►
From YouTube: OpenActive W3C Community Group Meeting / 2017-11-15
Description
A public hangout for members of the OpenActive W3C Community Group.
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-openactive/2017Nov/0004.html
For more information visit: https://www.openactive.io/w3c-community-group.html
A
What
I
wants
to
do
this
week
is
to
look
at
the
the
current
state
of
the
data
is
being
published,
so
I've
done
some
very
initial
investigation
to
see
how
well
people
are
conforming
to
the
standards
to
help
give
us
a
sense
of
where
to
go.
Next
I
wanted
to
briefly
discuss
data
harvesting,
which
is
a
topic.
A
That's
come
up
in
a
few
discussions
recently
about
how
to
support
developers
and
hopefully
have
a
maybe
a
bit
of
a
discussion
around
facilities,
data
which
again
is
something
that
I
think
a
few
publishers
are
looking
for
support
for
in
standard,
but
we
haven't
yet
kind
of
bottomed
out
what
the
requirements
are
there.
So
this
goes
very
much
focused
on
sort
of
taking
stock
of
the
current
standards
work
and
where
we
might
want
to
go
next
and
try
to
keep
some
time
at
the
end.
A
So
if
there's
anything
that
anyone
wants
to
raise,
then
we
can
discuss
that
in
the
corn
as
well.
So
there's
a
saying,
I
was
I've
been
doing
a
bit
of
Investigation,
it's
quite
high
level,
initially
just
to
look
at
what
data
is
being
published
so
far.
How
well
people
are
conforming
to
the
standards
and
look
at
how
the
standards
are
being
used
at
the
moment
so
to
see
which
which
aspects
of
the
data
model?
A
For
example,
people
are
using
in
the
published
data,
because
what
I
want
to
do
as
part
of
our
ongoing
work
is
to
drive
some
of
the
decisions
and
prioritization
based
around
both
new
requirements,
but
also
using
some
insight
from
the
data
has
been
published.
So
if
it's
clear
that
people
need
better
documentation
about
how
to
use
specific
features
or
they,
we
need
to
focus
some
of
our
validation
tools
on
supporting
publish
in
certain
types
of
data.
They'd
be
nice
to
do
that,
based
on
knowledge
that
people
actually
help
in
those
areas.
A
So
to
begin
with,
I've
just
been
looking
to
see
how
many
feeds
conform
to
the
paging
specification
and
the
opportunity
data.
So
the
moment
we've
got
20
live
data
feeds
I,
think
they're
staging
for
more
than
one
publisher,
but
it's
there's
20
APR
17
of
them
conform
to
the
specification,
at
least
as
far
as
the
structure
of
the
data
that's
being
returned
in
the
AP
is
the
only
one
that
doesn't
conform
at
women
is
British
Cycling.
There
is
a
book
that's
been
filed
on
their
on
their
data
set.
That
is
a
very
simple
change.
A
There
they're
just
missing
a
license.
Just
rename
one
of
the
keys
in
the
response
and
they'd
be
conformant,
so
that's
pretty
good
state
to
begin
with
that
people
can
consistently
harvest
the
data
that
is
being
used
in
terms
of
the
the
modeling
specification,
it's
more
of
a
mixed
mixed
economy
at
the
moment
and
which
is
not
surprising,
given
that
we,
but
a
number
of
people
started
to
publish
data
before
we
finished
the
standardization
around
the
data
model.
So
at
the
moment
of
the
19
feeds
that
conform
to
the
the
paging
spec.
A
So
there's
a
layer
of
kind
of
validation
and
checking,
but
it's
good
to
see
that
we
have
eight
publishers
using
the
model
already,
the
looking
at
the
other
eleven
feeds
just
to
see
what,
whether
those
was
it
see
where
this
source
of
variation
is.
There
are
a
couple
that
are
actually
I've
just
got
small
errors.
That
would
mean
that
they
be
conforming
to
both
specifications.
So
Wadman
just
has
the
context
property
in
the
wrong
location
in
their
feed.
A
The
other
one
has
just
hasn't
quite
structured,
their
data
pages
correctly,
so
they've
kind
of
mixed
up,
the
paging
spec
and
the
opportunity
model.
So
in
both
those
cases,
I
think
it's
very
simple
changes
required
to
their
API
templates.
In
order
to
fix
that
up
so
with
a
bit
of
encouragement,
we
could
we
could
quickly
get
another
to
added
to
those
lists.
