IRC log of dxwg on 2020-01-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

20:48:48 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #dxwg
20:48:48 [RRSAgent]
logging to
20:48:54 [PWinstanley]
rrsagent, make logs public
20:49:03 [PWinstanley]
chair: PWinstanley
20:49:06 [PWinstanley]
20:49:22 [PWinstanley]
regrets+ Makx, DaveBrowning
20:49:28 [PWinstanley]
meeting: DXWG Plenary
20:49:44 [PWinstanley]
20:50:23 [PWinstanley]
rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:50:23 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate PWinstanley
20:56:56 [alejandra]
alejandra has joined #dxwg
20:57:58 [riccardoAlbertoni]
riccardoAlbertoni has joined #dxwg
21:00:48 [antoine]
antoine has joined #dxwg
21:02:40 [riccardoAlbertoni]
21:03:29 [SimonCox]
SimonCox has joined #dxwg
21:03:41 [roba_]
roba_ has joined #dxwg
21:03:50 [alejandra]
21:03:52 [Ana]
Ana has joined #DXWG
21:03:56 [alejandra]
scribenick alejandra
21:04:11 [SimonCox]
21:04:27 [roba_]
21:04:29 [PWinstanley]
21:04:33 [antoine]
21:04:36 [Ana]
21:04:45 [plh]
plh has joined #dxwg
21:04:50 [plh]
21:04:51 [Caroline]
Caroline has joined #DXWG
21:04:51 [alejandra]
scribenick: alejandra
21:04:57 [Caroline]
Present+ Caroline
21:05:08 [alejandra]
rrsagent, generate minutes v2
21:05:08 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate alejandra
21:05:52 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: no minutes to look at but catching up with latest stuff from last year
21:06:03 [alejandra]
... we'll start off with revision of re-charter
21:06:18 [alejandra]
... 13 Support; 3 abstain; 1 against but not by Formal Objection
21:06:34 [alejandra]
... the against was peculiar
21:06:43 [alejandra]
... [reading comment]
21:06:51 [AndreaPerego]
AndreaPerego has joined #dxwg
21:06:58 [AndreaPerego]
21:06:59 [alejandra]
... philippe, have you got any comment?
21:07:13 [alejandra]
plh: not everyone needs to like everything
21:07:36 [alejandra]
... my approach would be: thanks for your feedback but we need to consider all the comments
21:07:46 [AndreaPerego]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
21:07:46 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate AndreaPerego
21:07:47 [alejandra]
... it wasn't a formal objection
21:08:17 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: in the last charter, we had a challenge on getting traction on supposedly competing standards
21:08:33 [alejandra]
... probably we need to make sure we have better degree of engagement from the start
21:08:47 [alejandra]
plh: we have a recommendation
21:08:57 [alejandra]
... we have DCAT2 to maintain now
21:09:19 [alejandra]
... I'm not going to be answering the question on what is the scope from the consortium
21:09:38 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: enagement and giving people a rationale for all that we are doing, it is something we need to keep at the front of our minds
21:09:46 [alejandra]
... anyone else want to comment?
21:09:51 [PWinstanley]
21:09:56 [roba_]
21:10:00 [PWinstanley]
ack roba_
21:10:14 [alejandra]
roba_: the experience from OGC is that there is a tension between standard process and tooling
21:10:38 [alejandra]
... perhaps we haven't done here systematically is work out where the momentum in the community is
21:10:46 [alejandra]
... where is the community we want to influence looking
21:11:10 [alejandra]
... the technologies that have momentum/adherence
21:11:15 [alejandra]
... interoperability
21:11:39 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: we have lots of people that signed up to the group, but we've only have a dozen who joins in hte conversion let alone the meetings
21:11:55 [alejandra]
... they are from W3C member organisations
21:12:09 [alejandra]
... it'd be helpful to get additional points of view
21:12:14 [alejandra]
21:12:27 [alejandra]
... especially if we move to evergreen standards
21:12:27 [Caroline]
21:12:31 [AndreaPerego]
21:12:31 [alejandra]
... anything else?
