►
From YouTube: OpenActive W3C Community Group Meeting / 2022-11-09
Description
A public hangout for members of the OpenActive W3C Community Group.
For more information visit: https://www.openactive.io/w3c-community-group.html
A
Welcome
and
thanks
for
joining
the
w3c
community
group
call
for
openactive,
so
this
usual
domestics,
the
mic's
on
mute,
please,
if
you're,
not
speaking,
just
to
limit
the
background
noise
and
we
are
recording
the
session.
So
if
that's
no
good,
please
leave
now
and
yeah.
Just
a
quick
reminder.
If
you
haven't
already,
please
join
the
the
w3c
group.
A
It
takes
a
few
clicks,
but
it
is
important
and
it
shows
everyone
agrees
to
work
in
the
open
and
then
choose
that
you're
on
the
mail
on
this,
which
simplifies
keeping
everyone
informed
and
today
we're
going
to
focus
on
the
data
quality
in
Urban
Active,
picking
up
from
the
work
we
we
spoke
about
a
few
weeks
ago
with
we
had
the
data
quality
code
from
Office
of
national
statistics,
join
us
call
and
explain
a
little
bit
about
data
quality
action
plans.
A
You
want
to
ex
we're
following
a
data
called
it
called
the
action
plan
process
we're
going
to
explore
some
of
the
critical
data
fields,
ensure
that
what
we're
having
the
specification
is
sufficient
for
to
meet
that
Discovery
use
case
and
then
explore
data
quality
metrics
around
those
critical
data
fields,
so
explore
how
we
can
report
on
data
quality
over
time
to
help
us
identify
any
actions
or
identify
what
they've
done
to
kind
of
improve
their
quality
over
time,
with
a
view
to
hitting
that
use
case
to
delivering
on
that
use
case
and
then
I'll
explore
some
next
steps.
A
Beyond.
This
call
so
data
quality
action
plans
and
we
heard
from
ons
and
we're
the
approach
we're
going
to
take
data
quality
framework
for
open
active
is
based
on
that
action
plan
approach.
Basically,
action
plan
approach,
the
way
they
describe
it
is
around
focusing
on
the
purpose
of
the
data
and
why
you've
collected
and
why
you're
hoping
to
to
to
work
with
it
rather
than
just
looking
at
the
data
you've
got,
and
you
know
which
is
really
tempting
and
I
I
almost
did
exactly
that.
A
Just
dive
in
and
look
start
looking
at
the
classic
data,
quality
dimensions,
completeness
and
consistency
and
all
those
kind
of
things,
but
take
a
step
back
from
that
think
about
the
the
purpose
of
the
data.
What
are
you
trying
to
achieve?
Ask
those
questions
and
what
do
you
need
to
achieve
those
purposes?
And
what
can
you
say
about
those
things?
A
A
Does
that
make
sense
at
what
could
review,
and
so
they
also
talked
about
this
idea
that
you
can
get
a
selection
of
metrics
from
the
data
and
then
measuring
them
over
time.
You
did
a
rag
status
right,
Amber,
green!
You
can
imagine
that
and
then
you
can
look
at
each
different
use
case.
We
have
the
discovery
use
case
which
we'll
focus
on
today,
and
you
might
find
that
yeah,
you
you've
got
great
quality
for
that,
and
this
is
to
move
away
from
just
saying
that
the
date
is
good
or
bad.
A
In
such
general
terms,
you
focus
it
related
to
each
use
case,
so
maybe
we've
got
some
areas
to
work
on
in
the
booking
and
when
we
look
at
some
new
use
cases
like
social
subscribing
or
whatever
it
might
be,
we
find
it
they're.
A
So,
let's
just
summarize
and
I
think
what
we're
going
to
achieve
today,
or
hopefully
we're
going
to
make
start
on
that.
That's
okay,.
A
So
we
took
that
from
scratch,
and
you
just
start
with
that
that,
in
order
to
meet
the
Discover
use
case,
we
need
to
etc,
etc
and
work
through
an
exercise
like
that.
But
we
we
there's
already
so
much
work
been
doing
on
this
and
we
have.
We
have
an
existing
data
model,
so
we
could
just
dive
in
and
look
at
the
the
data
model
and
the
spec
we've
got.
A
So
this
is
an
exercise
that
Chris
has
been
through
already
and
if
I
put
this
Link
in
the
chat,
you
should
be
able
to
open
that
up
and
see
for
yourself
in
a
little
bit
more
detail.
But
Christy
just
want
to
explain
what
we're
looking
at
here.
C
Of
course,
sorry,
if
it's
in
the
chat
or
not
yet
that's
fine,
no,
it's
not!
Essentially
what
I've
done
so
on
the
previous
slide.
Howard
showed
that
you
have
the
data
model,
that's
from
the
modeling
opportunity,
spec,
and
so
what
I've
done?
If
you
just
go
back
a
slide,
sorry
for
yourself,
so
this
slide
here.
So
if
you
I
don't
know
if
you're
able
to
zoom
in
a
little
bit
just
so
we
can,
if
you
go
to
the
the
box
in
the
middle
event,.
C
Okay,
no
worries,
but
anyway,
the
box
in
the
middle
is
events
so
in
there
in
that
model,
is
giving
you
all
of
the
obviously
the
fields
that
we
want
to
say
in
the
data
when
it
when
it's
going
to
get
a
transferred
across
now
it
doesn't
break
down,
though,
on
there
what's
required,
what's
recommended
what's
optional,
so
if
you
go
back
to
the
next
slide,
sorry
Howard!
So
what
I've
done
is
just
on
this
slide
here
and
in
the
in
the
pack
or
there's
the
spreadsheet.
C
That's
in
the
chat
now
I've
just
taken
those
boxes
and
I've.
Just
then
highlighted
so
the
green
ones
will
be
your
what's
required.
The
Orange
is
what's
recommended
and
then
the
sort
of
blue
purple
is
what
is
optional
and
then
from
that
it's
then
a
case
of
then
deciding
amongst
the
community.
Are
these
the
right
ones?
Are
these
the
ones
that
should
be
required?
Are
these
the
ones
that
should
be
recommended?
Now?
These
are
the
ones
that
should
be
optional.
Should
we
be
thinking
about?
