►
From YouTube: OpenActive W3C Community Group Meeting / 2018-01-19
Description
A public hangout for members of the OpenActive W3C Community Group.
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-openactive/2018Jan/0001.html
For more information visit: https://www.openactive.io/w3c-community-group.html
A
Okay,
if
you
can
see
if
those
okay
so
yet
to
the
agenda,
the
whale
is
going
to
run
through
things
was
to.
First,
you
talk
about
the
general
requirements
that
have
come
up
during
some
of
the
previous
discussions.
So
you
can
see
what
I've
been
using
to
inform
the
proposal
we
can
skip
through
the
proposal.
A
I've
got
a
few
examples
of
changes
that
I
think
we
need
to
make
no
support
facilities
and
then
also
depending
on
how
much
time
we've
got
run
through
some
of
the
review
have
been
doing
around
the
active
places,
data
to
see,
look
at
the
alignment
between
that
and
the
existing
specifications
and
how
it
could
be
better
used
by
people
using
the
opportunity
data
and
then,
if
we've
got
time
at
the
end,
any
other
business
that
people
on
arrays,
okay,
so
I'm,
gonna,
I'm
gonna,
except
through
these
slides,
stop,
stop
me
and
ask
questions
at
any
point,
rather
than
waiting
to
the
end,
because
I
think
we
better
to
get
comments
as
we
go.
A
So
I
went
back
over
the
discussions
that
we've
had
so
far,
and
it
feels
to
me
like
there
is
to
two
distinct
user
needs
around
facilities
and
that
they're
focused
in
two
different
areas.
Firstly,
does
the
need
that
I
think
active
places
is
already
fulfilling,
which
is
need
for
data
that
describes
places
and
locations
where
people
can
take
part
in
activities?
So
it's
just
you
know
where
leisure
centers
are
what
equipment
they
have
and
some
basic
information
or
contact
details.
A
That
kind
of
thing
the
other
need
has
been
highlighted
is
data
that
describes
the
availability
of
facilities
so
that
the
key
example
being
I
want
a
book.
A
squash,
ball
or
I
want
to
book
a
table
tennis
table
at
the
moment.
We
don't
support
that
in
a
useful
way,
but
that's
what
it's
the
latter
piece
that
I
want
to
focus
on
in
the
first
half
of
the
discussion.
A
So,
looking
at
the
facility
availability
side,
what
I've
done
is
try
to
capture
what
I
think
the
use
cases
are
as
just
simple
questions
that
we
need
to
be
able
to
ask
of
the
data
that
is
being
published
in
order
to
support
the
kinds
of
applications
that
people
want
to
build,
and
then
I've
tried
to
turn
that
into
some
specific
requirements
that
we
can
then
use
to
drive
changes
to
the
specs.
So,
based
on
the
discussion,
it
seems
like
we
need
to
be
able
to
identify
what
facilities
were
available
at
a
location.
A
So
does
it
have
a
special
court,
how
many
squash
courts
what
activities
can
be
carried
out
in
a
particular
facility?
So
this
touches
on
a
kind
of
brief
discussion.
We
had
around
that
a
Sports
Hall
could
be
used
in
a
variety
of
different
ways,
so
we
might
want
to
kind
of
flag
up
that
a
particular
facility
could
be
booked
for
different
purposes.
A
We
need
to
know
where
facilities
are
so
you
know
how
do
I
find
this.
What
score?
Where
is
it?
What's
your
dress
and
then
getting
into
the
availability?
What
days
and
times
can
I
book
this
squash
court?
So
what
people
call
slots
and
then
for
a
given
slot
given
time
is
this
squash
court
still
available
so
seemed
to
be
the
key?
The
key
questions,
if
there's
anything
else
that
springs
to
mind,
then
then
shake
no,
but
I've
turned
those
into
basically
three
broad
requirements,
things
that
we
will
need
to
do
to
the
current
specifications.
A
So
the
first
is
that
we
need
to
be
able
to
include
data
about
facilities
in
the
paging
specification.
So
at
the
moment,
people
are
those
that
those
people
who
are
supporting
the
opportunity
data
model
are
publishing
events
they're,
not
publishing
other
types
of
information,
because
that's
what
we
focused
on
there
are
a
few
different
types
of
feed
for
people
who
were
early
adopters
and
haven't
moved
to
the
data
model,
yet
that
are
using
a
variety
of
different
structures
and
some
of
those
are
about
facilities.
A
So
I
think
there's
some
table
tennis
tables
in
there,
for
example,
but
we
need
to
need
to
be
able
to
kind
of
I
think
more
clearly
flag
about
what
type
of
data
is
it
events
or
is
it
facilities
that
is
even
given
feed,
then
from
a
given
facility?
We
need
to
be
able
to
associate
a
facility
with
a
place.
