►
From YouTube: OpenActive W3C Community Group Meeting / 2017-11-29
Description
A public hangout for members of the OpenActive W3C Community Group.
Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-openactive/2017Nov/0006.html
For more information visit: https://www.openactive.io/w3c-community-group.html
A
Welcome
everybody
to
latest
call.
There
is
a
couple
of
things
that
I'd
like
to
cover
in
the
agenda
today,
so
the
main
description
will
be
around
how
we
move
forward
with
the
activity
list,
but
I
also
wanted
to
give
a
quick
update
on
some
other
work
that
we've
been
doing
at
the
ODI
around
developer
tools
and
documentation.
And
if
you
have
time,
then
we
can
raise
any
other
issues
that
people
want
to
bring
to
the
group
I'm
hoping
to
get
a
few
of
you
to
contribute
to
the
discussion
as
we
go
forward.
A
A
You
can
see
the
slides,
ok,
yep,
so
so
to
kick
things
off
talk
a
little
bit
the
developer
tools
and
documentation.
So
in
our
call,
a
couple
weeks
ago,
Sally
and
I
shared
some
of
the
thinking
and
research
we've
been
doing
around
how
to
best
support
developers
in
beginning
to
use
the
data
that
has
been
published
by
a
variety
of
organizations.
So
far,
we
feel
that's
quite
important
to
make
sure
that
the
ecosystem
is
growing
in
the
way
that
it
needs
to
to
start
to
drive
a
nice
feedback
loop
between
users
and
publishers
of
data.
A
So
what
we've
been
doing
at
the
ODI
since
then,
we've
been
putting
together
a
road
map
of
content
that
we
want
to
publish
which
I
think
will
go
into
the
website
that
will
include
a
range
of
different
types
of
documentation.
Some
tutorials,
some
general
kind
of
background
information
on
how
we
approaching
building
the
technical
ecosystem,
say
I
think
once
we've
firmed
up.
What
that
looks
like
we
can
share
that
with
the
group
even
get
a
sense
of
exactly
what
we're
going
to
be
producing,
but
just
as
a
couple
of
updates
on
things,
we've
been
doing.
A
One
thing
that
our
learning
teams
been
working
on
is
putting
together
an
interactive
tutorial
to
help
data
publishers
start
to
understand
how
to
structure
their
data.
According
to
the
the
data
model
that
we've
been
recommending,
people
use.
This
is
still
the
kind
of
in
a
kind
of
internal
testing
phase,
so
I'm
just
showing
a
screenshot
for
now.
But
the
way
that
this
will
work
is
there'll,
be
a
series
of
lessons
that
will
take
somebody
through
in
a
kind
of
interactive
way
of
starting
to
express
some
data
using
our
standard
data
model.
A
So
they'll
actually
get
some
practical
guidance
on
putting
together
the
data
that
they
need
to
publish
and
it
will
kind
of
give
them
feedback
on
where
they
make
a
mistakes
or
whether,
where
they're
correctly
following
the
standard
model.
So
we
think
that
will
would
be
a
good
starting
point
for
many
developers.
A
But
to
do
those
who
you
know
don't
have
time
to
wade
through
detailed
specification
and
just
want
to
quickly
start
to
learn
how
to
get
the
most
from
the
standards
we're
creating
the
other
thing
that
we've
been
working
on,
which
we
published
the
first
version
of
yesterday
is
API
dashboard,
and
so,
if
you
want
to
look
at
this
now,
it's
that
status,
open,
active
to
IO
I'll.
Do
a
quick
demo.
A
So
the
first
release
is
quite
quite
straightforward.
This
is
live
now,
so
this
will
be
automatically
updated
whenever
any
new
data
publishers
come
online.
So
right
here,
you
can
see
immediately
see
which
ones
are
conforming
to
this
paging
spec
and
the
data
model.
So
you
can
quickly
kind
of
narrow
down
to
those
that
are
the
conformant.
A
We're
also
surfacing
where
there
are
issues
have
been
reported
against
the
feed.
So
that's
to
help
surface
any
known
problems
that
the
community
have
identified
and
hopefully
encourage
some
of
the
publishers
to
start
to
close.
Some
of
these
down
would
address
comments
that
developers
have
been
reporting,
so
it's
quite
quite
straightforward
to
begin
with,
but
already
provides
a
better
overview
of
the
current
state
of
data
publishing
than
we've
had
previously,
and
the
next
round
of
work
on
this
will
be
to
add
some
summaries
of
each
of
the
data
set.
A
It
may
be
that
we
want
to
surface
more
information,
such
as
volume
or
frequency
of
change
of
some
of
the
data
to
help
people
who
are
building
aggregators
or
more
information
about
some
of
the
detail
of
the
opportunities.
