►
From YouTube: OpenActive W3C Community Group Meeting / 2017-03-29
Description
A public hangout for members of the OpenActive W3C Community Group.
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-openactive/2017Mar/0021.html
For more information visit: https://www.openactive.io/w3c-community-group.html
A
Thanks
everyone
for
coming
on
to
our
next
community
group
hangout
had
a
few
apologies
from
something
other
members
of
group
this
week.
So
I've
got
there's
quite
a
list
of
things
that
wants
to
go
through
today,
I
kind
of
general
catch
up
on
where
we
are
next
steps,
I
think
Terry's,
probably
the
only
person
who's,
not
Vince,
call
before
we
just
want
to
quickly
introduce
yourself
to
the
group.
Oh.
A
Great,
thank
you.
So
I've
got
a
bit
of
a
catch
up
for
you,
so
it
helped
get
you
up
to
speed
on
where
we're
at
as
usual,
I've
got
a
few
slides
just
to
help
but
kind
of
organize
the
call
so
I'll
just
share
my
screen
now.
A
Ok,
hopefully
you
can
all
see
those
ok,
so
the
agenda
for
today's
call-
and
the
main
things
I
wanted
to
do-
was
just
give
a
brief
update
on
latest
changes
to
the
specification
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
plans
for
connect
next
steps
in
moving
to
getting
people
to
start
implementing
the
specification
I'd
be
interested
to
hear
your
thoughts
on
the
best
way
that
we
can
support
people
in
doing
that.
We've
got
some.
A
We've
got
some
things
planned
already
but
useful
to
feed
it
any
suggestions
and
then
there's
a
couple
of
things
that
have
been
added
to
the
agenda,
so
it
bends
kind
of
flagged
up
that
the
spec
doesn't
currently
support
describing
what
level
of
disability
support
is
available
for
events,
so
want
to
devote
a
few
minutes
to
talking
through
that,
and
there's
also
been
a
few
discussions
around
how
we
move
forward
with
standardizing
and
activity
lists.
A
So
I
wants
to
give
a
kind
of
brief
update
on
and
the
current
plan
for
doing
that
and
sort
of
paint
pictures
where
we
go
where
we
go
next,
ok
and
then
they've
got
him
any
other
business.
So
if
there's
anything
else,
you
want
to
raise
then
I'll
chunk
it
sometime
at
the
end
and
for
that
so
everyone's
got
a
chance
to
contribute.
A
So
so
I
guess
larger
photos
benefit
story.
So
far
the
we've
done
most
of
the
groundwork
for
the
standardization
when
it
happened
at
the
end
of
last
year,
so
we
did
at
the
ODI.
We
did
want
to
work
on
researching
existing
standards
and
requirements
in
the
sector
and
which
we
used
as
input
into
the
work
of
this
group.
A
A
The
other
kind
of
thread
of
activity
discussion
is
aware
and
encouraging
people
to
start
sharing
their
activity
lists,
partly
as
a
way
to
help
specify
how
to
publish
those
lists
were
also
with
a
view
to
starting
a
process
of
creating
a
standardized
list
within
the
sector,
and
so
we'll
talk
a
bit
more
about
that
later
in
the
call.
A
So
the
specification
and
I'll
just
quickly
recap:
what's
changed
and
then
we'll
just
have
equipment
could
look
through
the
spec.
Give
you
a
chance
to
ask
any
questions
so
the
the
focus
of
the
last
call
we
had
a
few
discussions.
The
main
one
was
around
how
we
were
going
to
handle
and
describing
cata
categories
of
events,
so
different
ways
that
we
might
tag
and
describe
events,
a
capturing
suitability
of
events
for
people
of
different
ages
and.
A
All
the
kind
of
cry
Syria
and
what
we
took
away
from
that
was
that
we
decided
to
keep
that
area
of
respect
quite
light
to
begin
with
and
look
to
kind
of
iterated
based
on
feedback
from
people
who
start
using
the
spec
and
I've.
Also
done
quite
a
few
changes
throughout
the
specification
itself
rejected
a
few
sections
just
to
make
them
a
bit
clearer.
A
Rosa
can
use
see
the
specification
now
yep
some.
A
A
I'm,
just
a
kind
of
quickly
just
give
you
at
all
through,
what's
changed,
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
in
detail
it
clocks
in
at
about
thirty
odd
pages
now.
A
So
it's
quite
a
bit
of
content
here
so
kind
of
key
things
that
have
changed
been
some
updates
to
some
new
sections,
so
I've
added
a
requirement
section
that
just
spells
out
some
of
the
high-level
requirements
that
I've
been
following,
as
we
have
created
the
specification,
so
things
like
the
primary
focus
being
on
discovery
of
opportunities
to
be
physically
active
and
need
to
cover
all
types
of
opportunity,
day,
data,
so
events,
activities,
venues
and,
and
also
importantly,
all
types
of
physical
activities,
so
that
we're
not
just
record
on
sports
welcome
activities.
A
More
broadly
so
I
thought
that
was
useful
to
spell
out
and
for
particular
people
who
might
be
coming
to
the
specification
from
outside
the
group
and
work
maybe
has
been
involved
in
the
early
development
I'm
under
the
concert.
Key
concept,
section
I,
revised
the
the
data
model,
diagram
and
I've
also
removed
a
couple
of
sections
here
in
the
previous
draft.
A
That
is
that
that
may
not
have
been
the
most
important
thing
to
focus
on
initially
for
the
first
version
of
the
spec,
so
rather
than
leave
it
in
as
a
kind
of
placeholder
I've
just
taken
it
out
for
now-
and
we
can
add
that
back
in
as
we
decide
that
we
need
some
controlled
vocabularies
in
areas
of
the
specification.