When
I
was
looking
today,
one
of
the
feeds
was
empty.
I,
don't
know
whether
that
was
a
point
in
time.
I'll
see
yeah.
It
was
so
food
yeah.
B
A
Yeah
so
yeah
on
the
we
are:
we've
got
a
developer
who's
working
on
building
an
API
dashboard,
which
I
mentioned
briefly
last
week.
So
one
of
the
things
we're
going
to
be
included
on
the
dashboard
is
the
number
of
issues
that
have
been
reported
against
the
datasets
to
kind
of
highlight
where
there
may
be
known
issues
and
direct
developers
to
look
at
them
so
of
setting
aside
those
three,
the
other
eight
are
using
using
custom
schemas,
basically
and
from
the
review
I've
done
so
far.
They
all
map
very
closely
to
the
opportunity
model.
A
I
was
trying
to
get
a
sense
of
whether
there
is
where
there
was
any
major
gaps
in
what
we've
developed,
but
I
I
can't
see
any
at
this
stage,
there's
certainly
some
variation
in
the
types
of
day
they're
publishing,
so
some
of
them
were
publishing
events.
Some
of
the
feeds
are
focusing
more
on
clubs
or
on
individual
locations,
so
table
tennis
tables,
but
there
is
support
for
all
of
those
in
the
existing
model.
A
There
is
some
use
of
a
couple
of
custom
properties
and
some
properties
that
are
in
our
beat
specification,
so
the
more
kind
of
been
proposed
properties
for
the
community
to
use,
but
most
people
seem
to
be
managing
with
the
core
properties
that
we've
already
defined
I
was
trying
to
get
a
sense
of
what
features
everyone
was
using.
Do
you
start
to
see
whether
we
can
identify
a
kind
of
common
subset
that
we
can
say
that
everyone
should
be
supporting
at
the
moment?
A
Perhaps,
unsurprisingly,
everyone
is
publishing
names,
descriptions,
associating
events
with
activities
identifying
the
organizers
the
offers
associated
with
the
events,
so
that's
pricing,
etc
and
also
its
location
address.
Interestingly,
most
of
them
are
also
identified
using
the
gender
restriction
property
as
well.
I
have
a
looked
in
the
values
of
that,
yet,
whether
it's,
whether
everyone's
just
using
it
and
it's
mixed
opportunities
or
whether
there
is
a
kind
of
gender
focus
to
most
of
the
events.
A
B
Is
that
if
they
do
distance
search
of
events
for
particular
area
of
London,
then
into
our
parks,
because
it's
our
parks
till
next
year
they're
all
events
that
are
individually
listed
out
with
everything
that
they
are,
and
so
their
request
was,
can
Alex
please
align
with
everyone
else
and
use
some
events,
those
between
the
same
event,
that's
occurring
weekly
and
you
said
load
of
events.
So
it
seems
to
be
some
convergence
around
this
idea
that,
if
you've
got
something
recurring,
we'd
rather
punch
them
into
sub
events
rather
than
just
spray
them
across
time.
B
A
A
Most
people
are
doing
it.
We
just
switched
to
the
spreadsheet
I'll
share
these
afterwards,
so
that
you
can
have
a
look
yourself
just
to
explore
where
things
are
at,
but
I've
got
a
spreadsheet
that
identifies.
A
So
I've
got
a
list
of
the
properties,
then
just
reading
across
page
the
total
number
of
publishers
who
are
using
that
property.
In
at
least
one
of
their
at
least
one
of
their
events,
I've
identified
whether
that
property
is
part
of
the
data
model
or
it's
in
the
b2
namespace
or
is
custom,
and
then
he
just
like
three
to
the
publishers.
He
just
says
just
indicates
whether
the
the
properties
in
use,
so
it
means
we
can
construct
deep,
dig
into
to
see.
A
A
The
ones
in
red
are
properties
that
are
custom,
so
they
have
not
been
defined
in
spec
or
anywhere
else.
So
there's
one
publisher:
that's
using
this
disambiguating
description.
One
is
using
a
venue.
Id
one
is
using
yeah
I
think
it's
a
year.
One
is
using
gender
restriction,
but
in
the
wrong
location.
So
that's
a
good
thing,
because
it
means
that
there
isn't
a
whole
set
of
extra
extra
custom
properties
that
people
are
feeling
that
they
need
or
that
they're
drifting
away
from
the
core
standard.