So
where
is
it
associated
the
facility
with
the
activities
that
can
take
place
within
or
on
or
using
that
facility
and
then
associate
events
so
slots
with
facilities
to
a
support,
the
description
and
availability?
A
Now
we
can
already
describe
the
availability
of
an
event,
there's
already
a
whole
set
of
terms
around
that.
So
if
we
can
reuse
that
we
can
simplify
the
process
of
adjusting
the
specifications,
then
the
third
requirement,
which
again
touches
on
a
discussion
we
had
in
November,
is
how
do
we
efficiently
check
to
see
if
a
facility
is
still
available
to
be
booked,
so
whether
slop
has
been
taken
or
not?
So
the
description
we
had
there
was
around.
If
slots
are
you
know
being
quickly
booked?
How
do
people
stay
on
top?
A
How
did
a
to
use
a
stay
on
top
of
the
fact
that
the
availability
is
changing?
Are
we
just
going
to
expect
people
to
be
harvest?
Always
there
different
approaches
that
we
might
use
to
make
that
easy
to
do
so?
Those
are
I,
think
the
broad
requirements,
so
what
I
was
going
to
do
is
step
through
each
of
those
and
propose
some
changes
to
the
specifications
to
support
it.
A
Everyone
happy
with
this
so
far,
yep,
okay,
I
trust,
you'll
share
it
out.
If
you
know
so
the
first
thing
by
including
facilities
data
in
the
feeds.
So
at
the
moment
there's
there
isn't
any
much
metadata
in
an
individual
feed.
It
just
has
a
list
of
items
a
next
page
in
a
license,
so
I
think
what
we
need
to
do
is
to
start
to
include
a
bit
more
metadata
that
will
help
somebody
who's
harvesting.
A
That
feed
understand
what
it
is
that
they're
actually
getting,
and
then
they
can
use
that
to
make
a
decision
about
actually
I'm
not
interested
in
events
only
what
facilities,
or
vice
versa,
so
I
think
the
way
that
we
do.
That
is
just
to
include
a,
but
it
highlighted
it
at
the
top.
We
just
include
a
new
key
name
to
be
agreed,
but
it
what
back
heat
would
do
was
in
identify
the
type
of
thing
that
will
be
in
the
list
of
items
that
will
be
the
top
level
in
the
items
so
for
existing
feeds.
A
This
is
always
events,
but
what
we're
able
to
do
is
then
start
to
indicate
that
feed
contains
facilities
instead.
I
think
we've
already
got
some
open
issues
too,
to
cover
additional
metadata
in
feeds,
and
a
couple
of
things
I'd
like
to
get
in
there
as
well,
is
identifying
what
version
of
the
feed
spec
this
particular
feed
supports,
and
what
what
version
of
the
opportunity
date
model
is
using
as
well,
because
I
think
that's
important
for
end-users,
because
they
might
have
to
make
some
different
decisions
about
how
they
process
the
data.
A
A
B
A
A
Okay,
so
that's
I
think
the
only
things
that
we
need
to
do
in
order
to
change
the
feeds
back
to
me
at
least,
introduce
facilities
in
terms
of
just
describing
facilities
so
starting
to
publish
some
data
about
it.
We
need
a
new
type
of
thing
in
the
data
model,
so
at
the
moment
we
we
just
we've,
got
events.
A
Organizations
etc,
so
we
need
facilities
and
we
need
to
identify
some
subtypes,
some
different
types
of
facilities,
so
squash
courts,
table
tennis
tables,
etc
and
there's
existing
data
and
categories
that
we
can
use
there
rather
than
having
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
to
find
them
ourselves.
The
reason
we
need
to
do
this
is
you
know
again:
people
want
to
be
able
to
filter
the
data
because
they
only
want
squash.
A
They
want
support
booking
of
squash
cause
they're,
not
interested
in
in
football
pitches,
for
example,
but
once
we've
defined
this
new
type,
we
can
use
existing
bits
of
the
data
model
to
do
the
heavy
lifting
for
lots
of
young
stuff.
So
we've
already
got
a
way
to
associate
something
with
a
place
or
location
because
we're
doing
that
for
events,
so
we
can
reuse
the
same
terms
there.
A
We
can
already
associate
events
with
activities
so
we'll
be
able
to
do
the
same
thing
with
a
facility
and
the
way
open,
proposing
that
we
associate
a
facility
with
the
slots
is
by
using
the
existing
event
data
model.
So
each
slot
is
an
event
we'll
come
back
to
that
in
a
second.
So,
at
the
very
basic
level,
the
data
would
start
to
look
like
this,
so
we've
got,
we
use
all
the
existing
properties,
so
name
description,
images,
etc,
etc.
We
would
you
would
say
that
something
was
a
type
of
facility
rather
than
event.