A
The
approach
that
we've
taken
so
far
is
that
the
properties
are
generally
kind
of
tags
and
so
just
kind
of
text.
Labels
that
can
be
associated
with
those
bits
of
the
event,
description
or
numeric
ranges.
So
the
kind
of
age,
height
weight
range
information.
It's
the
data
model
specification,
that's
had
their
kind
of
biggest
overhaul.
A
So
a
couple
of
things
to
highlight
there
is
I've
just
scroll
down
to
events,
to
give
your
kind
of
example,
so
I've
made
sure
that
each
each
of
those
sections
on
the
different
types
of
resource
that
were
were
publishing
as
part
of
opportunity
data.
There
is
a
table
of
all
of
the
kind
of
essential
properties
or
most
important
properties
that
we
think
are
useful
to
include
so
each
property's
link
through
to
a
more
formal
definition.
A
A
We
also
have
a
few
custom
properties
that
have
been
defined,
so
the
this
was
things
that
schema.org
didn't
cover
and
but
were
important
to
the
description
of
opportunity
data,
so
things
like
adding
an
age
range
or
height
range
or
gender
restriction
to
help
qualify
an
event
description.
These
are
also
linked
through
to
a
formal
definition.
A
A
So
this
is
kind
of
a
common
way
if
you're
defining
standards
on
the
web,
that
you'll
have
this
kind
of
separate
vocabulary
document.
So
the
that
kind
of
backs
up
the
the
main
specification.
It
means
that
anywhere
that
you're,
referring
to
a
custom
property
there
is
a
place
that
I'm
somebody
can
look
it
up
on
the
web
and
within
each
of
the
descriptions
of
the
resources.
I've
now
got
a
series
of
examples,
so
there's
at
least
one
and
often
several
examples
for
each
of
the
each
of
these
and
types.
So
you
can
see
here.
A
I've
got
a
simple
event,
description
that
just
has
the
URL
name,
description,
start
date
and
duration
for
a
tai,
chi
class
and
then
an
example.
That
shows
how
we
can
add
more
information,
so
here
information
on
the
organizer
and
then
the
location
where
the
class
will
take
take
place
and
the
the
two
types
of
resource
that
probably
most
documentation
here
at
the
moment,
our
events
and
locations,
because
that
they're
kind
of
22
key
types
really.
A
But
there
are
examples
in
in
every
section,
so
the
examples
of
how
to
describe
an
organizer
and
then
also
a
very
simple
activity
list.
So
the
spec
is
kind
of
much
more
complete.
Now,
hopefully,
there's
this
useful
documentation
that
can
help
guide
people
towards
implementing
it
and
so
Terry.
As
you
start
to
do,
some
work
would
be
useful
to
get
some
feedback
from
you,
perhaps
on
the
mailing
list
on
and
how
you
found
working
with
the
with
the
specification.
Absolutely.
B
A
Okay,
so
that's
yes!
So
that's
where
we
got
to
revising
the
spec.
A
The
other
thing
that
I've
done
is
I've
kind
of
relabeled,
the
spec
now
from
an
editor's
draft,
so
something
that
was
basically
being
kicked
around
within
this
group
to
what
I've
called
a
candidate
specification
and
because
I
think
we're
at
the
stage
now,
where
it'd
be
useful,
to
get
a
wider
group
to
give
us
feedback
on
the
specification-
and
it
also
is
just
useful
marker
to
say
that
we've
reached
a
useful
milestone
that
the
spec
is
kind
of
reasonably
complete.
A
It
may
not
cover
all
of
the
detail
that
everyone
needs,
but
there's
a
kind
of
coherent
model
there
that
should
cover
and
eighty
or
ninety
percent
of
the
use
cases
people
have
for
sharing
opportunity.
Data,
so
I
think
we're
a
stage
now
where
we
can
start
to
have
conversations
about
whether
there
are
specific,
specific
elements
that
are
not
covered.
A
So
things
like
disability,
sport,
which
will
come
to
shortly,
but
also
just
get
collect
feedback
from
people
who
are
starting
to
implement
the
spec
and
we've
got
a
number
of
organizations
like
gll,
who
are
starting
to
publish
some
open
data
now,
and
we
want
to
encourage
them
to
start
with
the
spec
and
see
how
well
it
matches
up
against.
A
A
We
have
a
proposal
into
the
schema.org
group
about
how
to
extend
schema.org
to
cover
recurring
events
and
backwards
cut
back
covers
all
of
the
requirements
that
we
have,
although
we've
captured
so
far
for
opportunity.
Data
and
the
reason
we
did
it
rather
than
just
creating
our
own
custom
property
is
that
they
were
already
debating
that
so
and
I
just
submitted
a
proposal
that
would
cover
our
needs
and
also
improve
schema.org
itself.
A
If
they
decide
not
to
go
forward
with
that,
then
we
can
take
a
view
of
whether
we're
happy
to
adopt
whatever
proposal
they
go
with
or
whether
we
just
update
our
specification
to
to
take
on
my
original
proposal.
And
so
there
is
a
note
in
respect
to
say
that
we
were
kind
of
waiting
on
some
confirmation
from
them
in
that
area.
A
The
other
thing
that
has
been
highlighted
the
way
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
examples
at
the
moment
is
around
how
to
describe
the
equipment.
That's
available,
a
location
so,
for
example,
that
there
may
be
table
tennis
tables
available
at
a
facility.
