19:59:12 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dxwg
19:59:12 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-irc
19:59:23 <PWinstanley> rrsagent, make logs public
19:59:36 <PWinstanley> chair: PWinstanley
19:59:52 <PWinstanley> rrsagent, create minutes v2
19:59:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-minutes.html PWinstanley
20:00:27 <PWinstanley> regrets+ Caroline, AndreaPerego
20:01:36 <riccardoalbertoni> riccardoalbertoni has joined #dxwg
20:04:56 <DaveBrowning> DaveBrowning has joined #dxwg
20:06:07 <roba> present+
20:06:21 <PWinstanley> present+
20:06:22 <riccardoalbertoni> present+
20:06:40 <DaveBrowning> present+
20:06:45 <annette_g> annette_g has joined #dxwg
20:06:48 <roba> scribenick roba
20:06:51 <annette_g> present+
20:07:05 <nobu_ogura> nobu_ogura has joined #dxwg
20:07:13 <nobu_ogura> present+
20:07:17 <PWinstanley> https://www.w3.org/2022/09/27-dxwg-minutes
20:07:33 <annette_g> +1
20:07:41 <DaveBrowning> 0 (not present)
20:07:47 <nobu_ogura> +1
20:08:00 <PWinstanley> +1
20:08:03 <roba> proposed: accept minutes of meeting on 27-09
20:08:05 <riccardoalbertoni> +1
20:08:07 <roba> 0
20:08:22 <roba> resolved: accept minutes of meeting on 27-09
20:09:12 <PWinstanley> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2022.10.11
20:09:28 <PWinstanley> meeting: DXWG Plenary
20:09:36 <DaveBrowning> rrsagent, draft minutes
20:09:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-minutes.html DaveBrowning
20:10:05 <PWinstanley> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:10:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-minutes.html PWinstanley
20:11:08 <riccardoalbertoni> +q
20:11:09 <roba> topic: DCAT update
20:11:50 <riccardoalbertoni> Discussion of the feedback from the privacy group https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/created_by/npdoty
20:11:55 <roba> riccardoalbertoni: no meeting last week - outstanding from last plenary: feedback from privacy group
20:12:08 <riccardoalbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1526
20:12:13 <roba> ...three issues
20:12:29 <roba> authenticity and integrity of dcat files and associated datasets #1526
20:12:29 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/1526 : authenticity and integrity of dcat files and associated datasets
20:13:16 <PWinstanley> q+
20:13:23 <PWinstanley> ack riccardoalbertoni
20:13:24 <riccardoalbertoni> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WX1TVE22AaUOSSkjunI9tvXFVF6gj5AhCVJsPHTrYXw/edit?usp=sharing
20:13:32 <roba> felt not to be in scope of DCAT - but seeking opinion from group.
20:13:39 <roba> draft reply here..
20:14:01 <PWinstanley> ack PWinstanley
20:14:42 <roba> PWinstanley: needs to be expressed clearly its a model - and can be implemented in many ways - RDF for clarity of expression
20:14:55 <roba> security is a matter of implementation
20:15:20 <roba> based on best practices and case -by-case requirements
20:15:25 <roba> q
20:15:26 <riccardoalbertoni> ack
20:15:33 <riccardoalbertoni> q?
20:15:35 <roba> q+
20:15:38 <annette_g> q+
20:15:41 <PWinstanley> ack roba
20:16:17 <PWinstanley> roba: I concur - the issue about a data model with multiple serialisations is interesting, and RDF is a good canonical model because it is lossless
20:16:51 <PWinstanley> ... but the issue here is that if you want extensions to DCAT then an application profile is required.
20:17:22 <PWinstanley> ... we haven't provided any guidance on this (e.g. for geoDCAT-AP etc)
20:17:41 <PWinstanley> ... and I think that it's a weakness not to have this in scope
20:17:44 <riccardoalbertoni> q+
20:18:03 <PWinstanley> ack annette_g
20:18:18 <DaveBrowning> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:18:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-minutes.html DaveBrowning
20:18:43 <roba> annette_g: agree that there is a difference between spec and implementation - worth putting a note in regarding how to use it
20:18:55 <riccardoalbertoni> https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat-3/#security_and_privacy
20:19:22 <roba> we recommend that people publish checksum
20:19:29 <PWinstanley> q?
20:19:33 <roba> q+
20:19:33 <PWinstanley> ack riccardoalbertoni
20:20:18 <roba> riccardoalbertoni: we have a section on security and privacy - please look and suggest improvements if required.
20:20:31 <riccardoalbertoni>  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WX1TVE22AaUOSSkjunI9tvXFVF6gj5AhCVJsPHTrYXw/edit?usp=sharing
20:20:43 <roba> does the response suffice?
20:20:48 <annette_g> q+ to talk about the checksums in particular
20:21:20 <roba> we acknowledge the issue but its not in scope..
