– DRAFT –
DCAT-Telecon2019.02.06

<alejandra> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌wiki/‌Meetings:DCAT-Telecon2019.02.06

Confirm agenda

alejandra: Any other topic to discuss?
… And what about thinking about a new PWD?

Approve minutes from last meeting

<alejandra> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2019/‌01/‌30-dxwgdcat-minutes

<alejandra> +1

+1

<PWinstanley> +1

SimonCox: +1

Resolved: Approve minutes from last meeting

Outstanding actions

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

PWinstanley: I made some progress on the very old ones

<PWinstanley> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌726

<alejandra> closing #173, #174, #197

close action-173

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

close action-174

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

close action-197

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

<alejandra> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌134

<alejandra> AndreaPerego: I will check the current draft and see what text could be integrated

<alejandra> it could go on Introduction: https://‌w3c.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat/#introduction

<alejandra> or in Motivation for change: https://‌w3c.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat/#motivation

<alejandra> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌282

<alejandra> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌270 can be closed

<alejandra> close action-270

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

<alejandra> close action-278

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

<alejandra> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌278

Public comments list

<alejandra> https://‌lists.w3.org/‌Archives/‌Public/‌public-dxwg-comments/

alejandra: The most recent ones have been addressed, right?
… We still have to reply to Ine (and Luca).

<alejandra> AndreaPerego: About Ine's reply, I'll check if we are addressing the issue

Action: AndreaPerego to reply to Ine's message on comments list

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

<alejandra> https://‌lists.w3.org/‌Archives/‌Public/‌public-dxwg-comments/‌2019Jan/‌0005.html

AndreaPerego: This was fixed in the UCR via a PR, and Jaro replied to the mail.

alejandra: Stephen raised some issues in GH, but we haven't replied on the mailing list.
… Should we do that, as per possible W3C requirements?

PWinstanley: I would try to be pragmatic here. What is important is getting feedback.

Action: alejandra to check comments list for missing replies

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

Review open DCAT pull requests if required

<alejandra> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌735

alejandra: Please review outstanding PRs - some following up from yesterday's sprint

<alejandra> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌730

alejandra: There's also one related to the "bag of files" issue. Should we wait for Makx's review?

PWinstanley: Let's wait for Makx.

SimonCox: I tried to fold his comments in the current examples, so better wait for him. It has no impact on the rest we are doing.

<alejandra> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22due+for+closing%22+label%3A%22dcat%22

alejandra: So, what is left is next sprint planning. And some open issues ^^
… Should we look at them?

SimonCox: +1 from me.

alejandra: About https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌224
… So, should this be for the UCR to decide if it should go in?

<riccardoAlbertoni_> yes I agree

PWinstanley: +1

<alejandra> AndreaPerego: this can be linked to another action for me

<alejandra> ... about including examples about licensing and rights

<alejandra> ... and how to use the different properties

<alejandra> ... such as odrl:hasPolicy etc

<alejandra> ... I'll get in touch with Nick

Action: AndreaPerego to add examples related to licensing and rights (see https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌224)

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

<alejandra> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌81

<alejandra> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌pull/‌651

<alejandra> final 'due for closing': https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌80

About licences and rights there's already a issue in GH: https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌676

SimonCox: About #80, this is in a non-normative part, and I'm unsure how long I should go.
… I tried to illustrate how this alignment with qualified forms can work.
… Maybe is just for corner cases.
… But this issue was not addressed systematically.
… If anyone has an interest in it, please step in. It might end up in a normative section.

alejandra: Indeed it may be a niche thing - and I see the requirement is yet to be approved.
… Do we keep the issue for the moment, or we are going to close it as we won't be able to address it?

SimonCox: My understanding is a low concern. We can close it. Maybe with a note saying we were not going on with it.

alejandra: Can you make a proposal then?

SimonCox: Yes.

alejandra: So I'll tag the issue so that we can come back to it if we have time.

<alejandra> proposed: label issue 80 as wontfix and close it adding a comment that we are not going to deal with this issue as too specific/niche

<SimonCox> +1

<alejandra> +1

+1

<riccardoAlbertoni_> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

Resolved: label issue 80 as wontfix and close it adding a comment that we are not going to deal with this issue as too specific/niche

<alejandra> Milestone: https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌milestone/‌14

alejandra: Should we now look in other issues?
… Quite a few of them are editorial, and Dave is assigned to them.

<Zakim> SimonCox, you wanted to ask about editor/contributor list

SimonCox: About contributors. I think a couple of people on the call made quite a few contributions, so it might be worth giving them full credit.

<PWinstanley> +1

<alejandra> +1

SimonCox: About the issue concerning Annette proposal, it is probably still incomplete and relates to a specific case of API automation.
… The scope is a bit different from the general one.

<SimonCox> re list of DCAT editors ... to add riccardoAlbertoni_ and AndreaPerego to list of editors in recognition of their substantial contributions to the document

PWinstanley: I think we should still give it a chance to make the point.
… I also think the machine-to-machine perspective is worth being considered.

SimonCox: One of the issues is that I don't completely catch Annette's proposal.
… So I'm concerned on the impact that it may have on the spec.

PWinstanley: I don't disagree, but I think that trying somehow to think of people writing tools when talking about services.

<SimonCox> I'm looking at Annette's proposal here https://‌agreiner.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat/#dcat-scope

PWinstanley: We need to put a bridge.

alejandra: I do see the value. What is unclear is why we need, e.g, a class instead of a property for this.

<alejandra> AndreaPerego: I was also trying to catch the point made by Annette - one of the things we should consider whether it is or not in scope of DCAT

<alejandra> ... one of the examples was about the description of the interface

<alejandra> ... she was talking about human targetted description of it

<alejandra> ... maybe this information should not be in DCAT but in the API description linked from DCAT such as Swagger, OpenAPI, etc

<alejandra> ... this is what people are using for doing this job

<alejandra> ... description of search capabilities

<PWinstanley> +1 to AndreaPerego , but we need to be explicit about this

<alejandra> ... we are not saying how to do these things within DCAT, we point to other language specifications that are designed to do the job

<alejandra> ... from a developer perspective, I'd be happy to reuse what is out there rather than having to adapt my code

<PWinstanley> we need to explicitly delegate

<alejandra> ... I may not be catching completely the point

<alejandra> ... but we could consider if the requirements are or not in scope

<riccardoAlbertoni_> +1 to AndreaPerego consideration about the scope

<PWinstanley> ? does Hydra have something to offer too?

alejandra: Maybe it would be good to have an example to clarify the points.

SimonCox: Yes, I think we should ask Annette to provide examples to move the discussion forward.

<SimonCox> In order to understand the scope of Annette's proposal, need to see a worked example, then we can tell if AndreaPerego response is suffucient

<alejandra> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌675

<alejandra> AndreaPerego: wanted to reply about PWinstanley comment about Hydra

<alejandra> ... there is one example by Luca Trani

<alejandra> ... and it is yet another way of doing things

<alejandra> ... we don't need to enumerate the specs

<alejandra> ... we say 'use what is out there to do the job'

<riccardoAlbertoni_> yess

alejandra: Thanks. We can then close the meeting.

<PWinstanley> bye

<riccardoAlbertoni_> Thanks a lot, bye

[meeting adjourned]