A
Now,
there's
a
couple
of
different
ways
within
the
existing
model
that
we
can
indicate
the
type
of
facility
we
can
either
just
define
them
all
up
front
and
we'll
use
it
in
the
type
property
or
we
can
use
if
another
feature
that
is
in
schema.org,
which
allows
you
to
see
and
associate
an
additional
type
with
the
resource
and
we
could
just
use.
We
can
just
use
a
list
there
that
could
grow
over
time
a
bit
more
easily
than
revising
the
call
specification
and
what
we
can
come
back
to
this
later.
A
But
what
I'm
proposing
we
do
is
we
draw
on
the
list
of
different
types
of
facility?
That's
in
active
places
already,
because
they've
already
kind
of
charted
a
lot
of
this,
but
in
terms
of
saying
that
this
facility
is
in
a
particular
location,
so
it's
an
alleged
center.
We've
already
got
ways
to
do
that.
We
can
tag
it
with
activities
if
we
want
to
say
that
you
know
this
particular
pitch
could
be
used
for
these
different
types
of
sport.
A
A
We've
got
different
ways
of
describing
events,
and
what
people
are
doing
is
that
they
are
in
existing
feeds.
Most
people
are
publishing
an
event
and
then
some
sub
events,
so
which
kind
of
like
slots
it's
kind
of
times
that
stage
in
class
might
be
running
all
there,
instead
defining
a
schedule
so
again,
I
think
we
can
use
this
to
describe
the
slots,
so
a
facility
could
have
an
array
of
and
events
associated
with
it.
A
We
can
associate
the
offers
with
event,
so
we
can
put
a
price
against
it
and
so
there's
no
need
to
remodel
that
and
I
think
the
only
adjustment
we
might
want
to
make
is
currently.
We
have
status
property
event
status
that
allows
you
to
say
whether
an
event
is
postponed
or
canceled,
etc,
and
what
I
think
we
should
do
is
just
define
an
available
or
unavailable
status
code.
So
you
can
easily
say
this
slot
easily
determined.
A
This
is
gone,
or
this
slot
is
still
available
for
booking,
just
as
a
quick
check,
because
the
existing
way
that
we're
handling
availability
is
just
by
describing
the
number
of
participants
which
doesn't
make
sense
here.
You
just
want
to
know
if
this
event
is
available
to
you
or
not
in
terms
of
the
offer.
A
C
A
Okay,
great
okay,
so
the
the
I
think
the
only
other
thing
that
to
talk
about
I
think
really
is
the
third
item,
which
is
being
able
to
efficiently
efficiently
check
if
an
event
is
still
available.
So
at
the
moment
the
default
mode
for
any
changes
to
any
of
the
data
is
that
people
need
to
be
harvested.
So
if
new
offers
or
prices
get
added
people
just
tweak
the
description
change
the
time
everything
needs
to
be
harvested.
A
So
as
a
kind
of
fallback
we
can
rely
on,
you
know
people
we
harvesting
regularly
as
a
way
to
pass
through
availability
information,
so
that
can
be
going
back
whether
the
status
has
changed,
for
example,
or
whether
there
are
new
slots
of
able,
but
I
kind
of
I.
Think
that
over
time,
just
relying
on
me
harvesting
is
going
to
be
problematic
for
us
in
general,
because
there
are
so
many
there
could
be
an
awful
lot
of
churn,
particularly
on
feeds
that
have
very
popular
events
or
facilities
or
publishing
a
large
amount
of
data.
A
So
there's
basic
be
a
restful
call
you
can
make,
you
know
is
to
say,
is
this
event,
and
that
might
be
an
event
you've
identified
within
the
schedule.
Is
this
event
still
available
I
think
that
could
be
quite
quite
cheap
to
implement
for
a
platform
it
could
be
expanded
to
include
you
know,
additional
all
the
additional
data
that
you
have
about
an
event
or
facility,
but
I
think
the
initial
use
case
we
have
at
the
moment
is
just
that:
availability
information,
so
that
somebody
can
do
that.
Quick,
real-time
check
is
this.
A
That
is
this
slot
available,
I
kind
of
thing.
We
need
this
when
we
get
getting
into
booking
anyway,
because
somebody
will
need
to
be
able
to
do
this
kind
of
live
check
before
initiating
a
booking
workflow,
because
you
don't
want
to
you
can't
you
can't
be
rehabs
doing
at
that
point,
so
that
endpoint
could
be
something
that
could
that
could
be
advertised
from
within
the
feed.
It
could
be
part
of
the
feed
metadata
as
well.
A
I
think
we
already
recommend
in
the
data
model
that
every
event
has
got
a
unique
identifier
and
ideally
has
a
URL
that
could
be
used
to
get
information
about
it
and
we
might
be
either.
You
just
rely
on
that
as
a
way
to
expose
the
machine-readable
data,
but
I
kind
of
think.
An
explicit
endpoint
might
be
a
better
option,
so
each
of
when
we've
got
an
event.
