►
From YouTube: OpenActive W3C Community Group Meeting / 2020-06-03
A
A
A
C
D
E
F
A
A
A
A
A
A
In
a
medium
complexity
scenario,
we
have
say
three
tennis
courts
available
through
a
single
organization,
it's
possible
to
book
those
in
say,
60
minutes
slots.
However,
one
of
those
is
distinguished
from
the
others
by
being
the
main
court
and
is
more
desirable
for
booking
and
maybe
has
a
different
rate
associated
with
it
than
the
other
tennis
courts.
And
then,
in
the
most
complicated
scenario,
we
have
say
a
large
central
hall
in
a
sports
facility
which
could
be
configured
for
two
badminton
courts:
two
tennis
courts,
one
basketball,
court
or
multiple
play
spaces.
A
A
Arriving
at
a
correct
modeling
of
this,
the
original
approach
was
to
have
something
called
facility
use
which
covered
the
sort
of
most
generic
situation.
So
you
might
say,
tennis,
court
and
access
through
that
model
would
give
you
access
to
anyone
of
say
three
tennis
courts,
but
it
was
assumed
that
the
end
user
and
the
facility
were
not
that
interested
in
which
of
those
three
was
assigned.
A
A
Recently,
Nathan
used
I
think
closest
to
the
actual
implementation
of
this
kind
of
thing
had
a
bit
of
a
dialogue
with
Nick
on
one
of
the
github
issues
and
indicated
to
that.
As
far
as
you
were
concerned,
Nathan,
if
I
read
you
rightly
essentially,
the
most
granular
modeling
was
what
was
preferred
there.
A
So
in
fact
you
could
do
away
with
the
upper
layer
of
abstraction
and
simply
model
all
of
the
individual
individual
facility
uses
and
forget
about
the
layer
of
abstraction
on
top
saying
here
are
all
of
our
tennis
forms
here
are
all
of
our
badminton
courts.
However,
that
seemed
to
evolve
a
discussion
whereby
the
individual
facility
uses
do
end
up
being
aggregated
but
kind
of
as
a
physical
location,
rather
than
being
aggregated
as
something
in
a
more
general
class
called
facility
use.
C
C
But
you
can
also
potentially
group
it
by
activity
the
problem
with
grouping
and
by
activity
is,
then
you
don't
have
any
of
that
information
about
where
it
is.
So,
if
you've
got
all
of
your
football
pictures,
some
of
them
might
be
indoor
some
of
my
be
indoors.
Some
of
them
might
have
different
surfaces.
So
when
we
were
designing
our
system,
we
basically
decided
that
the
most
granular
approach
is
the
most
appropriate.
Because
then
the
client
can
decide
where
the
subdivision
needs
to
take
place
where
the
aggregation
needs
to
take
place.
Err.
A
C
B
I
understand
and
in
the
issue
Nathan,
we
vote
I.
Think
your
example
was
Indoor
Sports,
Hall,
Farmington,
ABCD
outdoor
pitches
and
the
space
that
is
the
indoor
sport
school.
That
already
exists.
I
guess
in
the
model
is
that
right,
yes,
okay,
great
and,
and
is
the
the
type
of
activity
that
we're
talking
about
balancing
versus
football,
is
that
modeled
at
the
level
of
sports
will
I
assume
not
it's
the
balance
in
a
level?
Is
it
yeah,
as
fountain
Ayers
got
the
activity
because.
C
B
C
B
B
Does
map
on
to
facility
use
in
terms
of
we
could,
as
you
say,
as
long
as
we
group
by
location,
space
and
activity,
you
can
create
a
pseudo
facility
news
out
of
that
yeah
group
thing,
so
I
think
that
the
thrust
of
my
question-
and
it
was
more
in
the
direction
of
the
reasons
we
had
some
to
use
in
the
first
place.
I'm.
B
House,
the
other
I
supposed
right
so
when
I
so
exactly
so
so
in
looking
at
this
github
issue,
I
actually
went
back
to
the
w3c
call
direct
two
years
ago,
when
we
agreed
to
use
facilities
and
individual
facilities
to
kind
of
remember
what
the
logic
was
at
the
time
and
I
actually
they've
got
everyone
present.
