Re: [geolang-comment] Montreal minutes posted

[Mary Nishikawa <nisikawa@fuchinobe.oilfield.slb.com>]

Lar Marius,

Thanks for getting the minutes out in a jiffy and sorry for having to skip 
out of the meeting  to catch my plane. I think that for the next time, it 
would be best not to schedule the meeting so late after the conference.

I have some comments.

 From the minutes:
"The meeting made the following decisions"

I realise that you want this to go forward quickly, and are very 
enthusiastic, but I think that you cannot report that "decisions" were made 
since a quorum was not present, as John pointed out,  and there was no vote.

You could tone it down a bit by saying that the following were discussed 
and will be commented on from absent members later on (something like that).

Here is my reply anyway.

"The numeric codes of the ISO standards should be used in the subject 
identifiers, since these are the only stable identifiers in the source 
standards. No other subject identifiers should be provided. "

Agreed.

"The published subject sets should be published as a single HTML file 
containing the subject indicators as well as human-readable metadata. "

Agreed.

"The subject indicators for each code should take the form of rows in a 
table, with columns for English names, French names, each of the three 
codes, and finally the subject identifiers themselves. "

I am not so sure about this. Can we discuss this a little more? I am not 
that happy with tables. The structure should be as simple as possible.
What do you mean by subject identifiers? Please explain (Ihave not looked 
at your examples yet).

"Accompanying the HTML file should be machine-readable metadata in the form 
of both XTM and RDF files, linked to from the HTML file, which would then 
serve as the point of entry. "

This seems to follow what we discussed in TM Published subjects earlier in 
the morning, i.e., about what we would like to see in the recommendations 
(second deliverable). This needs to be added for those who did not attend 
the earlier meeting.

It needs to be made clear that what we are working on is following the 
progress of the TM Published subjects committee (We really need to vote on 
the structure ASAP). The work is being done in tandem, so to speak, but it 
is not obvious to onlookers.

"The XTM metadata should be separated into three files: one for metadata 
about the PSI set, one for the information provided about the subjects in 
the source standard, and one for mappings from the old subject identifiers 
to the new. "

This sound a little complicated and it is not so clear. It would be good to 
submit a proposal to the committee, and it would be good to discuss on IRC.

Suggestion:

Try getting all committee members involved, no matter how minor the tasks.
You know that I enjoy doing all this stuff :-))

Cheers,
Mary

At 18:51 02/08/18 +0200, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:

>Hello everyone,
>
>The minutes of the Montr$BqB(Bl meeting have now been posted at
>   <URL: 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/geolang/docs/montreal-minutes.html >
>
>If you have any comments, please let me know.
>
>--
>Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
>ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TC        <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>