GeoSPARQL Standards Working Group Meeting Minutes

Meeting Details

Meeting Date: 23/08/2023

Meeting Time: 2000 UTC

Meeting Location: GoToMeeting

Attendees

Attendee	Moniker
Matthew Perry	MP
Timo Homburg	TH
Nicholas Car	NC
Joseph Abhayaratna	JA

Note Takers

• MP

Action Items From Last Meetings

| Done? | Item | Responsible | Due Date | | —- | —- | —- | — |

Discussion Items

Time	Item	Who	Notes
2012	Intro	MP	Call for Patents None known Roll Call Attendees recorded in minutes Attendees confirmed vocally
2015	Run through actions	All	NC - Issue #433 - working on fixing hyperlinks
	ISO Publication Discussion	All	TH - Fixed ISO doc links: Jo needs to meet with Scott about pending issues TH - Annex A4 for DGGS NC - need to fix DGGS Annex sections in original GeoSPARQL 1.1 doc too [#436](https://github.com/opengeospatial/ogc-geosparql/issues/436) NC - we can close metanorma format ticket [#425](https://github.com/opengeospatial/ogc-geosparql/issues/425) JA - OGC allows maintaining document in metanorma format We should merge the 1.1 spec into the master document and then maintain it in metanorma format OGC can pull their document out of metanorma Once we are happy with a 1.1 metanorma document, we can give the branch to OGC team to do final modifications and change requests for ISO
	Spatial Ontology	All	JA - OGC has a desire to support spatial ontology work. Scott thinks GeoSPARQL group would be the group to do the ontology work - with collaboration with GeoSemantics DWG TH & NC - We are committed to 1.3 and doing it, but spatial ontology is a larger work that needs more discussion. JA - Pieces of the ontology will probably emerge from 1.3 work
	Chairs	All	JA - Scott to make updates for new chairs
	Meeting notes	All	JA will push the meeting notes to GIT as markdown doc
	EWKB	All	MP - is it an issue if EWKB is not defined in another OGC spec NC - we may have to do a brief definition of it similar to what we did with DGGS Literal JA - it may be a problem - we could ask them to support it as a community standard TH - we also encourage the use of SRID URI instead of encoded SRID in binary
	Qualified Geometries	All	[#418](https://github.com/opengeospatial/ogc-geosparql/pull/418) - discussed how this interacts with qualified features. Specific example being proposed buildings and their different geometries and the need to use a different style for fuzzy geometries in EU/Germany. Discussion with NC required Issues for consideration: Confirming scope, Spatial Ontology
2121			MEETING ENDS

Action Items

| # | Item | Responsible | Due Date | | —- | —- | —- | —- |