Well,
every
organization
present
on
this
call
was
present
on
that
call
and.
B
And
the
the
main
reasoning
for
having
facility
use
was,
if
you
imagine,
a
search
search
results
page
where
you
want
to
search
for
abandoned,
includes
accords
at
7:00
p.m.
on
Tuesday.
You
kind
of
probably
want
to
list
the
results
by
the
facility,
rather
than
all
the
location
rather
than
by
the
individual
courts.
So
you
kind
of
you
want
your
search.
Results
should
probably
be
you
know,
ledger
Center,
a3
and
listen
to
be
caught
whatever
in
insight,
so
you're
kind
of
your
search
results,
so
they
just
sent
a
level.
B
Maybe
do
that
with
with
location
actually
probably
without
needing
to
worry
about
it
at
the
facility
use
level,
but
I
think
the
idea
was
that
that
that
would
be.
That
would
be
useful
and
then
out
of
the
back
of
that
came
the
conversation
with
about
booking
systems.
Some
booking
system
has
managed
this
at
the
aggregate
level.
For
example,
legend
legend
slots
are
managed
at
the
facilities
level,
not
the
individual
facilities
level,
whereas
Gladstone
is
managed
at
the
individual
facilities,
not
the
cell,
to
use
level.
B
So
then,
basically,
then,
therefore,
if
we
have
both
types
of
systems-
and
it
sounds
like
system
maintenance
describing
is
the
individual
facility
is
similar
to
Gladstone,
then
because
both
exists
has
a
way
of
representing
that
the
opportunity.
So
a
number
of
spaces
in
that
sorry
number
of
slots
at
a
particular
time
and
the
can
be
booked
so
ABC
and
so
will
need
to
figure
out
a
way
in
that
search
results.
A
B
But
then,
but
then,
even
in
thinking
about
that
kind
of
fill
will
actually
does
it.
Does
it
needle
alignment?
Can
we
not
just
represent?
Can
we
not
just
have
the
search
results
page
include
both
because
if
it
includes
individual
facilities
and
facilities,
then
when
there's
an
individual
opportunity,
you'll
see
call
a
Corby
court
see
and
in
the
results,
and
when
you
haven't
got
that
level
of
granularity,
it
would
just
come
through
as
Amazon
Court
available
I
book
now
so
I
guess
Mike
yeah.
So
it's
kind
of
thinking
from
the
search
side
really.
B
Is
there
a
use
case
where
we
actually
need
to
worry
about
mapping
these
two
things
together,
or
is
it
just
the
case
that
kind
of
whichever
form
they're
presented
in
you
just
go
ahead
and
book
through
that
form?
When,
therefore,
what
that
would
mean
is
the
main
rule
is
every
booking
system
needs
to
choose
one,
you
can't
do
you
shouldn't
do
both,
or
at
least
your
slots
should
only
exist
in
one
or
the
other.
So
if
you
have
a
individual-level
slots,
you
should
use
individual
facilities
and
your
slot
should
exist
in
there.
A
And
is
there,
is
there
a
sort
of
a
problem
with
the
domain
that's
actually
being
modeled?
Is
there
is
the
problem
with
reality
in
the
sense
that
would
it
sometimes
be
the
case
that
somebody
might
want
to
book
the
facility
rather
than
an
individual
facility
use?
So
if
we
have
say
main
Sports
Hall
and
then
we've
got
a
bunch
of
activities
that
are
subdivisions
of
that
and
somebody
yeah?
How
do
how
do
we
deal
with
that
situation?
A
C
A
A
A
B
B
That's
what
the
booking
system
and
as
soon
as
you
start
to
try
and
create
that
representation.
You
know
in
a
more
compatible.
You
need
to
put
all
these
rules
in
place
so
that
you
can
meaningfully
say
that's
booked
to
these
things
that
no
longer
available,
and
when
you
start
doing
that,
then
it
all
gets.
It
gets
really
hairy.