So
I
need
to
have
a
closer
look
at
that
and
when
I
start
writing
some
of
the
supporting
documentation
to
see
whether
there
is
existing
terms
and
schema.org
that
cover
that
or
whether
we
need
to
include
some
more
custom
properties
in
our
specification.
A
So
I
might
bounce
a
few
suggestions
of
the
list
in
that
area
and
and
then
the
third
one
is
the
question
around
activity
lists
which
we'll
come
back
to
in
a
moment.
So
I'm
just
going
to
pause
briefly
there
and
just
see
if
anyone
has
any
any
questions
on
anything
that
I've
covered
so
far,.
D
A
A
Know
in
beautiful
and
useful
to
take
a
look
yeah.
Thank
you.
You
can
share
link
to
me
with
that
I
figure
it
okay,
anything
else
that
anyone
wants
to
raise
this
point.
I,
don't.
B
Know,
if
is
entirely
relevant
return.
One
of
the
things
to
be
found
in
the
GL
data
is
that
they
have
classes
that
tie
to
more
than
one
activity.
I,
don't
think
it's
a
huge
problem,
but
I
noticed
that
what
it
looks
like
from
the
schema
that
we're
that
you
know
single
activity
of
no
class,
don't
don't
know
if
that's
gonna
be
relevant
to
use
with
people.
A
Okay,
that's
it
that's
an
interesting
point,
so,
actually,
in
the
scheme
at
the
moment,
you
can
have
multiple
activities
class
and
there's
a
the
the
activity
property
you
can,
it
can
have
a
single
value
or
you
can
give
it
a
list
of
values,
and
it
may
be
just
at
the
example
that
I've
given
in
a
specification
is
and
not
that
clear,
maybe
I
can
improve
that
and
but
Nick
I'm
spotting
Lemaitre.
A
common
about
that
same
example
is
ample
6
anemia
to
what
people
show
it.
A
A
Perhaps
not
the
best
best
example,
but
I
just
kind
of
gave
a
list,
a
basically
list
of
tags,
saying
tai
chi
martial
arts
of
combat,
but
that
could
equally
have
been
cycling
and
weights
and
running.
You
know
if
there
was
a
kind
of
multi.
You
know
multi-activity
event,
so
you
could.
You
could
specify
that,
but
I
think
Nick
made
a
comment
around
wanting
to
identify
the
kind
of
primary
activity
that
was
it
that
was
being
undertaken
event.
D
Well,
it's
just
if
you're
gonna,
but
if,
if
the
kind
of
long-term
thing
of
this
is
around
booking
you're
trying
to
find
an
activity
and
then
roof
activity,
then
if
you've
got
multiple
things
like
martial
arts
or
just
how
that
examples,
that's
quite
hard
to
to
do
it
cause.
You
know
a
lot
of
I
suppose
a
lot
of
issues
and
them
in
the
back
ends
when
you're
trying
to
collect
things
together.
So
that's.
Why
thought
she
did
not
have
a
primary
activity
and
then
draw
out
I?
D
A
B
C
Is
there
might
be
an
interesting
question
here
about
like
I
think?
The
way
this
is
inferred
is
that
the
tags
exist
on
the
activities
and
the
activities
are
related
to
the
sessions
themselves,
so
am
I
reading
that
right,
so
we
were,
we
were
not
able
to
tag
sessions,
we're
only
able
to
tag
activities
and
they're
connected
to
sessions
that
right.
A
C
C
A
So
there
is
a
category
yeah,
so
we
can
say
begin
alone
tends
to
you.
Can
state
cardio,
yeah.
A
So
it's
kind
of
thick
in
it
essentially
they're.
Both
they
can
both
be
used
in
the
same
way.
They
can
I
be
a
single
tag,
multiple
tags
or
they
could
be
a
kind
of
more
structured
as
I've
shown
in
example,
7,
where
the
activity
is
actually
kind
of
in
this
case
is
formally
defined
in
an
activity
list
and
when
here
we're
giving
its
kind
of
preferred
label
and
turn
or
labels,
and
we
could
give
kind
of
broader
links
to
broader
terms
there.
A
So
here
it
could
have
linked
how
to
say
martial
arts
so
both
of
those
properties.
You
can
you
do
the
do
the
same
thing,
but
the
category
just
a
kind
of
broad
kind
of
tagging
property,
whereas
the
activity
property
is
specifically
for
relating
it
to
two
activities
that
I
Delia
formally
defined
somewhere.
E
A
No,
there
was
a
there
was
a
broad,
so
there
was
a
broad
set
of
I
guess
qualifiers
prerequisites
that
we've
kind
of
chatted
about
on
the
last
call
and
kind
of
you
know
things
like
you
know,
equipment
that
you
need
to
bring
or
whether
you
need
to
be
a
member
or
other
kinds
of
prerequisites
and
we're
kind
of
on
that
list.
A
A
A
A
I
think
the
rationale
for
including
it
in
a
more
structured
format
would
be
too
I
guess
to
provide
that
animal
principal
way,
or
maybe
let
people
find
events
that
doodle
didn't,
require
them
to
use
certain
equipment,
but
I'm,
not
sure
we
have
kind
of
strong
requirements
there.
So
I
kind
of
like
to
go
back
to
guess
back
to
the
group
really
I
can
share
this
with
amalia
to
say
what
you
know,
what
kind
use
cases
to
people
have
around
that
kind
of
prerequisite.
Yes
may
be
right
if
the
balance
between.
E
Not
having
it
on
the
list
because
you
could
fit
it
in
the
additional
information
and
people
that
are
providing
data,
knowing
that
it's
important
for
it
to
be
in
the
additional
information,
because
people
might
not
need
to
be
able
to
search
by
it.