So
some
of
the
suggestions
that
we've
heard
so
far
are
things
like
when
there
is
a
particular
age
range
focus
for
some
of
these
activities,
so
that
if
the
developers
again
interested
only
certain
types
of
opportunity
data,
they
can
more
easily
find
that
those
that
could
be
most
useful
for
their
their
application
development.
A
B
On
that,
it
might
be
quite
helpful
to
also
show
the
available
types
of
data
so
to
negator
facilities
data
to
see
to
see
that
I
know
we
don't
have
any
yet,
but
maybe
there's
something
about
that.
So
it's
clear,
I
think
more
than
four
types
classes,
courses,
facility,
availability
and
tickets-
something
about
that
might
be
useful
because
particular
date,
users
are
interested
in
facilities
versus
and
then
potentially
also
something
about
whether
they're
booked
able
when
we
get
to
that
point,
I'd
be
useful.
B
A
Sure
I
think,
as
we
add
that
someone's
we
could
make
some
more
progress
on
booking,
then
I
would
expect
to
update
this
to
include.
You
know
whether
those
providers,
including
support
for
that
in
their
feeds,
yeah
so
I'll
when
I
circulate
the
slides
after
the
call
I'll
put
a
link
into
the
github
project.
So
if
anyone
wants
to
submit
feature
suggestions,
then
they
can
do
that
just.
C
Jump
in
quickly
sorry
Lee,
just
once
it
says
well
that
we
have
actually,
you
might
notice
some
of
these
look
very
so
stark,
developer,
developer,
II,
that's
even
worse,
some
bare-bones.
At
the
moment
we
have
started
and
another
activity
in
a
different
stream
to
update
the
open,
active
websites
and
to
think
about
how
that
actually
sits
with
all
the
tools
that
we're
creating
as
well.
So
the
idea
is
that
we
will
basically
be
considering
the
branding
that
should
be
applied
in
different
ways
and
hopefully
to
create
some
patterns
as
well.
C
That
can
potentially
be
applied
when
we
are
creating
these
more
standalone
pieces.
So
don't
be
alarmed
if
things
suddenly
start
looking
a
little
bit
different
across
the
board
and
if
you
want
to
provide
feedback
in
terms
of
the
interface
you're
very
welcome
to,
but
also
asterisk,
that
they
might
change
as
well.
A
A
Okay,
so
there's
a
couple
things
I
wanted
to
try
and
cover
off
today.
So
briefly,
kind
of
recap,
where
we
are
with
the
list
and
then
have
a
discussion
about
how
we
can
move
forward
I
I
think
couple
of
weeks
ago,
I
briefly
suggested
that
we
might
want
to
order
face-to-face
workshop
to
try
and
push
forward
on
some
of
these
issues.
In
a
way,
that's
less,
it
will
be
easier
to
do
that.
A
I'm
just
doing
it
on
a
webinar
like
this,
so
I
like
to
kind
of
discuss
what
that
and
I'll
own
for
that
which
it
might
look
like
so
just
to
kind
of
recap,
current
status.
So
the
work
that
we
did
earlier
this
year
is
we
developed
a
set
of
draft
editorial
guidelines
that
was
intending
to
help
us
scope,
the
requirements
around
the
activity
list
and
some
of
the
high
level
I
guess,
rules
or
governance
around
what
goes
into
it.
A
When
we
published
a
very
early
draft
of
the
activity
list
that
was
based
on
some
work,
the
number
of
you
involved
with
to
help
combine
the
Sport
England
Sports
week
and
exercise
movement,
the
dance
lists
as
a
we
use
those
as
a
starting
point,
because
they
were
already
well
developed
and
I'd
been
shared
under
an
open
license
so
that
we
had
we
could
create
something
by
joining
on
them.
I.
The
result
of
that
is,
we've
ended
up
with
a
an
activity
list
which
is
quite
broad
and
shallow.
A
A
Some
of
the
discussion
that
we
had
as
I'm
the
feedback
we've
had
is
I
think
different
opinions
about
how
how
structured
the
list
should
be
so,
whether
it
be
useful
to
have
a
more
nested,
deeper
nested
structure
or
whether
we
should
be
trying
to
have
something
that
is
relatively
small
and
more
flat.
So
there's
22
comments
on
the
spreadsheet
at
the
moment,
just
mostly
nothing
minor
amends
to
wording,
synonyms,
etc.
A
A
We've
been
using
a
Google
spreadsheet
to
collate
that
the
initial
data,
which
was
good
enough
to
do
the
combination
of
those
first
three
lists
but
is
not
really
suitable
for
the
kind
of
work
that
we
need
to
do
ongoing
it
there's
not
really
a
lot.