B
So
the
decision
last
time
was:
let's
keep
it
simple
at
the
product
level
and
if
it
starts
to
get
out
of
hand
with
the
number
of
requests
and
updates
that
happen,
then
then
that's
something
to
look
at
them.
Given
that
the
you
know
like
fast
impedes
and
legend
feeds
and
the
number
of
facilities
they
have
as
soon
as
when
you
get
to
the
end
of
the
feed,
which
is
like
two
days,
it's
14
days
ahead
of
bookings
that
two
days
behind.
B
So
when
you
get
to
the
end
of
the
feat
which
is
I,
guess
16
days
of
slots,
it's
actually
quite
quick
to
keep
up
to
date
because
minute-by-minute,
you
don't
have
that
many
updates
of
these
things.
So
even
even
you
know,
paging
every
few
seconds
with
500
items
on
a
page.
If
someone
books,
I
mean
the
the
volume
you
need
to
get
to
to
have
a
this
is
is
higher
than
the
biggest
of
the
facilities
that
existed
right.
A
B
D
B
Used,
generally
speaking,
this
is
Toto
to
take
a
real
example
right,
if
you,
if
it
was
the
same
price
to
book,
a
community
center
for
a
half-day
or
now
or
something,
and
in
that
community
center,
you
could
pull
out
the
kit
for
bands
and
you
can
pull
out
the
kit
for
whatever
you
wanted
to
pull
out
right.
Then.
That's
an
example
of
this
is
the
same
price.
Everything's.
The
same
description
is
the
same.
It's
a
multi-use
facility
in
the
true
sense
of
the
word.
B
That's
a
good
example
where
you
might
have
more
than
one
activity,
but
in
this
case
with
ledger,
centers
and
places
where
you
generally
need
to
know
what's
being
booked
because
they
set
it
up
and
tear
it
down
afterwards,
then
that's
where
most
products
tend
to
actually
have
a
single
activity
associated
because
they
want
to
know
what
the
legend
says
wants
to
know
whose
booking
badminton
versus
squash
right
versus
table
tennis
in
the
same
in
the
same
space.
So
if.
A
Sorry
I
missed
part
of
that,
so
it's
supposing
you
had
one
facility
that
could
be
used
for
badminton
or
for
tennis,
say,
and
those
were
identical
courts
ignoring
some
restrictions
there.
So
then,
in
that
case,
that
would
just
be
represented
as
a
sink
as
two
separate
facility
uses.
Is
that
the
intention
then,
if.
B
They
had
different
prices
and
they
were
separately
bookable.
Then,
yes,
right,
okay,
well
more
the
more
if
they
were
separately
book'll
rather
than
different
prices,
if,
if
the
thing
you're
booking
it,
when
we
are
modeling
reality
in
that
it's
the
product,
we're
modeling.
So
if
the
thing
you're
booking,
if
the,
if
the
thing
you
call
up
reception
and
say,
can
I
book
X
genuinely
is
more
to
use?
So
can
I
book
the
poor
for
12
o'clock
and
they
don't
care
what
you
do
with
it,
because
all
the
bits
are
in
there?
B
D
I
ask
a
really
stupid
question,
or
maybe
it's
not
so
stupid,
but
a
simple
question,
maybe
is
I,
have
no
idea,
but
is
this
managed
on
the
data
publisher
side
in
that,
if
I
know.
D
B
B
D
I've
also
been
lost,
you've
been
talking
kind
of
messaging,
my
Craig
Mark,
who
leads
on
active
places
around
how
they
model
multi-use,
but,
having
listened
to
more
of
the
conversation,
I
think
what
they
don't
almost
care
about
is
how
it's
actually
used.
It's
more
a
case
of
what
there
is
so
I.
Don't
think
that
really
relates
to
this
issue.
I
can
chuck
it
either
in
the
chat
or
on
the
github.
B
B
B
B
So
the
way
this
will
be
represented
usually
is
either
well
I.
So
I'll
take
the
assumptions
of
working
under
from
what
I've
just
said
earlier
around
one
or
the
other
right,
so
both
isn't
an
option
right
now.
