GeoSPARQL Standards Working Group Meeting Minutes
Meeting Details
Meeting Date: 02/04/2026
Meeting Time: 2000 UTC
Meeting Location: Microsoft Teams
Attendees
| Attendee |
Moniker |
| Jo Abhayaratna |
JA |
| Matthew Perry |
MP |
| Timo Homburg |
TH |
| Nicholas Car |
NC |
Note Takers
- MP (assisted by Teams transcription)
Action Items From Last Meetings
| Done? | Item | Responsible | Due Date |
| —- | —- | —- | — |
Discussion Items
| Time |
Item |
Who |
Notes |
| 2000 |
Meeting setup and administration |
JA, MP |
- JA confirmed the meeting is now scheduled in UTC to avoid daylight savings issues.
- Recording and transcription confirmed.
- Chairing handed over to MP for the main part of the meeting.
|
| 2005 |
Roll call and call for patents |
MP |
- Roll call completed.
- No patents declared.
|
| 2010 |
Building Blocks and compliance benchmark update |
TH |
- TH reported on follow‑up discussions with Rob Atkinson regarding Building Blocks.
- Outlined proposed approach for documenting GeoSPARQL functions as Building Blocks, including examples, queries, and validation assets.
- Agreement that function representation in Building Blocks is an open design question requiring further experimentation.
|
| 2030 |
ISO GeoSPARQL standardisation progress |
NC |
- NC reported ongoing work on the ISO version of GeoSPARQL.
- Identified broken links and minor administrative issues in GeoSPARQL 1.1 requiring correction.
- Confirmed that changes are non‑normative and primarily structural and terminological.
|
| 2040 |
Repository hygiene and Rainbow alignment |
NC, TH |
- Discussion on aligning GitHub repository structure with resources deployed to OGC Rainbow.
- Agreement to group RDF artefacts consistently and introduce manifest files per version.
- TH confirmed feasibility of updating CI scripts to support the new structure.
|
| 2100 |
Implementation experience and performance concerns |
NC, TH, MP, JA |
- NC reported that several triple stores implement GeoSPARQL functions non‑performantly at scale.
- Consensus that this is primarily an implementation issue rather than a standards compliance issue.
- Discussion on whether performance benchmarks should exist alongside compliance benchmarks.
|
| 2120 |
Governance, Rainbow, and OGC engagement |
JA |
- JA discussed the need for clearer governance and resourcing around OGC Rainbow.
- Highlighted the importance of demonstrating real usage to secure continued investment.
- Planned follow‑up discussions with OGC leadership to raise awareness of GeoSPARQL needs.
|
| 2155 |
Close |
All |
MEETING ENDS |
Action Items
| # |
Item |
Responsible |
Due Date |
| 1 |
Create initial Building Blocks examples for GeoSPARQL functions |
TH |
Next Meeting |
| 2 |
Circulate draft ISO GeoSPARQL content highlighting non‑normative changes |
NC |
Next Meeting |
| 3 |
Audit GeoSPARQL 1.1 RDF resources and align repository structure with Rainbow deployments |
NC, TH |
Next Meeting |
| 4 |
Engage OGC leadership on Rainbow governance, resourcing, and roadmap visibility |
JA |
Ongoing |