Meeting minutes
<riccardoAlbertoni> agenda: https://
approve last meeting minutes https://www.w3.org/2021/04/14-dxwgdcat-minutes
proposal: approve last meeting minutes https://
<riccardoAlbertoni> +1
+1
<DaveBrowning> +1
Resolution: approve last meeting minutes https://
approve agenda
<riccardoAlbertoni> https://
riccardoAlbertoni: Any change needed?
AndreaPerego: Nope
<DaveBrowning> okay by me
DaveBrowning: Fine with me.
advancements on 2PWD
<riccardoAlbertoni> https://
riccardoAlbertoni: I will reply to PLH about the resolution to go for 2PWD.
… I'll also mention the issue with the PubRules checker.
… Any other things?
AndreaPerego: Not from my side.
DaveBrowning: I'm happy with it.
… Strange that PubRules checker hangs - it shouldn't, and report instead an error.
DCAT dissemination
riccardoAlbertoni: We had an almost complete version of the DCAT2 paper.
… I think we are loosing precious time, and maybe we should move it forward as it is.
… Would this make sense to you? Should we take an additional month to consolidate it?
AndreaPerego: I think there's still some editorial work to be done, so some additional time might be needed.
… Maybe we can fix a deadline to complete the paper, and then submit it.
DaveBrowning: Fine with me. We can inform the other authors about the plan, and go ahead.
riccardoAlbertoni: About the deadline, what about the third week of May?
… Actually, we also need to decide about the journal, and format the paper accordingly.
<riccardoAlbertoni> https://
riccardoAlbertoni: Any objection about submitting to Future Generation Computer Systems
AndreaPerego: +1 from me
<DaveBrowning> +1 also
AndreaPerego: About dissemination, should we go for open access? Can we publish a pre-print?
riccardoAlbertoni: Preprint is possible, but gold open access is too expensive.
… But we can share the accepted version
<riccardoAlbertoni> 21rst may ?
<DaveBrowning> +1
riccardoAlbertoni: So, let's try to have it ready for May, 21st.
AndreaPerego: Agreed.
DaveBrowning: Agreed.
riccardoAlbertoni: I'll drop a mail to the authors.
open issues
<riccardoAlbertoni> Referencing named graph of endpoint or RDF quad file, https://
riccardoAlbertoni: I selected one to discuss ^^
riccardoAlbertoni: [summarising the issue]
riccardoAlbertoni: One of the raised issue is that there is not in DCAT a way to specify the graph of a distribution available from a given SPARQL endpoint.
… This might be in scope with VOID, being RDF-specific.
… We have two options: either we address the requirement, or reject it.
… The reason for rejecting is because is RDF-specific.
… WDYT?
AndreaPerego: It is indeed RDF-specific, but it also relates to the more general issue of whether DCAT should provide a way to specify query params. So maybe we can keep it on hold.
… Another issue raised in the discussion was about relations between distributions, which look similar to another issue raised by Renato Iannella.
… We may need to consider both things in our reply.
DaveBrowning: I tend to think it is not in scope with DCAT. But we need to be confident that the problem can be addressed somehow.
riccardoAlbertoni: The problem with the link to the distribution from a service/API is that it looks very specific to the technology used, so there may not be a solution that fits all.
… Maybe we can add an example in the non-normative part, just to point out the issue and that there is no standard solution for that.
DaveBrowning: I agree about the fact that this is specific to technologies.
… Adding the example helps raise awareness and shows we considered the issue.
AndreaPerego: Maybe we can add that addressing this issue would require, e.g., agreeing on specific query params for each API interface that can be used to get a specific subset.
riccardoAlbertoni: So, who's going to reply?
DaveBrowning: I'll give it a try.
riccardoAlbertoni: AOB?
[meeting adjourned]