25 Jun 2019



billroberts, Linda, jtandy, lieberjosh, dersenv, greenwood, lbermudez, Roy, AndreaPerego, ChrisLittle, ChrisL, ClemensPortele
Jeremy Tandy, Linda van den Brink
Bill Roberts


<LieberJosh> q

<LieberJosh> +

<brinkwoman> https://www.w3.org/2017/sdwig/meetings/f2f-4.html

<scribe> scribe: Bill Roberts

<scribe> scribenick:billroberts


Rob Smith presentation

RobSmith: Video Search with Location. Details can be found at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1130
... is this something that could be worked on in an OGC Testbed?
... Key Issues are:
... in-band vs out-of-band
... best services to integrate?
... other issues?
... future activities?

lbermudez: have you considered distributed search?
... there's a lot of data so might need distributed search and then have to think about how to integrate it
... is there anything useful in DataCue?

RobSmith: there is a thing called TextCue which is similar
... WebVMT works like TextCue but instead of the metadata being text, it is location information

LieberJosh: where is the grey area where we don't just have annotation of a video, but also have orientation per frame etc, which could lead to a need to balance volume/complexity of metadata with bandwidth

RobSmith: can keep it small by just having locations at occasional times, then interpolate

Jeremy Morley: 2d or 3d positions?

RobSmith: currently 2D, but could do 3D too if there was a requirement for it

Jeremy Morley: might want 3D for drones

LieberJosh: text markup is usually interval based - valid for some time period. The location approach is maybe a bit different. It's correct at one instant then tehre are rules about how to make other deductions from that
... so is the interval based annotation method a good start for an instant based key-frame approach?

RobSmith: this is handled by the 'path' command. You can move to a point or draw a line from one point to the next

lbermudez: analogy to GMLJP2

LieberJosh: could you add different interpolation methods?
... I think the search use case is the compelling one


lbermudez: we have 2 projects usign video in the innovation programme. One is the Disasters pilot, using video to identify flooding
... using machine learning
... another use case was for verifying the authenticity of video for submissions in courts of law

RobSmith: similar considerations for dashcam footage and use by the police

Jeremy Morley: if you think of video as a sequence of stills, is it also relevant to an actual sequence of still images, taken along some track

RobSmith: at the moment the linkage is done by time, which gets round the video format problem. You could put your images onto some dimension, which could be time
... doesn't necessarily need to be continuous, just ordered

Jeremy Morley: orientation of camera also relevant

RobSmith: it's all work in progress
... and aim to re-use existing standards where possible
... looking for opportunities to do pilot deployments

lbermudez: you could observe those two demonstration activities mentioned above

RobSmith: interested to find out that there is a use case for recorded Augmented Reality

Christine: it's useful for record keeping/audit, or for capturing tacit knowledge from a user
... to capture the user's perspective in real time

<brinkwoman> meeting will be ajourned until 3PM

Spatial Data on the Web Roadmap

<brinkwoman> https://w3c.github.io/web-roadmaps/sdw/

brinkwoman: W3C has several roadmaps, that show an overview of technologies and standards within a domain and what is the status of each
... the goal is to show people quickly what's going on
... I have prepared one of these for SDW
... Should we keep working on this? If yes, who can help as I can't do it all myself. Or should we publish it as is?
... Perhaps an OGC staff member could help
... There is a section called 'Features not considered web friendly' which might concern some OGC members as it includes some of the widely used standards such as WMS, WCS etc which are not always a great match with modern web practices

AndreaPerego: why are the OGC services not considered web friendly? Because they are designed for consuming via things other than a web browser
... what could be done to make them more web friendly?

brinkwoman: there are criteria in the first page of the roadmap for assessing 'web friendliness'

AndreaPerego: could this be brought into the process of designing new OGC services so they are more web friendly

jtandy: we don't want to alienate the community by appearing critical of well-established standards, especially when people are known to be working on improving 'web-friendliness'
... also we could link to OGC standards and note that we haven't reviewed them, with a pointer to the place where ongoing work is being documented
... that would make it less controversial to publish the roadmap in its present form

brinkwoman: the doc needs maintenance as the collection of standards is always changing

jtandy: what mechanism should we put in place to do that maintenance?