But
if
it's
not
in
the
criterion,
then
people
might
not
include
it
and
it's
importantly
to
Gibbs
no
for
the
consumer,
because
that's
going
to
be
a
big
marriage,
lock
people
attending
or
not
attending
just
knowing
what
to
expect
yeah.
A
E
D
I
soy
yeah,
it's
Nikki,
I'll,
agree
with
Jay
day.
I
thought
that's
what
we
we
kind
of
got
to
that.
We
discussed
that
last
week
and
we
said
we'll
make,
or
it
might
not
be
the
structured
fields,
but
there
was
a
need
for
where
we
won
creates
those
notes
there,
particularly
for
those
smaller
providers
who
wouldn't
necessarily
have
a
structured
fields
around
price.
All
these
other
things
that
they
should
almost
have
include
all
that
in
that
extra
information,
yeah.
D
A
Yes,
so
it
might,
we
do
a
bit
of
both,
and
it
might
be
useful
to
for
me
to
put
a
note
to
a
section
in
this
back
to
say
are
the
kind
of
information
that
we
would
expect
to
see
in
a
description
field
and
in
the
tutorial
documentation
that
overproducing
and
I
can
include
a
section
on
that
as
well.
So
we've
got
in
both
places.
There's.
E
F
Yes,
so
in
open
sessions
we
find
that
clubs
who
are
better
sessions,
don't
always
know
expect
what
people
would
need
to
know.
So
we
give
them
prompts
in
terms
of
here's.
A
description
is
what
you
might
put
in
the
description,
and
then
we
have
a
separate
field,
for
you
know.
Is
there
any
equipment
you
need
to
bring
what
you
need
to
wear,
because
we
found
tickling
people
trying
something
new
I'm,
not
having
that
information
is
just
enough
to
to
be
a
blocker.
A
Okay,
that's
that's
very
useful.
Thank
you
any
other
comments
or
shall
I
should
I
move
on.
Oh,
it's
just.
F
Some
reflecting
a
bit
on
on
actually
information
on
how
you
attend
the
session,
so
it's
obviously
quite
straightforward
when
there's
look
ability,
but
then
it
gets
a
bit
more
complicated.
When
you
look
at
sessions
that
smaller
clubs
run
and
often
they
don't
have
a
booking
I'm
facility
and
they
need,
it
meant
many
happy
just
for
people
to
turn
up.
Then
this
issue
do
you
to
learn
up
with
cash
or
card,
and
then
some
of
them
actually
need
you
to
email
them
and
and
register
by
email.
F
So
there's
a
little
bit
of
complexity
around
they
actually
attend
attention
and
I
wondered
whether
this
package
have
any
details
on
how
you
actually
go
to
something
how
you
actually
admit
to
going
something.
E
A
Okay,
so
this
this
feels
like
it's
kind
of
related
to
some
other
commissions,
around
kind
of
availability
and
booking
more
broadly,
which
we
haven't
really
could
have
dug
into
very
much
because
we've
kind
of
purposely
focused
some
of
the
initial
work.
Just
really
get
this
kind
of
basic
data
model
together.
A
So
what
I'm
wondering
is
whether
we
should
at
least
kick
off
having
some
of
those
discussions
in
one
of
the
next
couple
of
community
group
hangouts
and
whether
we
can
just
start
to
just
kind
of
do
some
requirements
capturing
that
area
I'm,
even
if
he
doesn't
necessarily
go
into
the
formal
specification
yet,
but
we
can
at
least
start
to
get
some
of
the
requirements
down.
Get
people
share
their
experience
with
capturing
and
documenting
that
kind
of
information
and
thats
like
a
reasonable
step
forward.
A
Yeah
that
sounds
good,
okay,
great
okay!
I
will
I
will
schedule
one
of
our
calls
around
that
as
a
theme,
then
great
okay,
I'm
going
to
jump
back
to
my
slides.
A
Okay,
so
in
terms
of
next
steps,
II.
A
As
you
can
see
on
slide
we're
going
to
be
pulling
out
a
kind
of
call
for
implementations
so
for
people
to
start
kind
of
testing
the
specification
in
earnest,
so
I'm
gll,
going
to
be
I,
think
paving
the
way
there.
So
thank
you,
terry
and
we'll
be
asking
some
of
the
others
that
have
started
to
publish
data
and
open
active,
to
kind
of
look
at
the
specification
as
well
and
to
help
support
people
in
moving
forward
and
help
kind
of
sign
post
them
towards
using
the
specification
we're
going
to
be
doing
some
additional
work.
A
So
I'm,
currently
working
on
at
one
calling
a
primer
document
which
is
going
to
be
a
series
of
how
to
questions
and
answers
that
relate
to
specific
bits
of
the
specification.
So
it
will
be.
You
know
how
do
I
describe
when
an
event
will
be
taking
place.
How
do
I
describe
where
it's
going
to
be
taking
place?
A
We're
also
going
to
be
doing
a
fairly
minor
change
to
the
existing
paging
specification,
and
that
currently
just
says
that
people
can
publish
whatever
data
they
have
available
and
we're
just
going
to
just
update
that
to
just
recommend
that
people
look
at
using
the
modeling
opportunity
data
specification
to
organize
their
data
and
and
point
out
to
the
primer
and
supporting
documentation.
That
says
how
they
could
include
any
custom
elements
as
well.
A
But
I
had
a
question
for
the
group
I'm
about
how
we
can
kind
of
best
support
this
kind
of
sort
of
implementation
and
testing
phase,
and
so
will
have
the
primer.
