Caroline_: Scribenick: SimonCox
newton: present+
Caroline_: https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:Telecon2017.09.11
annette_g: Present+ annette_g
SimonCox: Topic: approve minutes of last meeting
Caroline_: https://www.w3.org/2017/09/04-dxwg-minutes
roba: present+
SimonCox: Missing regrets added - thanks Dave
aisaac joined the chat room.
SimonCox: Resolution: minutes of last meeting approved
aisaac: present+ antoine
Jaroslav_Pullmann: q+
fanieli joined the chat room.
fanieli: present + Ixchel
SimonCox: Topic: grouping requirements
Caroline_: ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
fanieli left the chat room.
DaveBrowning joined the chat room.
Jaroslav_Pullmann: go on, I'll setup my audio please
SimonCox: No sound from Jaro
Ixchel joined the chat room.
Ixchel: present + Ixchel
Stijn_Goedertier_AIV joined the chat room.
SimonCox: SOunds like a ronbot now
SimonCox: s/ronbot/robot/
Stijn_Goedertier_AIV: present+ Stijn_Goedertier_AIV
SimonCox: Jaroslav_Pullmann: no new work on requirements sorting
SimonCox: ... not much work done.
DaveBrowning: present+ DaveBrowning
SimonCox: ... thematic grouping, but no prioritization
SimonCox: ... reqs are mostly one-liners, no more structure.
SimonCox: ... need to understand what is expected from re-organization of requirements
alejandra: q+
Caroline_: Comparison and analysis of W3C UCR documents https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Comparison_and_analysis_of_W3C_UCR_documents
SimonCox: ... work on content, make more precise?
Caroline_: q?
Caroline_: ack alejandra
SimonCox: alejandra: catching up after missing a few weeks
RiccardoAlbertoni joined the chat room.
SimonCox: ... read emails, html now allows to filter
Zakim joined the chat room.
SimonCox: ... had in mind that each req could become GitHub issue, for tracking purposes
SimonCox: ... classification as labels in GitHub - easier than lots of JS in HTMl doc!
SimonCox: s/HTMl/html
SimonCox: Caroline_: yes, was discussed. We will use GitHub to track issues.
SimonCox: alejandra: does this also include Requirements?
achille_zappa joined the chat room.
SimonCox: ... can close req/issues when they have been implemented.
roba: q+
• Zakim sees roba on the speaker queue
SimonCox: Caroline_: resolution was to use GitHub comprehensively
SimonCox: ... now need to group requirements. (per this Topic!)
Caroline_: ack roba
• Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
RiccardoAlbertoni: present+ RiccardoAlbertoni
SimonCox: roba: Tried to see if stylesheet woudl do grouping in UCR document
SimonCox: ... lots of separate requirements. Trade off between grouping and emumeration of all simple cases
Makx_ joined the chat room.
SimonCox: ... editing risk --> repeating requirements
SimonCox: ... grouping is best compromise. Have not yet finished going through individual UCs and grouping
SimonCox: ... propose to work through a couple to see how process works
Jaroslav_Pullmann: q+
• Zakim sees Jaroslav_Pullmann on the speaker queue
SimonCox: ... premature to throw them all into GitHub
Caroline_: ack Jaroslav_Pullmann
• Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
alejandra: sure, rob, thanks
SimonCox: Jaroslav_Pullmann: GitHub supports good traceability
SimonCox: ... some analysis needed before transition to GH
Makx_: presnt+ Makx
Makx_: presnet Makx
Caroline_: s/presnt/Present
Makx_: present+ Makx
Caroline_: q?
• Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
AndreaPerego joined the chat room.
SimonCox: Makx spelling challenge
SimonCox: Caroline_: already grouped 6.5 - 6.9
SimonCox: ... start discussing those?
AndreaPerego: present+ AndreaPerego
• AndreaPerego apologises for being late.
Makx left the chat room. (Ping timeout: 180 seconds)
• Caroline_ welcome AndreaPerego
SimonCox: Jaroslav_Pullmann: grouping of reqs not yet concluded. WHat do groups look like?
SimonCox: ... broad thematic groups, or highly focussed
SimonCox: ... currently up to three hierarchy level of requirements
SimonCox: roba: first few sets - 6.1-6.4 Profiles, 6.5-6.9 Versions are cleanly separated
SimonCox: ... subsequent ones not yet classified or grouped, unclear how they will work
SimonCox: ... Versioning is a good group now
SimonCox: ... 6.17 might join versioning group
SimonCox: ... need to decide if level of detail is correct on Versioning group
SimonCox: In case anyone wants to check - this document https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Comparison_and_analysis_of_W3C_UCR_documents
• AndreaPerego wonders why RRSAgent is not available.
SimonCox: AndreaPerego - possibly because someone didn't do something they shoudl have?
RRSAgent joined the chat room.
RRSAgent: logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/09/11-dxwg-irc
Jaroslav_Pullmann: q+
• Zakim sees Jaroslav_Pullmann on the speaker queue
Caroline_: should we vote on requirements in groups?
Jaroslav_Pullmann: still unclear what are meaningful groupings for requirements
… should we extend the tagset?
Jaroslav_Pullmann vanished from voice :-(
<Jaroslav_Pullmann> Sorry, I have to reload Webex, no audio at all
roba: proposed to do initial tryout on first groupings
<Caroline_> can you hear us Jaroslav_Pullmann ?