C
You
know
rearranging
the
importance
of
what
ones
are
going
to
come
through
in
order
to
meet
both
the
use
cases,
but
they're
making
sure
that
as
we
follow
it
all
through
that
the
data
quality
is
where
it
should
be
at
every
stage
of
the
data
life
cycle.
So
there's
just
a
you
know,
start
for
10,
just
a
bit
of
a
mapping
exercise
just
to
highlight
what
elements
are
there
what's
required?
What's
recommended?
C
What's
optional
and
like
I
said,
if
you've
got
the
link
open,
you
can
see
I've
mapped
it
all
the
way
across
for
each
of
those
boxes
that
you
saw
in
the
previous
data
model.
There's
some
that
haven't
got
colors
highlighted
that
just
means
that
there
isn't
anything
further
down
in
the
spec
So
within
the
spec,
as
it
goes
through
obviously
explains
in
a
bit
more
detail,
and
it
has
a
examples.
Doesn't
it
and
then
you
have
a
box
that
then
shows
you
what
is
required?
C
What's
recommended
what's
optional,
so
if
you
for
argument's
sake,
organization,
image
and
address
hasn't,
got
a
color,
because
it's
then
not
highlighted
later
on
in
the
table
from
what
I
can
see.
But
then
you
have
a
little
bit
further
down
where
I've
got
not
in
the
model,
but
on
the
table.
There's
telephone
same
as
an
identifier
are
in
the
the
table
saying
these
are
recommended,
but
not
highlighted
at
the
top
of
the
data
model.
So
do
we
want
to
have
that
consistency
in
the
spec
that
everything
is
all
in
that
one
place?
C
A
That's
great
thanks,
Chris
I
think
when
I've
expanded
the
this
bridge,
you
know
I
see
it
does
it
does
go
right
along
and
so
I
think.
Just
for
now,
we've
got
if
people
have
got
the
link
to
spreadsheet
Can.
Anyone
confirm
is
it
opening
for
people
outside
the
ODI?
A
Yes,
yeah,
that's,
okay,
all
right
so
I
mean
it's
a
Google
Sheets
you've
got.
You
can
I
think
you
can
add
a
comment,
yeah
yeah.
So
so
you
know
if
there's
anything
as
we're
chatting
along,
if
you
want
to
add
a
comment
that
would
be
that'd,
be
fine,
but
I.
Think
we'll
just
scan
through
some
of
these
green
items
is
an
easy
route
in
these.
Are
things
we've
identified
as
essential
and
we're
just
sense
checking
that
we're
meeting
that
use
case
for
the
discovery.
A
So
this
is
someone
in
an
activity
finder
or
you're,
using
using
the
tools
to
be
able
to
discover
what's
happening
local
to
them
and
you
know
bear
in
mind.
We
want
that
to
be
a
positive
experience
to
get
them
help
them
find
an
activity
suitable
for
them
to
get
active
so
start
at
the
start.
I
guess
with
the
events
you
know
to
your
mind,
to
my
mind,
I
think
we
need
to
know
what
is
the?
What
is
the
event?
What
is
the
activity?
A
And
URL,
so
someone
who's
been
around
a
bit
longer
can
give
me
help
me
out
here,
is
that
maybe
Nick
is:
is
that
a
link
to
an
individual
identifier
URI
for
that
event,
or
is
that
like
a
public
face
in
yes,.
E
Yeah
that,
yes,
that's
right,
that's
a
public
facing
sorry.
The
URL
is
the
public
facing
page
that
user
can
access.
E
Yeah
exactly
that
URLs
consistently
used
across
all
the
all
the
objects
to
say
this
is
where
you
can
find
more
information
about
the
thing.
So,
if
you're,
a
user,
finding
that
event
on
say
the
Paris
book
website,
they
click
on
that
URL
on
the
parisport
website
and
they
would
land
on
the
page
of
the
original
organization.
That's
publish
that
data.
E
F
A
The
name
Common
Sense,
yeah
description,
optional,.
C
B
Well,
description
is
recommended,
I
mean
yeah
on
open
sessions.
We
push
really
hard
for
people
to
write
descriptions
but
I,
guess
it's
class
subjective
on
what's
considered
a
good
quality
description,
yeah.
E
E
If
you
don't
have
a
on
put
it
on
a
list
of
times
that
it
starts,
you
don't
have
a
name,
then
you
can't
describe
it
and
if
you
don't
have
a
URL,
then
it's
like
you
can't
you
can't
send
it
anyone
onwards.
From
that
point,
you
can't
actually
have
an
activity.
You
can't
show
it
in
a
search
because
you
don't
know
how
to
categorize
it.
If
you
have
an
offer,
you
can't
there's
no
price,
so
you
can't
sort
by
Price
or
anything
like
that.
E
So
it's
they're
very
functional
things
rather
than
the
kind
of
descriptive
things
based
on
the
idea
that
those
things
are
kind
of
core
to
an
experience
like
the
most
basic
experience
that
you
might,
you
might
decide
to
build
using
the
the
stuff.
So
it's
not
a
that.
That's
why
there's
a
kind
of
separation
between
the
validator
that
validates
what's
required
from
a
kind
of
you?
You
know
what
the
system,
what
any
any
integrating
system
would
expect
to
be
there.
E
You
know
and
can
rely
on
as
a
minimum,
and
what
from
a
data
quality
perspective
we
want
to
say
is
something
that
we'd
like
to
see,
and
you
know
various
use
cases
have
different.
You
know
requirements
for
level
of
other
fields
that
it
might
include
so
kind
of
just
separating
that
idea
of
like
this.
E
What
we've
got
here
is
the
system
basic
required
like
bare
minimum
set,
as
opposed
to
you
know
what
a
particular
like
parasport,
for
example,
would
ask
organizations
that
are
integrating
to
obviously
provide
relevant
accessibility
information-
that's
not
required,
but
for
the
parasport
use
case
it
would
be
so
when
they're
asking
people
to
open
up
data,
they
would
be
saying.
Can
you
can
you
please
do
this,
and-
and
we
previously
have
there's
been
some
work
started
in
the
community
previously
to
kind
of
to
come
up
with
those?
E
What
are
the
fields
for
the
different
use
cases?
It's
kind
of
ended
up
in
a
spreadsheet?
That's
Loosely
used
now
with
new
Integrations
to
say
this
is
a
spreadsheet
that
someone
that
could
be
familiar
with.