That's
that's
fully
specified
in
the
feed,
rather
than
being
via
a
schedule,
then
you
can
associate
that
you
could
associate
that
URL
directly
with
the
event.
A
But
another
approach
is
to
use
your
your
I
templates
and
to
specify
how
to
construct
the
URL
to
check
the
availability
of
any
event.
So
what
the
URI
template
would
would
say
is
things
like
for
this
base
URL,
and
this
take
tack
on
the
event.
Id
and
you'll,
get
back
and
availability
check,
status
or
plug
in
the
date
and
time
and
facility
ID
and
you'll
get
back
and
identifier,
so
I
get
back
the
status
stays
check
and
be
using
your
eye
template.
A
It
gives
flexibility
for
each
individual
platform
to
decide
for
itself
how
that
check
is
implemented
without
was
having
to
specify
it.
All
we
need
to
specify
is
how
to
map
data
that
is
already
in
a
feed
board
in
the
event,
descriptions
or
facility
descriptions
into
that
template,
and
then
what
the
response
should
look
like
any
thoughts
or
comments
on
that
there's
an
approach
was
that
thumbs
up
Tom.
C
D
A
Yes,
yeah
I
guess
is
yeah
I
mean
the
alternate.
Is
that
you
we
have
the
same
mechanism
but
just
for
pulling
down
the
information
about
facility.
So
you
just
put
your
pull.
You'd,
be
less
calls
but
a
bigger
response,
I
suppose,
because
you
don't
even
that
sponsor.
You
include
the
date
on
all
of
the
slots.
D
A
Yeah
I
mean:
if,
if
we
go
this
route,
then
it
can
be
used
for
other
purposes
and
just
checking
availability
it'd
be
a
way
for
to
somebody
to
sink.
You
know
sink
any
cash
data
that
they
have.
If
they
wanted
to.
You
know
it
doesn't
just
remove
the
usefulness
of
the
feed,
but
it
provides
another
way
to
kind
of
do
that.
Cash
clearance,
sure
yep
in.
B
The
book
went
sorry,
oh,
there
was
a
useful.
The
UI
templates
would
have
been
useful
there
because
they
have
they
have
a
schedule
and
they
generate
the
events
based
on
the
scheduled
appointment
booking
if
the
event
has
already
exist
so
that
that
template
is
a
good
I
mean
it's
not
facilities,
but
that
would
certainly
have
helped
that,
but
that
would
have
been
the
booking.
Url
embedded
would
have
been
with
need
to
include
a
euro
template,
so
I
guess
what
I'm
wondering
is.
B
A
In
the
feed
it's
a
it
be
like
a
discovery
document
is
just
gonna.
Have
you
know
this?
Is
your
I
templates
for
events?
This
is
it
for
facilities.
This
is
it
for
individual
slots
and
then
applied
can
compute
strapped
into
making
a
call
as
soon
as
it's
already
harvested
some
data.
So
there's
a
way
to
I
mean
if
it
was
going
to
get.
A
If
we
can
end
up
with
a
lot
of
information
in
there,
it
might
be
useful
to
publish
the
discovery
document
separately,
which
is
what
some
API
is
already
do,
but
given
we're
asking
people
to
always
publish
a
feed
putting
it
into
that,
you
know
fetching.
The
first
page
is
relatively
cheap
anyway,
but
you
know
I'm
willing
to
take
comments
on
that,
because
there
are
some
pros
and
cons.
A
So
the
the
thing
that
I
wanted
to
highlight
that
this
doesn't
address
which
we
did
discuss
is
it
doesn't
deal
with
this?
The
more
complex
use
case
of
where
you
might
want
to
be
able
to
say
this
portal
can
be,
you
know,
can
be
divided
up
into
separate
courts.
You
know
could
be.
You
know,
reconfigured
to
be
used
in
the
different
ways
and
find
some
way
to
communicate
that
to
users.
C
C
So
you
can
book,
you
can
break
that
picture
up.
You
might
say
seven
aside
with
and
seven
aside
and
therefore
we
would,
it
would
kind
of
know
that
there
were
slots
available,
semi
size,
let's
label,
rather
than
just
purely
looking
for
that
wider
fit
or
if
you're
definitely
looking
from
the
Leben
site
page.
B
As
a
specific
point,
there
is
that
the
the
pricing
of
those
individual
types,
so
seven
aside
and
eleven
aside,
we'd,
probably
be
embedded
in
the
products
which
were
talking
about
exposing
so
I
guess
they
would
need
to
split.
The
booking
system
would
need
to
split
out
the
ability
to
book,
half
and
full
courts
kind
of
anyway
and
then
related
between
them.
Just
so
that
you
would
know
how
to
do
that
and
how
much
it
would
cost
yeah
yeah.
C
You
build
self
on
the
price
you
know
difference
between
you
know.