<roba> Describe title/group "Versioning" ?
<Jaroslav_Pullmann> yes, I am back
<roba> Are the set of requirements complete?
<roba> Are the descriptions simple yet meaningful (in the context of the group)
<roba> Are there other requirements that need to be in this group
<annette_g> +1 for tags
Jaroslav_Pullmann: Are there multiple dimensions of classification?
Thanks @dsr
<roba> How are these requirements applicable to multiple deliverables - e.g. version semantics in DCAT, extended version models in guidance, negotiation by profile (also version?)
1. Describe title/group "Versioning" ? 2. Are the set of requirements complete? 3. Are the descriptions simple yet meaningful (in the context of the group) 4. How are these requirements applicable to multiple deliverables - e.g. version semantics in DCAT, extended version models in guidance, negotiation by profile (also version?)
(Roba suggestions to focus treatment)
Caroline_: makes sense to me
Jaroslav_Pullmann: Is there a single hierarchy/classification dimension?
… is a requirement part of versioning, QA, distribution
… multiple tags required to detect that a requirement applies to several groupings
<Caroline_> SimonCox: it feels like we had a group as part of the use cases and the we are teasing them apart to get the requirements
<Caroline_> ... I like roba suggestion that we run through an exercise to see how it goes but I am concerned how long we will take
roba: grouping in UCs was not so formal
… tags in UC document not so formal or useful. Allowed us to test the JS ;-)
… is it reasonable to say "here are all the versioning requirements"
… we will know that when we've given it a try
… all very complicated, trying to mitigate risk of multiple incompatible solutions
… to requirments that weren't quite grouped right
<Makx_> +1 to alejandra
alejandra: lets analyse the requirements and not burn time grouping
Caroline_: maybe we can give actions to some group members who are willing to work on specific res
… e.g. who is willing to work on Versioning group?
<Jaroslav_Pullmann> Caroline, what would be the "set"?
Jaroslav_Pullmann: good proposal - use groupings to govern work programme
<Caroline_> annette_g:
Jaroslav_Pullmann: lets look at groups now and get volunteers
<Caroline_> s/annette_g:
annette_g: grouping should be 'by deliverable'
<aisaac> annette_g++
annette_g: worried about smaller groupings, applying to small pieces of deliverable
… requirements should inform the deliverables systematically
… editors need list per deliverable
Jaroslav_Pullmann: tags for deliverables already in place
… when can we shring them down to more practical lots of work
annette_g: lets see requirements sorted by deliverable
Jaroslav_Pullmann: will change JS prototype to achieve this
… filtering
Action: Jaroslav_Pullmann to provide different views on filtered content in UCR document
<trackbot> Created ACTION-37 - Provide different views on filtered content in ucr document [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2017-09-18].
Again: this document https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Comparison_and_analysis_of_W3C_UCR_documents
This is the one we are working on https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/
roba: 'profiles', 'versioning', 'functional descriptions of distributions' so far
… the rest look a bit like 'lots more metadata' ...
… will now try to pull out next set of groups
… are the descriptions of requirements (and groupings) OK as they are currently in https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/
Caroline_: tagging is important, but more important to have 'overview', not just tags
Action: all to provide feedback to UCR editors on requirements organization
<trackbot> Error finding 'all'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/users>.
<annette_g> @caroline do you mean a summary for each group?
<roba> two needs going forward: the "next group" to organise and feedback on the level of detail on the groups already made (profiles, versions, fine grained description of datasets and distributions
Jaroslav_Pullmann: could we agree to select one of the groupings, assign responsibilities
… Jaroslav_Pullmann will looka t versioning, see if grouping/wording is complete
… etc
Action: Jaroslav_Pullmann to review 'versioning' group
<trackbot> Created ACTION-38 - Review 'versioning' group [on Jaroslav Pullmann - due 2017-09-18].
roba: will not review his own work!
… someone else to find next priority group?
<Ixchel> I agree with roba on his point.
Caroline_: Volunteers to do the requested review?
Sorry - not me, I'm travelling then on vacation next three weeks (yipee!)
Caroline_: Any hands up??? People!
Profiles ?
roba: maybe reuben, lars on Profiles?
Action: Caroline_ to ping lars and Reuben re reviewing Profiles grouping
<trackbot> Created ACTION-39 - Ping lars and reuben re reviewing profiles grouping [on Caroline Burle - due 2017-09-18].
<Caroline_> +1 to alejandra that all group should review the requirements
alejandra: all should try to contribute
Caroline_: did Jaroslav_Pullmann do Action 31?
Jaroslav_Pullmann: yes, but could not close
Caroline_: Any other actions to close today?
… meeting good in moving forward understanding, not so many closed actions.
<Makx> thanks, bye bye
<RiccardoAlbertoni> bye
<annette_g> Bye all!
<Stijn_Goedertier_AIV> thanks, bye
<alejandra> thanks and bye all!
<AndreaPerego> Bye!
<Jaroslav_Pullmann> Bye!
@dsr we will need your help massaging minutes - do you need my text log?
<dsr> yes, I have saved the irc log and will patch up the minutes tomorrow
Succeeded: s/waht/what/
Succeeded: s/shoudl/should
Succeeded: s/regets+ LarsG, Thomas D'haenens//
Succeeded: s/RRSAgent: generate minutes//
No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: simoncox