2017-08-24 Meeting notes

Date

24 Aug 2017

Attendees

Agenda

1) Where we are on our road map.

2) Open Action Items

3) JIRA Issues Review - https://jira.edmcouncil.org/projects/RDFKIT/issues

4) Todays content discussion.

Proceedings:

20170824 FIBO FPT RDF ToolKit

Headless set-up: DA has made it to the install of MagicDraw. Now it is asking for license keys.

This is in a different place than anyone's existing install since it's on our AWS server. Can use trial for a while. Needs key for CCM and for MagicDraw. DA does not need technical help from Jim, just the license. JL: the trial license doesn't let you do more than 20 classes. 18.5 also has CCM embedded BUT: We need everyone /everything on the same versions, for reasons. This is 18.4 at present. Also the CCM for 18.5 is for Cameo EA only not MagicDraw.

06 JL: Shyould be a sales person e.g. Joyce.

ACTION: DW to contact Joyce. – Done

Need: A MagicDraw License and a CCM License. Does not need a separate license for Collaborator (for publishing). Should NOT be using Cameo EA. Should use MagicDraw. License is for CCM 18.0 SP10 and MagicDraw 18.4. Collaborator: the plugin for this is free and so does not need a license. We will at some point want to have Collaborator installed on the headless thing, though the new web structure developed by Pete / Cory / Frankel would not use that. But now we do.

Open Actions

Lots of Glossary Work - JL please give specific of where to look for a list of the requirements covered by this action? DW : We wanted a simplified version of the Glossary, and simpler search. Also synonym. This is something that is simply a project setting. MB will do that. JL: Why is [control]F not sufficient? DA there are a lot of things where the name of a class e.g. Share also returns places where the word Share turns up in text or longer names of things. So you get pages of things under S from there. Bad user experience. Need to limit the search to what are called "the head terms" in the Glossary. This answers JL question

W3C Time Refactoring with EK - DA not done yet. MB has already refactored this in CCM. To document this against the JIRA issue in question. W3C Time refactoring - next time

About to All - not done yet.

Action 4 about documenting how catalog files are generated - to be updated when S3 comes in. First part is now redundant. Does the catalog get updated when new stuff is posted? In publication, yes the catalog is updated. Triggered by pull request. In source, for users doing this locally, need to follow steps in Developers Guide that DA published last week. Needs to be tested. This is what this action about. The rest of Action 4 is happening going forward. The 3rd bit is unclear. So check this off as done or OBE.

DA/TC RDF ToolKit. Is this part of the Maven thing? No, this is the thing about auto generating the catalog files. Presently this is done by a DA script, needs to be migrated into the ToolKit itself. Will not happen by Q3. Will more detail be added to the Developers Guide? DA this is why we need MU, DN to use it and identify whether it is understood at their level of knowledge. Involves the management of the scripting environment in those users' machines. MU did make some comments. DW has added comment. RC would be good to review it. RC: Need email with what we would like him to do.

Does this means anyone working locally in OWL needs to also know all about scripting? Yes - this is a current pre-requisite. Documented as such. Once the RDF Toolkit is done, this is not a pre-requisite. There may be environment constraints as well as knowledge constraints on this.

Next item: where is Elie? Asking JG is Artifact ontology is still to be done and if Elie needs to do it? JG question is whether this is a separate ontology. JG: Currently don't use the Artifacts Ontology in the current scripting arrangements. DA we do use this a little bit. PR: Can take this over from Elie if he has dropped out. JG: We would want to treat this like any other FIBO ontology. Also, PR has been involved with the SM stuff.

MB: what about the non-OMG metadata requirements? JG: the new Artifacts Ontology Is our metadata to supersede the SM stuff. MB - see the list he did on metadata in the About and other files in June 30 release.

Next action - this is the new structure where we have a landing page where you choose between deliverables.

VOWL: Questions from David Newman about VOWL. Question was that VOWL does one of these low-energy "physics" thing. Is our proposal to have a static snapshot of this or let it bounce around? JG you can freeze it. Can that just happen without someone having to press a button? JG get this out under a different product heading rather than ontology. MB there is also OntoGraph from NinePoint which has configurable autogen diagrams in 3 flavors. JG anything you can run headless can be used for this. JG does it run headless or are you using the GUI? MD said you will need X running. Whatever X is (did not need a hardware emulator). May have to redirect the screen for X into a dev/null. JG is on the agenda for FLT on Monday

Next: 403 and 404 errors. JG - not done. DA you currently get a 403 on 10% of stuff. People complain every day. MB also links from auto-replaced IRIs in our files often go to 404s

Next item: Cambridge. In hand.