So
if
you
represent
this
using
facility
use,
you
wouldn't
see
this
screen,
you
would
just
see
tennis
court
and
practice
wall
and
they
would
be
your
two
options
and
you
either
either
choose
the
tennis
court
or
practice
school
and
then,
when
you
get
there,
they
tell
you
which
court
you've
booked.
C
B
I
think
I
think
well,
this
is
try,
and
so
what
I
said
earlier
about,
maybe
picking
one
or
the
other.
This
is
trying
to
combine
both.
So
in
this
example,
your
slot
contains
individual
slots,
which
is
why
I
think.
Actually.
This
is
probably
flawed,
because
in
this,
what
this
is
trying
to
do
is
find
out
find
some
homogeneous
representation
that
would
work
across
every
system
where
you
can
kind
of
choose
to
represent
one
or
the
other
or
what
that
would
mean
for
you
guys
is.
B
What
what
then
do
you
does
that
stop
you
doing
anything
basically
like
if
you
can
imagine
having
having
lots
of
feeds
that
you're
pulling
data
from
I
mean
Nathan.
You
might
already
have
to
solve
this
I
don't
know
because
some
of
the
feeds
already
facility
fees
have
got
so
it's
using
them.
So
I
guess
how
how
we
reconciling
that
pulling
data
which
is
facility,
use
and
pulling
data,
which
is
individual
facility
use
and
then
I
guess.
B
Mm-Hmm
Tim,
this
is
gonna,
be
a
bit
shameless,
in
apologies
for
those
on
the
call
that
are
not
part
of
play
finder,
but
that's.
It's
got
a
good
interface
that
might
be
good
to
test
this
with
and
Tim.
Would
you
mind
just
going
on
play
finder
and
searching
for
tennis
at
7:00
p.m.
and
this
will
hopefully
give
us
the
actual
problem.
C
B
B
This
is
what's
happened,
then
you
can
see
how
this
has
worked.
Both
ways
so
I
think
facility.
This
being
a
facility
is
view,
was
an
input
into
the
previous
decision-making
around
this
plus
legend,
making
this
obvious
both
sides,
so
you
wouldn't
so
to
be
clear,
then
even
without
I
thought
we
were
gonna
need
a
different
example,
but
just
using
this
example,
we
still
need
to
be
able
to
map
from
individual
facilities
to
facility
use.
For
this,
then,
potentially.
B
To
do
the
aggregation
effectively,
what
that
means
is
on
the
search
side,
we'll
need
to
create,
like
a
su,
do
like
facility
you
slot.
Won't
we
just
I
mean
because
each
of
these
is
that's
what
one
of
these
is
so
so
you're
looking
at
the
top
you're,
basically
looking
for
every
time,
you're,
looking
at
three
o'clock
of
other
facilities
and
you're,
taking
all
the
individual
slots
available
and
you're
kind
of
creating
one
from
them,
yeah.
C
B
Can
I
just
check
Tom
cuz
you've
had
some
thinking
about
this
as
well.
In
your
view
of
an
interface
that
books
facilities,
would
you
do
this
like
it's
presented
here
with?
Would
you
be
able
to
pick
which
court
can
you
hear.
F
F
C
Agreed
interesting
because
the
thing
he
wants
to
know
which
court
is
the
user
doesn't
really
mind
right.
So
that's
so
that's
probably
where
legends
come
from
their
model
yeah.
So
if
you
start
at
the
venue
manager,
then
you
basically
go
as
granular
as
possible.
But
if
you
start
at
the
end
user,
like
we
did
with
play
finder,
then
you
get
kind
of
the
most
general
model.
Okay,.
B
A
B
So
I
probably
should
be
represent.
Other
voices
on
the
call
so
MCR
active
would
would
do
want
to
have
the
abilities
of
chooser
court
for
their
product.
Well,
they
want
to
ensure
that
you
get
the
same
experiences
you
get
on
on
the
gladstone
or
the
website
their
own
website,
as
you
would
on
their
website.
