W3C

– DRAFT –
DXWG Plenary

11 February 2020

Attendees

Present
alejandra, Ana, annette_g, Caroline, kcoyle, PWinstanley
Regrets
AndreaPerego, RiccardoAlbertoni, Simon
Chair
Caroline
Scribe
Caroline, kcoyle

Meeting minutes

<Caroline> zakim pick a vitim

<Caroline> zakim pick a victim

<Caroline> https://‌www.w3.org/‌2020/‌02/‌04-dxwg-minutes

admin

proposed: approve minutes of last meeting

<PWinstanley> +0 (not there)

<Ana> +1

0 (not here)

<Caroline> +1

<plh> +1

<annette_g> +0, not there, though I'm sure it was fabulous

<alejandra> +1

Resolution: approve minutes of last meeting

DCAT publicity

<Caroline> https://‌docs.google.com/‌spreadsheets/‌d/‌1_f5CAZv7rgUjJH5YXkmD6w5xS6GX5X2AmEp_LMptAfQ/‌edit#gid=560881316

need to review spreadsheet; put yourself on to send emails, contact folks

<alejandra> It is the same spreadsheet we had before - put together by the group

any comments?

just a reminder for those who haven't gotten to this yet

<annette_g> I can't edit the Gdoc

Caroline: also let us know if you have papers, conferences, etc.
… blog post has been translated to Portuguese and posted

DCAT3

Caroline: many issues to resolve
… split the repo?
… much discussion on email; no consensus yet

<Caroline> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌issues/‌1216

<annette_g> (the new link works, thanks)

kcoyle: I was looking at the amount of the overlap we have on the issues. Because there are concerns that if we split we will lose connections
… I will continue to try to make sense of that

<kcoyle> kcoyle: split will be less difficult if there is not much overlap

Caroline: other comments? don't seem to be ready to vote on this

?+

<alejandra> https://‌twitter.com/‌alegonbel/‌status/‌1224806505586753537

alejandra: think we need to try splitting; also, did a twitter thread about DCAT publicity

Caroline: asks Alejandra if she thinks we should try

alejandra: yes, we can fork the repo and we don't lose anything; start with one document
… move issues;

annette_g: experiment to find out how difficult it is

<alejandra> we are also missing some people in this call

kcoyle: we could do a pool about it
… I am wondering where are we with the conneg?

Caroline: good question but no answer at this moment

kcoyle: shall we ask in an email? Caroline thinks there already was one

Action: on kcoyle, ask about conneg in an email

<trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌users>.

Action: kcoyle, ask about conneg in an email

<trackbot> Error finding 'kcoyle,'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://‌www.w3.org/‌2017/‌dxwg/‌track/‌users>.

Action: PWinstanley set up poll about trying split

<trackbot> Created ACTION-396 - Set up poll about trying split [on Peter Winstanley - due 2020-02-18].

<Caroline> https://‌lists.w3.org/‌Archives/‌Public/‌public-dxwg-wg/‌2020Jan/‌0142.html

RDA versioning proposal

<kcoyle> kcoyle: some folks are connected to the RDA group

<kcoyle> PWinstanley: possibly Simon

alejandra: no discussion at recent European meeting (is this right?)

Caroline: maybe we can connect with them and see what interaction makes sense
… can someone take this action?
… shall we ask Simon? (We could give him an action ;-)

Action: PWinstanley to initiate contact with RDA

<trackbot> Created ACTION-397 - Initiate contact with rda [on Peter Winstanley - due 2020-02-18].

DCAT "future work" issues

<Caroline> https://‌github.com/‌w3c/‌dxwg/‌milestone/‌27

Caroline: Alejandra created the milestone document

alejandra: created initial milestones; Riccardo and Andrea have added more issues, those
… tagged with feedback (although most are editorial)
… Andrea tagged some untagged issues
… issues around versioning, future work, and feedback

Caroline: alejandra you suggest that we deal with these issues first

alejandra: need to first prioritize the future work ones
… have called it DCAT3, FPWD

Caroline: yes, please continue with that

extract from UCR

Caroline: we talked about this last week. Extract those related to versioning, ...

plh: as for use cases and requirements in the evergreen situation
… (digging up slides)

Caroline: we talked last week about splitting up UCR document

<plh> https://‌docs.google.com/‌presentation/‌d/‌1x_FrdVUt2Hp01t2fXyQa0sROwkzC8UKFIhcNqsyoSCQ/‌edit#slide=id.p

plh: on slide 13 - to be a REC or not to be
… remember that evergreen is not yet adopted by W3C; and this group will need to adopt it
… slide 13 gives 3 options
… CR forever, doesn't move beyond that
… versions: you can publish DCaT3 same as was done for DCAT2
… third is rec forever; instead of publishing in stages you directly revise existing rec
… you don't have to go back to early stages (PWD); you have one single step
… that is only available in process2020
… if DCAT2 worked for you, do the same for DCAT3 (FPWD, etc.)
… if that is difficult you can do the 3rd option
… so, the question is? do you want a big version, or have more granularity

kcoyle: it seems the questions have to be about the users of DCAT
… it seems they should have a say in this

PWinstanley: my concern is the business about ? fatigue, and the other is that this
… could become a niche project of a small number of people; hard to get wide review
… it would be challenging to keep the energy behind a project that is ongoing

plh: peter, are you saying that he don't have the energy to do dcat3?

PWinstanley: I think we can do 3, but am not sure about 4 and 5 because it may become narrower
… difficult getting non-W3C folks to give the necessary feedback in the early stages

plh: one approach is like web application group - they have a scheduled approach
… each year they decide which properties will be added
… it gives them a focus on a reduced set of issues and a specific time
… you could decide that we will do DCAT3 in one year; and decide what will be in that
… and have it ready for fall

PWinstanley: that cadence sounds about right; needs to be balanced with the push
… to publish frequently. we realized that didn
… didn't work for use, to publish many small changes
… shorter than one year may not work

plh: ok, so decide a once a year version; work back from February to set milestones
… and dates; folks know that if they don't get their property this year that can look forward
… to the following year; and you can always decide that a version is an x.1

PWinstanley: if decision about changes has to do with support then there's likely to be broad
… review

Caroline: do we have to make a decision now? or should we first work on milestones and cases?

plh: first sort out issues - which are DCAT3, which are a later version?

PWinstanley: alejandra has already started this

alejandra: yes, I was thinking about FPWD, so what I've done is just the very first stage

Caroline: in the next meeting we can cover more with more of the editors here

<PWinstanley> bye!

<annette_g> bye all!

<Ana> thank you, bye

Summary of action items

  1. on kcoyle, ask about conneg in an email
  2. kcoyle, ask about conneg in an email
  3. PWinstanley set up poll about trying split
  4. PWinstanley to initiate contact with RDA

Summary of resolutions

  1. approve minutes of last meeting
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 104 (Sat Dec 7 01:59:30 2019 UTC).

Diagnostics

Maybe present: plh