Jeremy Morley: we can record when it was last updated and watch for certain triggers (eg a new standard or a new version) that could lead to an update

<greenwood> OGC service were based of SOA, now moving to WOA

<greenwood> https://iwaponline.com/jh/article/18/2/210/23/Groundwater-data-network-interoperability

jtandy: one consideration is that the group will need re-chartered. Maintaining this kind of thing could be part of the charter

billroberts: I think it can be very useful, especially if we signpost and publicise it well. Not sure on how to organise the maintenance though

Jeremy Morley: sounds like a 'triggering' model rather than a 'polling' model will work best, especially if that trigger could instigate activity by the people working on each new standards etc.

brinkwoman: that could perhaps be coordinated by the OGC and the process around approving new standards etc
... it's not actually much work to do the maintenance if someone is prompted to do it

PROPOSAL: change the 'not web-friendly' section to 'not fully reviewed' and link to ongoing work on those standards, then publish the roadmap in that form

<brinkwoman> +1


<AndreaPerego> +1

<brinkwoman> jtandy +1

<projector_> +1

RESOLUTION: change the 'not web-friendly' section to 'not fully reviewed' and link to ongoing work on those standards, then publish the roadmap in that form

<scribe> ACTION: brinkwoman to make the small necessary changes


<AndreaPerego> DCAT 2: https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/

AndreaPerego: This work was carried out in the Data Exchange Working Group of W3C (link above)
... DCAT2 is now basically completed and moving to the recommendation stage
... There are two main points relevant to SDWIG.

<AndreaPerego> DCAT 2014 diagram: https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/#vocabulary-overview

AndreaPerego: 1. DCAT extended to include the notion of services and APIs (as well as datasets)

<AndreaPerego> DCAT 2: https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#UML_DCAT_All_Attr

(Andrea, the screensharing seems to be using all the bandwidth and we can't hear you now)

(so please stop the screensharing)

<AndreaPerego> Other issues: https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1123

AndreaPerego: the work includes addressing that sdw issue above

<AndreaPerego> Geometry: https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/dcat/#Class:Location

AndreaPerego: on describing spatial and temporal resolution of a dataset, and the spatial coverage of a dataset using a geometry
... Note that this property is not intended to be a detailed specification of the geometry, but rather for discovery purposes, to support users searching or filtering a catalogue

jtandy: in Section 6.15, the RDF Class is given as dct:Location, so in the Dublin Core namespace, and you are adding properties to it?

AndreaPerego: yes, adding new properties

jtandy: what is the deadline for review of draft DCAT2?

AndreaPerego: not sure, but soon, will check

jtandy: please send a request for review to the main SDWIG mailing list

<AndreaPerego> ACTION: AndreaPerego to send mail to SDWIG comments list about review of DCAT2

jtandy: where/how should people provide feedback?

AndreaPerego: can either send to the mailing list or via Github

billroberts: we are starting to do an implementation that uses DCAT2, so will report that

<AndreaPerego> Thanks

brinkwoman|2: I see you are using w3cgeo for some spatial properties. I had described that in the SDW roadmap as not supported, because Dan Brickley had pointed out that it was never properly reviewed

scribe: do you still think it is a good choice

AndreaPerego: we thought about that, but it is still the most widely used property for describing that
... but it is a fair point

brinkwoman|2: I will create an issue for that

jtandy: could you please tell us about the workshop happening at ISPRA next week

AndreaPerego: I sent a note to the mailing list (finding link)

<AndreaPerego> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-sdwig/2019May/0006.html

"Workshop on making spatial data discoverable through mainstream search engines"

AndreaPerego: this is part of how to implement SDWBP in the context of INSPIRE. (Other BPs have also been under consideration)
... the workshop is covering discovery by search engines, but not only that. Also about how to make spatial data more web friendly and usable in a more general sense
... We are getting together people working on this topic and aiming to produce a roadmap of actions
... the programme will be available soon
... unless the participants object, then we'll publish the outcomes of the workshop on the website

(Andrea we are losing your audio again)

(still can't hear)

We are not hearing you yet - it might be a problem at our end. Investigating

We seem to have been kicked off webex, maybe because of problems wtih the event wifi

But since you are about finished, Jeremy says: thanks very much for your contribution and we'll let you go to your next meeting

