<scribe> scribenick: ted
<scribe> Scribe: Ted
Review of action items
Discussion on UML tooling
Clemens shares https://github.com/ogcincubator/route
Mark: main item for today was to look at what Megan posted on collaboratory
... also should discuss next steps
http://citydata.utoronto.ca/index.php/Tpso:Route
Megan: there are some classes we are adding relevant to the use case, you can see class listing link
http://citydata.utoronto.ca/index.php/Category:Class
Megan: you can see existing and proposed classes. we have a number of generic higher level and then more details such as Tpso for Tranportation Planning Ontology
http://citydata.utoronto.ca/index.php/Tpso:Route
Megan: description of route defined in arcs and nodes, short description of use case and description logic (OWL) that goes along wih that and a diagram
... we link to other terms that have been defined
... ArcPD represents Arc in a network, invariant aspects
... Tpso Arcs allow us to discuss how things may change over time
Mark: maybe delve into time invariant descriptions
Megan: we needed to represent properties changing in time, link upward representation
... for instance a speed limit may change at different times, arc123@time1 could have one speed limit and arc123@time2 another
Ken: I am wondering why to use a specialization of arc to time variant, would consider other way around
Megan: if we go back to listing of classes, ArcPD is our specialization of time variant arc
... you still have that division. the term Arc is generic
Ken: what does PD stand for?
Megan: per durant
Ken: I would avoid acronyms that aren't easy to understand, and not defined here http://citydata.utoronto.ca/index.php/Tpso:ArcPD
Megan: we need to make it more clear
Mark projects a diagram of subclasses
Mark: the problem we are addressing here is how do you represent something with properties changing over time, how to avoid loosing them
... VehiclePD is our most basic representation of a vehicle that says it is temporal entity, vin, manufacturer etc won't change over time
... vehicle class properties are immutable whereas the PD extensions are
... there are some edge cases, for instance color generally does change but if it does it would be a new vehicle instance
Ken: I am trying to understand practice of manifestation of instance
Mark: association of VehiclePD as a Time Varying Entity is a manifestation of Vehicle
... Megan can you write a description of the manifestation process?
Clemens: should we do that with something more route related instead?
Megan: that could work
Clemens: I hope to find time but what I could try is to add stuff from our model and see if I can enter our stuff there
... thought I created an account but the browser stored credentials aren't working, created a new account
... idea is we could create new subclasses of route and can create an OGC route like you have TSP
Megan: that would be great
Clemens: so you create the UML and take a screenshot and upload
Megan: plantUML is preferred and another option
Mark: account issue likely from a spam attack
Megan: we had to do some cleaning up as we didn't have enough safeguards in place
Mark: we have an approval process in place now
Ken: what is the distinction between how we are going to use github versus the collaboratory?
Mark: collaboratory for class definitions unless you think we can do in github, issues, documents etc
... what is the collaboratory built on top of?
Megan: MediaWiki
Ken: we want a use case driven design, it would seem to me we should have that structure. area we define use cases, information flow diagrams, then classes and data models
Mark: I agree there needs to be a stronger representation of use cases in collaboratory
... needs to be representation of use cases with different concepts being proposed
Ken: my involvement is from TC204, we are investigating how to create an information view within our architecture
... we do not want to create our own data model but point to one used by the industry
... that is an angle I am looking at this with
... how we can tie in our reference architecture to model we are trying to establish
... there are also multiple active efforts in 204 awaiting better way to document their data, we're trying to figure out where and how
... I do not have a problem using this MediaWiki site to do that but think it needs more structure for that to be possible
... more important is the access rights
... might be better elsewhere than University of Toronto
Mark: no problem, we can do citydata.org or whatever we get our hands on
Ken: we need to clarify our governance process, allow for people to enter data and show how it is maturing
... are there fields to do that?
... distinguish proposal versus approved
Mark: there is categorization and capability to comment but we don't have a governance model and would appreciate your input, want to take an action on that?
Ken: sure
Mark: if people can form their opinions using this, it can feed into governance
... we have not identified who is responsible for review process and stamp of approval
... imagine a representative from each of the major SDO
Ken: I received liaison approval from 204 to W3C
Ted inquires what MediaWiki extension are used to see if W3C could host
Megan: sure, not many extensions
Mark: we're fine hosting
Ken: final, published, official version will need to go somewhere
Ted: we can decide later, certainly possible at W3C and maybe within Spatial Data on the Web group which is OGC+W3C
Ken: should we reach out to TC22?
Mark: depends on how deep we go into vehicle representation
... why don't we discuss that more at the next meeting?
... identify where our boundaries are, want to avoid redoing all TC204 has been
Ken: challenge is how do we migrate disparate models into a single model
... not limited to who submits first
... template structures like you have are useful
... TC204 can start moving this direction and send to TOCC github
Mark: I would be open to that. without publishing ISO standards documents you could upload UML
Ken: copyright applies to documents more than UML diagrams
... including definitions is where we can get into trouble
Ted: is there a reaction to your proposal to ISO on having data models public?
Ken: they are still considering it and have agreement within TC204 to work together, TC204 is fine referencing external resources and content with an open process
Mark: we have a few new proposals for our ISO group. citydata model which will be drawing from existing standards, second project is city level data model, a third for transportation planning
... we receive approval yesterday
Action item review
Megan: writeup example with Arc class
Megan - writeup
Mark - explore domain name options
Ken - governance workflow
Clemens - add concepts from OGC model to collaboratory
Mark: Megan also to add use case category
... 27 May 8am work?
Ken: that is IoT week for me
... 28th I can do
Clemens: problem for me from 8-10E
Mark: 10E 28 May, same URL