21:12:36 [PWinstanley]
ack Caroline
21:12:59 [alejandra]
Caroline: we talked about that at the office and we're going to try to engage more Brazilians too
21:13:15 [alejandra]
... not only that, maybe it would be nice for each of us to try and bring someone else
21:13:26 [alejandra]
... brainstorming and think about who to engage
21:13:40 [PWinstanley]
ack AndreaPerego
21:13:42 [alejandra]
... there might be organizations not even aware of the working group
21:14:04 [alejandra]
AndreaPerego: my two cents - we should probably consider that it is a particular situation
21:14:12 [alejandra]
... DCAT was already standard and we extended it
21:14:24 [alejandra]
... supporting backward compatibility
21:14:31 [alejandra]
... people were looking at what we were doing
21:14:48 [alejandra]
... when we went to CR we started getting feedback
21:15:13 [alejandra]
... on the other side, because DCAT is already implemented, the profiles such as those done in Europe, they just included the new version
21:15:22 [alejandra]
... from them we got some feedback at the end of the process
21:15:33 [alejandra]
... in a new standard, the situation may be different
21:15:40 [alejandra]
... people are seeing what is going to happen
21:15:56 [alejandra]
rrsagent, generate minutes v2
21:15:56 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate alejandra
21:16:07 [AndreaPerego]
21:16:12 [AndreaPerego]
21:16:14 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: this conversation can be go on and on, but we should consider it from time to time
21:16:18 [PWinstanley]
ack AndreaPerego
21:16:33 [alejandra]
AndreaPerego: I cannot see the comments
21:16:48 [alejandra]
same problem for me too (Alejandra)
21:16:54 [antoine]
I see them
21:17:21 [alejandra]
I got a message "Not allowed"
21:17:46 [alejandra]
AndreaPerego: before I used to be able to see the comments
21:17:51 [antoine]
21:17:59 [alejandra]
plh: this is member only
21:18:06 [PWinstanley]
ack antoine
21:18:38 [alejandra]
antoine: about these comments, which I can see, the person who didn't suppor the charter also has some comments on the document licenses and that the charter history is not completely accurate
21:18:48 [alejandra]
... I'm seeing the comments but not the charter now
21:19:05 [alejandra]
plh: for the charter history, I'll fix it
21:19:13 [alejandra]
... for the license, I'd like to discuss with the group
21:19:24 [alejandra]
... the question is: DCAT Rec is supposed to use document license
21:19:37 [alejandra]
... we unintentionally switched to Software & Doc license
21:19:52 [alejandra]
... most of the groups don't use the document license
21:19:55 [alejandra]
... but use the new one
21:20:14 [antoine]
sounds ok!
21:20:15 [AndreaPerego]
21:20:17 [alejandra]
... which allows the spec to be forked
21:20:38 [alejandra]
... we concluded that using the doc license to prevent the spec to being forked
21:20:46 [alejandra]
... makes no sense
21:21:05 [alejandra]
... most of the specs can be forked nowaways and in practice it doesn't happen now
21:21:11 [PWinstanley]
ack AndreaPerego
21:21:17 [alejandra]
... my recommendation is to switch to a more open license
21:21:18 [alejandra]
21:21:21 [alejandra]
21:21:34 [roba_]
21:21:41 [plh]
21:21:53 [plh]
21:22:10 [alejandra]
AndreaPerego: what license we can use?
21:22:15 [PWinstanley]
ack alejandra
21:23:32 [PWinstanley]
alejandra: when I was editing something on the doc we had a list convo about this - we were looking at the license on the ttl and there is a distinction between the doc and the ontology. Do we use the same, or different?
