- From: Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:15:52 +0200
- To: Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>
- Cc: Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>, SDW WG Public List <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>, Kerry Taylor <kerry.taylor@acm.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFVDz414mMQFksiWFByMfErh=dzd7HoLLkMAcCtQMkzNooQ9Ew@mail.gmail.com>
Hello Ed, Yes, it was a valuable discussion. It was good and insightful to have it. I did feel sorry for the other agenda item. Perhaps it is sufficient to have a strict time limit for trying to resolve an issue next time. If we want to have a fresh issue next week I can suggest ISSUE-22 <http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/22>. It is about best practices and has a proposed solution. But I have to tell you that I can't join next week's meeting because of being in another meeting. Greetings, Frans 2015-06-24 16:52 GMT+02:00 Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>: > Hi Frans, > > Maybe this issue was a more complex one ? I feel the conversation today > was really valuable, but we did not reach an agreed position - That's OK ! > > I actually think we might have reached the same point via the email thread > and perhaps it might have taken even longer... > > We can try to resolve this issue again next week or try a different one, > and let's see how we get on. Could I suggest you nominate an issue for > next week, we can discuss via the list over the next week and we give > ourselves a strict 30 minutes to discuss and agree/or not on next weeks > call. > > Ed > > On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 at 15:35 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote: > >> Hello Ed, Kerry, >> >> Today's meeting showed that it is difficult to resolve an issue with a >> vote in a meeting. It's a pity we did not have time for the second item on >> the agenda. But still we need to have a way of resolving issues. Could >> there be other ways of having the group members critically assess a >> proposed solution at more or less the same time? >> >> It seems to me that much of the discussion we have had today could have >> taken place in the e-mail thread. Maybe there is a way to encourage >> discussion on a particular issue on the list in a particular time window? >> Or should there be extra teleconferences? >> >> Regards, >> Frans >> >> 2015-06-23 11:56 GMT+02:00 Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>: >> >>> Hi Frans, >>> >>> Thanks for the reminder - I have sent the relevant request to the >>> systems team to set up the automatic e-mail notification when new issues >>> and actions are raised. >>> >>> Phil >>> >>> On 23/06/2015 10:13, Frans Knibbe wrote: >>> >>>> 2015-06-23 10:32 GMT+02:00 Alejandro Llaves <allaves@fi.upm.es>: >>>> >>>> Yes, this is a good idea. There are also "raised" (pending) issues >>>>> related >>>>> to the UCR document and to me it is not clear which is the right >>>>> procedure >>>>> to fix them. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I don't think there is an official procedure. What I would like to >>>> suggest >>>> (and have been doing) is: >>>> >>>> 1. Raise an issue. >>>> 2. Make sure there is at least one associated e-mail thread (Phil >>>> mentioned that should happen automatically but so far that has not >>>> happened >>>> in our case). >>>> 3. Debate the issue in the e-mail list. >>>> 4. Once the debate seems to be finished propose a solution and >>>> change >>>> the status of the issue to 'pending review'. >>>> 5. Make a final decision. For instance, accept the proposed >>>> solution in >>>> a meeting. >>>> >>>> If we could keep up a rate of resolving one issue each week we should >>>> have >>>> an issue-free document this year :-) >>>> >>>> Saludos, >>>> Frans >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>>> Alejandro >>>>> >>>>> On 22 June 2015 at 21:46, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello Ed, >>>>>> >>>>>> At the moment three UCR issues have the status 'pending review'. Of >>>>>> those, I think ISSUE-10 < >>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/10> >>>>>> >>>>>> seems a good one to try to resolve. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't know how long it will take to reach agreement. Perhaps it will >>>>>> help if resolving a particular issue is a separate agenda item. That >>>>>> should >>>>>> allow people to read up on the subject beforehand and to raise any >>>>>> problems >>>>>> with the proposed solution in the e-mail list. Ideally there will be >>>>>> no >>>>>> need for further discussion in the meeting and we can just have the >>>>>> vote. >>>>>> >>>>>> Greetings, >>>>>> Frans >>>>>> >>>>>> 2015-06-22 20:38 GMT+02:00 Ed Parsons <eparsons@google.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hello Frans, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Do you have a specific issue in mind, and some idea as to how long we >>>>>>> will need to discuss. Kerry is putting this weeks agenda together >>>>>>> tomorrow.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ed >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 at 17:43 Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello Ed, Kerry, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We still have some unresolved UCR issues. I believe it was Kerry who >>>>>>>> suggested that we might use the weekly teleconference to try to >>>>>>>> resolve >>>>>>>> one selected issue. Do you think there is time for that in the next >>>>>>>> meetings? If so, then I suggest we start with issues that relate to >>>>>>>> Best >>>>>>>> Practices because that is our next deliverable. Or we could have >>>>>>>> one of the >>>>>>>> UCR editors suggest an issue, and perhaps also do a bit of >>>>>>>> preparation of >>>>>>>> the issue to facilitate decision making. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Frans >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Frans Knibbe >>>>>>>> Geodan >>>>>>>> President Kennedylaan 1 >>>>>>>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 >>>>>>>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl >>>>>>>> www.geodan.nl >>>>>>>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ed Parsons >>>>>>> Geospatial Technologist, Google >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mobile +44 (0)7825 382263 >>>>>>> www.edparsons.com @edparsons >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Frans Knibbe >>>>>> Geodan >>>>>> President Kennedylaan 1 >>>>>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) >>>>>> >>>>>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 >>>>>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl >>>>>> www.geodan.nl >>>>>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Alejandro Llaves >>>>> >>>>> Ontology Engineering Group (OEG) >>>>> >>>>> Artificial Intelligence Department >>>>> >>>>> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid >>>>> >>>>> Avda. Montepríncipe s/n >>>>> >>>>> Boadilla del Monte, 28660 Madrid, Spain >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.oeg-upm.net/index.php/phd/325-allaves >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> allaves@fi.upm.es >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> Phil Archer >>> W3C Data Activity Lead >>> http://www.w3.org/2013/data/ >>> >>> http://philarcher.org >>> +44 (0)7887 767755 >>> @philarcher1 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Frans Knibbe >> Geodan >> President Kennedylaan 1 >> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) >> >> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 >> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl >> www.geodan.nl >> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer> >> >> -- > > Ed Parsons > Geospatial Technologist, Google > > Mobile +44 (0)7825 382263 > www.edparsons.com @edparsons > -- Frans Knibbe Geodan President Kennedylaan 1 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl www.geodan.nl disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer>
Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2015 15:16:22 UTC