IRC log of sdwssn on 2016-11-29

Timestamps are in UTC.

20:55:13 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #sdwssn
20:55:13 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/11/29-sdwssn-irc
20:55:14 [kerry]
kerry has changed the topic to: https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Meetings:SSN-Telecon20161129
20:55:15 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
20:55:15 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #sdwssn
20:55:17 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SDW
20:55:17 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
20:55:18 [trackbot]
Meeting: Spatial Data on the Web Working Group Teleconference
20:55:18 [trackbot]
Date: 29 November 2016
20:55:37 [kerry]
present+ kerry
20:55:48 [kerry]
chair: Armin
20:58:52 [ahaller2]
present+ ahaller2
21:01:21 [RaulGarciaCastro]
RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdwssn
21:01:22 [ahaller2]
regrets+ scott simon
21:02:50 [RaulGarciaCastro]
present+ RaulGarciaCastro
21:03:39 [ahaller2]
regrets+ scott
21:03:43 [ahaller2]
regrets+ simon
21:03:48 [kerry]
present+ kerry
21:05:29 [KJanowic]
KJanowic has joined #sdwssn
21:06:10 [KJanowic]
present+ kjanowic
21:07:35 [ahaller2]
scribe: ClausStadler
21:07:44 [ahaller2]
Approving last meeting's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/11/22-sdwssn-minutes
21:07:49 [kerry]
+1
21:07:52 [ClausStadler]
+1
21:07:55 [RaulGarciaCastro]
+1
21:07:56 [ahaller2]
+1
21:08:18 [ahaller2]
Patent Call
21:08:33 [kerry]
resolved: Approving last meeting's minutes https://www.w3.org/2016/11/22-sdwssn-minutes
21:09:03 [ahaller2]
topic: Assigning tasks on the writing of the WD http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/ for December 16th deadline
21:09:13 [kerry]
topic: Assigning tasks on the writing of the WD http://w3c.github.io/sdw/ssn/ for December 16th deadline
21:09:31 [KJanowic]
KJanowic has joined #sdwssn
21:10:36 [kerry]
q+
21:10:45 [ClausStadler]
Updates to SSN ontology, especially actuation, modularization (several has been superseeded by discussions now), sosa-core naming,
21:10:49 [ahaller2]
q?
21:10:54 [ClausStadler]
spec generation has been looked into; couple of issues that can be solved, either manually or hacking into the python code
21:10:55 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:11:27 [ahaller2]
q+
21:11:28 [ClausStadler]
s/several has been/several currently written things have been
21:12:15 [ahaller2]
ack ahaller
21:12:57 [ClausStadler]
kerry: not sure if all issues with specgen can be fixed, such as cardinality restrictions / multiple restrictions with the same property
21:13:53 [ClausStadler]
classes and properties not linked in the output, difficulties with hash / slash uris
21:14:01 [KJanowic]
q+
21:14:18 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:15:08 [ClausStadler]
KJanowic: manual changes will be lost after regeneration; bad idea
21:15:16 [ahaller2]
q?
21:15:37 [ClausStadler]
ahaller2: will try to fix issues in the code
21:15:48 [KJanowic]
IMHO, this has great potential for going terribly wrong.
21:16:14 [kerry]
q+ to suggest to armin we meet in person to go through this
21:16:25 [KJanowic]
ahaller2: changing in the code would probably the better way to go
21:17:15 [KJanowic]
I can update the intro section (which I also originally drafted)
21:17:17 [KJanowic]
q+
21:17:25 [KJanowic]
I can do the sosa parts
21:17:37 [ClausStadler]
volunteers needed to go throught the text: such as introduction, goals
21:17:48 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:17:48 [Zakim]
kerry, you wanted to suggest to armin we meet in person to go through this
21:18:12 [ClausStadler]
KJanowic: volunteers for introduction (and possibly other parts)
21:18:18 [KJanowic]
I volunteer to do all the SOSA related parts
21:18:23 [ClausStadler]
ahaller: happy to rewrite modularization part, update the graph, there are no longer imports, no longer call it 'core' because it isn't
21:19:08 [ClausStadler]
kerry: work on the dulce alignment, equivalenc class axioms - need to be norminative
21:19:18 [ClausStadler]
s/equivalenc/equivalence
21:22:14 [ClausStadler]
ahaller: will alot of the equivalent axioms point to the dolce part?
