– DRAFT –
DXWG Plenary

Meeting cancelled - not quorate.

meeting reconvened as pwinstanley got time wrong

<roba_> * apologies - looks like my hotel bandwidth is unusable

proposed: accept minutes https://www.w3.org/2023/02/28-dxwg-minutes of last meeting

<riccardoAlbertoni> +0 (i was not there)

+1

<nobu_ogura> +1

RESOLUTION: accept minutes https://www.w3.org/2023/02/28-dxwg-minutes of last meeting

update from DCAT group

riccardoAlbertoni: DCAT v2 draft is available from the usual link -
… work done in the last month includes:

<riccardoAlbertoni> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DWifljP6bTb_Z1Bk40ltek1cfepJPAYmJsl2tIwOXZ4/edit#gid=1783901278

riccardoAlbertoni: list of implementations in the google doc
… set of features "at risk"
… the 'at risk' items are noted in the document

<riccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestone/3

<riccardoAlbertoni> https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestone/31

riccardoAlbertoni: There is a milestone ( #31) - future priority work

<riccardoAlbertoni> DCAT CR milestone https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/milestone/30

riccardoAlbertoni: The remaining issues are in DCAT CR milestonethat collects the issues still relevant, but most of these issues should be closed after the CR is voted in

<riccardoAlbertoni> PR w3c/dxwg#1569

riccardoAlbertoni: There are still a couple of issues needing resolved before we go to CR. #1569 relates to issues raised by B van Nuffeln

<riccardoAlbertoni> PR t, w3c/dxwg#1543

riccardoAlbertoni: There is also a PR prepared some time ago that fixed the issue related to the technical discussion we had some time ago about JSON-LD. This is still an issue that is challenging as we are trying to provide 2 options for a range just to fix an issue that depends on another standard (RDF serialisation) - so it's not really a DCAT issue
… Is there strong opinion on this? We could postpone this, or we can keep the same range as DCAT2, but add the note prepared by Pierre-Antoine as a record of the issue

Sometimes it is correct to note the technical debt and focus on the priority of getting the recommendation done

nobu_ogura: I think the priority is getting the recommendation out

Implementations are not going to be as plentiful as they were with earlier versions, but I suspect that once a stable CR is available people wanting to upgrade might find this to be the appropriate point, and we can get implementation evidence then

<riccardoAlbertoni> w3c/dxwg#1502

riccardoAlbertoni: I would support that we get a vote set up for CR and colleagues can then focus on the draft and this vote might reveal any remaining issues
… The next issue is wide review. #1502 shows that we have ticked most of the boxes. There are different communications (schema.org, RDA) but we need to find the emails to prove the wide review