It's
not
a
great
environment
for
doing
this
kind
of
collaborative
editing
and
restructuring
of
what
is
quite
quite
a
large
data
set.
So
that's
where
you're
at
and
we
need
to
come
up
with
a
more
detail
plan
for
how
to
move
forward.
A
So
that's
the
kind
of
some
of
the
discussion
I
want
to
have
I
spoke
to
a
few
of
you
offered
to
kind
of,
but
some
of
your
perspective
on
what
what
we
should
be
doing
and
where
the
list
would
be
useful
to
you.
So
I'm
going
to
quite
a
few
of
you
now
maybe
chip
in
with
a
bit
of
input.
So
so
Nicky
are
you
able
to
give
us
a
bit
of
your
experience
on
developing
these
kind
of
shared
code
lists
and
thesaurus
from
your
work
that
you've
done
in
poor
ism.
D
There
would
be
in
the
service
list.
So
it's
pretty
much
a
sort
of
mature,
stable
list
now,
but
it
probably
took
us
somewhere
in
the
region
of
seven
or
eight
years
to
get
to
that
point,
and
but
where
we
really
started
was
a
requirement
for
local
authorities
to
report
to
central
government
on
on
the
services
they
provided
and
basically
identifying.
There
was
no
common
ground
for
doing
that.
D
This
is
a
service
kind
of
thing,
and-
and
we
had
some
free
monthly
review
of
that-
and
we
basically
just
used
at
the
time
just
sort
of
Excel
spreadsheets
posted
on
full
and
discussion
forums,
to
consult
and
talk
about
that.
It
was
before
the
days
of
Google
Spreadsheets
and
that
so
we
didn't
even
have
any
way
of
easily
sharing
spreadsheets
or
sharing
the
information.
But
but
that's
how
we
did
it
and
basically
we're
poor
ism.
D
Did
the
work
and
put
the
the
drafts
of
the
spreadsheets
and
drafts
of
the
taxonomy
together,
but
the
working
group
who
were
all
pretty
much
with
local
authority
representatives
were
the
ones
that
had
the
sort
of
final
say
on
what
went
in
and
what
didn't
go
in
over
time?
That
list
kind
of
grew,
and
there
were
other
reasons
that
people
people
sort
of
wanted
to
say:
okay,
well,
I
work
in
social
care,
so
I
want
to
see
my
bit
of
the
list.
D
So
we
built
a
functions
list
that
sits
on
top
of
the
service
list
and
breaks
it
down
so
that
people
can
look
at
it
in
small
chunks.
That
kind
of
cross
references
it,
and
we
do
that.
We've
done
that
with
different
sort
of
what
channels
are
the
services
to
deliver
through
all
sorts
of
things
like
that
and,
as
I
said
links
through
to
the
powers
and
duties
it
links
through
to
what
records
you
keep
out
a
service
and
how
long
you
need
to
keep
them.
D
So
people
can
download
all
those
and
use
them
and
basically
historically,
as
I
say,
the
the
local
authority
community
took
responsibility
for
agreeing
the
content
of
all
all
the
lists
and
over
time
that
gradually
died
to
a
great
extent.
Working
group
as
such
doesn't
exist
any
longer,
albeit
for
a
project
we're
currently
working
on
we're.
Looking
at
we're
trying
to
reinstate
it.
But
so
all
the
lists
or
everything
is
pretty
much
in
maintenance
mode
and
and
the
key
things
really
that
we
kind
of
had
to
establish
up
front
were
the
rules
about
the
taxonomy.
D
So
you
know
what
capitalization
did
you
use?
What
special
characters
did
you
allow
all
those
sort
of
things
and
trying
to
achieve
some
sort
of
consistency
in
levels
of
granularity
in
detail
and-
and
those
are
all
pretty
well
established
now,
so
we
everything
is,
to
a
great
extent
in
maintenance
mode,
and
subsequently
we
developed
some
tools
in
house
that
sitter's
sort
of
part
of
the
LG
inform
and
LG
inform,
plus
tools
that
the
local
government
association
run
to
publish
the
vocabularies
and
the
mappings
between
them.
A
A
D
You
know
where
we
were
what
other
uses
there
might
be
for
these
things
and
whatever,
but
we
did
find
that
it
actually
helped
to
kind
of
get
people
in
a
room
and
come
and
tell
you
how
they
were
using
it
and
what
issues
they
had
rather
than
just
letting
them.
You
know,
stick
it
on
a
forum
and
that
seemed
to
work
quite
well
in
the
early
days.
D
I
think
you
know
what
the
situation
would
be
be
now
I,
don't
know
we
might
be
about
to
find
out
if
we're
trying
to
resurrect
our
working
group
and
but
obviously
you
know
online
meetings
and
that's
an
option
now,
which
probably
weren't
so
easily
an
option
back
then.