21:23:51 [AndreaPerego]
21:23:53 [alejandra]
plh: it is as CC with attributions (not legal comment)
21:24:05 [SimonCox]
Note that Wikidata will only use ontologies with CC0 license
21:24:10 [alejandra]
... I see no reason not to use the same license for the ontology
21:24:11 [PWinstanley]
plh: the licence is not CC0. We should use the same licence for doc and ttl
21:24:19 [SimonCox]
21:24:34 [PWinstanley]
alejandra: I agree- that is what I would have suggested
21:24:36 [PWinstanley]
21:24:42 [PWinstanley]
ack roba_
21:25:00 [alejandra]
roba_: people who are using the spec tend to go to the usable artifacts
21:25:12 [alejandra]
... if something is not well documented is an issue
21:25:50 [antoine]
@SimonCox: Wikidata "duplicates" every ontology they want to use anyway. There are not many statements in Wikidata that use non-Wikidate classes and properties.
21:26:04 [riccardoAlbertoni]
in the turtle we are using
21:26:06 [PWinstanley]
ack AndreaPerego
21:26:07 [alejandra]
FYI: this is the link to the discussion in the mailing list:
21:26:25 [alejandra]
and I had mentioned CC-BY
21:26:37 [alejandra]
so happy that the W3C one is similar
21:26:51 [alejandra]
AndreaPerego: is there a sharealike requirement? can it be commercial?
21:27:05 [alejandra]
plh: you need to attribute the work, with or without modification
21:27:06 [SimonCox]
yes @antoine - that is because very few published ontologies are licensed CC0
21:27:12 [alejandra]
... include disclaimers...
21:27:19 [alejandra]
... if you make changes, you need to document them
21:27:29 [PWinstanley]
ack SimonCox
21:27:58 [antoine]
21:28:05 [alejandra]
SimonCox: I've already noted in the thread that wikidata takes an attitute that they don't reuse any ontology that doesn't have a CC0 license
21:28:24 [alejandra]
... I suggest a conversation between W3C and Wikidata should happen
21:28:34 [alejandra]
... vocabularies for general purpose
21:28:45 [alejandra]
... unfortunate that Wikidata cannot use them directly
21:28:58 [alejandra]
... antoine mentioned that they use to clone vocabularies
21:29:08 [alejandra]
... but my understanding is that it is not their preference
21:29:21 [alejandra]
... but they do it when there isn't an appropriate license
21:29:47 [alejandra]
... if we use the w3c URIs the attribution is given via the URI reference
21:29:54 [alejandra]
... and for the ontology then we could have CC0
21:30:32 [alejandra]
action: plh to ask W3C legal if we can use CC0 for the ontology given the Wikipedia terms
21:30:32 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-385 - Ask w3c legal if we can use cc0 for the ontology given the wikipedia terms [on Philippe Le H├ęgaret - due 2020-01-21].
21:30:35 [AndreaPerego]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
21:30:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate AndreaPerego
21:30:58 [roba_]
21:31:17 [alejandra]
plh: legal process is stretch
21:31:27 [alejandra]
... I'll see if I can get a 'yes' from them
21:31:44 [PWinstanley]
ack antoine
21:32:02 [alejandra]
antoine: I'm not extremely convinced by the wikidata argument in the moment
21:32:15 [alejandra]
... I was shocked to say that they clone ontologies
21:32:20 [alejandra]
...I'd be in favour of CC0
21:32:39 [alejandra]
... and I'd be in favour of discussing with Wikidata
21:32:44 [plh]
21:32:52 [alejandra]
plh: another question about the spec
21:33:01 [alejandra]
... issue about using the proper license
21:33:10 [alejandra]
... willing that people are willing to change to the more open license
21:33:18 [alejandra]
... do we have to fix that issue?
