19:47:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwgdcat
19:47:32 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-irc
19:47:34 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:47:34 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #dxwgdcat
19:47:36 <trackbot> Meeting: Dataset Exchange Working Group Teleconference
19:47:36 <trackbot> Date: 08 May 2019
19:47:56 <DaveBrowning> meeting:DXWG DCAT subgroup teleconference 08 May 2019 20:00 UTC
19:48:18 <DaveBrowning> meeting: DXWG DCAT subgroup teleconference 08 May 2019 20:00 UTC
19:48:31 <DaveBrowning> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:DCAT-Telecon2019.05.08
19:49:03 <DaveBrowning> regrets: Lars Svensson, Makx
19:49:18 <DaveBrowning> rrsagent, draft minutes v2
19:49:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html DaveBrowning
19:56:32 <PWinstanley> PWinstanley has joined #dxwgdcat
20:06:32 <riccardoAlbertoni> riccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwgdcat
20:07:14 <riccardoAlbertoni> present+
20:08:02 <SimonCox> SimonCox has joined #dxwgdcat
20:08:09 <SimonCox> present+
20:10:03 <PWinstanley> present+
20:10:10 <DaveBrowning> present+
20:10:15 <DaveBrowning> chair: DaveBrowning
20:10:35 <PWinstanley> scribenick PWinstanley
20:10:52 <DaveBrowning> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:DCAT-Telecon2019.05.08
20:11:00 <PWinstanley> topic: Admin
20:11:09 <alejandra> alejandra has joined #dxwgdcat
20:11:15 <PWinstanley> meeting: DXWG DCAT meeting
20:13:07 <PWinstanley> proposed: agree minutes https://www.w3.org/2019/04/17-dxwgdcat-minutes
20:13:12 <PWinstanley> +1
20:13:30 <DaveBrowning> +1
20:13:34 <alejandra> 0 (was absent)
20:13:34 <SimonCox> +1
20:13:38 <alejandra> present+
20:14:04 <SimonCox> Sorry - regrets on that one - 0
20:14:18 <riccardoAlbertoni_> riccardoAlbertoni_ has joined #dxwgdcat
20:14:46 <SimonCox> minutes https://www.w3.org/2019/04/17-dxwgdcat-minutes
20:14:57 <riccardoAlbertoni_> +1
20:15:00 <PWinstanley> resolved: agree minutes https://www.w3.org/2019/04/17-dxwgdcat-minutes
20:15:09 <AndreaPerego> AndreaPerego has joined #dxwgdcat
20:15:19 <PWinstanley> proposed: agree minutes https://www.w3.org/2019/05/01-dxwgdcat-minutes
20:15:28 <PWinstanley> 0 - not there
20:15:29 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:15:35 <DaveBrowning> +1
20:15:38 <riccardoAlbertoni_> +0 (I was not there)
20:15:43 <SimonCox> +1
20:15:54 <PWinstanley> resolved: agree minutes https://www.w3.org/2019/05/01-dxwgdcat-minutes
20:16:21 <PWinstanley> topic: content of DCAT CR
20:16:25 <DaveBrowning> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestone/14
20:16:37 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: are we finished yet?
20:16:41 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:16:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:16:57 <SimonCox> SHould remove NOTE in Section 4
20:17:17 <PWinstanley> ... there are a few editorial fixes needed, but apart from that we had addressed everything yesterday
20:17:32 <AndreaPerego> q+ to note there's alejandra's draft PR: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/803
20:17:42 <PWinstanley> ... We probably need to make a statement of how we proceed
20:17:42 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:17:42 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to note there's alejandra's draft PR: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/pull/803
20:18:03 <SimonCox> Editors note in https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#RDF-representation is not correct anymore
20:18:05 <alejandra> +q
20:18:18 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: There is a draft PR made by alejandra  for linking datasets within a publicaiton - is this going to be merged? there is no negative feedback
20:18:22 <DaveBrowning> ack alejandra
20:18:31 <SimonCox> Remove note https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#conformance
20:19:51 <PWinstanley> alejandra: I think that if people are happy it would be useful to include this and I can spend time in the next week to address is.  The PR is incomplete, we need to look across the document to see consequentials.  Can people wait?
20:19:59 <AndreaPerego> q+
20:20:57 <DaveBrowning> q?