A
The
beta
properties.
A
few
are
using
this
formatted
description
to
include
a
kind
of
HTML
version
of
the
event
description,
but
the
other
properties
are
only
being
used
by
individual
individual
publishers.
So
there
isn't
necessarily
a
kind
of
obvious
alignment
around
some
of
these
as
yet,
so
we
need
to
have
more
discussion
there.
A
So,
as
I
say,
I'll
share
this
out,
so
you
can,
you
can
have
a
look
and
I
also
want
to
put
more
detail
to
get
a
sense
of
how
many
opportunities
are
using
these
these
properties.
So
we
can
understand
where
the
publishers
are
just
using
by
describing
their
events
in
a
consistent
way
or
whether
there's
a
degree
of
variation
in
the
amount
of
information
they
have
about
each
of
the
opportunities
in
putting
together
the
list.
A
One
caveat
is
meeting
point
I,
think
it's
good
Jim
they're
using
the
beta
version
of
this,
so
they
just
need
to
switch
over
to
just
update
their
feed
to
use
the
standardized
version
that
the
attendee
instructions,
the
is
coached
indicator
and
the
accessibility
information
of
the
day
to
day,
obviously
so
far
nobody's
using
those
so
either.
We
need
to
be
highlighting
this
to
publishers
or
over
time,
if
nobody's
using
these
things,
and
maybe
we
just
need
to
drop
them
from
the
specification
I.
Don't
think
that's
the
case
for
the
accessibility.
C
A
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
absolutely
yeah,
so
I
mean
I.
Think
there
are
things
like
like
the
accessibility,
where
we
want
people
to
be
taking
that
time
to
adjust
their
systems
and
kind
of
encourage
people
on.
But
there
are
I
think
that
there's
then
what
we
might
end
up
with
quite
a
mixed
bag
of
other
properties
that
are
being
we've
discussed
are
being
used,
so
we
might
want
to
duplicate
those.
So
I
think
there's
just
two
separate
dsm-4
and
discussion.
A
So
I've
mentioned
properties
not
in
use,
so
that
my
initial
kind
of
can
conclusions
from
that.
Just
quite
quick
review
is,
firstly,
I.
Think
there's
some
a
couple
of
small
changes
that
we
need
to
be
making.
Probably
the
paging
spec
to
include
encourage
people
to
include
some
versioning
and
performance
information
in
the
feeds.
A
We
might
give
us
a
bit
more
insight
into
how
to
strip
to
that
tooling
and
clearly,
if
we
still
have
11
publishers
who
have
not
adopted
the
model,
we
need
to
understand
what
we
should
be
doing
to
support
those
and
create
some
better
documentation
to
support
that
kind
of
mapping
process
for
them
within
the
the
ADI
team.
At
the
moment,
we're
looking
at
that
as
part
of
the
kind
of
learning
and
training
strand
of
the
project.
A
Well,
whatever
we
can
all
collectively
do
to
encourage
the
publishers
to
adopt
the
standards
would
be
good.
You
know
adding
plus
ones
to
issues
where
we've
filed
them
to
ask
father
with
the
publisher
to
ask
them
to
fix
up.
Just
their
feeds
will
be
good.
Just
using
a
kind
of
individual
social
networks
would
be
good
as
well,
so
that
we
just
don't
drive
up
those
numbers
so
that
that
was
my
kind
of
quick
checking
on
the
state
of
the
data,
any
other.
Any
questions
or
observations
on
that.
A
The
way
that
the
ecosystem
is
built
at
the
moment
is
we're
relying
on
data
harvesting
as
a
way
for
people
to
access
the
opportunity
data.
The
reason
for
doing
that
and
design
the
ecosystem.
That
way
is-
and
there
are
a
large
number
of
different
publishers
who
will
be
contributing
data,
so
a
harvest,
and
then
aggregate
approach
makes
sense
to
allow
people
to
pick
and
choose
the
sources
that
they
need
for
their
application.
A
It
does
mean
that
everybody
every
developer
will,
unless
they're
only
using
data
from
a
single
provider,
which
seems
unlikely
that
everyone
will
have
the
same
requirement
of
being
able
to
harvest
data
to
index
it
locally.
So
well
from
a
technical
point
of
view.
