Meeting minutes
approve meeting minutes
<Nobu_OGURA> +1
<Caroline_> https://
<plh> +1
<Caroline_> +1
<RiccardoAlbertoni> +0
<DaveBrowning> +1
<Caroline_> https://
<annette_g> +1
+0
Updates from DCAT subgroup
<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://
RiccardoAlbertoni: focused on WD - closed 35 issues
… plan to stabilise versioning and dataset series
… on track per plan to close in march, publish in June
… 3 issues open, not normative
… suggest start review for vote next plenary
<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://
<RiccardoAlbertoni> https://
RiccardoAlbertoni: plan to address this issue (see chat)
… expected to be last WD before CR
… will be working on other issues after WD - are there any constraints?
… for @plh
plh: once we are in CR we can classify new as "feature at risk"
… only have to prove whats new has implementation
… "each term in revised charter is used in multiple catalogs or systems"
… with new process can move stay in V3 or move to V4
ConnegP
<plh>
roba: implementation mode at OGC for both ConnegP and the Profiles Vocabulary
… we haven't pushing further because there are no changes
… there is work in OGC around a suite of APIs
… about ConnegP, implementation is doing well but in the real world there is not much use yet
… the challenge is to gather other organizations to join the task force
… is there a huge hurry to finalize as a candidate?
… talking about interoperability, is it still moving slowly?
… I think ConnegP is not ready to be published as a rec
plh: we can leave it in the charter as it is
… if we intend to publish as a recommendation, note in the future is not a option
… my recommendation is to leave as it is and we may never push it further
… it doesn't hurt the group
roba: I don't believe the editors want to publish as a note
… at the moment there is no evidence that there is a better alternative
… it is a positive outcome of the new W3C process
roba: there are opportunities to explore community engagement
<plh>
plh: how many people from the group would be interested to attend TPAC in person in Vancouver?
… TPAC might be hybrid, which is a challenge in terms of equipment etc
… my recommendation to the group is to answer the questionaire and if you are not sure say you are likely to go. Then you will have an opportunity to give your final answer in May
<RiccardoAlbertoni> me I am not attending in person
<roba> me also unlikely - though regretfully
<roba> me profiles would be good but these are outside charter still?
<plh> "The Dataset Exchange Working Group will not create application profiles or metadata standards that only apply to very specific domains (such as particle physics, accountancy, oncology etc.)"
<roba> annette_g: would love to hear about profiles
<roba> roba: example StatDCAT
<roba> ...making sure i wasnt missing any intent to develop generic profiles of how other vocabs might be used
<roba> RiccardoAlbertoni: usually such profiles have their own developers and communities
<roba> ... everytime a common solution identified tried to push into DCAT
<roba> ... plan is to continue in this fashion
<roba> roba: will try to bring examples from communities as they emerge.