21:22:23 [ClausStadler]
kerry: refer to the SSN classes in the old namespace; decision was made on the observation part, others need to be worked on
21:22:33 [ClausStadler]
ahaller: if label gets changed, its no longer the same thing
21:23:27 [kerry]
q+
21:24:29 [ClausStadler]
ahaller2: danh and raul to work on the table (https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table)
21:24:47 [RaulGarciaCastro]
It seems you cannot hear me
21:24:56 [RaulGarciaCastro]
Yes
21:25:06 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:25:31 [KJanowic]
q-
21:25:38 [kerry]
claus! not that table!
21:25:58 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:25:58 [ClausStadler]
my bad - which table were you referring to?
21:26:18 [RaulGarciaCastro]
I’ve been taking a look to the usage of the SSN ontology: haven’t found many datasets using it. I have also searched for ontologies reusing SSN
21:26:28 [RaulGarciaCastro]
I collect the analysis I’ve made and will share with the group
21:27:08 [RaulGarciaCastro]
I’m working in the analysis of the usage of SSN (right now not on the implementation report)
21:27:09 [KJanowic]
Claus: by the table we mean the implementation report overview table
21:27:13 [ClausStadler]
kerry: implementation report is not in the deliverable, its a separate document
21:27:33 [ClausStadler]
Thanks for clarification
21:28:05 [ahaller2]
q?
21:28:10 [RaulGarciaCastro]
I don’t know :)
21:28:24 [ClausStadler]
ahaller2: Its not decided yet, others put the implementation report into the deliverable, it could be an annex
21:28:42 [ahaller2]
topic: Decision on removing someValues from restriction on hasSubSystem ISSUE 85
21:28:45 [RaulGarciaCastro]
I’m working on it; right now the problem is the lack of datasets (i.e., the coverage is low)
21:28:56 [kerry]
issue-85 ?
21:28:56 [trackbot]
issue-85 -- remove someValues from restriction on hassubsystem -- raised
21:28:56 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/85
21:29:11 [ahaller2]
q?
21:30:10 [KJanowic]
https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/actions/226
21:31:09 [ClausStadler]
s/dolce/dulce
21:32:36 [ahaller2]
q?
21:34:10 [KJanowic]
Long version short, our current axiom is fine and in line with Mereology and its axiomatizations and also what DUL meant by hasPart. that said, I do not see any harm by removing the existential quantification
21:34:11 [KJanowic]
q+
21:34:31 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:35:37 [ahaller2]
q?
21:35:40 [ClausStadler]
kerry: If the presence of the existencal restriction improves reasoning, it would be a strong reason to keep it.
21:35:41 [RaulGarciaCastro]
+1 to removing the restriction, I don’t like forcing systems to include hasPart with themselves just to be consistent
21:37:21 [KJanowic]
You do not enforce this
21:37:32 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:37:49 [KJanowic]
for two reasons, first because of our haspart definition and second because the OWA
21:38:26 [RaulGarciaCastro]
OK
21:40:18 [ClausStadler]
ahaller2: Can the restrictions be moved into the DUL aligment?
21:40:26 [KJanowic]
My point is that the forall quantification alone will not do anything. it only states that if there would be something it would be inferred to be a (sub)system. It does *not* restrict the predicate
21:40:51 [KJanowic]
q+
21:41:45 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:41:54 [ClausStadler]
ahaller2: Advantage would be that it makes the new SSN more lightweight
21:42:36 [kerry]
agreed! that is the point!
21:42:42 [ahaller2]
q?
21:43:43 [ClausStadler]
KJanowic: The exsistential restriction does: If there would be a usage of the hasSubSystem relation to something, such as chewin gum then the chewing gum would be a system. It does not restrict the usage of hasSubSystem.
21:43:47 [kerry]
q+
21:43:59 [ClausStadler]
s/chewin /chewing
21:44:02 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:44:05 [KJanowic]
Claus: the forall restriction, not the existential restriction
21:45:00 [KJanowic]
sorry kerry for not being clear, I meant how we used the local closure in other parts of the system definition: https://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/ssnx/ssn#System
21:45:15 [KJanowic]
s/KJanowic: The exsistential restriction does/KJanowic: The forall restriction does
21:45:42 [kerry]
dont park it!