These
are
the
these
are
the
fields
that
generally
are
being
useful
in
in
places,
but
that's
not
that's
very
different
from
for
more
required.
That's
helpful,
no.
A
That
is
helpful,
but
I
think
we
would
maybe
my
the
use
case.
I've
highlighted
the
discovery
is
just
too
broad,
you
know,
and
we
need
to
think
of
so
I
think
one
of
the
one
of
the
things
sport
England's
came
to
see
is
that
we
make
it,
but
it's
perceived
that
it's
hard
for
the
small
Publishers
to
get
started
and
I
think
so.
This
idea
of
sense
checking
the
minimum
is
required
from
us
from
that
perspective,
for
a
small
Publisher's
activities
to
be
discoverable.
A
That
could
be
one
thing
to
focus
on
and
I
wonder.
Is
there
such
a
difference
between
the
system
requirements
and
the
kind
of
most
basic
minimum
user
experience?
A
You
know
that
a
small
business
publisher
might
want
to
provide
May,
I
I,
don't
think
it's
necessarily
a
huge,
a
huge
difference.
Where
is
it?
What
is
it?
Who
can
go,
what
what
it
will
cost
Etc?
A
But
of
course
you
mentioned
the
the
kind
of
accessibility
requirements
for
the
disability
Sports,
and
that
is
something
it's
definitely
in
Focus
in
the
community
in
the
coming
months,
probably
next
year.
By
now,
of
course,
we
will
we
will
be
exploring
that
further,
but
this
is
this
is
more
about
honing
in
on
that
on
that
core
minimum
viable
data
asset,
that's
going
to
allow
that
discovery,
so.
E
I
mean
just
so
sorry
back
a
step
on
that
out
you're
when
you,
you
say
that
the
driving
force
point.
This
is
there's
a
perception
that
the
data
is
too
difficult
to
publish
for
small
providers.
So
is
that
something,
like
you
know,
a
small
provider
using,
for
example,
open
sessions?
There's
too
many
fields
being
asked
of
them?
Is
that
what
that's
about
I
think
it'd
be
really
good
to
get
to
the
bottom
of.
A
I
think
that's
the
the
sense
that
I
had
that
you
know
that
in
our
in
in
you
know,
open
data
institutes,
kind
of
approach
to
this
work.
The
set
you
know
which,
which
was
a
phase
of
work
set
out
before
I,
joined
the
ODI.
So
you
know
I'm
picking
picking
that
up.
Was
it
the
test
that
perception
that
the
spec
is
is
not
overly
odds
you
know,
and
that
so
you
know
to
provide
reassurance,
it's
more
difficulties.
These
are
the
minimum
Fields
you
need.
A
Nothing
stands
out
in
the
green
sections
as
being
overly
owners.
F
How
can
I
just
make
guns
make
comments
I'm
just
struggling
with
this
a
little
bit
because
I'm
trying
to
work
out
if
the
items
are
great
at
the
minimum,
what
value
they
actually
deliver
so
anybody's
going
to
be
consuming
those
because,
looking
at
the
list
in
column,
A
I
know
that
our
solution
float.
Multiplayer
delivers
just
about
nearly
all
of
those
if
I'm
over
rightly,
and
we
still
have
requirements
from
our
clients
who
want
more
to
make
the
salute
their
Solutions
work.
So
I'm
just
trying
to
work
out.
E
Well,
I
think
that
was
oh
sorry,
I
didn't
say
that
that
Stephen
is
absolutely
what
I
was
trying
you
you've
expressed
it
better
than
I
did
in
terms
of
the
system
required
versus,
what's
actually
needed
that
that's
right
this.
This
is
a
list
of
the
basic
system
requirements,
not
what
clients
are
looking
for.
E
B
A
I'm
asking
I've
started
with
the
question:
are
they
are
the
green
ones?
Sufficient
or
you
know,
are
the
green
ones
complete?
Do
we
have
everything
we
need,
but
you
know
the
other.
The
other
side
is
certainly
true.
What
else
should
be
there
and
things
that
we've
got
is
optional?
If
we
want
to
provide
a
positive
experience
based
on
that
minimum
viable
product
should?
Should
we
get
enough
with.
D
A
Description,
for
example,
is,
is
optional
or
recommended
the
Orange
is
recommended.
Isn't
it
is
enough
to
say
that
start
date
and
time
I
just
recommended.
E
So
maybe
I'll
I'm,
sorry
I'm
not
being
very
clear
here,
but
because
these
are
system
level
requirements,
the
use
cases
themselves
will
will
need
the
different
will
need
more
as
Stephen's
saying
so.
Clients
will
need
more,
depending
on
what
client
is
asking
for,
depending
on
what
use
cases
they're
interested
in
right,
they'll
be
asking
for
more
stuff.
So
there
is
a.
There
is
a
a
thing.
E
That's
that
would
be
really
helpful,
which
is
to
Define
what
particular
use
cases
need,
so
that
implementers
can
decide
which
use
cases
they're
aiming
to
to
meet
in
respect
to
those,
but
the
the
so
that
that's
a
slightly
different
conversation
to
what's
on
the
screen.
E
What's
on
the
screen
is
the
system
minimum
and
so
I
would
be
I
would
suggest
we
probably
don't
want
to
add
any
more
required
fields
to
what's
on
the
screen
without
like
a
like
system
based
reason,
and
the
reason
for
that
is
that
at
the
moment,
if
anyone
builds
something
that
hasn't
got
a
green
thing
in
you
know,
then
it
will
fail,
like
the
validation
completely.
So
you
can't
like
it's
not
you
know,
it'll
fail,
test,
Suite
or
fail
stuff,
and
that's
that's
designed
so
that
it's
you
know
this
is
the.
Without
this.
E
You
can't
even
get
off
the
starting
box.
Nothing
will
work
kind
of
level
of
thing,
but
as
Steven's
saying,
clients
obviously
want
a
richer
experience
and
that's
a
different
thing.
So
and
it's
and
it's
if
we
say
something's
required
a
user
experience
level,
we
probably
shouldn't
be
failing
everything
in
the
kind
of
way
that
we
fail
things
that
are
this
basic.
