– DRAFT –
DXWG Plenary

<kcoyle> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2018/‌10/‌30-dxwg-minutes

<kcoyle> proposed: accept Oct 30 minutes

<annette_g> +1

+1

<DaveBrowning> 0 (not present)

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

<antoine> 0

<riccardoAlbertoni> 0

<antoine> -1

<antoine> 0

antoine: missing regrets.. we can acknowledge here

<kcoyle> regrets from Oct 30 = Karen Coyle, Riccardo Albertoni, Dave Browning

Resolved: approve minutes of Oct 30 with addition of regrets for Karen Coyle, Riccardo Albertoni, Dave Browning

<kcoyle> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌open

open actions

antoine: still ongoing

kcoyle: suggest turn into a github issue

PWinstanley: reclassify #246,7 as DCAT

DCAT revision

alejandra: few minor PR merged - discussed priorities last week
… address main topics by mid-Jan
… need to discuss more, start assigning to people
… suggestion that releasing more PWDs brought more feedback

kcoyle: seems to help editors review progress and motivates reviews as they see responses
… need to solicit more feedback - what might help?

ncar: about to go into meeting - agencies usually use ISO19115 - but are exploring DCAT as a 'future state'

<Zakim> DaveBrowning, you wanted to ask about publishing moratoria

DaveBrowning: where are the 'blackout periods'

* Calendar infrastructure from W3C would be nice :-)

kcoyle: progress on abstracts in other languages?

ncar: will try to do Polish next week

<alejandra> the good thing is that the vocabulary also is translated to several languages

profile negotiation

<PWinstanley> point on the translations: at TPAC - Richard Ishida - might be able to help

<antoine> roba: we've handled issues

<antoine> nick: yes it's good for review

<antoine> roba: there's a proposal to change the editors.

<antoine> ... moving Ruben from editor to contributor

<antoine> roba: there's one point about QSA

<antoine> alejandra: I've spent time looking at the doc

<antoine> ... I did changes in the text, Lars merged them.

<antoine> ... some clarifications.

<antoine> ... and US English

<antoine> kcoyle: so there's one final PR to merge?

I will take final minor edits merge on today

<antoine> kcoyle: someone should ask the group to review the doc after these merges

kcoyle: please send out request to review when done - if today tomorrow we can ask for review by next meeting and vote on FPWD

Action: roba merge edits and announce to group for review

<trackbot> Created ACTION-255 - Merge edits and announce to group for review [on Rob Atkinson - due 2018-11-13].

profile guidance

antoine: not a lot of recent updates processed
… inputs from @kcoyle to incorporate
… conversation with Jaro re UCR and feeding requirement updates into guidance doc
… structure discussed at F2F proving a challenge for UCR, perhaps also Guidance doc

Profiles ontology

<alejandra> could you please include the issue number here?

<antoine> roba: we have a discussion on naming terms

<antoine> ... nick has made some suggestion on the is/has convention

<antoine> ... we can treat as an editorial change, we've got no installed base

<antoine> kcoyle: we can wait for comments

<antoine> roba: ok

<antoine> kcoyle: if there's a fair amount of work, then we could go with the current one

<antoine> roba: it's already done!

<alejandra> this is the PR roba is referring to: https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌532

antoine: we should go for it and wait for feedback
… homogenising now will help

<antoine> kcoyle: ok so this sound like the thing to do

<PWinstanley> milestone?

<antoine> ... but then can you freeze a draft?

<antoine> roba: happy to do it and then do an editorial review and then freeze

<antoine> kcoyle: question to the group: we've not done a group review

kcoyle: we havent done a group review

<antoine> ... we've decided to move to FPWD but haven't brought it to the group

<antoine> roba: not sure I understand

<antoine> ... it's been brought to the group last week

<antoine> ... a lot of comments have been made

<antoine> ... and handled

<antoine> ... what could we do more?

<antoine> kcoyle: there was not a group action (formal)

<antoine> ... people who have followed it have been engaged

<antoine> ... but for others it's unclear so we may want to set a period to allow others

<antoine> annette_g: it sounds a standard procedure to have a review period and vote after

<antoine> ... I'm not sure we've done it

<antoine> ... that said I'm ok with the current state

<antoine> Jaroslav_Pullmann: I've overlooked the request for review

<antoine> ... if there's time given until next Tuesday I could do it

<antoine> riccardoAlbertoni: I was involved in the review and put some suggestions

<antoine> ... I would prefer if in the future we've got an explicit call and period

<antoine> ... but as far as I'm concerned I'm ok with this version

<Zakim> DaveBrowning, you wanted to agree with annette_g

<antoine> DaveBrowning: +1 with annette_g 's summary

<antoine> ... following the procedure adds extra clarity

<antoine> ... so that we all agree with publishing

<kcoyle> straw poll: announce a review for the WG of profilesOnt to end Nov 13

<PWinstanley> +1

+1

<DaveBrowning> +1

<kcoyle> +1 from nick

<antoine> nick +1

ncar: +1

<annette_g> +1

<Jaroslav_Pullmann> +1

<alejandra> +1

<riccardoAlbertoni> +1

<antoine> +1 but voting I won't probably have the time to review so would again (benevolently) abstain when voting for FPWD

<antoine> alejandra: ok for some more days, but we shouldn't delay to make it public

<antoine> ... should we look for all 3 docs that are profile-related?

<antoine> kcoyle: profile guidance is not ready, it's only for profile negotiation and profile ontology

<antoine> alejandra: ok

<antoine> kcoyle: Dave, what do you need for moving to FPWD

<antoine> dsr: PubRuleChecker

<antoine> ... and permission for the short name

<antoine> ... from Philippe

* thanks antoine...

<antoine> ... subsequent versions would be more straightforward

<antoine> dsr: for namespace management we don't have a very formal policy

<PWinstanley> dsr please can you formally state this about document linkage - see minutes of last week's meeting for discussion on this where we need exact detail

<antoine> kcoyle: is it true that we don't have a namespace for the ontology, or has there been a discussion?

<antoine> dsr: there's been a discussion

<antoine> ... maybe the group could have a top-level ns

<antoine> kcoyle: we could discuss it before next Tuesday

<antoine> dsr: this would streamline discussion

<antoine> kcoyle: do we have short names?

<antoine> nick: we've have suggestions but no decision yet

<antoine> ... re PubRule, ReSpec checker we've run the doc through them already

<antoine> kcoyle: there could be an action on discussing short name and namespace with dsr

<antoine> nick: it would be alright

Action: roba to process merge for name change; announce document for review

<trackbot> Created ACTION-256 - Process merge for name change; announce document for review [on Rob Atkinson - due 2018-11-13].

<antoine> roba: I want an action on me to process the merge and provide the doc for reivew

<antoine> antoine: discussion on namespace and short name is between nick and dave or the WG?

proposals are in document already..

<antoine> dsr: I don't decide I'm passing it

<Zakim> DaveBrowning, you wanted to ask which namespaces

<antoine> DaveBrowning: we're talking about namespaces for the set of profile docs?

<antoine> kcoyle: two things: the docs and the ontology

<antoine> dsr: yes the two things: short names for reports and namespace for the ontology

<antoine> roba, is there 2 github issues that you can point the group to, so that we can discuss?

<antoine> dsr: how many more of these namespaces do you think you'd need?

#398

<antoine> nick: I've mailed something to dsr about the namespace and have suggestions for the short names

<antoine> ... I will send a mail

<antoine> kcoyle: great

<riccardoAlbertoni> thank you bye

<PWinstanley> bye