A
hundred
hundred
pounds
is
gonna,
be
a
full-size
pitch
and
you
know
thirty
quid
is
gonna,
be
the
price
of
roughly
at
a
similar
size
and
the
user.
If
they
do
it,
if
they
know
about
sport
before
we'd
be
able
to
differentiate
that
quite
quickly,
but
it's
again
it
might
be
it's
more
about
the
some
of
this
might
be
something
guidance
that
goes
back
to
the
operators
or
what
how
they
do,
some
of
their
descriptions
to
get
pushed
down
with
some
Ladouceur.
Oh.
B
That's
a
good
point:
Emily
with
the
squash
court.
I
know
who
deserves
one
of
the
earlier
slides.
You
mentioned
an
event.
Type
of
squash
court
is
the
is
the
idea
here
that
we're
gonna
have
one
for
seven
aside.
One
for
eleven
aside.
Are
we
gonna
redefine
because
I
know,
there's
also
an
eleven
aside
football
activity
and
a
squash
activity
in
the
activity
list?
So
how
does
that
relate
to
the
additional
type
yeah.
A
Articulate
was
thinking
I
guess
for
the
case
of
like
a
seven.
If
you
want
a
seven
aside
pitch,
then
you
it
may
need
to
be,
but
it
could
just
be
in
the
activity
it
could.
What
we
could
do
is
just
a
football
pitch
that
can
support
act
in
the
activities
description,
it
would
just
say
seven
aside
and
then
you
can
filter,
so
you
could
easily
find
all
of
the
football
pitches
and
then
filter
down
to
activities,
though,
for
those
that
support
the
seven
aside
versus
five
aside.
A
It'd
be
interesting
to
know:
yeah
I
mean
I've
got
I
was
gonna,
show
you
say,
but
I
show
tonight
so
Sally
you
can
couldn't
make
it.
Today
she
was
look
doing
some
investigation
on
the
active
places
data.
So
I
asked
her
to
pull
out
the
lists
of
types
of
equipment
facilities
that
are
already
in
there.
A
So
inactive
places
the
equipment
is
things
like
high
bars,
parallel
bars
that
table
tennis
tables
are
indicated
as
a
equipment
in
the
piece
of
equipment
in
there
in
terms
of
facilities,
lots
of
the
facilities
that
do
have
overlap
with
the
activities
and
then
subtypes
yeah
I
mean
it's
very
similar
to
the
list
of
activities
that
sporting
them
gave.
A
So
I
think
we
need
to
avoid
getting
too
bogged
down
in
spelling
out
all
of
the
different
types
of
facility,
but
so,
if
we've
got
useful
lists
that
people
are
happy
to
share,
that
would
be
great
because
we
could
start
to
put
those
into
the
specification.
B
On
that
slide
there,
just
a
quick
question
on
the
contained
contained
in
I've.
Had
the
previous
sound
a
bit
feedback,
because
I
know
gll
semi-folks.
He
knew
that
particular
key
so
far
and
the
data's
not
as
obvious
as
it
could
be
in
terms
of
the
location
which
is
a
kind
of
key
information
with
the
postcode
and
all
the
rest
of
it.
B
It's
kind
of
moves
moves
around
in
in
the
structure,
depending
on
how
many
contained
in
places
they're
embedded
inside
or
if
it's
just
the
river
level,
so
I'm
just
wondering
for
this
in
terms
of
simplicity,
is
there
any
reason
why
we
couldn't
use
the
location
the
same
as
we've
got
in
an
event?
There's
a
clear
location.
A
B
A
Okay,
okay,
would
it
seem
like,
but
at
least
everyone
on,
the
call
here
seems
reasonably
comfortable
with
with
this
outline.
So
in
that
case,
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
I'm
going
to
start
revising
the
both
specifications.
To
put
those
in
so
we've
got
drafts
that
people
can
start
commenting
on
and
I
can
circulate
the
SD
slides
and
those
drafts
to
the
the
wider
group.
So
then
we
get
more
eyes
on
it,
but
I'm
confident
we
can
kind
of
move.
A
This
fall
quite
quickly
because
I
don't
think
it's
a
kind
of
radical
change
in
direction
for
us,
which
is
good
because
I
know
that
some
people
are
waiting
for
it
and
it
would
be
good
to
start
lining
up
some
implementations,
so
people
so
people
who
could
be
start
to
you.
This
part
of
the
date
model
to
start
to
conform
to
the
standards.
I.
A
Think,
though,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
I
think
there
are
a
couple
of
non-standard
feeds
that
might
be
able
to
be
moved
over
to
a
more
standard
structure
once
we
have
this
in
place,
but
I'm
sure
that
there
are
other
platforms
that
could
be
publishing
facilities,
data
so
I
know
Nikki
you've
been
Dizzy's
your
descriptions
right
now.