20:21:44 <PWinstanley> ack roba
20:21:47 <roba> they are asking specifically re RDF integrity
20:22:59 <PWinstanley> roba:  3 things:  1/ response needs to be clear about scope early in the draft; 2/ checksum is not the only way of checking so perhaps it should be provided as an example of determining intergrity; 3/ is there anything in the W3C canon that addresses it
20:23:02 <PWinstanley> https://w3c.github.io/rch-wg-charter/explainer.html
20:23:57 <roba> roba: perfect - lets just reference this
20:24:08 <PWinstanley> q?
20:24:16 <PWinstanley> ack annette_g
20:24:16 <Zakim> annette_g, you wanted to talk about the checksums in particular
20:24:51 <roba> annette_g: i dont see anything re security there..
20:25:16 <roba> PWinstanley: once you have a canonical form you can do checksums
20:25:50 <roba> checksum for integrity
20:26:05 <PWinstanley> q?
20:26:16 <roba> riccardoalbertoni: DCAT talking about checksums for distributions - not DCAT metadata
20:27:06 <roba> annette_g: nothing in security and privacy re checksums - can we add a note ?
20:28:06 <annette_g> q+
20:28:14 <PWinstanley> ack annette_g
20:28:55 <roba> annette_g: analagous to software - checksum for each distribution
20:29:41 <PWinstanley> s/analagous /analogous/
20:29:47 <roba> roba: problem is metadata is designed to sit above distributions
20:30:47 <roba> riccardoalbertoni: summary - we cannot do much in this direction
20:31:32 <roba> PWinstanley: 1 - state its not in scope of model, 2 - point to new community group
20:31:52 <roba> 3 - thanks for feedback and note timeliness
20:32:05 <annette_g> q+
20:32:40 <roba> 4 - may rely on canonical serialisation and is a significant technical challenge
20:32:53 <PWinstanley> ack annette_g
20:33:16 <roba> annette_g: should we give people a note on how to use a checksum
20:36:05 <DaveBrowning> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:36:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-minutes.html DaveBrowning
20:38:20 <roba> annette_g: i dont read it as about integrity of DCAT - is it about someone else publishing a different DCAT record with a different checksum?
20:38:54 <roba> PWinstanley: can we seek refinement of the issue to clarify its scope
20:39:49 <roba> roba: as i read it the wording implies its about the integrity of the DCAT and hence the checksums for the distributions.
20:40:31 <roba> annette_g: i dont care about a checksum on the metadata - want to provide guidance on implementation on checksums
20:41:07 <roba> roba: need to avoid specifying an implementation
20:41:26 <roba> PWinstanley: make sure its clearly an example
20:42:57 <roba> TOPIC: content negotiation by profile
20:44:37 <PWinstanley> roba: both ConnegP and the profiles vocab are being used in OGC and a series of Australian Gov LD projects.
20:45:25 <PWinstanley> ... There is no published DCAT profile that allows for the description of the conformance of the data - no standard practice
20:45:56 <PWinstanley> ... Handling multiple representations is forward thinking, and it is at the API level
20:46:25 <PWinstanley> ... the implementation is working "well enough" in its current form
20:46:52 <PWinstanley> ... and there are no competitors.  So we are waiting for requirements to emerge
20:51:40 <annette_g> q+
20:51:45 <PWinstanley> ack annette_g
20:52:02 <roba> roba: we have two independent implementations - but nothing in the wider community is obviously ready for semantic interoperability in this detail.
20:53:14 <roba> PWinstanley: fundamental "soft sand" around definition of a profile.
20:53:27 <roba> e.g. data profile only?
20:54:26 <roba> PWinstanley: issues with IETF and the use of HTTP headers
20:54:54 <roba> proposal to remove HTTP as normative
20:55:34 <roba> q+
20:55:51 <PWinstanley> ack roba
20:56:15 <annette_g> roba: there are any number of philosophical discussions about what's a profile, you could possibly add in extra classifications.
20:56:32 <annette_g> The big issue is that this was originally meant to dovetail with an IETF process, which is stalled.
20:57:02 <annette_g> The two independent implementations we have eare around the QSA approach. There is a proposal to take the http part of out the specification.
20:57:07 <PWinstanley> roba:  there are all sorts of views on what a 'profile' is, but the big issue is that there is a stalled IETF process and at present there doesn't seem to be any route to developing the HTTP model further.
20:57:29 <annette_g> s/eare/are
20:57:38 <PWinstanley> ... There is also no alternative functionality we can reference.
20:58:12 <PWinstanley> ... The model is ready to go, and will operate whether using HTTP or QSA
20:59:05 <PWinstanley> ... The recommendation looks ready to go from the QSA perspective, and we could dissociate the HTTP angle and deliver an effective recommendation.
20:59:35 <DaveBrowning> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:59:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-minutes.html DaveBrowning
21:04:26 <PWinstanley> rrsagent, create minutes v2
21:04:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/10/11-dxwg-minutes.html PWinstanley