Implementer
in
implementing
that
is
fairly
straightforward
and
what
we're
interested
in
in
doing
is
part
of
the
support
we're
offering
to
both
publishers
and
consumers
is
to
see
whether
there
is
interest
in
the
broader
technical
community
about
developing
an
open-source
harvester
we've
had
some
some
initial
conversations
with
various
people
in
the
community.
B
Highlighting
which
there
are
services
and
harvesting
is
the
first
piece
of
that
puzzle
and
so
benefit
is
that
if
they're
large
number
of
organizations
are
sharing,
the
burden
will
help
with
data
to
conform
to
the
standards
more.
So
the
idea
being
that
there's
it's
a
bit
like
using
one
web
browser
to
actually
kind
of
bad
analogy,
but
like
Safari
and
Chrome,
both
use
the
same
engine
underneath
to
access
the
HTML.
B
So
if
you
look
at
the
web
page
in
Safari
or
in
chrome,
it
will
look
quite
similar
and
that's
the
kind
of
thing
we're
saying
here
is
that
aggregators
will
be
able
to
have
this
access
the
same
kind
of
common
engine,
which
means
that
if
someone
puts
some
data
out
there
that's
not
valid,
then
it
will
not
be
valid
for
anyone.
It's
not.
B
B
A
A
A
The
information
they
collect
will
need
to
be
stored
locally
so
that
they
can
then
use
that
as
part
of
their
applications.
So
what
because
then
we
know
that
that
is
going
to
be
a
common,
recurring
piece
of
work.
We
just
want
to
see
whether
creating
a
it
could
be
as
simple
as
a
client
library,
or
it
could
be
that
something
that's
more
more
complete
framework
help
developers
get
through
that
process
quicker,
so
they
can
focus
on
the
application
build
rather
than
the
kind
of
mechanics
of
just
shuttling
data
around.
B
D
A
A
So
I
giving
our
time
to
move
us
on
to
unless
there's
any
other
comments
on
just
to
have
a
bit
of
a
discussion
around
facility
later.
So
this
has
come
up.
I
think
he's
come
up
in
a
couple
of
the
previous
calls
and
I
think
some
of
the
main
missed
discussions
and
I
know.
Nick
has
spoken
to
a
few
people
about
it
as
well
recently,
so
I
just
really
just
wanted
to
get
a
sense
from
people
on
the
call
what
what
facilities
data
means
to
them,
because
it
hasn't
meaning
to
me
by
much.
A
It
was
quite
it's
quite
what
people
are
referring
to
so
I'd
originally
thought
the
facilities
data
was
actually
about
the
kind
of
equipment
and
other
kind
of
infrastructure
that
was
available
at
a
location,
but
I
think
what
people
are
interested
in
is
how
to
communicate
availability
of
equipment
of
squash
courts
or
tables
etc.
As
a
part
of
what
they're
publishing
the
feed
so
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
open
up
and
just
see
what
the
requirements
people
had.
Anyone
was
chipping
any
kind
of
thoughts
on
what
we
need
to
be
collecting
there.
E
What
times
what
times
they
start
taking
bookings,
what
something
they
stopped
taking
bookings
and
each
how
long
this
session
kind
of
runs
for
where
it
is
so
not
too
far
off
for
the
session
stuff
is
just
kind
of
fixed
location,
so
that
I
think
my
co-founder
James
has
been
talking
to
Nishat
I'm
in
a
little
bit
about
what
specifications
we
would
need
for
that.
But
yeah,
it's
pretty
basic
stuff,
but
yeah.
F
That
so
there's
two
bits
of
that:
there's
the
marrying
that
most
facilities
available
and
then
there's
the
issues
within
that
found
configurations
around
pitches.
So
a
sports
hall
could
be
divided
up
into
sports.
All
will
have
will
be
able
to
accommodate
all
bebeto
courts,
a
farside
pitch
basketball.
F
F
We
have
two
badminton
courts
by
the
same
time,
be
running
some
other
activity
around
that
diversely.
Once
you
move
into
biggest
ball
tools,
you've
got
that
six
courts
and
things
above
B
can
have
a
pretty
different
configuration
because
you
can
fight.
You
have
five
side
football
running
along,
of
course,
for
that
badminton
courts
and
you
can
have
the
other
two
Berman
controls
still
playing
badminton.
F
So
all
the
operators
within
a
back
end
systems
will
have
that
configuration
and
if
that's
the
kind
of
conversation
around
pitch
basis,
then
probably
we
need
people
like
by
a
lot
that
configuration
particularly
when
you
come
to
pigeons
and
other
stuff,
because
the
other
one
is
three
that
any
of
the
artificial
pitch
is
another
one.