E
If
you
see
what
I
mean,
because
that's
a
different
type
of
problem,
it's
about
making
sure
that
if
people
don't
have
descriptions
that
they
can
be
added
or
maybe,
but
we
want
to
really
avoid,
which
is
what
happens
if
we
put
too
much
required
stuff
in
it
at
this
level?
Is
people
start
faking
data
just
to
pass
the
validator?
You
know
they
add
fields
and
they
put
hard-coded
values
in
just
to
make
sure
that
it
gets
through.
Even
though-
and
they
put
to
do,
come
back
to
you
later.
A
I
understand
that
and
I
think,
but
that
does
actually
you
know
that
is
helping
us
come
towards
the
the
answer
that
we're
looking
for
today,
which
is
which
of
these
fields
do
is
I
mean?
Maybe
the
colors
are
now
a
distraction,
and
but
you
know
which
of
these
fields
do
we
think
are
required,
no,
which
of
these
fields.
Should
we
monitor
over
time
and
comment
on
you
know?
A
So
if,
if
a
description
adds
to
the
experience-
and
we
can
come
up
with
some
kind
of
commonsensical
measure
of
what
is
a
good
description,
then
these
are
things
we
can
report
over
time.
B
Can
I
can
I
just
add
something?
Okay,
just
to
say
yeah,
so
totally
agree
what
Nick
was
saying,
for
example,
in
open
sessions.
A
lot
of
these
are
required
from
five
years
from
our
side,
but
look
at
them
all
specifically
and
Nick.
Correct
me
from
wrong,
but
not
having
the
end
date
as
required.
That
leads
to
partial
schedules,
I
think
I'm
going
to
get
to
be
looking
at
partial
schedules.
B
I
think
book
went
particularly
had
partial
schools
in
the
past,
which
has
been
caused
us
some
issues
from
an
end
user's
perspective,
because
we
don't
know
when
it
it
could
be
in
2040
that
it
stops
there's
no
end
date
in
it.
So
we
can't
verify
that
data.
So
if
we
are
making
any
changes,
complete
I
think
the
end
date
is
actually
a
required
field
for
data.
If
that's
one
thing
that
we
could
look
at.
E
Yeah,
so
we
could.
We
could
certainly
talk
to
that.
So
the
the
end
day
is
is
required
for
certain
subsets
of
data
and
we'd
have
to
look
at
the
details.
So
Event
Event
has
displayed
on
on
the
slide
is
event.
Is
the
most
generic
abstraction
of
an
event
of
a
thing,
whereas
a
schedule,
a
scheduled
session
is
the
kind
of
more
detailed
thing
or
duration.
E
So
we've
had
comments
from
organizations
such
as
British,
Triathlon,
I,
think,
along
the
lines
of
events
that
don't
have
a
clear
end
date
and
you
know
forcing
people
to
come
up
with
durations
the
things
where
that
doesn't
necessarily
make
sense,
and
that's
what's
Driven,
that
for
the
most
generic
version,
but
I
think
the
thing
to
be
interesting
to
look
at
I'm
just
telling
I'm
going
to
quickly
dive
into
the
dev
docs
and
confirm
it
is
what's
required
for
the
specific
types
for
a
course
for
a
session
Etc,
because
that's
probably
more
only
what
you're
you're
referring
to
there
and
scheduled
sessions
is
a
slightly
different.
E
Sorry.
Partial
schedules
is
a
slightly
different
problem,
definitely
worth
a
discussion,
but
I
think
might
be
different
to
this.
In
terms
of
data
quality
and
that's
more
about
there
is
the
capability
within
the
spec
to
provide
a
schedule.
That's
not
100
accurate
for
systems
where
they
don't
have
the
capability
to
provide
expert
schedules
and
that's
that's
to
allow
more
systems
to
participate
in
the
ecosystem,
and
that
definitely
is
problematic
because
you
know
without
a
clear
schedule
how
on
Earth.
E
Do
you
tell
the
customer
what's
happening,
but
that's
that's
where
some
systems
are
in
their
kind
of
you
development.
So
but
that's
maybe
a
separate
thing
to
pick
up.
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
depart
that
or
you
know
or
put
that
as
an
agenda
item
for
another
time.
It's
a
really
good
conversation.
F
D
A
The
kind
of
user
experience,
memories
or
that
use
case
Discovery,
and
so
on
that
just
head
back.
A
Stand
out
I
want
to.
A
For
the
event
and
started
for
the
schedule,
so
is
that
Scott
day
programs
we'll
say
starting
July
2020?
It
ends
at
some
point
in
the
future.
Maybe
it
doesn't
have
an
end
date,
whereas
the
schedule
is
it's
on
a
Wednesday
at
2
p.m
or.
D
E
I
think
Howard
your
something's
going
on
because
we're
only
hearing
a
sentence
every
few
seconds
and
then
it's
going
quiet
again.
So
we
didn't
hear
all
of
what
you
were
saying
to
stuff
right.
C
I
mean,
while
it
goes
off
just
to
find
a
microphone
so
just
in
terms
obviously
of
the
spreadsheet
that
I
pulled
together
and
it
covers
I
completely
understand
the
point
there
and
I
think
I.
Think
I
had
the
educated
guess
that
these
would
be
more
minimum
system
requirements.
C
I
wasn't
making
the
suggestion
that
we
start
making
more
requirements
on
here,
because,
obviously
your
end,
that
would
mean
you
know
putting
more
through,
obviously
the
validator
and
then
just
getting
like
you
said
we
don't
want
I,
don't
know
fake
day
to
come
in
through
or
whatever
just
to
you
know,
pass
the
testing
phase,
but
it's
more
supposed
to
start
for
10
to
say:
look,
here's
a
list
of
you
know
fields.
That
is
what
we're
looking
for
this.
Is
this
on
the
right
lines.
Should
this
be
required?
Should
this
be
recommended?
C
Should
this
be
optional?
Should
everything
be
required?
You
know,
is
there
or
is
there
items
on
here
that
are
potentially
missing
to
then
have
a
full
set
of
fields
that
then
we
could
measure
in
terms
then,
if
data
quality
going
forward
in
terms
of
you
know
the
you
know,
your
completeness
and
your
timeliness,
etc,
etc.
So
that's
the
sort
of
the
reason
behind
putting
the
you
know
having
this
as
a
starter,
taking
it
from
the
from
the
spec.
