:49:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/04/18-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:50:17 <SimonCox> q?
20:50:30 <AndreaPerego> chair: SimonCox
20:50:31 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:50:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/04/18-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:50:35 <SimonCox> class and property for data distribution service https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/180
20:50:47 <PWinstanley> Topic: issue 180
20:50:52 <roba> so if a distribution was able to specify service type would this motivation still hold?
20:51:17 <SimonCox> RESOLVED: the range of dcat:dataset shall not be relaxed
20:51:23 <riccardoAlbertoni> \me ok
20:51:51 <PWinstanley> s/RESOLVED: the range of dcat:dataset shall not be relaxed, and the DCAT backbone shall have specific membership predicates for other types of resource included in a catalog (sub-properties of dct:hasPart)/RESOLVED: the range of dcat:dataset shall not be relaxed/
20:52:35 <roba> (note a subproperty of dcat:dataset where range is a subclass of Dataset meets the proposal)
20:52:55 <roba> ... that was my suggestion
20:53:07 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: roba  please can you explain your vision in a diagram?
20:53:19 <SimonCox> q?
20:53:20 <roba> q+
20:53:21 <PWinstanley> ... then we can do a comparison
20:53:28 <SimonCox> ack roba
20:53:41 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:53:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/04/18-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:54:14 <PWinstanley> roba: going back to the original proposal - the one on the wiki page -- 2 classes, almost identical.
20:55:08 <roba> ok
20:55:22 <roba> so if a distribution was able to specify service type would this motivation still hold?
20:55:26 <SimonCox> ACTION: RobA to make more detailed counter-proposal
20:55:26 <trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
20:55:32 <SimonCox> q?
20:56:10 <roba> especially if a sub-type of Dataset which is a collection of other datsets is also supported (i.e we have data set relationships)
20:56:24 <roba> otherwise we may have multiple ways of doing this when those facilities are available
20:56:32 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: This goes back to the earlier part of the discussion - many solutions and we decide to give names to some properties and not others depending on the way the model is going to be used
20:56:52 <AndreaPerego> @roba, yes it holds for me. The service itself won't be "hidden" into a distribution, but a standalone entity.
20:57:06 <PWinstanley> ...  frm the discussion coming from AndreaPerego services needed to be first class objects in a data catalogue.
20:57:25 <PWinstanley> ... there might appear to be an implicit super class,
20:57:26 <roba> @AndreaPerego - yes it still will be as a sube type of Dataset...
20:57:28 <AndreaPerego> The distribution can be linked to the service, but it is the distribution itself.
20:57:43 <AndreaPerego> s/but it is the distribution itself/but it is not the distribution itself/
20:57:54 <PWinstanley> ... we might be mixing the abstractions in the background with requirements in the foreground.
20:58:08 <SimonCox> q?
20:58:09 <riccardoAlbertoni> q+
20:58:11 <roba> yes an implicit superclass would help but changes the range of dcat:dataset :-(
20:58:21 <PWinstanley> ... the diagram might be showing only a part view of the requirements, with some components not shown
20:59:15 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> Dear all, before this meeting ends - I started to include Øystein's proposals like here: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/56#issuecomment-382467602
20:59:33 <PWinstanley> I have lost audio
20:59:53 <roba> anyway - I'm pointing out what looks like an antipattern in the model, and missing consideration of the implications of service types in distribution semantics - i would rather see this discussed when those facilities are on the table
21:01:43 <PWinstanley> riccardoAlbertoni: the services are not only ones exposing data, they can be other types.  In this case it is perhaps better not to use a subclass.  It would be reasonable to have class specialisation if they are services exposing data, but a DCAT catalogue can include other kinds of services
21:02:18 <PWinstanley> ... it is not a matter of object orientation, it is a matter of what the classes represent
21:02:18 <roba> @riccardoAlbertoni I agree - but i would model it differently if thats the case...  we perhaps need a superclass or "mix-in" for generic catalog entry metadata
21:02:20 <SimonCox_> SimonCox_ has joined #dxwgdcat
21:02:45 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: this discussion needs to be continued next week
21:02:48 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
21:02:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/04/18-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
21:03:09 <AndreaPerego> +1 to riccardoAlbertoni
21:03:11 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
21:03:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/04/18-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
21:03:41 <PWinstanley> bye
21:03:41 <riccardoAlbertoni> bye
21:03:46 <stijn_goedertier_AIV> thanks all
21:03:47 <Jaroslav_Pullmann> bye!