We're
also
planning
to
do
some
work
at
the
ODI
around
quaint
and
data
validation
tools,
so
that
you
can
check
that
your
data
follows
the
specification.
A
You
know
we'll
check
it
against
the
performance
criteria,
but
I'm
just
wondering
whether
there's
other
ways
that
we
can
offer
support
and
to
help
kind
of
encourage
people
to
to
get
more
involved
and
start
using
the
specification
things
that
we've
done
in
the
past.
Our
I
create
more
tutorials,
which
might
be
focused
on
particular
domains
or
particular
systems,
and
you
could
do
a
more
detailed
walkthrough
on
one
of
the
calls
to
maybe
look
at
the
primer
and
the
color
step
through
how
to
at
least
kind
of
published
some
basic
opportunity.
A
B
Nick
had
showed
me
a
github
page
where
people
were
posting
there
and
the
fees
that
they
were
working
on
and
what
I
went
to
look
for
was
its
know,
something
with
everything
in
it
an
example
with
everything
in
it
that
I
can
just
chop
out
the
bits
that
we
don't
use
and,
although
that's
probably
on
that
page
somewhere,
I
had
to
kind
of
click
through
a
bunch
of
stuff
to
try
and
find
find
the
right
one
to
be
useful.
To
have
an
example
somewhere
on
the
speckle.
A
Okay,
yeah,
that's
an
excellent
idea:
okay
I
can
do
that
and
we've
got
we've
gotta
get
other
people,
it
might
be
the
same
repo,
but
we
have
a
repo
with
a
few
examples
in
there
which
you
can
customize,
but
yeah
I've,
creating
a
the
kitchen
sink.
Con
is
a
good
idea,
so
I
can
provide
that
to
my
list.
There's
anything
else
that
people
would
find
useful
and.
E
That's
me
and
when
I
initially
started
talking
to
an
organisation
about
doing
it,
and
this
is
really
basic-
they
just
wanted
to
know
if
a
developer
was
going
to
do
this
and
how
does
it
kind
of
take
them?
How
much
should
it
cost
them
and
which
is
just
real
basic
level,
but
that
that
fee?
If
you
just
go
talk
to
whoever
and
whatever
organisation,
that's
going
to
be
their
first
point
of
interest.
C
Gonna
say:
yeah:
there
is
a
there's
actually
a
step
by
step
on
the
open,
active
website
on
the
open,
my
data
section
at
the
top
open
your
data,
so
I
think
can
step
one
where
it
says
implement.
It's
got
two
to
three
days
of
developer
time
as
the
kind
of
estimate
there
and
which
has
been
kind
of
repeatedly
independently
validated
by
everybody
than
we've
asked,
except
for
a
few
developers.
You
posted
three
weeks
and
then
we
show
them
that,
and
they
said,
oh
actually,
maybe
I've
misread
the
spec.
C
So
it's
quite
good
to
keep
people
talking
about
the
same
thing.
If
they're
thinking
it's
three
weeks,
then
maybe
they're
going
to
do
something
else
which
we
need
to
so
yeah.
That's,
that's,
probably
quite
a
good
number
to
use
and
it's
not
part
of
the
spec
per
se,
but
it
is
part
of
the
kind
of
step-by-step
get
started.
C
A
So
Jane
as
your
perspective,
as
a
kind
of
non
technical
person
would
be
or
non
developer.
I
should
say
and
is
useful
because
it
would
be
useful
to
know
what
is
there
some
higher-level
documentation.
That
would
be
useful
for
you
to
be
able
to
say
to
people.
This
is
why
this
is
why
we've
created
the
standard,
or
this
is
why
you
should
be
interested
in
in
supporting
it
and.
E
E
They
want
to
know
what
that
leads
to
and
that's
why
we're
taking
approach
of
strange
them
and
open
up
your
data
and
and
we're
really
going
to
be
talking
about
aggregating
it
Gordon,
so
I
can
show
them
how
IPL
their
date
will
resultantly
ending
more
sales
for
them,
and
I
said
that
sounds
a
bit
hard
but
and
the
look
commercial
organizations,
that's
what
the
warm
in
odm
are.
The
endgame.
C
C
We
can
we
can
furnish
you
with
a
whole
bunch
of
collateral
around
the
sales
side
of
this,
which
includes
that
some
of
that
material
slides
a
kind
of
a
brief
summary
of
benefits.
Things
like
that
which
absolutely
one
hundred
percent
are
required.
In
every
case,
we
haven't
had
one
case
yet
whistle
just
picked
up
a
spec
and
gone
I'll.
Do
this
because
it
looks
like
fun.
Oh
I,
like
one
developer,
did
that
and
came
into
the
meeting
having
already
implemented
the
spec
before
we
started
the
meeting,
which
was
amazing
but
yeah.
A
Okay,
okay,
well
I'm,
going
to
move
us
on
because
a
couple
of
things
to
talk
about
so
but.
E
A
Any
if
you
have
any
further
suggestions,
as
you
start
looking
through
the
specification,
then
please
please.
Let
me
know
because
I
think
either
work,
that
kind
of
key
point
we're
getting
more
people
to
use.
It
is
really
really
critical,
so
anything
we
can
do
to
reduce
the
friction.
There
is
good,
so
I'm
going
to
jump
back
to
my
slides
okay.
So
this
is
the
agenda
item
that
been
asked
if
I
could
add.
So
this
is
a
rant
categorizing
the
disability
support
available
at
events.