G
But
I
suppose,
on
the
back
of
that
Chris
sorry,
this
is
Andy
from
Gladstone
a
close
Nick.
It's
it's
probably
more
of
a
case
of
how
did
yourselves
get
to
the
point
of
what
was
deemed
as
required
versus
potentially
what's
optional
in
the
in
the
opportunity.
G
Feed,
then
that's
driven
through
into
what's
then,
can
be
consumed
if
we
can
get
sort
of
gauge
of
that
to
maybe
how
that
came
about
and
as
Chris
is
saying
you
know,
maybe
there
is
a
time
that
we
maybe
need
to
maybe
refresh
what's
that,
but
obviously
that
that
may
have
a
consequence
on
the
validation
models
and
that
sort
of
thing
as
well,
but
you've
obviously
gone
through
an
exercise
to
get
where
we
are
right
now,
maybe
I
don't
know
I
might
be
wrong,
but
maybe
that's
a
point
to
look
at.
G
So
you
know
what
we've
got
in
a
moment.
What,
in
theory,
as
Stevens
indicated
through
the
development
string,
there
is
a
set
requirement
to
the
validation.
What
we
have
to
pass
through
at
the
moment,
which
may
differ
to
what
we're
seeing
on
here,
but
then
that
might
be
down
to
the
need
of
the
top
clients
we're
working
with
versus,
maybe
at
the
other
end
of
the
scale
or
the
mineral
data,
and
he's
trying
to
find
that
happy
part.
But
I
think
what
you're
saying
Nick
is
that
for
the
validation.
There
is
a
set
criteria.
E
E
Probably
you
can
go
back
and
watch
the
videos,
because
they're
probably
still
online
we're
talking
about
28
I,
don't
know
it
was
17
18
or
something,
and
there
was
a
there-
was
a
consultation
through
all
these
fields
and
the
decision
around
which
ones
were
the
core,
as
as
I
mentioned
a
little
bit
earlier,
is
driven
by.
What's
the
bare
minimum,
that's
necessary
to
drive
a
search
experience
over
this
data,
that's
meaningful
and
I
know
that
sounds
like
it
might
be
a
bit
subjective.
E
So,
to
give
you
an
example,
without
a
start
date,
you
can't
search
for
something
that's
happening
a
particular
time,
and
you
also
can't
tell
someone
you
know
when
it
might
be
happening
when
they
actually
want
to
turn
up
without
a
location.
It's
not
that
useful
to
someone
to
know
where
it
is
even
like
a
basic
level.
Without
an
organizer,
it's
not
possible
to
know
who's.
E
Actually,
putting
on
the
session
without
an
activity
you
can't
search
for
across
a
number
of
different
data
sources,
a
particular
thing
like
yoga
and
the
Activity
one
sport
England
were
quite
Keen
to
push
and
I
think
they
were
right
in
doing
so
at
the
very
beginning.
E
That's
something
that
the
initiative
takes
quite
seriously,
as
they
saw
the
disparate
data
that
we
have
across
the
sector
as
being
a
key
problem
that
needs
to
be
solved,
so
they
were
a
key
driver
on
the
activity
list
and
that
being
that
and
then
on
offers
around
the
price,
and
without
that,
it's
difficult
for
someone
to
know
whether
it's
something
that's
appropriate
for
them
to
go
to
or
not,
and
if
you
know,
and
and
also
sorting
by
price
and
and
those
type
of
things,
and
so
that's
that's
where
those
things
came
from,
it
wasn't
driven
from
a
a
kind
of
a
hypothetical
user
experience
per
se
as,
like
you
know
what
it,
although
it
does
sound
like
some
of
that
relates
to
kind
of
hypothetical
user
experience.
E
It
was
more
what's
the
minimum
like
if
you
take
any
of
those
things
out,
does
the
data
still
make
sense?
You
know
if
you
take
a
location
out,
we
just
say:
there's
yoga
happening
at
seven
o'clock.
Does
that
make
sense
you
know?
Is
it?
Is
it
something
that's
useful
and
that
that's
the
type
of
test
that
was
was
being
applied.
A
Sorry
about
that
that
was
helpful.
I
think
you
know
it's
in
terms
of.
Is
it
the
right
time
for
for
a
refresh
of
these
things
only
if
it
makes
any
in
any
sense
we
we
we're
exploring
what
work
needs
to
be
done
on
the
validator
to
ensure
that
they're
up
to
date?
Anyone
relate
those
connect,
those
to
the
test,
Suite
more
more
in
a
more
integrated
way,
and
so
you
know
we
are
creating
some
resources
to
work
on
on
the
valid
data.
A
So
if
there
are
changes
to
these
things,
they
could
be
reflected,
but
I
think
going
back
to
the
going
back
to
the
the
use
case
Discovery.
We
know
these
are
minimum
system
fields
to
allow
a
basic
search
query
over
the
data.
That
might
not
be
a
particularly
good
experience
as
Stephen
says,
that
is
that
minimum
version
really
worth
it.
A
So
when
we
come
to
talk
about
data
quality,
we
want
to
go
beyond
just
taking
the
boxes
to
get
through
the
validator.
So
you
know
what
what
do
we
want
to
know?
I
suppose
we
need
it's
things
like
start
dates
and
times
valid
they're.
Not
you
know,
10
years
in
the
future
or
in
the
past
that.
A
To
measure
on
a
more
regular
basis,
is
there
anything
like
that
that
comes
out
I
think,
and
we
mentioned
the
activity
list.
I
think
I
do
think.
That's
an
important
data
asset
that
we
can.
We
can
potentially
do
more
with
in
the
in
the
initiative.
So
right
now
the
the
kind
of
mandatory
things
on
there
are
the
the
title
and
the
concept
a
linking
back
to
the
activity
list
vocabulary
so
I
think
Chris
in
your
exploration.
You
found
that
there's
some
variations
there
or
some
inconsistencies
so.
C
C
Had
a
look
through
some
data,
just
as
you
know,
to
see
if
there's
any
evidence
of
any
particular
I,
don't
know
irregular
repeated
data
quality
issues,
you
know
I
mean
you
could
like
with
most
things.
You
know
we
know,
data
is
never
going
to
be
100,
but
obviously
we
want
to
try
and
get
as
close
as
we
can
to
it.
But
you
know
I
can
see.
There
are
some
issues
around.