OWL Time

ChrisL: this is a W3C rec now in maintenance mode. A couple of minor problems were reported and fixed recently
... there were some hiccups with going through the process of making it an OGC standard as well
... there were requests to make the terminology consistent with an ISO standard
... the ISO terminology was published after the OWL Time doc, so the plan was to add an addendum to note the new ISO terminology
... but I'm not sure of the status of that change

brinkwoman: Francois told us we need a resolution in order to make the change

<brinkwoman> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/pull/1116

ChrisL: this went through as the Pull Request given above
... 2 more issues have arisen since then.
... One relates to Allen algebra about relations between time intervals. These have been registered as link relation types with IANA. We could potential add something to the doc to note these have now been registered
... this would be a non-normative change so could just be added
... The ontology has been cited in scientific papers recently
... Elf Pavlik has recently commented that the Allen algebra takes the view that there is no such thing as an instant, just very short intervals, which raises some fundamental problems

<projector_> https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1131

ChrisL: Elf has suggested adding 3 terms to the ontology as synonyms (see issue 1131 above)
... Simon Cox and I agree this is ok in mathematical terms, but new items is a more significant change and affects the normative statements

jtandy: this sounds like an extension, not errata. For SSN we created a separate Note, which might later lead to a second version. I recommend taking the same approach here

brinkwoman: the earlier point about referring to ISO could be treated as an erratum if we resolve to do it

PROPOSAL: to publish an erratum for OWL Time relating to Pull Request 1116

<ChrisL> +1 for merging #1116

<projector_> +1

<projector_> jtandy +1


RESOLUTION: to publish an erratum for OWL Time relating to Pull Request 1116

<scribe> ACTION: ChrisL to talk to the Francois/Ted to make the change

jtandy: please update issue 1131 on the IANA considerations

Correction to the above: the issue about time instants and intervals is https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1126

ChrisL: Simon and I will produce the text of a new note and put it through the W3C process
... https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1055 there is a problem with comparing instants using DateTime, because it mixes up issues of calendar and coordinate system

jtandy: Can Chris and Simon check with the original poster and see if he is happy with the answer, then close the issue if he is

ChrisL: https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1133 the answer is basically 'no'.

jtandy: please update the issue with an appropriate answer

ChrisL: after working through Roger Lot's comments, it was suggested by Scott Simmons at the Singapore meeting that it would be useful to have an OGC document about timestamps/intervals etc and where there are risks of problems that might arise in other OGC standards

Meeting adjourned till 16.30


<ChrisLittle> See https://w3c.github.io/html-extensions

<MichaelGordon> (sorry in another session but do want to ask a question if possible)

<AmeliaBR> https://maps4html.github.io/HTML-Map-Element-UseCases-Requirements/

<AmeliaBR> Closing up: I will definitely follow up with ChrisLittle , and will try to put together a short survey.

<AmeliaBR> I'm especially interested in more feedback about what type of data is available, what server features / APIs. That section of my report is still a ToDo, so that should be very valuable on that side.

<AmeliaBR> Will do.

<ChrisLittle> Bye

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: AndreaPerego to send mail to SDWIG comments list about review of DCAT2
[NEW] ACTION: brinkwoman to make the small necessary changes
[NEW] ACTION: ChrisL to talk to the Francois/Ted to make the change

Summary of Resolutions

  1. change the 'not web-friendly' section to 'not fully reviewed' and link to ongoing work on those standards, then publish the roadmap in that form
  2. to publish an erratum for OWL Time relating to Pull Request 1116
[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
$Date: 2019/06/25 16:05:21 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 0.63)

WARNING: Low confidence (0.63) on guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format
Please email an example of your input log format to dbooth@w3.org
so that I can consider adding support for your log format.

Succeeded: s/GML2/GMLJP2/
Succeeded: s/thign /thing /
Succeeded: s/services/APIs/
Present: billroberts Linda jtandy lieberjosh dersenv greenwood lbermudez Roy AndreaPerego ChrisLittle ChrisL ClemensPortele
Found Scribe: Bill Roberts
Found ScribeNick: billroberts
Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/sdwig/meetings/f2f-4.html

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: andreaperego brinkwoman chrisl

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]