A
F
Hello,
okay,
so
one
of
the
requirements
from
get
active,
London
and
other
gang
active
sites
was
that
you
can
filter
by
disability
and
either
where
those
categories
actually
come
from
the
come
from
get
active
and
they
cover
the
five
of
the
five
categories.
Kind
of
covers.
Quite
a
high
level
of.
F
Disabilities
and
then,
and
and
then
this
this
option,
if
clubs
aren't
really
sure
you
can
get
in
touch
with
them,
so
that's
sort
of
another
option,
but
really
we
want
this
to
be
more.
This
is
kind
of
a
working
progress.
It's
a
very,
very,
very
ward,
and
the
political
impairment,
for
instance,
isn't
necessarily
very
helpful.
F
So
we
see
this
kind
of
being
potentially
higher
our
list
and
the
best
example
of
this.
You
could
find
it
on
parasport
org,
dot,
UK,
where
you
could
search
for
sports.
You
know
high
level
its
physical
impairment,
but
then
they
spinal
cord
injury
and
then
you
can
be
more
specific
than
that
and
say,
quadriplegic
or
paraplegic,
and
then
that
will
kind
of
take
you
into
a.
F
Search
which
is
very
specific
to
your
needs
so
yeah,
we
see
it
as
sort
of
evolving,
but
at
the
moment
we've
got
these
sort
of
five
categories
which
which
cover
the
five
main
groups.
A
B
C
Okay
and
I'm
from
the
side
of
e
e
fds,
the
English
Federation
of
disability
sports
we've
had
a
few
conversations
with
before
they.
They
certainly
have
a
view
on
on
this
kind
of
list
and
contributing
to
that
and
I
also
believe,
prompting
Nick
a
little
bit.
That
Alison
mentioned
that
there
is
a
there's,
a
someone
in
its
portland
or
some
group
in
sport
England's.
C
But
certainly
it's
something
that
when
we've
spoken
to
and
also
an
order,
they
called
motivate
East
in
East
London,
then
that
all
these
people
are
keen
to
standardize.
This
and
they've
all
got
views
on
how
granular
to
make
it
or
less
granular
to
make
it
so
I
think
there's
definitely
the
specialist
discussion,
but
tension
can
be
had
by
bringing
some
of
these
people
in
to
ask
them
about
about
that.
C
D
A
D
Point
view
sport
is,
it
is
a
big
and
if
you
don't
want
to
get
it
wrong,
so
you
know
it's
almost
as
big
as
when
you
start
looking
at
me,
break
it
down
as
big
as
we
started,
getting
some
volunteering
it
and
into
coaching
Philip
issues
around
that
around
disability
sport.
So
if
we're
going
to
embark
on
that
I
think
we
need
to
do
a
bit
of
impact
about
you
know,
potentially
how
far
you
want
to
go
down
this
or
how
long
this
might
take,
because
it
is,
it
could
be.
D
Quite
a
bit
at
work
in
me
is
on
the
scale
of
doing
that.
Like
the
volunteering
and
coaching
club
stuff,
so
I
know,
we
want
to
create
simple
things
to
start
off
with,
but
there's
a
danger
that
will
equate
it
to
simply
and
then
we'll
get
some
will
get
some
kind
of
blowback
on
it.
So
I
think
we
need
to
kind
of
maybe
have
a
few
discussions
offline
and
then
come
back
with
a
potential
way
forward.
B
E
I
said
a
screenshot
of
what
we
have:
we've
got
that
quite
high
level
view
riches
and
we
consulted
yes,
yes,
an
interactive
on
the
neighbors,
that's
what
they
agreed
to
the
top
levels
and
we've
taken
the
perspective
of
allowing
people
to
search
by
the
top
level.
But
then
we
go
into
the
actual
event
or
activity.
E
Does
then
additional
information
that
can
be
free,
tight
and
because
we
didn't
want
to
go
into
the
25
different
potential
categories,
because
it
was
chief
details
at
that
at
this
stage
and
we
want
to
be
ability
to
go
to
share
that
information.
So
that's,
which
is
that
high
level
with
free
text
boxes.
C
E
Well,
we
are
weak,
we
consulted
them
on
what
should
be
on
the
smallest,
rather
than
whether
they
thought
there
should
be
a
small.
Well,
we
haven't
I
have
the
conversation
of
interactive,
whether
whether
they
thought
we
should
have
a
massive
list
or
smallness
and
they've
said
that
they
thought
the
best
approach
to
take
would
be
to
have
the
smallest
with
additional
information
that
could
be
free
time.
C
Really
interesting
Justin,
just
in
terms
of
because
I
know
that
one
of
the
public
sector
requirements
which
opposes
and
what
I
was
going
to
say
before
is
often
too
to
include
this
somewhere.
So
some
so
people
like
csps
public
health,
usually
need
to
have
this
box
ticked,
as
in
as
in
they've
accounted
for
disability
empowerment
groups.
So
if
there's
a
simple
solution
like
that
that
we
can
use,
if,
if
the
alternative
is
to
go
into,
you
know
massive
amount
of
work,
maybe
there's
a
start
of
a
tender.
If
there's
already
been
some
work
done.
E
C
I'd
say
well
we're
really
great,
and
this
such
throws
out.
There
would
be
to
have
a
session
like
this,
with
interactive
fds,
sporting,
the
disability,
rap,
etc
on
the
call
and
openly
discussing
this,
because
I
think
that
whatever
is
decided,
I
imagine
as
nick
says
someone
that
some
points
going
to
challenge
that
decision.