We
might
move
that
forward.
You're,
saying
brief
format:
yeah.
B
They
seem
pretty
keen
and
so
yeah,
so
there's
a
few
people
involved
if
there's
anyone
else
that
wants
to
get
involved
in
implementing
stuff
around
this
as
a
trial,
obviously
Devon
to
you
being
involved
in
implementation.
For
me,
the
data
user
side
or
the
data
provider
side
is
that
well
for
the
data
user
side
there's
any
way
than
consuming
that
data,
then
there's.
Obviously
a
lot
of
data
to
continue
to
that
could
be
useful
for
the
a
to
provider.
Side
be
great
to
get
your
thoughts
on
this
and
help
shape.
B
A
That'd
be
great
I
mean
and
as
a
rule
of
thumb,
for
four
new
pieces
of
work
like
this
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
get.
You
know
both
at
least
one
publisher
and
consumer
to
be.
You
know
on
board
and
saying
that,
yes,
they
get
in
from
that,
you
know
either
they've
done
a
prototype
or
they're
already
implementing
it
according
to
the
spec,
because
then
we
actually
get
validation,
that
it
is
implementable
and
it
is
useful
for
real
news
cases
rather
than
us.
A
Being
you
know,
driven
by
you
know,
assumptions
it's
good
to
have
that
kind
of
implementation,
check,
interface,
okay,
so
for
the
second
half
I'm
gonna
go
through
some
slides
that
Sonny
prepared,
based
on
her
review
of
active
places
just
to
the
just
about
kind
of,
have
a
look,
how
it
aligns
with
the
work
that
we've
done
so
far
and
how
it
might
be
made
more
useful
to
the
community.
You
know
so
that
we
can
kind
of
join
up
some
existing
data
with
what
Sport
England
already
publishing.
A
So,
just
as
a
quick
recap
for
those
of
you
who
haven't
looked
at
it,
it's
a
sports
facilities
database,
that's
published
by
sport,
England,
so
active
places
powered
calm.
It's
currently
available.
The
data
is
available
in
several
different
ways.
There's
an
API
you
can
download
CSV
and
JSON
files,
and
there
is
a
paged
teacher
exchange
endpoint
as
well,
so
there's
a
variety
of
different
ways
that
it
can
be
consumed.
A
B
A
The
there
was
a
few
things
that
we
wanted
to
try
and
look
at
so.
Firstly,
we'll
try
and
determine
how
the
active
places
data
model
aligns
with
what
we've
got
in
the
opportunity
data
model
so
far
and
I'd
see
whether
well,
firstly,
whether
the
places
data
could
be
published
according
to
the
opportunity
data
model
or
whether
there's
things
that
we
might
want
to
add
into
the
opportunity
data
model
based
on
what
active
places
is
doing
at
the
moment.
A
The
our
opportunity
model
is
a
much
lower
level
of
detail
than
what
is
in
active
places
and
that's
reflects
the
fact
that
actually
places
is
disappointing.
That's
very
different
set
of
use
cases
than
we
do
at
the
moment
and
it's
the
second
bullet
notes.
If
we
wanted
to.
If
we
want
people
to
be
publishing
this
kind
of
place,
data
in
feeds,
then
it
should
be
advertised.
So
it
goes
back
to
that
point.
They
made
earlier
about
adding
some
metadata
so
that
somebody
could
identify
that
a
feed
is
about
locations
rather
than
events
or
facilities.
A
A
So
we
deliberately
did
that
just
to
kind
of
keep
things
like
just
meet
the
immediate
requirements
for
helping
people
find
events
and
Sally
took
some
time
out
to
try
and
match
the
the
Sport
England
data
model,
so
the
X
places
daily
model
against
the
opportunity
date
model.
The
detail
isn't
isn't
important.
It
shouldn't
be
readable.
A
It's
just
to
kind
of
highlight
the
fact
that
there's
only
is
a
lot
more
detail
in
active
places
than
we
are
asking
people
to
the
public,
so
that
highlights
the
fact
that
there
is
potentially
a
whole
rich
set
of
data
that
existing
platforms
and
applications
could
be
making
use
of,
if
they're
not
already,
if
they
can
find
a
way
to
kind
of
start
to
connect
the
opportunity
data
with
that.
That's
been
published,
place
in
Sport
England,
so
just
to
give
it
a
kind
of
overview.
A
This
is
the
kind
of
things
that
are
in
the
active
places.
Data
mall
at
the
moment,
so
there
are
sites
which
have
facilities,
they
also
have
equipment
and
then
there's
additional
information
about
each
site.
So
information
on
stable
access
contact
points
and
also
clubs.
So
there's
a
few
things
there
that
we're
not
really.
We
haven't
really
addressed
so
far.
I.
