20:33:05 RRSAgent has joined #dxwg 20:33:05 logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-irc 20:33:12 Zakim has joined #dxwg 20:33:18 rrsagent, make logs public 20:33:27 meeting: DXWG plenary 20:33:32 chair: Karen Coyle 20:33:45 regrets+ : David Browning (probable), Nicholas Car (probable) 20:33:51 present+ 20:45:25 rrsagent, create minutes v2 20:45:25 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html kcoyle 20:56:40 PWinstanley has joined #dxwg 20:57:03 present+ 20:58:35 roba has joined #dxwg 21:00:08 AndreaPerego has joined #dxwg 21:00:17 present+ 21:00:33 agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2019.02.19 21:00:39 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 21:00:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 21:01:16 Makx has joined #dxwg 21:01:41 present+ Makx 21:03:08 present+ 21:03:12 antoine has joined #dxwg 21:03:19 present+ antoine 21:07:48 riccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwg 21:09:45 scribenick: PWinstanley 21:10:12 topic: agenda 21:10:26 meeting: DXWG Plenary 21:10:40 https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2019.02.19 21:11:09 https://www.w3.org/2019/02/12-dxwg-minutes 21:11:30 topic: approve last week minutes 21:11:31 proposed: accept minutes 21:11:37 +1 21:11:42 0 not there 21:11:42 +1 21:11:43 +1 21:11:43 0 ( i was not there) 21:11:49 0 21:11:52 +1 21:12:00 resolved: accept minutes 21:12:09 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 21:12:09 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 21:12:18 topic: open action items 21:12:18 topic: open action items 21:12:44 kcoyle: there are no plenary open actions, but there are plenty from subgroup activity, some going back some time 21:13:04 ... e.g. #135 - #175, #193 21:13:21 s/topic: open action items// 21:13:34 roba: #193 is still open, there are conneg issues in discussion and the test suite is in development 21:14:06 SimonCox has joined #dxwg 21:15:18 present+ 21:15:52 present+ 21:16:14 kcoyle: discussion on individual open items 21:16:34 alejandra has joined #dxwg 21:17:13 mail about 244 at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-dxwg-wg/2019Feb/0309.html 21:17:29 q+ 21:17:39 ... the issue of profiles has come up in multiple places, but we need to make a decision on action 244, but it is complex and so cannot be done quickly 21:17:42 ack antoine 21:17:42 present+ 21:18:33 kcoyle: is it better to break down to smaller pieces? 21:18:38 antoine: it may be that we discuss aspects of it. e.g. #769 discussion would be related to what I'm trying to cover 21:19:00 q+ 21:19:31 kcoyle: Peter and I will think about this and come up wiht a plan 21:19:31 antoine: let's keep it on the agenda for a couple of weeks and see if the issues get some focus and then I'll relate these to this work 21:19:34 ack AndreaPerego 21:20:34 AndreaPerego: what is the current situation - there is a confusion re: what a resource descriptor is. Some say a distribution, but others say it is between a profile distribution and the profile itself. I think it is like a distribution 21:20:52 +1 its just a qualified association to an artefact/resource as a dcat:Distribution is 21:21:26 ... we shouldn't complicate the data model 21:21:29 ... for me I've not yet seen a strong case for something intermediating between a profile and its distribution. The distribution is the artefact. 21:21:47 ... Same with roles - concept or relationship. It can be a relationship 21:22:25 q+ 21:22:40 ack antoine 21:22:42 kcoyle: to me this gets to the basic model, and we need to agree this prior to moving forward. We need to bring this down to a vote so we see where people are. 21:23:29 +1 to looking at concrete examples - I found them very useful in DCAT discussions 21:23:48 +1 to examples 21:24:09 antoine: this is worth a plenary discussion - 30+ mins. A lot of discussion happens without looking at concrete examples, and from those I can illustrate why I think there is a need for the intermediate level. I think that AndreaPerego and I agree, but perhaps others don't 21:24:20 q+ 21:24:24 kcoyle: who can create sensible readable examples? 21:24:39 ack roba 21:24:59 q+ 21:25:40 roba: there are examples, Makx showed one at the F2F. 21:25:55 Put example snippets into the issues - don't rely on people going out to the repo 21:26:16 at least put specific links into the issue thread 21:26:25 https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/profilesont/examples/ 21:26:32 ... Examples are through the profiles ont doc 21:26:41 kcoyle: we need links. issue #529. Put snippets into the issue 21:26:52 ... let's do the discussion there 21:27:03 ack antoine 21:27:38 https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof/ 21:27:49 antoine: I'm volunteering to add these examples in my docs (examples -> URIs) 21:28:38 q+ 21:28:39 kcoyle: are you pointing to roba examples? 