– DRAFT –
DXWG DCAT subgroup teleconference 18 October 2018 8:30 UTC
18 October 2018
<PWinstanley> http://www.semantechs.co.uk/model-viewer/
<DaveBrowning> presetnt+
0
<DaveBrowning> +1
Approved: minutes approved
most actions need to remain open
there have been no comments
https://doodle.com/poll/k56yprbesi6ewtks
Tuesday 21:00 is the most voted, but overlaps with the plenary
21: 00 UTC
Other options are Wed 21:00 UTC or Wed 22:00 UTC
where Wed 21:00 UTC doesn't guarantee DaveBrowning attending every week
and Wed 22:00 UTC having Andrea and Riccardo with 'if need be'
DaveBrowning: we'll try to sort out my conflict
DaveBrowning: let's go for 21:00 UTC on Wednesdays
<Makx> +1
+1
<DaveBrowning> +1
<PWinstanley> +1 for 21:00
Makx, so you can review this PR for this evening please?
<Makx> yes
thanks
Action: Makx to review https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/459 by this evening
<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
as the 2nd PWD has been published, I propose to close the PR now
the branch will remain open
<Makx> where is the 2PWD? I can't find it. Did we agree which message to send and where?
but we don't need to have the PR open anymore
and it shouldn't be merged
2nd PWD is here: https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat-2/
we agreed on the plenary that we need to publicise it
Introductory message and Spanish translation available in the wiki
<DaveBrowning> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/DCAT_revision_-_public_working_drafts#Spanish_translation
We agreed in closing the 2nd PWD PR
<DaveBrowning> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Arequirement+label%3Adcat
DaveBrowning: there needs to be guidance on the consequences of different decisions
… how we respond to the collection of requirements about versioning
… what to include in the normative and not normative part
… maybe the focus could be on informative recommendations
alejandra: Ideally, we should provide more normative details if possible, but the time constraints are a problem
PWinstanley: difficulty will be in interoperability if different organisations propose their own solutions
PWinstanley: we should identify the issues that people should not do in certain ways
DaveBrowning: if we had more time, we could do a good job, but not so sure for the end of the year
PWinstanley: finding out with Dave R and Philippe L about how much time we've got
DaveBrowning: question about subsets is another area where we are using subsets and distributions that are informationally equivalent
<PWinstanley> This is from Philippe "You can also use our milestones calculator as well. https://w3c.github.io/spec-releases/milestones/ For example, if you were to publish the Recommendation on June 27, your latest day to publish the Candidate Recommendation would be April 11: https://w3c.github.io/spec-releases/milestones/?rec=2019-06-27"
DaveBrowning: issue about expressivity... we haven't acknowledge the need to have relationships between distributions other than the parent
… master dataset and subdatasets, so that the subdatasets have distributions
… this ensures that the distributions are informationally equivalent
alejandra: we can recommend this representation as the 'proper' way
… so that distributions are informationally equivalent