You
know
completeness
within
the
data.
You
know
some
fields
that
are
missing.
C
That
apparently
are
required,
so
I'm
not
sure,
obviously
how
they've
managed
to
get
through,
but
I
I'm,
not
too
sure
on
the
data
that
I've
looked
at
if
it's
quite
old
and
it
has
been
fixed
since
then,
but
I
mean
this
goes
back
to
I,
don't
know
if
anyone's
you
know,
when
you
go
through
the
testing
phase,
everything
obviously
goes
through
and
it's
all
fine
and
signed
off,
obviously
I'm,
not
too
sure
how
the
process
all
works.
C
Nick,
I'm
thinking
back
to
previous
roles
I've
been
in,
but
then,
when
you
get
through
to
you
know
when
they
go
live
and
they
start
passing
live
data
through.
You
know,
surely,
obviously,
that
those
required
films
should
then
still
come
through,
but
so
I've
noticed
that
you
know
some
required.
Fields
were
missing
just
a
bit
of
inconsistency
around
some
providers,
you
know,
provide
you
know,
completing
fields
that
others
aren't
now
it's
not
around.
You
know
the
required
Fields,
but
around
recommended
do
we
want
everyone
to
really
try?
C
You
know
to
get
that
data
quality
as
high
as
we
can
do.
We
want
people,
you
know
sorry
and
the
data
to
be
exactly
the
same
across
the
you
know,
so
that
we
can
measure
those
metrics.
You
know
more
efficiently.
C
A
bit
of
you
know
inaccuracy
as
well
around
well.
This
is
I
mean
what
I
found
really
in
some
sessions.
Some
sessions
names
were
saying
gym,
session,
50
minutes.
This
was
in
the
name,
but
then,
when
you
looked
at
the
time,
the
duration,
it
said
one
hour
now,
we've
obviously
got
some
inconsistency
there.
So
you
know
it's
picking
up
on
those
little
things
there
making
sure
that
okay,
if
you're,
going
to
put
a
time
in
the
name,
make
sure
Italy's
up,
obviously
to
the
duration.
C
So
those
are
just
a
few
things
that
kind
of
stood
out,
but
is
that
things
that
we
should
be
measuring
is
that
you
know?
Is
this
a
concern?
Is
this
an
issue
that
people
have
seen
in
their
data
and
obviously
I,
don't
know
just
what
I've
sort
of
founder
I
need
to
obviously
have
conversations
with
the
community
I
think,
even
if
you
say
something
or
yeah,.
F
Yeah
Chris
just
pick
up
that
comment.
That's
interesting,
one
to
call
out
yeah,
it's
interesting
one,
to
call
out
actually
that
that
specific
example,
because
a
lot
of
The
Operators
will
schedule
activities
that
are
less
than
the
hour,
but
they'll
actually
program
them
to
be
to
take
up
an
hour
on
the
system.
Oh
okay,
so
therefore
you
yeah,
so
you'll
share
to
the
class
to
take
place.
It'll
start
at
one
o'clock
and
the
end
time
on
the
system
will
be
two
o'clock,
but
actually.
F
F
That
example
isn't
isn't
it's
a
good
one
to
call
out
as
as
the
way
the
operators
us
use
the
system
and
I
would
practically
put
that
in
place
in
order
to
attract
customers
in
to
do
activities,
but
then
you
get
this
disparency
that
you've
just
called
out
which
I
recognized,
but
nevertheless
it's
we've
got
reasons
for
doing
it.
Yeah.
A
I
think
that's
it
taking
off
some
of
those
kind
of
little
queries.
You
know
that
that's
not
a
is
it
a
difficult
issue.
It's
a
way
of
ensuring
people
got
time
to
get
in
and
out.
You
know
it's
now
a
slot
effectively,
but
those
are
you
know,
good
good,
to
kind
of
build
out
a
pitch
of
of
the
practices
behind
the
data.
I
think
that's
the
you
know,
and
and
that's
how
that's
the
whole
purpose
of
this
exercise,
but.
A
F
You
know
we're
the
ones
to
deal
with
the
customers,
we're
the
ones
that
deal
with
customers
that
turn
up.
So
if
you
start
an
activity,
five
minutes
late
for
whatever
reason,
because
the
microphone's
not
working,
and
then
you
finish
it
five
minutes
early,
then
the
customers
only
had
50
minutes
out
of
an
hour
slot.
So
therefore,
if
you
only
advertise
it's
50
minutes,
then
the
customers
can't
complain
and
again
that's
a
reality.
Because
that's
what
actually
happens
you
know
so
from
an
operator's
perspective.
A
E
This
is
more
of
an
aspirational
field.
I
think
it's
fair
to
say,
program.
There's
some
work,
that's
been
done
to
take
to
Les
Mills
classes,
for
example.
E
This
was
in
discussions
with
Les
Mills
ages
ago
to
populate
a
directory
of
those
classes
with
the
relevant
images
and
videos
and
all
the
content
that
Les
Mills
provides
to
anyone.
That's
using
those
classes
as
and
as
licensed
them
within
their
Center
and
the
the
program
allows
for
the
so
it's
it's
allows.
It
allows
the
reverse
lookup
experience.
E
So
if
you're
Les
Mills-
and
you
want
to
see
all
of
your
programs
across
all
the
different
centers
where
they
appear
you
can
describe,
people
can
link
to
that
and
say
this
is
a
Les
Mills
program
and
then
then
you
can
either
find
all
the
Les
Mills
programs
in
the
same
way
as
you
can
come
with
the
activity
list
and
to
find
yoga
in
general
or
the
other
way
around.
E
You
can
see
what
this
program
is
with
the
full
content
available
from
the
from
from,
for
example,
Les
Mills,
and
for
those
that
aren't
aware,
Les
Mills
provides
kind
of
classes
with
their
own
branding.
Very
specific
videos
and
and
everything
around
it.
So
it's
not
just
a
a
hit
class,
for
example,
but
it
would
be
a
very
it'd,
be
body
pump
or
something
which
is
their
specific
brand
of
of
hit
to.
E
So
if
for
people
that
aren't
well,
it's
the
Les
Mills,
that's
the
use
cases,
the
Les,
Mills
type
of
organizations
that
have
licensed
programs-
England
netball-
is
another
one
they
have.
You
know
some
ngbs
have
licensed
programs
that
they
run
I.