B
So
they
don't
want
to
if
someone
so
and
I'm
friend
of
Mines
dad
plays
and
has
played
for
a
long
time
and
badminton
every
week
and
he
likes
a
specific
court,
because
the
lighting
in
there
in
the
sports
hall
is
such
that
if
you
get
the
wrong
court,
then
you
kind
of
get
blinded
by
and
he
gets
a
headache
so
for
that
regular
user.
That
court
is
really
important
and
that's
and
it's
it's
so
I'm
pulling
on
different
things.
But
that's
why
MCR
that's
the
kind
of
use
case.
B
Mc
I
have
in
mind
when
they're
saying
they
want
to
be
able
to
offer
the
same
functionality.
So
I
don't
know
if
we
can
get
rid
of
it
completely,
because
I
do
I.
Do
expect
that
but
there'll
be
other
reasons
why
you
want
one
court
over
the
other
right.
But
if
you
know
a
venue
well,
for
example
in
this
for
squash
courts-
and
you
know
that
you
know
for
is
actually
was
built
after
the
others,
and
you
know
he's
a
bit
sketch,
you
probably
avoid
it
make.
D
If
otherwise,
maybe
there
are
ways
but
I'm,
not
sure
how
you
would
me,
but
if
you
know
that
there
are
three
courts
available
as
the
venue
and
you
would
need
to
know
which
ones
are
an
artbook,
because
if
then,
let's
say
two
of
them
are
booked
and
one
of
them
isn't
and
someone
turns
up
on
the
day,
you
kind
of
need
to
know
which
ones
are
are
and
aren't
available.
It
might
not
matter.
I
can
agree
that,
for
most
most
users
won't
care
which
court
they
get
picked,
or
they
definitely
that
I
can
see
there.
D
A
B
A
B
On
the
github
issue,
if
you,
if
you
scroll
I,
did
I
realized,
there's
a
proposal
actually
in
November,
which
has
got
some
code
in
it,
which
might
be
quite
useful
if
you
maybe
scroll
to
that,
which
is
the
second
comment
in
the
issue
and
this
this
is
actually,
if
you
go
down
a
little
bit
further.
This
is
showing
an
exact
example
of
what
it
would
look
like
to
include
both
in
your
feed,
so
you've
got
there
an
individual
slot
inside
the
slot,
and
so
we've
got
both
shown
and
so
I
guess
just
the
more.
B
We
talk
about
this,
the
more
what
I'm
wondering
here
is
I
guess
we
said
at
the
beginning:
it
would
be
complicated
for
systems
to
surface
both
probably
much
easier
to
service
one
or
the
other,
but
that
pushes
the
problem
into
the
aggregation
layer
right
into
whoever
it
is
that's
pulling
later
and
playing
it
together.
So
we
end
up
in
another
another
normalize
problem,
which
is
something
that
obviously
other
effective
use
cases
struggled
with
is
bringing
together
different
types
of
data
because
of
the
flexibility
in
the
model.
So.
F
So,
just
to
jump
in
I've
just
had
a
quick
look
over
our
kind
of
wireframes.
For
this
we
have
it
kind
of
represented
in
two
ways.
So
at
the
availability
level
it's
the
facility
use
and
then
once
you
go
through,
you
can
select
the
kind
of
the
court
or
the
pinch
number.
So
that's
how
it's
represented
on
our
side
right.
B
B
B
A
Yeah
that
has
the
benefit
of
being
sort
of
a
standard
approach,
in
that
it's
more
of
a
better
word
another
consumer,
but
I
suppose,
if
they've
lifted
a
very
similar
burden
in
the
past
with
regard
to
scheduled
session
and
session
series,
and
that
kind
of
thing,
then
it's
not
quite
as
onerous
as
you
might
think.
Yes,.
B
I
mean
the
focus
has
always
been
to
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
the
publisher,
because
they're
the
ones
which
are
the
most
difficult
to
convert
right.
Every
user
is
very
happy
to
crack
on
when
given
enough
commercial
incentives,
as
this
is
all
about
booking
here,
isn't
it
and
but
but
yeah.
That's
that's
been
the
reason.