21:33:42 [alejandra]
proposed: close issue without action
21:34:00 [alejandra]
resolution is that we keep the license 'software and document' license
21:34:09 [alejandra]
so, keeping the most open license
21:34:11 [SimonCox]
... i.e. the more open license
21:34:37 [alejandra]
plh: if we get the new charter approved, we can squeeze it in the new charter
21:34:40 [antoine]
21:35:13 [PWinstanley]
ack antoine
21:35:21 [alejandra]
antoine: struggling to understand if this is the issue that we want
21:35:40 [alejandra]
+1 to use the more open license
21:35:51 [PWinstanley]
21:35:55 [antoine]
21:35:56 [riccardoAlbertoni]
+1 to use the more open license
21:35:57 [roba_]
21:35:59 [AndreaPerego]
21:36:06 [SimonCox]
21:36:12 [Caroline]
21:36:22 [Ana]
21:36:25 [alejandra]
resolved: close issue without action (meaning that we will use the more open license for the spec)
21:36:31 [AndreaPerego]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
21:36:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate AndreaPerego
21:36:56 [annette_g]
annette_g has joined #dxwg
21:37:03 [alejandra]
plh: I'll get approval for new charter by next week
21:37:05 [PWinstanley]
ack roba_
21:37:21 [alejandra]
roba_: wanted to make sure we don't loose the other important point Simon made
21:37:29 [alejandra]
... about dereferrencing of identifiers
21:37:38 [alejandra]
... check if we can have CC0
21:37:38 [annette_g]
Hey, all, sorry to be so late. We're in maintenance mode at the supercomputing center, and I had to put out some fires.
21:37:51 [alejandra]
... and then check if dereferencing is a valid form of attribution
21:38:08 [alejandra]
... we need to have an understanding of that from W3C in general, and probably also OGC
21:38:31 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: we need to select the meeting time
21:38:41 [AndreaPerego]
topic: meeting time
21:38:41 [Caroline]
21:38:44 [AndreaPerego]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
21:38:44 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate AndreaPerego
21:38:48 [PWinstanley]
ack Caroline
21:38:51 [alejandra]
... this time is difficult for Caroline in a regular basis
21:38:59 [alejandra]
... but would find Wednesday easier
21:39:07 [annette_g]
21:39:11 [alejandra]
Caroline: I think I'd be available
21:39:21 [SimonCox]
(To determine meeting timing we should do a poll - e.g. using Doodle)
21:39:25 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: are people happy to keep this time or should we consider other times?
21:39:37 [AndreaPerego]
+1 from me to keep the current time.
21:39:40 [SimonCox]
This time OK
21:39:43 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: is there a need for a call?
21:39:56 [alejandra]
21:39:59 [roba_]
we are a self-selecting sample of course :-(
21:40:07 [alejandra]
proposed: we keep this time
21:40:10 [riccardoAlbertoni]
21:40:11 [AndreaPerego]
21:40:13 [plh]
21:40:14 [PWinstanley]
21:40:14 [alejandra]
21:40:14 [annette_g]
21:40:16 [roba_]
21:40:17 [antoine]
21:40:18 [SimonCox]
21:40:25 [alejandra]
resolved: we keep this time
21:40:25 [Caroline]
21:40:49 [alejandra]
topic: DCAT2
21:41:00 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: we have the member only results
21:41:18 [alejandra]
... 10 support; 3 abstain; 1 suggestion of changes
21:41:34 [plh]
21:41:50 [alejandra]
plh: we need to see the issues in that milestone
21:42:09 [riccardoAlbertoni]
21:42:23 [PWinstanley]
ack riccardoAlbertoni
21:42:55 [alejandra]
riccardoAlbertoni: we have resolved most of the issues
21:43:00 [alejandra]
... several 'due for closing'
21:43:20 [alejandra]
... some other issues plh has assigned himself
21:43:35 [alejandra]
... 1182 and 1177 are open but I think we can close them
21:44:08 [alejandra]
21:44:24 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: are people happy for riccardoAlbertoni to lead this?
21:44:39 [alejandra]
riccardoAlbertoni: next two days, I'll be busy
21:44:39 [PWinstanley]
ack alejandra
21:45:11 [PWinstanley]
alejandra: that is fine - if riccardoAlbertoni can lead then others can review - I've been doing this recently
21:45:39 [alejandra]
plh: riccardoAlbertoni will you give me the document or do you want me to generate from github?
