– DRAFT –
DXWG Plenary

approve last meeting minutes https://‌www.w3.org/‌2019/‌10/‌22-dxwg-minutes

<AndreaPerego> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

+1

<kcoyle> +1

<PWinstanley> proposed: approve minutes

<PWinstanley> accepted: approve minutes

Resolved: last meeting minutes approved

DCAT2 move to PR

<PWinstanley> https://‌w3c.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat-implementation-report/

<AndreaPerego> Yep.

AndreaPerego: completed - should be final version
… majority of issue has at least one implementation - matches requirement

<AndreaPerego> Summary: https://‌w3c.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat-implementation-report/#analysis

AndreaPerego: 16 have "planned implementations"
… based on feedback from plehegaret evidence that these are at least "implementable"
… no strong objection from DCAT-AP WG
… therefore expect to be able to implement in profiles
… we excluded dcat:Resource as its an abstract class
… evidence from vocabularies that extent, catalogs - focused on representative subset
… key issue is whether W3C regards the imp. evidence for the 16 revisions as sound

PWinstanley: pointed out to W3C that there are strong commitments from major programs provided Rec status achieved
… he indicated that combined with impl report this was looking OK

<AndreaPerego> Number of existing implementations: https://‌w3c.github.io/‌dxwg/‌dcat-implementation-report/#fig-existing-implementations-distribution

PWinstanley: any other issues before we vote?
… any features at risk we may have to pull?

AndreaPerego: we have a number not marked "at risk" in the 16 unimplemented

PROPOSED: Submit implementation report for DCAT to W3C

<Makx> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

<kcoyle> +1

+1

<AndreaPerego> +1

Resolved: Submit implementation report for DCAT to W3C

recharter

PWinstanley: Simon raised concern about "waterfall" process - response is its a short charter pending transition to "evergreen" and improvements made to wording to address other points
… email response suggests sufficient comfort level to progress
… any other comments or objections?
… nb email + poll response is evidence
… Caroline Burle will join as co-chair
… membership "rolls over"
… aggregation in one github repo an issue - but a one-off fix
… need to be developing evergreen processes

<PWinstanley> roba: I was wondering if one of the challenges of the evergreen process is going to be maintainance of the registers?

PWinstanley: acton on me to ask

Action: PWinstanley to ask about maintenance process for registers in evergreen status

<trackbot> Created ACTION-381 - Ask about maintenance process for registers in evergreen status [on Peter Winstanley - due 2019-11-05].

PWinstanley: PROF vocab is still in scope under section 3.2 "other vocabularies"
… no specific reference - so it can keep going
… next thing Conneg-by-profile to be completed asa Note in this Charter period - next charter has it as a Rec deliverable
… wide review, implementation reports.

conneg

How to get CONNEG BY AP completed as WG note be end of year

<PWinstanley> roba: other than the formal note status (editorial changes) that there are any barriers to putting the document out 'as is'. I'm in the middle of an implementation and will be deployig shortly

<PWinstanley> ... that will be with OGC shortly. There are some default behaviours that need to be clarified, but otherwise I think this can be completed within a couple of weeks

<kcoyle> +1 to clarifications based on experience

<PWinstanley> ... I think we should have had more frequent publications - we could put it out as a PWD now and then aim for a note by first week of december

kcoyle: understanding is as Note then re-vote to put it on Rec in next charter

PWinstanley: yes

roba: thats what the eds think too.

AndreaPerego: what is the deadline for implementation report

PWinstanley: thursday 31st

AndreaPerego: a few more pieces of evidence available to integrate - will drop email when ready to submit

outstanding actions

<PWinstanley> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌actions/‌open

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close ACTION 134

PWinstanley: lets tidy old actions

+1

<AndreaPerego> +1 - more fit for a DCAT primer

<PWinstanley> +1

<Makx> +1

<AndreaPerego> close ACTION-134

<trackbot> Closed ACTION-134.

Resolved: close ACTION 134

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close action 380

<AndreaPerego> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

<kcoyle> +1

<Makx> +1

Resolved: close action 380

<AndreaPerego> close action-380

<trackbot> Closed action-380.

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close 296

<Makx> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

Resolved: close action-296

<AndreaPerego> close action-296

<trackbot> Closed action-296.

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close action 379

<Makx> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

+1

<AndreaPerego> Should be a conneg one

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close ACTION-143

<Makx> +1

+1

<PWinstanley> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1 - quite old, and probably about DCAT primer

<kcoyle> +1

Resolved: close ACTION-143

<AndreaPerego> close ACTION-143

<trackbot> Closed ACTION-143.

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close ACTION-175

<Makx> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

+1

<kcoyle> +1

<AndreaPerego> +1

Resolved: close ACTION-175

<AndreaPerego> close ACTION-175

<trackbot> Closed ACTION-175.

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close ACTION-247

<Makx> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

<AndreaPerego> PWinstanley: More for a primer, and not going to happen soon

<AndreaPerego> +1

+1

<kcoyle> +1

Resolved: close ACTION-247

<AndreaPerego> close ACTION-247

<trackbot> Closed ACTION-247.

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close ACTION-279

<AndreaPerego> +1 - this was done

<PWinstanley> +1

<Makx> +1

<kcoyle> +1

+1

Resolved: close ACTION-279

<AndreaPerego> close ACTION-279

<trackbot> Closed ACTION-279.

<AndreaPerego> proposed: close ACTION-145

+1

<AndreaPerego> +1

<Makx> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

<kcoyle> +1

Resolved: close ACTION-145

<AndreaPerego> close ACTION-145

<trackbot> Closed ACTION-145.

AndreaPerego: question about issues? what is done with these

PWinstanley: because recharter should be a seamless rollover- wil check

AndreaPerego: milestone for DCAT rec will need to be redescribed or issues changed

<AndreaPerego> Thanks, bye bye