19:37:17 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwg
19:37:17 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/08/20-dxwg-irc
19:37:25 <PWinstanley> rrsagent, make logs public
19:37:37 <PWinstanley> chair: PWinstanley
19:37:50 <PWinstanley> meeting: DXWG Plenary
19:38:04 <PWinstanley> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2019.08.20
19:38:33 <PWinstanley> regrets+ riccardoAlbertoni; DaveBrowning; Alejandra
19:54:50 <TomB> TomB has joined #dxwg
19:55:29 <dsr> dsr has joined #dxwg
20:00:06 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #dxwg
20:00:34 <PWinstanley> present+
20:01:49 <ncar> ncar has joined #dxwg
20:05:18 <dsr> present+
20:05:38 <ncar> present+
20:05:40 <TomB> present+ TomB
20:05:40 <dsr> scribenick: dsr
20:05:40 <kcoyle> present+
20:05:43 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
20:05:54 <dsr> rrsagent, set logs public
20:05:55 <annette_g> present+
20:06:07 <PWinstanley> Topic: Admin
20:06:13 <PWinstanley> proposed: accept https://www.w3.org/2019/08/13-dxwg-minutes
20:06:30 <PWinstanley> +1
20:06:34 <TomB> +1 to approve minutes
20:06:35 <kcoyle> +1
20:06:36 <annette_g> +1
20:06:37 <ncar> +1
20:06:42 <ncar> regrets LarsG
20:06:48 <PWinstanley> resolved: accept https://www.w3.org/2019/08/13-dxwg-minutes
20:07:21 <PWinstanley> regrets+ LarsG
20:08:27 <dsr> PWinstanley: way back in March we decided that we would stop work on some work items until we had progressed some other items
20:09:03 <kcoyle> it was march 19
20:09:18 <dsr> We are not intoAugust and
20:09:31 <ncar> q+
20:09:50 <dsr> s/We are not intoAugust and/We are now into August and need to resolve how to move forward/
20:09:51 <PWinstanley> ack ncar
20:10:14 <dsr> ncar: Conneg has pretty much finished a big round of work
20:10:51 <dsr> As soon as the pull requests are through we are ready for review by the full WG
20:11:22 <dsr> We’re wanting to focus on the vocabulary
20:12:28 <dsr> PWinstanley: for the last 2 weeks we. haven’t had a DCAT task force meeting, and work has been edging ahead on github
20:12:58 <TomB> q+
20:13:05 <dsr> There has been a kind of lunn on ConNeg and a chance to progress other things
20:13:25 <dsr> s/lunn/lull/
20:13:29 <PWinstanley> ack TomB
20:13:31 <dsr> acl TomB
20:13:42 <dsr> s/sr: acl TomB//
20:13:45 <dsr> ack TomB
20:13:54 <dsr> TomB: there are 12
20:14:17 <dsr> .. weeks left in the charter, and we’ve focused on the main spec
20:14:47 <ncar> q+
20:14:56 <dsr> I am a little but puzzled and am wondering what the goal should be
20:15:03 <dsr> s/but/bit/
20:16:17 <TomB> +1 to look forward to a community group
20:16:29 <PWinstanley> ack ncar
20:16:38 <dsr> PWinstanley: I wanted to consider if we lift the hold on the work items whether there is sufficient resources for the time left in the chsrter to finish them. I would need to wait for a fuller group to formally decide, but today we can collect input
20:17:04 <dsr> ncar: I haven’t done any work on the guidance document for some time
20:17:14 <PWinstanley> s/chsrter/charter/
20:17:29 <dsr> No substantive changes to the vocab spec
20:17:31 <kcoyle> q+
20:18:06 <PWinstanley> ack kcoyle
20:18:26 <TomB> q+ to suggest that the goal be to publish a WG Note
20:18:58 <dsr> kcoyle: we need to provide feedback to the person who commented
20:19:23 <ncar> q+
20:19:38 <dsr> ncar: the profile vocab document is quite mature
20:20:01 <dsr> s/the profile vocab document is quite mature/
20:20:26 <dsr> ncar: the actual ontology has remained unchanged for some time
20:21:09 <kcoyle> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Afeedback+label%3A%22ON+HOLD+profiles-vocabulary%22
20:21:12 <kcoyle> that's 30 items
20:21:20 <dsr> ncar: we would need about one month to prepare the next WD
20:23:06 <PWinstanley> ack TomB
20:23:06 <Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest that the goal be to publish a WG Note
20:23:52 <ncar> q+
20:24:26 <dsr> TomB: I don’t like the idea of trying to rush through a REC in the last 12 weeks of the charter
20:25:27 <PWinstanley> ack ncar
20:25:45 <kcoyle> There are 88 issues that are open https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22ON+HOLD+profiles-vocabulary%22
20:26:11 <kcoyle> q+
20:26:28 <dsr> ncar: it is rediculous for not proceeding with the vocabulary
20:26:52 <TomB> q+ to suggest that work in fact proceed - but as a WG Note
20:27:25 <dsr> s/rediculous/ridiculous/
20:27:27 <ncar> q+
20:27:47 <dsr> PWinstanley: Nick, the DXWG wasn’t chartered for that work, …
20:28:38 <ncar> q+
20:29:13 <dsr> People in the WG were happy to take on the vocab work to see how it would fly
20:30:10 <dsr> I don’t want any mud slinging, rather to focus on the process and the chartered work items as a priority
20:30:22 <PWinstanley> ack kcoyle
20:31:15 <dsr> kcoyle: PLH has a tool that allows you to work back from the delivery date to see what needs to happen by whem
20:31:37 <PWinstanley> ack TomB
20:31:37 <Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest that work in fact proceed - but as a WG Note