21:45:46 [alejandra]
riccardoAlbertoni: is there a procedure for this?
21:46:40 [alejandra]
plh: focus on the issues and let me know and I can point you to the tools or run them myself
21:46:56 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: reminder about discussion on papers and blog posts, etc
21:47:05 [alejandra]
... put them around and get quick feedback
21:47:58 [alejandra]
... perhaps different languages and different audiences
21:48:55 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: are we going to break out the github for one repo per document?
21:49:03 [alejandra]
I think that would be good
21:49:21 [roba_]
+1 to split up and reset issue chaos
21:49:23 [alejandra]
topic: Conneg
21:49:29 [antoine]
I prefer to keep the same repo. Issues may be about several deliverables...
21:49:36 [SimonCox]
According to Phillipe the DXWG is unusual in not having split the repo from the beginning!
21:49:50 [AndreaPerego]
Same opinion of antoine
21:50:14 [alejandra]
roba_: as nick is not here, I'll take the discussion on conneg
21:50:18 [plh]
21:50:24 [SimonCox]
(Git subtree command allows you to split the repo and keep the history)
21:50:37 [alejandra]
... my understanding is that nic has been following the W3C process for PWD3
21:50:55 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: we voted towards the end of last year to take it forward
21:51:22 [alejandra]
(but we won't get the split of the issues)
21:51:39 [plh]
21:52:23 [alejandra]
roba_: I've got an extended contract with OGC and will extend conversations engaging various organisations
21:53:26 [alejandra]
topic: prof
21:53:32 [alejandra]
roba_: same situation
21:53:48 [alejandra]
... ready to be published as a note
21:53:53 [plh]
21:53:54 [plh]
21:54:09 [PWinstanley]
ack plh
21:54:21 [alejandra]
plh: it's been published as a note in mid Dec
21:54:45 [alejandra]
... it can be updated anytime
21:55:01 [alejandra]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
21:55:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate alejandra
21:55:22 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: remaining topic was open actions
21:55:44 [alejandra]
21:56:43 [alejandra]
382 can be closed
21:56:56 [plh]
close action-382
21:56:56 [trackbot]
Closed action-382.
21:57:07 [alejandra]
21:57:20 [plh]
21:57:20 [trackbot]
action-338 -- Antoine Isaac to Handle definition in 662 re profiles and media types in Profile Guidance -- due 2019-06-18 -- OPEN
21:57:20 [trackbot]
21:57:27 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: related to 242 is 338
21:57:53 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: small taxonomy of profiles
21:58:06 [alejandra]
... data profiles and talk about them in isolation
21:58:36 [alejandra]
... if we're going to do anything on profiles it has to be very focused
21:58:38 [roba_]
21:58:43 [PWinstanley]
ack roba_
21:59:04 [alejandra]
roba_: ADMS is a note and declares itself a profile of DCAT
21:59:22 [alejandra]
... can we look at the W3C cannon and note how they relate to each other
21:59:33 [alejandra]
... we might get a sense on how to do things
21:59:46 [alejandra]
... keen to keep it open
21:59:58 [alejandra]
... not sure to specify what we want to do now
22:00:36 [alejandra]
PWinstanley: we'll meet up same time next week
22:00:45 [roba_]
22:00:45 [SimonCox]
22:00:46 [riccardoAlbertoni]
22:00:47 [PWinstanley]
rrsagent, create minutes v2
22:00:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate PWinstanley
22:00:52 [alejandra]
RRSAgent, draft minutes v2
22:00:52 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate alejandra
22:01:34 [Ana]
* thank you, bye
22:04:35 [annette_g1]
annette_g1 has joined #dxwg
22:44:34 [annette_g]
annette_g has joined #dxwg
23:01:51 [annette_g1]
annette_g1 has joined #dxwg