21:28:58 antoine: I think I have, I'm trying to link the prof vocab to other things 21:30:02 antoine: I wouldn't put everything in #529 - it is large and will become unwieldy 21:30:24 q+ to briefly comment on PROF examples - e.g., https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof/#ex-1-dcat-ap-described-using-profile-ontology-in-rdf-turtle 21:30:27 q+ 21:30:52 ... but we probably shouldn't have another issue for everything. I can refer to the section of my alignment from #529 21:30:55 ack AndreaPerego 21:30:55 AndreaPerego, you wanted to briefly comment on PROF examples - e.g., https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof/#ex-1-dcat-ap-described-using-profile-ontology-in-rdf-turtle 21:30:57 kcoyle: do we deal with this as a whole, or fragments? 21:31:52 AndreaPerego: some examples in the prof onto are not clear. the one I linked to is about DCAT, but it seems misaligned with the discussion 21:31:58 +1 to Andrea's point: this is the sort of inconsistency that would make work on it hard 21:32:37 yes - that example is broken - the one in the github is right :-( 21:32:53 q+ 21:33:03 ack roba 21:33:06 kcoyle: we may need new examples 21:33:56 roba: AndreaPerego picked up an incorrect example. I will look at it - it is an editorial problem 21:34:04 Jaroslav_Pullmann has joined #dxwg 21:34:11 present+ 21:34:24 ... #529 was originally an alignment to DCAT, but the prof voc doc needs to emphasise the relation 21:34:38 ack antoine 21:34:52 This whole discussion was triggered when Max showed how they had shoe-horned profile descriptions into a DCAT structure. roba picked this up and has tried to clarify it or explore it. We do need to be clear about whether we want Profile descriptions dependent on DCAT in this way ... 21:35:11 antoine: this is not about one specific example, there is no example of prof as artefact in the prof onto doc 21:35:30 ... perhaps it is good for roba to sort this prior to other work on this 21:35:35 message to roba - it doesn't work to refer only to examples in the repo, when in fact they are inconsistens 21:35:39 s/prof as artefact/prof:hasArtifact 21:35:41 action: roba to clean up examples 21:35:43 Created ACTION-295 - to clean up examples [on Rob Atkinson - due 2019-02-26]. 21:35:47 s/inconsistens/inconsistent/ 21:36:17 ... and then put snippets into the issues (they will be dated by the issue comment) 21:36:25 q+ 21:36:30 kcoyle: we have a way forward - look at examples, then work out how to move forward with the diagrams antoine is making 21:36:31 ack antoine 21:37:25 antoine: in the meantime I'll focus on specific issues, and when roba updates the examples i need to confirm my understanding of the ontology 21:37:39 ... being involved in the paper on prov I'm familiar with this area, but need to double check after the example update 21:37:55 s/Max/Makx 21:38:13 dsr has joined #dxwg 21:38:16 q+ 21:38:23 ack Jaroslav_Pullmann 21:38:31 topic: votes 21:38:33 and there is a PR to implement the change from ontology to vocabulary: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/768 21:38:36 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 21:38:36 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 21:38:37 kcoyle: Next Item: the vote in favour of renaming the profiles ontology to a profile vocabulary 21:38:43 https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/rdf_entity/http_e_f_fdata_ceuropa_ceu_fw21_f6f27f059_bf785_b4d7d_bb602_b6448aab73bd5 is a dcat:Distribution - and is in fact a Resoruce descriptor .. it is missing the artefact link: which shoul;d be https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/distribution/2015-06/dcat-ap_revision_draft_5_v0.05.docx 21:38:53 Jaroslav_Pullmann: a vocabulary is normally a set of qualified values, whereas the ontology is a model 21:39:03 ... what is the rationale? 21:39:26 +1 to jaro 21:39:29 q+ 21:39:30 q+ 21:39:31 https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-vocab/ 21:39:44 https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-model/ 21:39:53 prof defiens a namesapce and doesnt "combine" - i.e. profile other vocabularies 21:40:01 kcoyle: from a comment received - in some peoples' minds (W3C is equivocal) an ontology is in a single namespace, but a vocabulary combines them 21:40:25 Jaroslav_Pullmann: there is no hard rule, but this was my understanding 21:40:30 ack AndreaPerego 21:41:07 +1 to AndreaPerego 21:41:31 AndreaPerego: to add confusion, what Jaroslav_Pullmann calls a vocabulary is often called a controlled vocabulary, but in the semweb world there is a tendency for situations that are heavily axiomatised the term 'ontology' is used, but for lighter semantics the term 'vocabulary' is used 21:41:37 https://lov.linkeddata.es/ linked open vocabularies 21:42:28 .... but this distinction is very domain dependent 21:42:35 ack roba 21:42:44 +1 to AndreaPerego's description, which also differs from the hierarchy of controlled vocabulary/thesaurus/ontology 21:42:44 ... my vote in favour of using 'vocabulary' is because of the low level of axiomatisation 21:42:53 roba: I'm agnostic. 