If
we
go
big
list,
smallest,
you
know
whatever
we
do
and
if
it's
an
open
spec,
it
might
be
worth
us
making
sure
that
we
have
that
discussion
in
the
open,
potentially
I
suggestion.
A
Of
having
things
are
able
to
comment
on
I,
was
it
the
jaws
jaws
kind
of
attention?
Okay,
I
think
I
think
we
should
do
that
then
so
I
think
so
JD
said
you
shed
a
screenshot,
but
I
not
sure
I
can
see
it.
Something
with
you.
I
put.
C
E
A
Okay,
don't
we
can
we
can
just
do
the
kind
of
groundwork
of
just
collecting
together
what
it
excuse
me.
What
information
people
are
collecting
at
the
moment
and
then
kicked
around
on
the
list
to
have
a
straw
man
that
we
could
then
reach
out
some
of
these
organizations
to
get
their
specific
feet
on
approach
it.
A
quick,
so
I'll
call
taking
actions
to
your
to
move
that
forward.
A
A
G
A
A
So
I'm
fine
not
become
yeah.
The
final
agenda
item
really
was
just
trying
to
get
some
coyote
around
the
next
steps
with
regards
to
activity
lists.
So
where
we
are
currently
is,
we
have
defined
a
data
model,
a
standard
for
sharing
of
activity
lists.
A
So
there
are
some
examples
in
the
specification
now
about
how
to
to
share
lists
in
a
structured
format,
a
few
organizations
so
sport,
england,
sports,
three
open
sessions
and
I'm
in
have
shared
example,
data
that
shows
what
their
activity
lists
looked
like,
and
I
posted
to
the
mailing
list,
I
think,
a
week
or
so
ago
to
say
that
I
converted
some
of
those
into
a
standard
format,
just
really
to
kind
of
validate
that
the
specification
supported
the
types
of
list
that
people
had
in
their
systems.
A
So
it
was
a
kind
of
those
were
useful
inputs
to
the
standardization
process
and
it's
been
useful
way
to
validate
model,
so
we've
kind
of
we
can
put
a
tick
in
the
box
in
in
having
a
kind
of
data
format.
The
next
steps,
I
think,
are
around
actually
encouraging
people
to
start
sharing
those
lists
as
open
data,
so
not
just
with
this
group
but
publishing
them
on
their
websites
and
using
the
data
standard
to
to
do
that.
A
And
then,
from
that
basis,
we
can
then
start
to
think
about
how
we
go
about
the
process
of
creating
a
more
standardized
lists
of
activities.
So
what
what
requirements?
A
People
have
in
that
space
I'm
talking
about
the
kind
of
process
for
doing
that
and
the
people
who
need
to
be
involved-
and
there
are
a
few
different
approaches
of
kind
of
trying
to
take
a
more
kind
of
top-down
view
of
kind
of
recommending
a
particular
list
and
asking
people
to
adopt
it,
and
there
are
also
approaches
that
are
a
bit
more
bottom
up,
which
it
just
involves
asking
people
to
share
their
lists.
And
then
you
know
seeing
which
ones
get
adopted.
A
It's
trying
to
encourage
some
convergence
around
that
so
to
try
and
lay
those
options
out
a
bit
more
clearly
and
what
I'm
going
to
be
doing
is
just
creating
a
short
road
map
where
we
just
be
a
12
page
document.
That
just
says
how
I
think
we
can
move
forward
on
creating
that
standardized
list
of
activities
and
then
I
want
to
devote
our
next
call
on
the
top
of
April
to
go
into
that
topic
specifically,
so
we
can
kind
of
kick
around
and
what
that
well.
That
actually
involves.
A
So
really
that's
just
a
kind
of
a
kind
of
update
on
on
where
we're
at
is
everyone
kind
of
happy
with
with
with
that
process,
or
was
any
questions
about
what
work
is
happening
around
activity
list
at
the
moment.
A
That's
a
good
point,
so
might
my
assumption
is
being
that
those
people
that
might
publish
their
activity
list
is
over
data
as
a
separate
download
would
be
those
that
already
have
a
curation
process
in
place
where
they're
managing
a
list
in
turn,
Lee
know
that
sport
england
do
that
sports.
We
do
that
organizations
like
for
global
or
doing
that,
so
those
are
kind
of
documents
that
have
value,
and
that
could
be
that
value
could
be
shared
with
the
community
if
they're
published
openly.
A
But
I
think
things
are
a
bit
more
kind
of
user
generated
a
bit
more
freeform,
there's
kind
of
a
less
of
a
value
in
in
sharing
those.
It
might
be
more
valuable
for
those
organizations
to
be
able
to
use
lists
that
are
shared
with
the
community,
but
I
think
that's
just
some
of
that.
We
need
to
kind
of
spell
that
out
in
a
process
and
that's
what
I
kind
of
want
to
do
that
in
that
documentation
that
I'll
share
with
the
group
next
week.
A
But
I
just
wanted
to
recap
that,
because
we've
had
a
few
conversations
now
around
at
the
processor
and
activity
lists
and
we're
kind
of
it
at
the
point,
I
think
of
having
the
kind
of
groundwork
in
place
that
it
we
can
now
kind
of
get
into
the
details
a
bit
more
and
is
everyone
happy
with
that?
Has
anyone
got
any
questions
about
questions
or
concerns
about
that
process?.
B
One
thing
I
dinner
delivery
will
be
relevant.
Litter
we've
had
a
lot
of
managing
of
the
activity
list,
that's
been
their
way
in
the
dll
system
and
I
think
that
the
thing
is
just
clarity
for
whoever's
is
defining
their
list,
because
we've
had
weird
a
thing
whereby
sessions
have
names
and
then
the
activities
within
sessions
have
names
and
that
that
list
of
activities
grew
exponentially.