A
A
So
in
terms
of
similarities
so
trying
to
identify
you
know,
alignment
and
potential
improvement
around
model,
so
both
have
names
and
descriptions
of
places
both
have
some
way
to
describe
facilities.
But
at
the
moment
our
model
is
quite
light
in
that
really
we
can
kind
of
say
there
is
an
area
you
know
unless
your
Center
has
a
Hall
within
it,
but
that's
as
far
as
it
goes.
A
Both
have
geographic
information
address
and
contact
details,
but
the
details
of
the
model
is
slightly
different
in
each
case,
but
it
does
highlight
for
me
that
that
we
know
that
some
of
the
data,
the
people
functioning
at
the
moment
might
not
have
details
address
information.
It
might
not
have
geographic
coordinates
so
actually
doing
some
alignment
or
linking
of
existing
data
against
active
places,
might
help
people
bring
in
this
extra
extra
data
into
their
systems,
which
would
enrich
the
information
that
they're
publishing.
A
A
The
mentioned
different
relationship
sites
and
facilities.
Clubs
is
kind
of
wider
scope.
One
thing
that
had
Sally
highlighted
here
was
that
we
don't
currently
describe
any
opening
times
for
places.
I
think
this
support
in
schema
dog
for
doing
it,
but
we
haven't
asked
undocumented,
as
that
is
something
that
people
might
do.
She
was
just
highlighting
that
attaching
opening
times
to
facilities
might
be.
We
need
to
be
clear
on
what
that
means.
A
At
the
moment
we
could
either
define
a
new
active
places,
I
ID
field,
that
people
can
then
publish
the
identifiers
where
they
have
it
for
the
active
based
type.
That
would
mean
a
consumer.
Could
then
look
in
the
active
places,
data
for
additional
information,
so
to
say
both
access,
parking
or
etc,
or
there's
a
slightly
different
approach
to
how
it
modeled,
where,
rather
than
having
a
specific
ID,
we
kind
of
identified
in
it
in
a
bit
more
of
an
indirect
in
a
direct
way.
A
So
we
have
an
identifier,
we
say
what
type
of
identifier
is
and
then
what
the
value
is.
This
is
something
that
schema.org
does
and
the
reason
it
does.
It
is
because
then
schema.org
doesn't
need
to
define
all
of
these
different
types
of
identifiers,
so
it
means
that
other
systems
can
start
to
publish
their
identifier
schemes
which
might
come
from
different
registers
with
information.
A
So
it's
a
bit
more
open
to
extension,
then
so
other
people
have
got
location
databases
that
they
want
to
reference
from
their
opportunity
data
than
they
can
do
so
it
could
be
a
way
to
include
no
identifiers
from,
but
in
a
Foursquare
or
Facebook,
etc.
Assuming
that
there's
an
appropriate
license
around
them,
so
I
think
that
that
would
be
I
think
worth
considering
in
this
next
round
of
special
geishas
as
a
useful
addition.
A
Active
places
has
got
a
lot
of
detail
which
isn't
going
to
be
directly
important
for
describing
events
and
facilities.
The
fact
that
he's
published
on
them
an
open
license
in
well-documented
ways
means
that
people
can
start
to
use
that
in
their
applications
without
having
to
standardize
it.
So
we
can
start
to
use
that
date
model
to
inform
their
work
on
facilities
for
the
outlines,
I
think
within
the
within
the
program.
We
can
be
what's
making
stronger
recommendations
around
use
of
active
places,
data
by
people
who
are
going
to
be
using
the
opportunity
data.
A
It
might
be
useful
to
have
drive
some
specific
discovery
use
cases.
So
you
know
I
just
identifying
that
we're
laser,
centers
are
and
other
locations.
That's
brought
them
in
to
identify,
as
I
mentioned
before,
can
be
used
to
enrich
or
improve
existing
data
sets.
You
know
the
fact
that
the
address
or
the
information
in
their
contact
details,
etc.
It
makes
sense
to
me
that
the
platform
should
be
using
this
rather
than
trying
to
collect
their
own
information
and
again
because
we've
got
we've
got
you.
A
What
are
the
streams
of
work
for
this
years
of
activity
is
around
improving
current
documentation
and
guidance
to
support
developers
and
publishers?
I
think
we
probably
need
to
just
have
a
sit-down
with
bullying
Linda
and
see
if
there's
some
additional
things
that
we
can
do
to
to
support
people
in
using
active
places.
So
they
get
getting
the
most
value
out
of
the
data
that
is
being
published.
A
C
Everything
is
all
round
minimal
dimensions
to
play
certain
sports
and
what
is
actually
quality
certain
things
so
even
down
to
its
two
issues:
around
clearance
for
badminton,
whether
you
can
actually
play
their
minimum
specifications
around
their
so
where
it,
where
the
use
cases
stops,
are
more
important
than
for
those
people
who
are
organized
where
they
searching
for
it.
So
they
will
look
for
certain
things.