20:31:38 <annette_g> s/by whem/by when/
20:31:41 <dsr> s/whem/when/
20:32:41 <dsr> TomB: I hope Nick that you understand that I don’t want to stop work, and there is nothing wrong with a WG Note for which the bar for publication is much lower
20:32:44 <PWinstanley> ack ncar
20:33:37 <dsr> ncar: 2 points, if I think about my own efforts, I shouldn’t be working on the guidance document, but profiles overall, nobody I’ve spoken to has asked for major chnges
20:33:53 <dsr> a short period of time would allow us to tidy up a number of issues
20:34:07 <PWinstanley> s/chnges/changes/
20:34:41 <kcoyle> https://w3c.github.io/spec-releases/milestones/?fpwd=2018-12-18
20:35:06 <dsr> ncar: I would like to focus on progressing the vocabulary
20:36:55 <dsr> kcoyle: if we get comments we need to address them
20:37:50 <TomB> Tom has not heard any arguments specifically against going for WG Note (instead of Recommendation) for Profiles Vocabulary
20:38:44 <dsr> kcoyle: we could do a 2 week poll to make allowance for people coming back from vacation
20:39:51 <TomB> q+ to suggest that there would need to be a credible timeline
20:40:37 <PWinstanley> ack TomB
20:40:37 <Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest that there would need to be a credible timeline
20:40:44 <dsr> PWinstanley: we also need to gather views on the profile vocabulary, whether or not we as a group think it is best published as a WG Note or risk it running out of time on the REC track
20:41:19 <kcoyle> my understanding is that if you run out of time for rec track it defaults to a note - ?? dsr? does that ring true?
20:42:15 <dsr> TomB: I think a WG Note is much safer given the very limited time left to us
20:43:35 <dsr> PWinstanley: I thimk I need 2 actions: one on shortest possible path to REC for the profile vocab
20:44:00 <dsr> and the second on a poll on th future of the 2 profiles related items
20:44:35 <dsr> so that we have consensus as we start September on where we are going
20:44:59 <PWinstanley> action: PWinstanley  to contact PLH to work out shortest path to REC for profiles vocab
20:44:59 <trackbot> Created ACTION-359 -  to contact plh to work out shortest path to rec for profiles vocab [on Peter Winstanley - due 2019-08-27].
20:45:02 <dsr> kcoyle: the poll should gather info who can commit to work on the documents
20:45:03 <TomB> Tom suggests that WG Note be presented as an option in the poll.
20:45:11 <TomB> ...for Profiles Vocabulary
20:45:59 <TomB> Tom suggests that there be two timelines - one for Recommendation, and one for WG Note - given W3C process
20:46:17 <TomB> ...so that there is basis for a good decision.
20:46:35 <PWinstanley> action: PWinstanley to poll full WG to decide on taking profiles work off hold, to determine who is interested/available to do any work on these, and to determine on the basis of information from PLH what type of output we are going for
20:46:35 <trackbot> Created ACTION-360 - Poll full wg to decide on taking profiles work off hold, to determine who is interested/available to do any work on these, and to determine on the basis of information from plh what type of output we are going for [on Peter Winstanley - due 2019-08-27].
20:47:15 <TomB> q+
20:47:20 <PWinstanley> ack TomB
20:47:25 <dsr> PWinstanley: anyone have any issues with those actions?
20:49:00 <dsr> PWinstanley: I need to understand the tightest timeline
20:50:13 <dsr> PWinstanley: we need to verify that the person who raised an issue is agreeable to how we’ve handled it
20:51:36 <dsr> PWinstanley: there are a whole pile of open issues, some as the task forces haven’t met recently
20:53:03 <dsr> PWinstanley: Nick anything to add?
20:53:39 <dsr> PWinstanley: I am to put this to the full DXWG at the end of August
20:54:14 <ncar> q+
20:54:19 <dsr> some concern sbout progress in th IETF
20:54:20 <PWinstanley> ack ncar
20:54:51 <dsr> ncar: Ruben and Lars shay they are making good progress
20:54:52 <kcoyle> q+
20:55:01 <PWinstanley> ack kcoyle
20:55:12 <dsr> they think the IETF work will be done by the end of October
20:55:39 <dsr> kcoyle: do the IETF docs cite the W3C ones?
20:55:47 <dsr> ncar: yes
20:56:02 <dsr> s/yes/no/
20:57:51 <dsr> kcoyle: where are the documents in the IETF process?
20:58:25 <dsr> ncar: they are currently IETF drafts with an expiry early next year
20:58:40 <dsr> PWinstanley: any other business?
20:58:44 <dsr> no
20:58:57 <dsr> we will meet again same time next week.
20:59:03 <dsr> … end of meeting …
20:59:07 <PWinstanley> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:59:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/08/20-dxwg-minutes.html PWinstanley
20:59:10 <dsr> rrsagent, make minutes
20:59:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/08/20-dxwg-minutes.html dsr
21:01:01 <PWinstanley> rrsagent, create minutes v2
21:01:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/08/20-dxwg-minutes.html PWinstanley
21:29:36 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
23:20:36 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dxwg