Think
yeah
I'm,
trying
to
think
of
what
the
No
Strings
badminton
I,
think
no
strings.
Badminton
is
an
example
where,
in
the
NGB
of
badminton,
runs
a
no
strings
session
which
anyone
can
run,
but
they
they
have
to
kind
of
content
around
it.
A
Yeah,
but
if
you
do
have,
if
you.
D
E
A
E
Yeah,
so
so
it's
worth
saying
that
the
the
the
the
the
things
that
are
described
within
the
object
are
the
minimum
to
make
the
object
useful.
So
exactly
if
you
have
a
program,
you
need
to
at
least
describe
it
with
the
name.
Otherwise
it's
not
useful.
E
A
With
it
and
latitude
and
longitude
on
location
postal
address,
everyone.
E
This
is
an
interesting
one,
because
there's
no
open
Kit,
there's
no
GitHub
issue
relating
to
this,
the
latitude
and
longitude
only
being
required
if
an
address
is
not
specified.
That's
the
that's!
E
The
open,
GitHub
issue,
I
mean
there's
been
taught
discussions
in
previous
calls
around
that
specific
issue
and
why
that
might
be
useful,
but,
but
currently
it
is
I'd
say
this
particular
area
is,
is
a
little
bit
aggressive
in
terms
of
what
it
asks
for,
but
all
the
fields
of
the
address
to
be
present,
which
I
think
people
have
found
might
be
difficult
to
include
especially
I,
think
all
four
Fields,
including
County
or
whatever
it
is.
E
So
that's
that's
an
area
that
we
could,
that
is
in
that
issue.
There's
a
discussion
about
loosening
that
for
that.
For
that
reason.
A
Okay,
so
I
I
think
we
want
to
kind
of
tackle
the
kind
of
second
question
in
the
last
few
minutes,
which
is
around
what
kind
of
thank
you
measures
we
might.
We
might
look
to
to
ex
to
expect
or
to
to
look
for
on
some
of
these
fields.
So
if
I
can
just
get
rid
of
the
shrink
that
one
so.
A
Must
have
a
the
title
preferred
label
from
the
from
the
vocabulary
thing?
Is
there
any
kind
of
measures
beyond
that
kind
of
existence
of
the
data
that
we
want
to
to
look
at
so,
for
example,
activities
should
be
in
the
activity.
The
activity
name
should
be
an
activity
list.
It's
both
I
think
we
do
get
some
coming
through
that
are
that
are
not
in
the
list.
Is
that
I
think
I've
seen
that
in
the
data.
D
E
The
the
requirement
around
the
activity
list
is
that
it
currently
the
validator,
validates
that
you
got
to
use
the
something
from
the
activity
list
if
you're
publishing
data
that
is
reporting
to
be
referencing
the
activity
list.
So
that's
that
check
if
you're
using
activity
list,
you
should
use
the
activity
list
and
therefore
that
means
those
two
things
should
match.
Generally
speaking,
I
think
everyone
uses
the
activist
at
the
moment
at
least
I'm
aware
of
is
using
it
there's
a
recommendation
to
update
every
night
and
a
nightly
basis.
E
So
you
can
make
sure
the
latest
activities
from
agreed
by
that
committee
are
included
so
yeah
and
the
validator
currently
validates
for
those
things.
So
yeah
I
don't
know
if
you've
seen
the
rules
page
within
the
validator.
That
might
be
worth
looking
at
the
rules
page
and
the
validator
shows
you
all
the
rules
that
the
validator
company
runs
against
every
every
feed
that
it
validates
and
the
the
activity
that
is
it
complete
is
it?
E
Is
it
valid
yeah
that
stuff's
all
in
there
at
the
moment
as
a
rule
as
a
series
of
rules,
validated
checks
and,
as
I
said
generally
is,
is
met?
There
is
a
situation
where
the
pref
label
it's
possible
to
specify
activities
where
it
was
possible
in
a
previous
version
of
this,
to
specify
activities
that
are
just
made
up
and
not
related
to
the
activity
list.
E
A
A
You
know
the
rate
there
are
a
range
of
feeds
about
the
out
there.
At
the
moment.
Some
of
them
were
developed
over
time.
Some
of
them
won't
meet
the
latest
version,
so
that
does
feel
like
a
measure.
Then,
if
it
was
possible
to
put
out
some
open
active
data,
Under
The
Heading.
If
not,
you
know,
meeting
that
the
latest
variates
to
the
spec,
then
that's
something
we
can.
We
can
validate
and
explore
I.
E
Mean
this,
this
might
be
a
very
specific
suggestion,
but
the
draw
on
what,
in
the
previous
conversations
we've
had
on
this
in
this
forum
around
age
quality,
so
you've
got
this
required
concept
and
you've
got
the
rules
and
the
validator
that
exists
to
make
sure
the
things
that
are
required
are
required
and
things
that
claim
that
they're
happening
are
happening
and
all
that
kind
of
thing
separate
to
that
you've
got
this
idea,
as
we
talked
about
earlier,
which
is
the
let's
call
it
a
profile,
a
profile
of
the
of
the
fields
that
are
needed
for
a
particular
use
case
and
I
think
this
is
actually
work.
E
That's
been
codified
in
some
form
in
in
previous
work.
What
the
idea
is
the
ODI
is
actually
undertaken,
never
completed
just
but
started
this
work,
and
so
and
the
idea
of
the
data
profiles
was
that
if
you
have
a
data
profile,
for
example,
for
the
discovery
use
case,
let's
say,
but
that
might
include
a
number
of
fields
that
you
could
then
measure
whether
they
you
know
whether
the
data
is
fit
for
Discovery.
Let's
say
it's
all
fit
for
booking
or
fit
for
you
know.
E
X
and
effectively
what
you've
got
is
your
list
of
required
is,
is
more
than
the
validator
is
asking
a
bare
minimum
and,
though,
and
and
having
that
list
so
for
Discovery,
we
need
this
list
of
things.
You
can
then
do
what
this
slide
is
showing
you
can
have
a
measure
of
how
much
of
that
is
being
delivered
by
the
data
publisher.
So
you
can
say
you
know.
The
data
Discovery
use
case
requires
these
20
Fields
to
be
discussed
right.