We
want
to
find
a
3G
pitch
that
has
floodlights
and
it
does
this.
C
Schools
where
they
want
to
engage
with
its
without
those
schools
to
actually
offer
those
activities,
so
their
different
use
cases,
but
they've
been
driven
by
that
additional
kind
of
information.
So
the
other
things
are
kind
of
remotes
or
obvious
paper.
That's
around
the
opening
times.
Yeah.
You
will
use
our
opening
times.
I
mean
I
open
times
around,
but
if
we
for
things
like
schools,
is
it's
open
at
certain
time
and
the
type
of
actual
asset
accessibility
it
has
and
stuff?
C
So
you
wouldn't
expect
people
to
if
you're
doing
booking,
to
push
out
stuff
when
it's
not
available.
Anyhow,
you
will
use
those
active
places
opening
time
for
that
kind
of
stuff
and
the
other
thing
then.
Certainly
we
talked
about
issues
around
dividing
up
courts
or
particular
pitches,
though
enacted
places
with
example.
How
we
hold
cross
pitch
data
is
different,
that
we
don't
have
individual
IDs
for
each
grass
pitch
because
I'm
a
national
scale
it's
impossible,
because
they
are
remarking
them
out
and
changing
them
over
years.
C
So
we
will
say,
on
the
site
facility
sub
tire
is
full-size
football,
a
five
of
those
pitches.
There's
a
number
five
we're
not
giving
unique
identifiers
to
each
of
those
five
pitches.
Local
authority
should
do
that,
for
that
booking
system
probably
do
that.
But
we
wouldn't
do
that
on
the
confessional
thing,
because
it's
just
too
complicated
to
capture
information.
C
I
mean
from
our
perspective,
you
see
when
we
talk
about
the
opening
hours.
In
fact,
for
a
user
for
one
of
our
people
were
in
speaks
at
centers
were
getting
them
to
update
their
data,
is
always
the
hardest
point
so
actually
connecting
the
I
suppose.
The
timetabling
information
or
information
you'll,
get
out
of
the
Center
for
those
different
facilities
is
very
useful
for
us,
because
that
would
save
a
lot
of
heartache
on
some
of
that
capturing
that
data,
but
also
it's
very
actually
for
understanding
how
those
centers
being
used
for
us
as
an
organization.
C
It's
kind
of
very
that
we
very
useful
data.
It's
data
that
we
struggled
to
get
out
of
people
at
the
moment,
because
all
self
and
multiples
are
consistent.
That
yeah
there's
a
definite
it'd,
be
more
of
a
kind
of
that
long-term
development
of
how
we
can
actually
join
some
of
this
stuff
together.
More
so.
B
I
think
identify
is
currently
being
used
in
a
number
of
data
sets
for
representing
the
internal
ID
from
so
just
flagging
that
that's
specifically
quite
useful
thing
for
the
booking
scenario,
because
that
internal
ID
is
the
thing
that's
been
used
to
pass
through
to
any
native
booking
calls,
often
to
reference
that
particular
thing.
So
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
way
that
those
two
things
can
play
together,
almost
allowing
it
to
have
an
internal
ID
represented
as
well
as
whatever
other
references.
A
A
So,
if
we're
going
to
move
to
allowing
this,
then
we
need
to
think
about
what
it
means
for
existing
data,
and
it
may
be
that
using
this
approach
it
might
be
simpler
and
we
just
deal
with
the
fact
that
there
may
be
additional
place.
Databases
down
the
line
to
just
have
a
bit
more
understanding.
Those
way
to
do
it,
I'm
kind
of
mindful
at
the
time,
because
it
needs
to
wrap
us
up
three
today,
but
has
anyone
got
any
other
feedback
on
active
places
or
on
the
early
discussion
around
facilities.
A
If
then,
he
does
occur
to
you
afterwards
then
feel
free
to
drop
me
an
e-mail
or
start
a
discussion
on
the
mailing
list
so
that
we
can
start
to
get
more
people
involved
in
terms
of
our
next
calls
and
events
that
we
are
running
a
workshop
at
the
ADI
offices.
Next
Wednesday.
If
you
are
interested
in
participating
that
ant
already
signed
up,
then
I
suggest
dropping
me
or
Nick
an
email.
B
A
A
Those
suspicions
on
the
the
next
call
that
we'll
be
having
here
on
the
31st
of
January
will
be
to
recap
some
of
the
things
that
we've
learnt
in
that
workshop
and
also
give
people
who
couldn't
attend
in
person
the
opportunity
to
feed
in
their
requirements
and
into
the
description
as
well
and
I.
Think
they're,
looking
ahead
to
February
I.
Think
I
had
activity
list
in
here
from
before,
but
it
may
be
that
we
focus
on
booking
depend
on
where
the
energy
is
in
terms
of
driving
things
forward.