20:21:01 <alejandra> +q
20:21:12 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:21:15 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: I think we need to be ready by the end of the month.  It would be good to get it included
20:21:28 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: for me the addition is uncontroversial
20:22:19 <PWinstanley> ... I also think we can easily find implementation evidence
20:22:38 <DaveBrowning> ack alejandra
20:23:23 <PWinstanley> alejandra: in addition to this by the end of the month we need the doc reviewed by the plenary/  But what about evidence of implementation?
20:23:30 <AndreaPerego> q+
20:23:42 <alejandra> also note the new issue by Lars on editorial issues: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/922
20:23:46 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:23:47 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: according to the form,  if you have it then it should be included, but there wasn't much detail
20:24:08 <riccardoAlbertoni_> https://www.w3.org/2019/Process-20190301/#candidate-rec
20:24:19 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: that is my understanding too - we don't need the implementation evidence doc at the point we submit for CR
20:25:46 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: that sounds like we have some flexibility.  We have to give the plenary some time to consider this - so we need to ensure that there will only be pure editorial work after that.  The sooner we can get the plenary to look at the final content the better
20:27:06 <SimonCox> I've just scrolled through the ED and I see no problems with sending this to the plenary. I do still see editorial issues, primarily consistency in the notes, but nothing embarrassing.
20:27:43 <riccardoAlbertoni_> I agree with SimonCox
20:27:54 <SimonCox> ... modulo ALejandra contribution on citations?
20:28:54 <SimonCox> is alejandra's contribution 'normative'?
20:29:37 <PWinstanley> alejandra: hopefully there won't be any conflicts.  People already agree with its inclusion - so it should be OK
20:29:51 <AndreaPerego> This is also how I see it. I don't see particular issues in merging it.
20:30:05 <AndreaPerego> q+
20:30:06 <riccardoAlbertoni_> +q
20:30:08 <PWinstanley> ... I guess we can make the decision about whether it is normative.  What do people think?
20:30:19 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:30:33 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: I think that if it is added then it will be in the vocab spec and so will be normative
20:30:37 <riccardoAlbertoni_> q- ( andreas is making my point ;)
20:30:50 <DaveBrowning> q- riccardoAlbertoni_
20:30:52 <SimonCox> q+
20:30:57 <DaveBrowning> ack SimonCox
20:31:39 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: alejandra, in an earlier phase we added treatment of relationships - dct:relation and qualified relations.  There may need to have a note relating to these
20:32:03 <PWinstanley> alejandra: do you mean that the relationship to publication could be a qualified relation?
20:32:31 <riccardoAlbertoni_> present+
20:32:37 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: dct:isReferencedBy is also mentioned already.  Your addition is just adding to the idea mentioned there
20:33:03 <AndreaPerego> q+
20:33:15 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: looking back at that usage note in the description of qualified relations, how many of these do you want to reference explicitly?
20:33:31 <DaveBrowning> q?
20:33:32 <PWinstanley> alejandra: we coul;d argue that it isn't necessary to add it separately
20:34:27 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: depends on priorities.  My normative/non-normative point was really wondering if we can handle the dct:isReferencedBy with an example and an explanation rather than a separate section?
20:35:03 <PWinstanley> alejandra: it makes sense to add a separate section because the relationship in this case of publicaitons is special, strong, and needed across many domains
20:35:11 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:35:26 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: +1 to alejandra - it is worth having this prop in the spec
20:36:21 <PWinstanley> ... my experience with the JRC data catalogue - documenting data from multiple disciplines, the ability to link dataset to publication was commonplace
20:36:43 <SimonCox> OK - I'm cool with this because of the formal requirement from a key application community.
20:37:02 <alejandra> So, my action item includes adding a comment about qualified relation in that section
20:37:07 <SimonCox> I just wanted to draw attention to general consistency (which was already there!)
20:37:21 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: alejandra please pursue quickly
20:37:43 <PWinstanley> alejandra: I'll also cover the point about qualified relations
20:37:47 <AndreaPerego> s/coul;d/could/
20:38:16 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: PWinstanley  please send out to plenary about Monday
20:38:19 <SimonCox> could alejandra also include an RDF example fragment for this
20:38:29 <alejandra> +q
20:38:37 <DaveBrowning> ack alejandra
20:39:13 <SimonCox> +1 no domain, just 'recommended for use in the this context'
20:39:18 <AndreaPerego> +1 to dropping the domain
20:39:18 <PWinstanley> proposed: to include the points alejandra will include about the link between dataset and publication and drop the domain constraint
20:39:25 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:39:27 <alejandra> +1
20:39:29 <SimonCox> +1
20:39:34 <DaveBrowning> +1
20:39:36 <PWinstanley> +1
20:39:40 <riccardoAlbertoni_> +1
20:39:49 <PWinstanley> resolved: to include the points alejandra will include about the link between dataset and publication and drop the domain constraint
20:39:52 <AndreaPerego> q+
20:39:59 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:40:31 <riccardoAlbertoni_> That is a good point
20:40:31 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: should the property be linked to dcat:Resource rather than dcat:Dataset?