Where
you'll
divide
that
picture
up
quite
quite
often
in
peak
times
during
the
week,
your
weight
will
divide
that
full-size
3G,
it's
between
75
pitches.
F
B
There's
a
play
football
user-provided,
those
guys
as
well
and
there's
basically
need
to
be
two
ways
to
do
this
at
a
high
level.
Just
to
kind
of
give
you
a
scale
of
the
problem
that
we're
talking
about
the
two
ways
of
doing
it
are
either
we
expose
the
complexity
that
Nick
just
described,
which
is
there
is
one
square.
There
is
one
space
that
can
be
divided
into
three
or
into
five
or
into
seven
or
/
whatever,
depending
on
the
metrics,
and
try
and
put
a
standard
around
that.
B
So
everyone
can
see
how
you
divide
the
spaces
up
and
it
gets
hugely
complicated
because
you
know
a
half
a
basketball
court
is
the
heart:
is
usable,
but
a
quarter
of
basketball
court,
isn't
the
basketball
and
it's
different
for
badminton
and
always
kind
of
stuff.
So
the
rules
around
that
the
business
rules
are
really
complex.
The
other
approach
and
the
one
that
Jaime
favored
for
a
my
local
pitch
is
that
the
and
I
think
Raymond
was
I.
Think
on
the
same
page,
it's
probably
worth
a
further
discussion.
B
Is
that
actually
just
expose
the
offers
as
they
are
and
allow
the
systems
to
do
the
business
rules
themselves?
So
what
that
would
mean
is
instead
of
saying
there
is
one
sports
hall
which
can
be
divided.
Fifty
different
ways
actually
say:
there
are
two
half
badminton
courts:
one
balancing,
sorry
to
half
health
basketball
courts,
one
basketball
court
for
badminton
courts
all
available
and
as
soon
as
you
book,
half
badminton
as
a
half
basketball
court,
then
two
of
the
badminton
courts
disappear.
Who
are
saying
you
know
there?
B
Are
there
a
connected
products
and
the
availability
is
surfaced,
but
the
complexity
behind
that
veil
ability
of
all
of
these
different
configurations
isn't
surfaced
so
that
you
don't
to
worry
about
whether
that
badminton
court
is
in
the
same
place
as
the
basketball
court.
You
just
operate
on
the
basis
of
one
and
that
allows
apps
like
played
Tom
or
a
molecule
pitch
to
just
surface.
B
You
know
a
1/2
basketball
court
or
we
were
in
fact
just
serviced,
the
half
basketball
court
and
I'm
actually
booked,
because
and
because
of
the
complexity
we
just
discussed
extracting
that
data
from
the
system.
So
we
doing
work
with
Gladstone
infusion
that
that
is
actually
quite
difficult
task,
because
you
can
imagine
the
way
that
the
data
is
represented
within
the
system.
It's
a
lot
more
difficult
than
just
the
availability
data,
which
is
there's
a
table.
B
B
F
Agree
you
leave
the
the
operator
is
the
best
person
who
knows
how
they
configure
their
Center
and
release
the
data,
so
you
effectively
releasing
slots.
So
everyone
knows
well,
that's
what
ease
that's
fine.
They
know
they
can
look
above
in
support,
but
good
thing.
The
challenge
is
more
about
when
you
talk
about
opportunity
and
things
like
that,
as
if
operators
will
overly
will
again
push
out
the
things
that
will
make
them
the
most
money,
so
if
they
keep
pushing
it
well,
getting
to
the
point
is
a
tricky.
You
leave
it
too
much
in
there.
F
If
you
only
show
you
what's
there
at
the
moment,
there
is
also
the
opportunity
about
how
do
you
show
that
that
facility
could
potentially
be
booked
for
mentoring
or
could
be
booked
for
basketball?
It's
actually
not
called
there,
because
if
you
are
a
basketball
team
but
you've
sorted,
then
you
want
to
know
that
that
facility
will
offer
that
opportunity,
even
if
you
might
not
find
it
a
challenge.
A
You
know,
but
this
presume
you
there's
a
kind
of
there's
a
way
to
expose
that,
without
necessarily
exposing
all
of
the
complexity.
Around
configurations
I
mean
just
knowing
that
at
a
particular
venue.
