– DRAFT –
DXWG Plenary

Admin

<PWinstanley> proposed: accept https://‌www.w3.org/‌2019/‌08/‌13-dxwg-minutes

<PWinstanley> +1

<TomB> +1 to approve minutes

<kcoyle> +1

<annette_g> +1

<ncar> +1

<ncar> regrets LarsG

Resolved: accept https://‌www.w3.org/‌2019/‌08/‌13-dxwg-minutes

PWinstanley: way back in March we decided that we would stop work on some work items until we had progressed some other items

<kcoyle> it was march 19

We are now into August and need to resolve how to move forward

ncar: Conneg has pretty much finished a big round of work

As soon as the pull requests are through we are ready for review by the full WG

We’re wanting to focus on the vocabulary

PWinstanley: for the last 2 weeks we. haven’t had a DCAT task force meeting, and work has been edging ahead on github

There has been a kind of lull on ConNeg and a chance to progress other things

acl TomB

s/sr: acl TomB//

TomB: there are 12
… weeks left in the charter, and we’ve focused on the main spec

I am a little bit puzzled and am wondering what the goal should be

<TomB> +1 to look forward to a community group

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 charter to finish them. I would need to wait for a fuller group to formally decide, but today we can collect input

ncar: I haven’t done any work on the guidance document for some time

No substantive changes to the vocab spec

kcoyle: we need to provide feedback to the person who commented

ncar:

ncar: the actual ontology has remained unchanged for some time

<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

<kcoyle> that's 30 items

ncar: we would need about one month to prepare the next WD

<Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest that the goal be to publish a WG Note

TomB: I don’t like the idea of trying to rush through a REC in the last 12 weeks of the charter

<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

ncar: it is ridiculous for not proceeding with the vocabulary

PWinstanley: Nick, the DXWG wasn’t chartered for that work, …

People in the WG were happy to take on the vocab work to see how it would fly

I don’t want any mud slinging, rather to focus on the process and the chartered work items as a priority

kcoyle: PLH has a tool that allows you to work back from the delivery date to see what needs to happen by when

<Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest that work in fact proceed - but as a WG Note

s/whem/when/

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

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 changes

a short period of time would allow us to tidy up a number of issues

<kcoyle> https://‌w3c.github.io/‌spec-releases/‌milestones/?fpwd=2018-12-18

ncar: I would like to focus on progressing the vocabulary

kcoyle: if we get comments we need to address them

<TomB> Tom has not heard any arguments specifically against going for WG Note (instead of Recommendation) for Profiles Vocabulary

kcoyle: we could do a 2 week poll to make allowance for people coming back from vacation

<Zakim> TomB, you wanted to suggest that there would need to be a credible timeline

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

<kcoyle> my understanding is that if you run out of time for rec track it defaults to a note - ?? dsr? does that ring true?

TomB: I think a WG Note is much safer given the very limited time left to us

PWinstanley: I thimk I need 2 actions: one on shortest possible path to REC for the profile vocab

and the second on a poll on th future of the 2 profiles related items

so that we have consensus as we start September on where we are going

Action: PWinstanley to contact PLH to work out shortest path to REC for profiles vocab

<trackbot> Created ACTION-359 - to contact plh to work out shortest path to rec for profiles vocab [on Peter Winstanley - due 2019-08-27].

kcoyle: the poll should gather info who can commit to work on the documents

<TomB> Tom suggests that WG Note be presented as an option in the poll.

<TomB> ...for Profiles Vocabulary

<TomB> Tom suggests that there be two timelines - one for Recommendation, and one for WG Note - given W3C process

<TomB> ...so that there is basis for a good decision.

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

<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].

PWinstanley: anyone have any issues with those actions?

PWinstanley: I need to understand the tightest timeline

PWinstanley: we need to verify that the person who raised an issue is agreeable to how we’ve handled it

PWinstanley: there are a whole pile of open issues, some as the task forces haven’t met recently

PWinstanley: Nick anything to add?

PWinstanley: I am to put this to the full DXWG at the end of August

some concern sbout progress in th IETF

ncar: Ruben and Lars shay they are making good progress

they think the IETF work will be done by the end of October

kcoyle: do the IETF docs cite the W3C ones?

ncar: no

kcoyle: where are the documents in the IETF process?

ncar: they are currently IETF drafts with an expiry early next year

PWinstanley: any other business?

no

we will meet again same time next week.
… end of meeting …