E
If
there's,
if
there's
an
open,
active
standard
data,
Discovery
use
case
that
people
can
point
at
and
say
we
want
all
of
that
as
a
client,
for
example,
of
of
gll,
they
might
say
we
want
all
of
that
and
then
Jilla
have
to
say.
Well,
we
can't
we
haven't
got
this
or
this
or
this
or
this.
So
the
point
of
the
data
Discovery.
E
Sorry,
the
point
of
the
profiles
is
not
to
for
openactive
to
mandate
anything
over
what
the
clients
may
ask
for
specifically
for
a
central
centralized
perspective,
but
it's
more
because
there's
so
many
there's
such
Variety
in
all
the
different
bits.
But
it's
more
to
say:
there's
something:
we've
got
which
is
kind
of
agreed
on
and
we've
named
it
so
applying
without
really
understanding.
E
In
terms
of
you
know,
they've
come
up
with
a
profile,
a
list
of
things
that
they've
asked
for
and
then
other
people
who
are
implementing
against
what
MCR
I've
asked
for
I've
gone.
Yet
we
can
do
that.
We
can't
do
this.
We
can
do
that.
We
can't
do
this,
and
so
rather
than
representing
this
as
required
in
the
spec,
if
we
represent
it
as
a
profile
and
then
we
what's
on
the
slide
measure
against
it,
then
that
might
be
a
way
of
of
kind
of
achieving
this.
A
A
That's
really
helpful
and
I
think
between
what
you've
just
said
and
Steven's
earlier
comment
that
that
minimum
those
green
things
you
know
what
kind
of
a
search
experience
would
that
be
so
I
think
we've
got
enough
to
go
on
actually,
because
what
we
I
don't
mean
I
mean
Chris
can
do
now
is-
is
explore
those
the
green
stuff's
mandatory.
A
It's
in
it's
got
to
be
in
the
data
to
pass
the
latest
version
of
the
feed,
but
what
we
can
do
is
come
up
with
some
exploratory
measures
for
those
green
and
orange
ones,
and
that's
the
the
the
required
and
recommended.
So
that's
going
beyond
that
bare
minimum
of
the
system
requirements
and
start
to
explore
how
much
of
that
is
being
delivered
by
publishers.
A
If,
if
these,
you
know
and
we'll
just
draft
something
up
based
on
these
orange
and
green
fields
as
for
discussion,
something
to
explore,
but
if
we
think
that
that's
the
right
profile
for
that
enhanced
or
a
good
level
or
the
minimum
experience
for
your
user
in
the
discovery
use
case,
and
that's
a
start
we
can
make,
you
know
we
can
explore
what
that
looks.
A
Like
does
that
make
sense
if,
if
we
come
up
with
some
draft
measures
around
completeness
or
consistency
or
whatever
it
might
be
for
some
of
those
from
the
picking
from
the
green
and
orange
fields
and
we'll
present
that,
as
a
you
know,
a
very
simple
report
or
dashboard
or
something
and
just
see,
if
that
kind
of
adds
any
impact.
A
Or
value
to
to
Publishers
or
data
users,
and
that's
a
good
debate.
G
G
If
we're
looking,
then
to
verify
the
quality
of
the
data
being
passed
by
the
operator,
because
there's
already
highlighting
through
Stephen
and
everyone
actually
can't
be
here
to
know
who
I
represent
but
they're,
obviously
control
of
their
own
data,
because
it's
not
just
use
for
this
this
platform,
it's
also
used
for
their
own
internal
applications
as
well
as
Steven's,
highlight
as
well.
They've
got
their
own
booking
systems
and
those
sort
of
things
kiosks
and
so
on.
So
it's
meaningful
to
the
end
user.
G
So
I'd
I'd
be
a
bit
wary
that
that
this
starts
looking
at
the
quality
of
the
data
being
passed.
I
think
that's
down
to
the
operator
themselves
in
their
quality
of
the
data
good
to
highlight,
but
I
think
to
validating
the
quality
of
what's
expected
and
being
passed
in
the
model
and
the
schemas
I
think
that's
a
good
start
to
be.
F
E
Exactly
I
I'd.
Second,
that
comment
absolutely
from
Andy
that
the
validator
should
be
validating
the
system,
level
stuff
and
the
data
quality
framework.
If
there
is
one
applied
as
we're
just
as
I
I
recommended
a
minute
ago,
that's
something
that
is
applied
to
the
data
after
the
the
implementation
is
complete.
So
it's
not
a
it's.
Not
it's
not
that
the
the
operator
is.
It's
not
like.
E
The
system
is
unable
to
validate
anything
at
all
if
they
are,
if
they're
not
hitting
one
of
those
criteria
so
and-
and
it's
they're
totally
different
things.
So
when
the
system
is
building
the
stuff
they
can
validate
against
the
the
core
Fields
as
as
we've
talked
about
and
when
the
quality
of
the
output
data
is
being
measured.
That's
when
we
use
data
quality
framework
or
whatever
it
is
applied
to
that
with
the
fields
in
the
profile
separately.
E
Built
building
on
that,
the
in
terms
of
that
starter
for
10
for
the
discovery
profile,
I'd
actually
suggest
that
we
we
share.
E
If
you
haven't
already
got
access
to
it,
you
might
already,
but
the
there's
that
profile
that
emerged
from
from
various
places,
as
I
mentioned,
that
spreadsheet
that
we've
been
using,
it
might
just
be
worth
using
that
as
a
basis,
because
that's
something
that's
gone
through
iteration
across
MCR,
the
different
booking
systems,
and
you
can
kind
of
start
with
that
and
say-
and
this
is
the
stuff
that
gll,
for
example,
recently
implemented
and
and
all
the
pilots
and
the
booking
Pilots
that
just
went
through
aimed
for
as
well
as
a
starting
point.
E
A
Excellent,
if
you
can
do
that,
I
think
that
would
be
really
helpful.
Thank
you
very
much.
So
we're
just
about
a
time.
I
I
forgot
to
do
the
register
early
on,
so
if
I
could
just
do
that,
we've
got
Steven
from
gll
myself,
Chris
and
Tim
from
the
ODI
Ollie
from
London's
board,
Andy
Gordon
from
Gladstone
Nick
games
for
a
moment
and
Niche
for
a
moment
also,
and
we
did
have
Tom
Paxton
earlier
I
believe
also.