These
are
all
of
the
activities
that
can
they're
equal
support
is
one
approach
you
know
just
knowing
that
you
can
do
basketball
in
a
location
implies.
They've
got
a
basketball
court.
A
A
F
B
E
Kind
of
use
case
so
is
there
basketball
here
would
be
a
good
starting
point.
However,
that
information
is
seemingly
out
there
from
what
we've
kind
of
discovered.
Already
it's
more
to
do
with
the
availability
and
from
your
appointment
for
I
think
the
second
option
seems
to
make
the
most
sense
by
quite
far
what
that
would
mean
for
us.
Would
we
just
need
to
know
whether
that
time
slot
was
available
at
that
time?
So
if
I
try
and
put
it
into
perspective?
E
So
if
there's
a
sports
hall,
which
could
take
say
for
badminton
slots
or
if
they're,
if
it
was
one
basketball
court,
it
would
just
show
on
both
kind
of
someone
search,
basketball
or
someone
badminton.
That
says
which
show
on
both
sides
and
as
the
booking,
whichever
kind
of
was
the
first
booking.
Would
the
system
would
kind
of
work
out
what
the
availability
was
I'm,
not
sure
that
sounds
quite
complex
from
your
guys
end,
but
that
would
be
exactly
what
we
would
need
just
to
show
them.
E
A
Think
I
think
so
I'm,
but
I'm
wondering
how
much
of
the
existing
model
actually
covers
this,
because,
if
we're
mostly
talking
about
office,
I
think
we
can
already
say
that
there
is
an
offer
in
a
particular
location
and
that
the
offer
is
valid
from
start
and
end
times.
We
can
stay
with.
The
availability
is
around
that
offer
price.
F
Aside,
seven
aside,
a
nine
aside
or
full
size
and
the
price
will
vary
between
em
in
the
price,
should
tell
you
you
get
our
different
host
all
the
available,
because
you
know
full
size,
pitches
put
them
up
as
an
hour
roughly
so
yeah.
You
know
the
activity
is
there
in
certain
at
certain
activities,
so
some
entities
can
take
place
anywhere
and
therefore
you
that's
where
you
look
in
the
slot.
Other
ones
going
a
lot
very
much
tied
to
a
facility,
the
size
of
the
game,
its
influence.
F
F
B
Kind
of
saying
the
attribute
solves
the
activity
as
well.
I
can
even
see
what
you
know
in
just
looking
at
the
model
in
my
mind's
there
you
could
just
use
snow
events
to
represent
the
slots.
If
you
are
the
activity
list
directly,
then
7
aside
and
just
have
an
extra
cata
creative
activity
in
there
and
then
use
categories
to
represent
the
types
of
pictures.
That
probably
is,
if
I
want
mapping
that.
D
E
A
little
bit
for
me,
Nick,
yeah,
I,
think
it's
not
a
million
miles
away
from
the
session
data
in
terms
of
a
few
nuances,
but
what
I'll
do
is
I
can
share
a
list
of
the
specs.
That
would
be
good
for
our
case
and
see
if
that
matches
up
with
this
session
specs.
But
it's
not
a
million
miles
away
and
except
for
a
few
nuances,
revolving
stuff,
like
surface
type
and
things
like
that,
I,
don't
think
it's
million
miles
away.
E
A
That's
great
I
think
if
we
can
get,
we
can
get
some
concrete
examples
from
you
and
others.
Then
we
can
see
we
can
actually
just
try
it
out.
Oh
well,
how
does
it
look
come
and
put
it
into
the
existing
model
where,
where
we
hit
in
cases
that
we
need
more
properties
or
to
think
through
and
I
think
Nick,
we
could
probably
do
this
same
thing
with
the
active
basis
data.
The
I
know
that
there's
a
there's
a
lot
of
detail
in
some
of
the
facilities
description
that
we
haven't
dealt
with.
A
You
know:
I
keep
coming
back
to
the
the
details.
You've
got
in
there
around
cycle
tracks,
for
example,
so
there's
a
I
think
maybe
just
a
question
that,
whether
whether
we
need
to
incorporate
all
of
that
in
the
opportunity
model
or
whether
it's
enough
just
to
say
okay
places
exists
as
opening
license
data
and
just
putting
people
to
that.
As
you
know,
as
a
resource
rather
than
kind
of
be
publishing,
it.
