PCA Modelling, Methods and Technology, September 27th 2012
Time and place
27.09.2012, 2.30PM - 3.30PM (CEST)
GoToMeeting (how to connect - need login)
Next meeting: 25.10.2012, 8.30PM - 9.30PM (CEST)
Darius Kanga, Devesh Sachar, Gabriel Lopez, Hamazaki Geiza, Hilbert Pretorius, Ian Glendinning, Keith Willshaw, Lillian Hella, Onno Paap, Pavel Selchukov, Peter Denno, Scott Gracie, Victor Agrosking and Kari Anne Haaland Thorsen (MoM)
- Approval of agenda
- Approval of MoM from last meeting
- Updates from 15926.org (Kari Anne/Onno)
- Is the Namespace subject mature for voting?
- What does it mean that the MMT has voted for, and by this agreed on a particular subject?
- It is important that everyone has a clear and common understanding of the value and concequences of a voting....
- New topic on 15926.org: PCA RDS technical requirements (Pavel)
- Templates validating tool (Peter)
- Update on the pattern selector (Ian?)
Minutes of Meeting
1. Approval of agenda
2. Approval of MoM from last meeting
3. Updates from 15926.org
3.1 Is the Namespace subject mature for voting?
The Namespace subject has been thoroughly discussed on 15926.org. It was agreed that the subject is mature for voting but as it stands out now there is nothing concrete to vote for. Onno will summaries and divide into 4 concrete issues for the core-group to vote on.
4. What does it mean that the MMT has voted for, and by this agreed on a particular subject?
4.1 It is important that everyone has a clear and common understanding of the value and concequences of a voting....
A MMT voting indicates that we, as a group, agree on how something should be modelled. I.e. a MMT vote dose not say that this is the only way of doing things, but the MMT recommended way of working. The result will be recorded for the future, and relevant subjects will be presented to the ISO community.
5. New topic on 15926.org: PCA RDS technical requirements
Pavel suggested a new discussion thread to discuss PCA RDL technical requirements. This was considered as valuable both by the group as a whole and in particular by Ian (JORD project manager), as this will give valuable input to the JORD project. This topic should be open for non-MMT members to discuss. Onno will set up a discussion on this topic.
6. Templates validating tool
Peter Denno presented a template validation tool available online. The tool can be found on the following link: http://syseng.nist.gov/cre
For any questions, comments or suggestions for approval on the tool please contact Peter ([email protected]).
A first comment from the group was that it would be interesting to get a better understanding of the underlying logic of the tool.
7. Update on the pattern selector
No particular news on the JORD Pattern selector, but Ian gave an overall update on the JORD project.
8.1 Geometry SIG vs Geometry discussion group
Currently there exist two forums that discuss geometry related subjects. The PCA Geometry SIG chaired by Manoj Dharwadkar (Bentley) and the Geometry discussion forum on the 15926.org chaired by Gabriel Lopez. Members of the MMT SIG raised questions on the differences and relations between these two groups?
8.2 TemporalWholePart vs. WholeLifeIndividual
Keith raised the issue that we need a clear understanding of when to use TemporalWholePart vs. WholeLifeIndividual. Onne will start a topic to discuss this issue.
Action 11.12 Start a discussion on PCA RDL Technical requirements at the 15926.org forum(Onno)
Action 12.12 Start a discussion on TemporalWholePart vs. WholeLifeIndividaul at the 15926.org forum (Onno).
Action 13.12 Wrap up the namespace discussion and initiate a voting process (Onno, Kari Anne).
Action 14.12 Investigate and clarify relations/differences between the two Geometry communities (Kari Anne).