Meeting minutes 05062015
Attendees
- Pieter Pauwels
- Kris McGlinn
- Matthias Weise
- Jakob Beetz
Date and time
- 05/06/2015
- 11:00 CET
Agenda
INFORMAL CATCH UP SESSION
Action items
- <Think about tagging use cases>, <ALL>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Digest questionnaire results obtained from BuildingSMART event in Wiki>, <Kris>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Circulate doodle poll for LDAC event>, <Jakob>, <STATUS: NEW>
- <Develop sensor/energy model scenario>, <Kris>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Develop indoor navigation scenario>, <Matthias>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Think about an efficient way of building a map to available datasets and ontologies>, <all>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
Minutes
- Pieter: No agenda today, plan is to touch base since last meeting.
- Kris: I would like to discuss the status of the online questionnaires.
- Pieter: The inputs are available on the shared google drive.
- Kris: I will put together the present inputs for Questionnaire for Friday 12th June.
- Matthias: Status of LDAC event?
- Pieter: Discusses the LDAC event, who is presenting, who are doing handson sessions, etc. Shares a document so that participants can be added.
- Kris: We are still inviting EeB projects. We have had some interest and some speakers available. I will add these to the doc.
- Pieter: Matthias, just to update you on the previous BuildingSmart call last week. We have been looking at the requirements for owlIFC. We have decided that there is the need for a layered approach, three levels of owlIFC - simple, some semantic structure (allows some reasoning) and a full version.
- Matthias: Would be good to have use cases for each of these. For example, do you add rules/reasoning?
- Pieter: Define your own rules yourself in an open manner. So, e.g. the government sets requirements on energy performance, they can describe in a rule set. This can then be automatically checked, instead of having to read the pdf document.
- Matthias: What does Seppo use?
- Pieter: His own approach. We must merge these. That is why we need a ‘layered approach’ or mapping ontology. The problem is, not everyone wants to have all the constraints that are imposed by IFC. Therefore, some may require a simpler ontology to meet their requirements.
- Matthias: These need to be compared with the requirements discussed at the meeting in Espoo.
- Matthias: Discusses MVD and mvdXML (Model View Definitions). We are looking at a use case to map the schema to RDF. MVD allows these different 'views' so that developers can focus on the data that is important to them.
- Kris: Discusses LDAC handson session around CSVW.
- Jakob: We are creating a doodle poll also for participation at the LDAC event. I will circulate.
Notes
Action Items of Previous Meeting
- <Think about tagging use cases>, <ALL>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Digest questionnaire results obtained from BuildingSMART event in Wiki>, <Kris>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Develop sensor/energy model scenario>, <Kris>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Develop indoor navigation scenario>, <Matthias>, <STATUS: ONGOING>
- <Think about an efficient way of building a map to available datasets and ontologies>, <all>, <STATUS: ONGOING>