F
F
A
Interesting,
okay,
I,
the
other
thing
that
I
just
thinking
we
haven't
done
now,
is
documented,
like
how
would
you
example
reference
and
something
that
is
in
active
places
as
a
venue
within
your
opportunity,
data
for
you
to
start
to
come
and
link
those
two
datasets
together
and
for
some
of
you
who
is,
you
know
they
might
be
using
both
sources.
So
that's
something
that
we
include
in
the
documentation.
A
F
C
A
B
Great
to
see
it
just
one
more
thing
to
flag
on
this,
although
the
model
might
match
the
modeling
spec
I'm,
just
thinking
about
the
logistics
and
the
volume
beeping
softly
the
paging
spec,
we
might
need
some
rules
around
what
bits
of
the
model
we
expose,
or
maybe
they're,
not
rules
there.
We
just
let
this
happen
organically,
but
I'm.
Just
thinking,
if
you
imagine
a
the
current
way
it
works
is
that
you
would
push
the
whole
event
with
it.
Sub
events
every
time
that
there's
a
change
made
booking
so
the
availability
updates.
B
If
we
packaged
up
in
the
modeling
spec
without
giving
some
ability
to
almost
say
you
know
the
first
time
you
receive
this,
it's
a
full
model
and
then
maybe
you
only
have
there's
a
partial
there's,
a
way
of
having
a
partial
update.
The
model
I
know
the
mother
took
cause
when
you
do
this
at
the
moment,
but
like
a
you,
you
don't
want
to
pass
the
whole
twenty
products
back
and
forth
every
time.
B
A
A
B
C
A
Would
need
to
be
a
sad
word
is
what
it
looks
like
and
then
what
would
be
the
changes
being
hydrogen?
How
do
you
reflect
that?
Yeah?
Okay,
that's
been
useful.
It
useful
input
and
I'll
follow
up
with
a
couple
of
you.
You
would
Tom
and
Nick
talk
about
active
inactive
places
and
also
on
the
example,
data.
A
A
E
So
yeah
no
I'm
just
actually
looking
at
the
specifications
that
we've
got
on
ours
at
the
moment
and
I
guess,
because
it's
a
fixed
place
which
isn't
really
going
to
change,
so
it
just
needs
to
describe
what
that
space
is.
I
guess
get
some
it
bit
more
complicate
complicated,
and
this
is
course
all
divided,
but
for
say
a
football
pitch
which
is
seven
aside.
E
So,
if
you,
if
it
gets
to
a
point
where
the
providers
say
right,
this
is
our
ideal
format.
This
is
how
we
sell
it
and
there's
a
couple
of
things
in
terms
of
surface
opening
times
and
car
parking
things
like
that,
which
are
fixed
and
now
I'm
going
to
change.
Much
I
think
that
might
be
a
bit
of
an
easier
way
to
display
the
facility
they
on
platforms
like
ourselves.
A
A
A
Okay,
so
we've
got
two
more
calls,
but
I've
scheduled
in
before
the
end
of
the
year,
so
the
next
one
will
be
on
the
in
two
weeks
time
on
the
29th
of
November.
The
main
focus
of
that
will
be
talking
about
how
we
move
the
activity
list
forward.
I
raised
that
last
week,
there's
something
that
we
really
need
to
kind
of
rethink,
how
we're
approaching
it.
A
Also
on
the
29th,
we're
hoping
to
do
a
quick
demo
of
the
API
dashboard
that
we're
currently
building,
and
just
so
you
can
see
how
about
is
developing,
then
the
the
call
after
that
will
be
on
the
13th
of
December
and
there
we
want
to
focus
that
on
booking.
So,
looking
at
what
the
current
landscape
is
around
booking
in
the
sector,
what
API
is
people
are
using
start
the
discussion
around
what
the
climate's
people
have
had
by
that
by
that
call
will
have
done
some
research
of
the
ODI
that
we
can
share
what
we've
learnt.
A
So
we
start
to
have
more
of
a
discussion
and
move
that
that
booking
aspect
forward
as
well
I'll
schedule
the
the
calls
for
the
new
year
in
the
next
week
or
so.
But
those
are
the
kind
of
things
we'll
focus
on
you
know
in
the
end
of
the
year,
activity
list
and
booking
so
I
think
that
for
today's
call
I'll,
hopefully
you
can
get
the
video
up
for
anyone
who
couldn't
make
it
today.