We
had
to
come
back
and
come
up
boil
it
down
and
the
reason
it
grow
exponentially
is
because
people
call
the
same
activity
slightly
different
things.
B
So
it's
just
it's
just
giving
the
the
person's
by
the
list.
The
indication
say
some
things
are.
Some
activities
are
indisputable,
like
home,
cycling,
yeah.
So,
even
though
you
internally
new
organization,
you
might
call
it
far
cycling
on
spin
cycle.
Whatever
the
thing
is,
the
activity
is
cycling,
so
I'm
trying
to
try
to
divorce
the
internal,
the
main
creature
from
the
public
publish
your
own
work,
but
they
comin
fer
and
the
definition
of
it
and
not
finding
the
right
words
hear
that
you
know
I
mean
yes.
A
I,
do
yes
yeah
yeah,
and
we
have.
We
have
provision
for
kind
of
handling
that
type
of
issue
in
the
specification
a
moment,
because
you
can
collect
these
alternate
labels
and
for
activities
and
still
have
a
kind
of
preferred
kind
of
canal,
economical,
one
that
you
use
in
the
system,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
the
questions
around
activity
is
as
much
about
the
design
of
user
interfaces
for
inputting
events
and
some
of
the
systemic
benefits
of
converging
under
dies
list
to
help
your
data
integration,
as
it
is
about
kind
of
standardization
work.
A
You
know
in
terms
of
data
formats
that
kind
of
thing:
okay
right,
they
are
nearly
out
of
time
and
it
is
there
anything
else.
Anyone
wants
to
bring
to
the
group
today
and
I
think
that
is
any
kind
of
burning
questions
or
things
that
are
kind
of
front
of
mind
at
the
moment.
No.
A
Of
recap,
about
the
best
way
to
kind
of
contribute,
the
next
steps.
So
obviously
you
know
we've
got
the
mailing
list
and
if
you've
got
any
additional
comments
to
the
specification
and
then
please
please
share
and
like
you
know,
as
I
said
earlier,
it's
quite
it's
quite
a
lengthy
document.
Now
I'm,
if
you
don't,
you
know,
don't
have
time
to
kind
of
work
through
in
detail.
A
Even
just
piecemeal
comments
on
individual
sections
is
fine,
so
just
kind
of
share
thoughts
as
you
as
you
have
them,
as
I
said
in
the
call,
and
particularly
keen
to
get
experience
or
people
actually
trying
the
specification
against
real
world
data
to
see
how
well
it
fits
so
kind
of
detailed
technical
feedback
is
appreciated
as
well
as
well
as
the
mailing
list.
Then
we
also
have
github
for
as
an
issue
tracker.
A
I've
been
using
that
to
kind
of
callate
my
kind
of
actions
and
work
as
I've
been
working
on
the
draft
in
the
last
few
months,
and
so
please
feel
free
to
add,
had
issues
and
then,
if
you're
happy,
we
could
be
good
if
you
could
just
file
an
issue
around
the
disability
question.
Just
plenty
sport
question
and
then
we
can
start
collecting
some
of
the
requirements
in
that
space.
A
Thank
you
and
I'm
also
just
kind
of
cool
to
to
share
the
specification
out
with
with
your
colleagues
and
with
your
individual
networks,
and
we've
got
a
blog
post
that
we
going
out
I
think
in
the
next
day
or
so
that'll
just
be
doing
a
kind
of
general
update
on
the
standards
work
for
people
who
aren't
have
been
as
closely
involved
with
this
group
are
given
a
given
them.
A
D
I
just
thought
that
point
is
there
any
parts
of
it
you
want
to.
You
know,
get
people
to
particularly
comment
on
or
bits
of
it.
So
if
we
sharing
it
with
other
organizations
or
any
bits,
you
think
yeah
we're
definitely
more
it's
this
bit
with
you
right
or
from
you
know
the
tricky
bits,
as
we've
discussed
it
over
the
last
few
weeks
and.
A
I
think
the
bit
that
I'm
other
week
we
made
some
discussion,
some
decisions
about
kind
of
categorizations
and
participation
and
prerequisites
and
stuff
last
week,
I
think
that's
the
bit
where
I'm
still
a
little
bit
uneasy.
So
really
just
that
I
guess
the
event
description,
because
that's
the
core
of
the
data
model,
so
any
any
kind
of
properties
or
information
that
night
need
to
go
on
on
events.
So
getting
people
to
kind
of
focus
on
that
specifically
I.
Think
we'll
be
good.
A
Ok,
so
I
think
that
wraps
us
up
for
another
call.
So
next
one
is
in
its
in
two
weeks
today,
so
we're
going
to
focus
that
on
discussion
around
standardizing
activity
lists
and
then
in
a
month's
time
we
will
have
a
session.
That's
going
to
focus
on
just
collecting
some
initial
requirements
around.
A
So
I
think
that's
it
for
today.
Thank
you
all
again
for
taking
some
time
out
and,
and
they.
C
Could
I
just
apologies
for
this
week?
Just
thought
I'd
include
those
at
the
end,
so
Andy
from
Devon
Brent
from
fettle
Christopher
from
surco.
That's
Chris,
Jamie
from
my
local
pitch
Kim
from
sports,
sweet
Mike
from
pawsome
and
Raymond's
from
clarity.
Life
all
send
their
apologies.
So
hopefully,
next
week
we'll
have
everybody
back
in
back
in
the
room.
I.