20:40:35 <alejandra> +1 to Andrea's point
20:40:42 <alejandra> services also have associated publications
20:40:53 <riccardoAlbertoni_> +1 to Andrea's point
20:41:11 <SimonCox> s/be linked to/be listed under/
20:41:19 <DaveBrowning> +1 to dcat:Resource
20:41:31 <PWinstanley> +1 to the dcat:Resource point
20:41:33 <SimonCox> +1
20:41:47 <alejandra> +q
20:41:49 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: it looks like people are happy about this proposal
20:42:24 <DaveBrowning> ack alejandra
20:42:39 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:42:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:42:53 <PWinstanley> alejandra: to agree and say that if we think of profiles as a catalogable resource then they will have associated publications
20:42:55 <AndreaPerego> q+
20:43:03 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:44:59 <alejandra> +q
20:45:55 <DaveBrowning> ack alejandra
20:48:10 <riccardoAlbertoni_> +q
20:48:26 <DaveBrowning> ack riccardoAlbertoni_
20:48:50 <PWinstanley> proposed: we recommend the plenary to review and approve the plenary with a vote in 2-3 weeks
20:49:25 <alejandra> approve the draft...
20:49:29 <SimonCox> q+
20:49:34 <DaveBrowning> ack SimonCox
20:50:14 <PWinstanley> proposed: we recommend the plenary to review and approve the draft with a vote by the plenary in 2-3 weeks
20:50:23 <PWinstanley> proposed: we recommend the plenary to review and approve the draft with a vote by the plenary in 2 weeks
20:50:36 <riccardoAlbertoni_> +1
20:50:42 <DaveBrowning> +1
20:50:45 <PWinstanley> +1
20:50:47 <AndreaPerego> +1
20:50:53 <SimonCox> +1
20:50:57 <alejandra> +1
20:51:00 <PWinstanley> resolved: we recommend the plenary to review and approve the draft with a vote by the plenary in 2 weeks
20:51:04 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:51:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:51:28 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: Topic: implementation evidence
20:51:38 <PWinstanley> Topic: implementation evidence
20:51:57 <AndreaPerego> s/DaveBrowning: Topic: implementation evidence//
20:52:16 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: we have discussed what the evidence should include given that we are re-using vocabularies
20:52:40 <PWinstanley> ... it is not clear-cut
20:52:54 <PWinstanley> ... apart from, perhaps, Nick's work
20:53:18 <AndreaPerego> q+ to mention the draft at https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/andrea-perego-dcat-implementation-report/ir-vocab-dcat-2/index.html
20:53:20 <PWinstanley> ... So we need to think about what this evidence should comprise
20:53:28 <DaveBrowning> ack AndreaPerego
20:53:28 <Zakim> AndreaPerego, you wanted to mention the draft at https://raw.githack.com/w3c/dxwg/andrea-perego-dcat-implementation-report/ir-vocab-dcat-2/index.html
20:54:25 <PWinstanley> AndreaPerego: the link shows an incomplete doc that is based on DWBP
20:54:37 <PWinstanley> ... we need to complete this
20:54:48 <PWinstanley> ... for the vocabs we already have a list.
20:55:09 <PWinstanley> ... we just need to review the info on platforms to see what provides the best support
20:55:28 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: this is just the sort of framework I was imagining
20:55:42 <PWinstanley> SimonCox: that is the most elaborate implementaiton report I've seen
20:56:39 <PWinstanley> ... I can provide some alternative models
20:56:59 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: it would be useful to have some options
20:57:53 <PWinstanley> DaveBrowning: End of meeting
20:58:00 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:58:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:58:33 <AndreaPerego> present+
20:58:34 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:58:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego
20:58:59 <AndreaPerego> present- riccardoAlbertoni_
20:59:01 <AndreaPerego> RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
20:59:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/05/08-dxwgdcat-minutes.html AndreaPerego