Next Item: Architecture picture of where things run. And where they will run. Also the CCM process (MB). JG we should use the Gliffy plugin in Confluence, which makes nice system architecture pictures. Then maintain that on Confluence. This is a thing on the Confluence wiki. Do we have that enabled? May be chargeable? JG checks - it is enabled.

Next item is new. MB to describe the SKOS flavor he has been going on about.

Next item: RTF reports. MB will mail EK about whether any changes in IND. Other RTFs (BE and FBC) defer to Dec. Then IND or not depending on the answer

Next item translation: "Get round tripping working for September". This remains open.

Next item: Maven - Who is doing what on this? TC, DA and JG doing things on this but who is doing what? TC: This became less critical since we made it a separate issue to making the scripts available that DA was doing. so we should do this but not until we get the Jenkins SVT Build Environment issue resolved.

DA what is that SBT Build issue? TC: The way the SBT build system works is there is a small JAR file which is enough to kick it off, then looks for the right version of everything else. A launch file called sbtlaunch.jar or similar, is not being found. So the build can't run.

ACTION: JG set up a call with TC and work through this issue.

Sept 30 deliverable schedule - Most of these are under control

Versions references by publish dates item: this is part of ontodoc. This is held by the 404 issue. JG needs to get ontodoc working

47 This is also part of the CAmbridge conversation

Linked Data Fragments covered

SKOS flavor - MB action as above

Production and Master in ontology - easy one

WebVOWL is Monday's FLT

Glossary - see above

Refactoring per EK list - ongoing

FAO Country DONE

W3C Time see above

Anything else for 30 Sept. MB need human thought for metadata in the OWL files. So we need to figure out if we will do all of it, some of it or none of it for September. Also involve PR in this. MB to mail that pack to PR

Business Domains question - see PR comments on these. We need a new name for the top level thing e.g. BE, FND, since Business Domains are a separate view. BT does this let us slice and dice according to different context? Yes - see PR comments on this. The word sub-domain - might be frightening to our audience? BT doesn't think so. SMEs think in terms of their own contexts (domains) and will understand the notion of sub-sets of that. MB agrees that CDOs etc. would have no trouble parsing a term like sub-domain. https://wiki.edmcouncil.org/display/FLT/Business+Domains

PR: Production v Development: what do you see for things that are in Production when these have changed? This is per Cambridge notes: Production is a frozen version, Development is real time including updates to things that were in the scope of Production. JG this uses a tag for the frozen version. This would be in the versionIRI. MB currently versionIRI has master/latest JG this is useful in development, it corresponds to head in Git.

DW does this change my diagram on the wiki page? Production is frozen but not everything from Release follows through to Development. Dev is being updated on a different schedule to Prod, per Cambridge. This does not change the DW diagram. At any snapshot point in time for a dev and a prod, this relations hold but if Dev moves forward and Prod does not, we need to decouple the scope from the status in this view.

When is the status set? This is only set to Release at the end of the Quarter. This is in the artifact ontology. Would filter out whatever does not have the status Release. JG you can change things in Release. If you decide to do that. Which we have never decided to do. Then you get a Release ontology in the Production.

PR should only have the maturity Release when we have published something? All changes first go in the development branch and then go in the Production branch. Might have to reverse the status of Release for an ontology that was release and has now changed, during development. So, you have to reverse this setting for that ontology. What should the maturity level in Git be for such a thing? When someone does a pull request they should change the maturity level away from Release. This needs to be added as a quality check when you approve the pull.

PR: You also therefore need a new maturity level for an updated version of a previously released thing. This is not the same as the more hazy stuff in Development for instance. Then reset from e.g. Release-Update to Release during our quarterly release cycle.

So what to call it? And when it comes time to do a Publish how do we treat that? During a dev pub that goes to dev, then we get to 1/4ly pub what do we say then of its status? DA treat this status the same way as provisional. So under what circs do we need to treat it differently? Do we need this new tag?

PR proposes auto change all Release-Updated to Release at that point. Unit tests and integration tests would consider this maturity level as similar to Release. If it fails a test it is not allowed to be in that status. Update at the end of the quarter.

DW question: What does this change to the words on the development guide? DW needs to update those word in the primer. DA: Need to think through PR proposal and then write that in to the Dev Guide and Primer. Currently it says a developer sends a thing to release and push in there- which causes things to appear in release that are not yet in Prod. With PR's 4th maturity level, update the advice to FCTs on how to insure that and also specify the automated process in enough detail that we can check it is right and can implement it. Primer readers won' need to know about this but FCT Leads will.

Decisions:

Action items

jacobus.geluk@gmail.com [X] Anthony Coates set up a call with TC and work through the SBT issue.