So
I
guess,
if
you
know,
if
we
think
about
having
a
conversation
with
Gladstone,
to
go
and
do
this
or
legend
and
do
both
and
how
much,
how
long
that
were
taking
are
complicated.
B
That
would
be
and
all
the
rest
of
it
it
might
be
worth
keeping
it
simple
just
so
that
we
can
get
this
stuff
into
those
systems
without
any
additional
complexity
and
then
and
then
I
and
then
I
feel
like
maybe
in
well
in
that
in
the
in
the
open
source
Harvester
and
in
you
know
in
maybe
in
the
documentation.
We
make
it
really
clear
how
you
do
that
grouping,
how
one
could
store
the
data
so
that
that
grouping
would
be
easy
to
do.
For
example,
yeah.
A
A
C
A
A
A
B
But
then
I
mean
to
be
honest,
if
you
I'm
just
thinking
about
how
that
would
look,
if
you,
if
you
have
a
search
results
page,
you
would
have
the
search
results
by
whatever,
whatever
slot
was
available
right,
you
would
just
you
would
just
list
out
the
slots,
and
if
those
slots
were
individual
facilities,
there
would
be.
That
would
be
what
they
were.
If
there
were
facilities,
that
would
be
what
they
were
instead.
So.
C
Yeah,
my
only
slight
common
is
I've
just
had
a
quick
check
and
it
seems,
like
individual
facility
uses
a
subclass
of
facilities.
Mm-Hmm
is
that
intentional?
In.
B
B
B
So
so
here's
a
thing
right,
I,
don't
think
anyone
has
so
far
tried
to
actually
do
this
in
real
life.
No
one's
tried
to
combine
individual
facilities
in
the
civil
I
used
to
guess
that
are
currently
working
at
this
they've
already
done
the
work
so
changing
it
would
be
more
work.
It
sounds
like
smaller
systems.
I
mean
you
guys
right
now,
both
working
on
this
building
this
stuff
into
your
into
your
functionality.
B
So
I
wonder
if
it
is
it
worth
as
kind
of
revisiting
this
conversation
a
little
bit
further
down
the
line
when
we
realize
we
have
to
do
this,
combine
it
because
I
feel
like
when
we
actually
come
to
do
the
work
it's
so
this
is
quite.
This
is
conceptually.
It
feels
like
it's
quite
easy
to
do,
but
I
feel
like
when
we
get
there.
We
might
remember
this
call
anything.
C
B
F
D
A
Okay,
so
I
think
we're
just
about
done
at
this
point.
The
only
other
issue
that
was
raised-
I've
already
referred
to-
and
this
was
just
the
sheer
volume
of
updates
that
can
be
created
in
this
with
multifunction
spaces
and
that
kind
of
thing
so
not
really
a
concern
about
the
modeling
as
such,
but
a
concern
more
just
about
the
fact
that,
if
you
do
have
say
one
multifunction
space
with
a
lot
of
different
configurations,
you
end
up
having
to
issue
a
lot
of
updates
if
I
understood
the
issue
conclusion
correctly
Nick.
A
B
Yeah,
that's
right.
This
was
a
very.
This
was
much
more
of
a
theoretical
concern,
so
it
was.
It
was
more
about
yes
exactly
and
the
video
is
the
one
reference
there.
So
so
yeah
it's
it's
really
it's
one
of
those
things
and
I
think
everyone
looked
at
and
thought
wow
combat
or
an
explosion.
That
sounds
crazy.
That
there's
no
way
we
can.
B
We
can
deal
with
that,
but
actually,
in
reality,
there's
only
so
many
ways
you
can
use
a
space
right,
I
mean
most
people
only
use
it
for
five
or
six
things,
and
even
then
you
know
not
the
same
time,
necessarily
so
the
number
of
times
that
you
can
book
five
aside
and
that
takes
out
Amonson.
You
know
it's
not
necessarily
that
flexible,
so
yeah,
it
just
hasn't,
been
an
issue
and
and
the
resulting
data
volumes
from
the
big
systems.
With
you
know
two
hundred
and
fifty
sites
across
the
UK
which
is
GLL
right.