21:45:52 [KJanowic]
q+
21:46:39 [kerry]
-1
21:47:37 [ahaller2]
Vote between removing the existential restrictions on hasSubSystem or keeping the existential or removing universal and existential
21:48:01 [KJanowic]
Too many or clauses :-)
21:48:06 [kerry]
removing someValues from restriction on hasSubSystem ISSUE 85
21:48:17 [KJanowic]
q+
21:48:23 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:49:09 [KJanowic]
It is also really low priority (this may all change depending on the other changes we do)
21:49:28 [kerry]
removing someValues from restriction on hasSubSystem ISSUE 85
21:50:42 [KJanowic]
If kerry believes that this is a big step in usability of ssn, I am fine to go with kerry's suggestion
21:50:56 [ahaller2]
kerry to decide on issue 85 as editor of the new SSN
21:51:06 [KJanowic]
+1
21:51:08 [RaulGarciaCastro]
+1
21:51:09 [ahaller2]
+1
21:51:10 [ClausStadler]
+1
21:52:01 [kerry]
q+ to say I did edit it a bit --- marked as "(kerry)"
21:52:28 [kerry]
topic: Annotations in mapping table https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Mapping_Table
21:52:41 [KJanowic]
Okay, I will look into this
21:52:41 [kerry]
q+ to say I did edit it a bit --- marked as "(kerry)" in table
21:53:12 [kerry]
q+ to suggest that won't make the WD
21:53:16 [ahaller2]
q?
21:53:41 [ClausStadler]
ahaller2: There were no recent updates or comments on the annotation table. Decision in one of the last meetings to introduce our own rdfs:comments and annotations. Anyone who has objections to these annotations should raise an issue in the table.
21:53:48 [ahaller2]
q?
21:53:52 [ahaller2]
ack kerry
21:53:52 [Zakim]
kerry, you wanted to say I did edit it a bit --- marked as "(kerry)" and to say I did edit it a bit --- marked as "(kerry)" in table and to suggest that won't make the WD
21:54:10 [ahaller2]
topic: Remove featureOfInterest Class? i.e., second part of Issue ISSUE 86 and observableProperty?, i.e. second part of ISSUE 87
21:54:27 [kerry]
issue-86
21:54:27 [trackbot]
issue-86 -- Annotation for a feature of interest --- and why do we need it at all? -- raised
21:54:27 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/86
21:54:46 [KJanowic]
I would strongly be against removing the FOI class
21:54:54 [ahaller2]
q?
21:55:16 [KJanowic]
q+
21:55:22 [kerry]
moved to issue-94
21:55:24 [ahaller2]
ack KJanowic
21:55:29 [kerry]
issue-94?
21:55:29 [trackbot]
issue-94 -- Why do we need the sosa-core Feature of interest class at all? -- raised
21:55:29 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/track/issues/94
21:56:45 [ahaller2]
Q+
21:56:55 [ahaller2]
ack Ahaller
21:57:04 [ClausStadler]
KJanowic: FeatureOfInterest class has use cases, such as for filtering by that class in a faceted browser. Also, features that have no yet observed data could already be declared as instances of that class in advance.
21:57:30 [KJanowic]
Many reasons not to do that: APIs, faceted browsing, FOI that have not yet been sensed, creating subclasses,...
21:57:34 [RaulGarciaCastro]
+1 to leave it
21:57:34 [ahaller2]
+1 to KJanowic
21:57:35 [ahaller2]
q?
21:57:39 [ClausStadler]
+1 to leave it
21:57:44 [KJanowic]
I would vote -1 on removing , i.e., +1 on leaving it in there
21:58:07 [ahaller2]
+ leaving
21:58:11 [ahaller2]
+1 leaving
21:58:17 [KJanowic]
+1 on leaving
21:58:39 [kerry]
close issue-94
21:58:39 [trackbot]
Closed issue-94.
21:58:44 [KJanowic]
also keep observableproperty
21:58:49 [ahaller2]
q?
21:58:55 [KJanowic]
we also closed 85, right?
21:59:32 [RaulGarciaCastro]
RaulGarciaCastro has left #sdwssn
21:59:40 [RaulGarciaCastro]
RaulGarciaCastro has joined #sdwssn
21:59:48 [ahaller2]
close issue-85
21:59:48 [trackbot]
Closed issue-85.
21:59:51 [ahaller2]
q?
22:00:03 [KJanowic]
thanks for the productive meeting, bye bye
22:00:04 [RaulGarciaCastro]
Bye!
22:00:09 [ahaller2]
bye, thanks
22:00:12 [kerry]
bye!
22:00:32 [kerry]
rrsagent, draft minutes
22:00:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/29-sdwssn-minutes.html kerry
22:00:51 [kerry]
rrsagent, make logs public
22:01:00 [ahaller2]
RRSAgent, make logs public
22:01:07 [ahaller2]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
22:01:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/29-sdwssn-minutes.html ahaller2
22:13:35 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn
22:15:30 [ahaller2_]
ahaller2_ has joined #sdwssn
22:47:50 [ahaller2]
ahaller2 has joined #sdwssn