21:43:04 ... different sides of the same coin 21:43:20 ... to be consistent with DCAT we might as well use the term 'vocabulary' 21:43:21 RESOLVED: rename Profiles Ontology to Profiles Vocabulary 21:43:26 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 21:43:26 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 21:43:44 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/747#issuecomment-464371792 21:44:26 kcoyle: another issue for voting: should we include prof in the next WD. 12 votes in favour 21:44:31 q+ 21:44:36 ack roba 21:45:20 q+ 21:45:25 roba: were a set of roles defined in another doc, moving those into the ontology doc is fine. 21:45:31 kcoyle: we want them listed in the doc so that people actually see them - it is not about namespace 21:46:08 q+ to ask a clarification why properties will prevent the use of multiple roles 21:46:29 ack antoine 21:46:30 roba: we cannot action that until we know what they look like. we might need expert advice on OWL DL to ensure consistency 21:46:45 antoine: I think they can be in the same namespace for the moment 21:46:47 +1 to use the same namespace 21:47:11 +1 21:47:30 ... I think we should keep things simple 21:47:33 +1 to antoine's suggestion 21:47:34 ack AndreaPerego 21:47:34 AndreaPerego, you wanted to ask a clarification why properties will prevent the use of multiple roles 21:47:34 ... this depends on the conclusion to the discussion on how to present roles 21:47:59 AndreaPerego: what is the reason? why can we not have multiple relationships? 21:48:16 roba: I suppose you can repeat the relationship 21:48:41 ... unusual pattern of A with 5 relationships to B, but it can be done 21:48:53 resolved: Include a core set of roles in the next working draft of the Profiles Vocabulary 21:48:59 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 21:48:59 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 21:49:26 I see no problem with multiple roles on one relationship 21:49:37 kcoyle: I will include a link to this resolution in the issue, so that everything is connected. 21:49:42 the association class is an artefact to handle exactly this kind of thing 21:49:54 kcoyle: Next Item: there are many open issues - many seem to be dormant 21:50:13 but ResourceDescriptor is the association class - thats the pattern we currently have... 21:50:15 ... or they are done but not closed 21:50:34 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/3 21:50:54 ... if possible 21:50:54 q+ 21:51:05 (i looked at each.. +1 to close them all) 21:51:07 kcoyle: Let's work through these quickly 21:51:10 ack antoine 21:51:29 antoine: it has been merged. 21:51:45 try this view ... https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc 21:51:46 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/7 21:52:12 +q 21:53:03 alejandra: I think we can - but there is a list that Makx put together , let's check that they are on the spreadsheet for the implementation analysis 21:53:54 kcoyle: can Makx copy to the wiki page? 21:54:31 proposed: close #7 after Makx copies his info to the wiki page 21:54:42 +1 21:54:43 +1 21:54:45 +1 21:54:46 +1 21:55:09 resolved: close #7 after Makx copies his info to the wiki page 21:55:16 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/9 21:55:59 action: Jaroslav_Pullmann will close issue #9 21:56:00 Created ACTION-296 - Will close issue #9 [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2019-02-26]. 21:56:33 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/14 21:56:57 resolved: closed #14 21:57:02 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 21:57:02 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 21:57:03 q+ 21:57:23 ack alejandra 21:57:27 ack alejandra 21:57:51 antoine: if we close them because they are done, then add a note so that we know what was done 21:58:00 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/32 21:58:41 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/37 21:59:11 alejandra: I'll check issue #37 21:59:15 action: alejandra check issue #37 21:59:17 Created ACTION-297 - Check issue #37 [on Alejandra Gonzalez Beltran - due 2019-02-26]. 21:59:56 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 21:59:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 21:59:57 https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/38 22:00:03 q+ 22:00:09 https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/#ID50 22:00:35 antoine: I think I've found something like this - 22:00:55 action: Jaroslav_Pullmann issue #38 22:00:56 Created ACTION-298 - Issue #38 [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2019-02-26]. 22:01:28 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 22:01:28 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 22:01:40 please use https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-asc to find issues to close 22:01:49 bye 22:01:51 thanks! bye 22:01:52 Thanks, bye bye! 22:01:54 thanks & bye! 22:01:57 present- 22:02:13 RRSAgent, draft minutes v2 22:02:13 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html AndreaPerego 22:02:50 rrsagent, create minutes v2 22:02:50 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/02/19-dxwg-minutes.html PWinstanley 22:15:51 dsr has joined #dxwg