W3C

– DRAFT –
DXWG Weekly Plenary

13 August 2019

Attendees

Present
annette_g, kcoyle, ncar, PWinstanley
Regrets
Alejandra, DaveBrowning, LarsG, riccardoalbertoni, roba
Chair
PWinstanley
Scribe
kcoyle

Meeting minutes

PWinstanley: far from a quorum; and no decisions needed, but we can catch up

admin

proposed: accept minutes of last week

+1

<PWinstanley> +1

<ncar> +1

<dsr> +1

<annette_g> +1

Resolved: accept minutes of last week

PWinstanley: nothing we can work on in open items
… wasn't a DCAT meeting last week or this week but still github work happening
… asking Nick: progress on conneg? draft to group?

ncar: we're very close; got some pull requests through; member status keeping him from merging
… no conneg meeting this week
… lots of discussion regarding the pull requests that are pending
… should be done early next week

PWinstanley: any major changes?

ncar: no, changed wording of some constructs; added examples
… especially examples of redirects; needed keyword discovery mechanism
… hard to read now because of overlapping pull requests

PWinstanley: perhaps need examples of implementation that people can add

ncar: yes, would be great to get more examples
… potential for a new implementation model - we have http and query
… but there may be other environments that can be included either as normative section or an example

PWinstanley: need to end with something that can be concluded within the next few months

ncar: should be easy to add new functions/implementations
… however, document is an abstract model

<PWinstanley> kcoyle: What effect will these different models have on the implementation requirements? Presumably these are the same as for any recommendation, and will these examples add to the implementation requirements?

<PWinstanley> ncar: the abstract model describes 2 functions

ncar: document says you have to fulfill 2 functions; the examples show how to do it in specific environments

<PWinstanley> ... the illustrations are just that - guides to implementation

ncar: (explains how to do this; it'll make more sense with examples!)
… something like oai-pmh could become compliant without more than a tweak

<dsr> According to the email sent to the chairs list, the September moratorium details are as follows:

<dsr> September 11, 1200Z: Deadline for publication requests before moratorium

<dsr> September 12: Last publications before moratorium

<dsr> September 16-20: No publications

<dsr> September 24: Publications resume

PWinstanley: need to get wd in by Tuesday 10th, best by the 3rd or 5th of September

ncar: we had a requirement that describes how to link other representations of a resource to the default
… so question after 3pwd is how to align that with PROF vocab
… they use different models (PROF is a class model)

PWinstanley: asks about IETF document

ncar: major update about 2 months ago; no change between the two documents

PWinstanley: we can't have a w3c doc going out without the IETF document being concluded
… it makes sense to have the IETF one concluded first; otherwise w3c document
… goes out on a technical specification isn't there yet

PWinstanley: my point is that it is a potential show-stopper from the point of view of things going through w3c

ncar: I'll ask when it will get through the IETF process

PWinstanley: same time next week!

Summary of resolutions

  1. accept minutes of last week
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by Bert Bos's scribe.perl version Mon Apr 15 13:11:59 2019 UTC, a reimplementation of David Booth's scribe.perl. See history.

Diagnostics

Maybe present: proposed