So
you
know
we
might
have
gone
down
that
route
if
we
were
starting
now.
Okay,.
A
It's
there,
so
you
mention
just
some
stuff
at
around.
You
know,
rules
around
capitalization
and
things
were
there
other
types
of
kind
of
governance
and
decision
making
support
that
you
put
in
place.
You
know
thinking
back
because
what
some
of
the
things
that
we've
been
struggling
with
is
the
kind
of
scope
tiverton
list
about
how
much
we
put
in
there.
D
I
think
perhaps
ours
was
more
clearly
defined
than
yours.
In
you
know,
we
we
started
off
with
what
what
services
does
a
local
council
have
to
deliver?
So
you
know,
that's
a
pretty
fine
item
fits
list.
It's
it's
probably
less
flexible
than,
and
you
know
less
people
involved
than
in
your
you
know
vocabulary
or
your
taxonomy
and.
D
So
I
think
that
one
was
fairly
straightforward.
Some
of
the
others,
like
the
subjects
list
which
and
was
put
together
and
that's
the
bit
broader
and
coming
up
with
rules,
was
really.
It
was
really
quite
difficult
for
that.
But
again
we
tried
to
to
almost
think
of
it
from
the
opposite
end
and
consider.
If
someone
was
coming
to
use
this
list,
would
they
look
for
this
term
in
it
or
not?
D
And
you
know
again,
that
was
a
that
was
a
list
of
subjects
that
someone
might
be
coming
to
government
for
not
just
local
government
but
government
as
a
whole
and
rather
than
as
we
best
with
the
service
list.
We
starting
from
this
is
what
local
government
think
they
provide
with
the
subjects
list.
We
looked
at
it
from
the
other
point
of
view,
point
of
view
and
said:
if
I
was
someone
coming
to
the
subject
list
coming
looking
for
something
from
government,
would
I
expect
this
term
to
be
in
the
list.
D
What
I
expect
to
find
this
here?
So
that
might
be
an
approach
that
works
better
from
your
point
of
view,
because,
because
that's
the
way,
you're
kind
of
looking
at
things
are
providing
something
for
the
public
to
use
to
find
things
rather
than
telling
someone
what
you're
doing
kind
of
things
so
that
opposite
approach
probably
works
better
for
that
one
yeah.
Okay,.
A
D
They've
now,
as
I
said,
pretty
much
gone
into
annual
update
mode
having
gotten
fairly
stable,
but
certainly
early
on.
You
know,
you'd
find
barely
a
sort
of
one
or
two
days
went
by
without
somebody
saying
well,
I
think
this
should
be
in
there
on
it.
So
we
had
to
kind
of
have
a
cut-off
point
at
which
we
said.
Okay,
we're
going
to
look
at
everything
everyone's
raised
at
this
point
and
it
was
I
think
it
was.
D
It
probably
started
off
as
almost
monthly
for
the
first
six
months,
but
after
that
went
into
quarterly
mode
so
that
we
got
regular
updates,
because
what
we
did
find
was
they
did.
You
know
people
who
were
trying
to
use
it
if
they
found
that
there
was
too
much
missing
from
it
or
it
didn't
work
for
them.
We
were
trying
to
encourage
all
the
local
authorities
to
use
them,
so
we
had
to
kind
of
put
a
fair
amount
of
effort
into
keeping
it
up-to-date
and
making
it
how
they
wanted
to
use
it.
Otherwise,
anyway,.
B
D
Was
it
wasn't?
It
wasn't
well
the
group,
basically
the
I
and
some
of
my
colleagues
would
put
together
the
proposed
changes,
and
then
we
circulated
it
to
the
working
group
so
offline,
not
they
didn't
actually
have
to
do
any
work
cover
then
read
the
changes
that
we'd
suggested
and
agree
them
or
question
them
kind
of
thing,
so
that
and
we'd
then
publish
take
their
feedback
into
account
and
publish
another
draft
of
the
list,
and
you
know
for
the
first
six
months.
D
Everyone
didn't
have
to
agree,
it
was,
you
know,
majority
basis,
but
in
practice
we
didn't
generally
find
that
once
things
went
out
to
the
working
group,
it
was
pretty
much
unanimous
either
you
know
yes,
this
is
this
is
okay
or
no?
We
don't
think
it
is.
This
is
why
not,
and
we
didn't
often
find
those
situations
where
people
would
actually
disagree
about
it.
So
we
had
to
have
to
make
decisions
based
on
sort
of
majorities.
It
was
really
a
kind
of
either
it's
right
or
it's
an
odd
situation.
A
A
E
Yeah
sure
I
guess
it's
actually
probably
move
dominantly
powered
by
yes
in
c-list
in
then
it
appears,
although
we've
got
ten
different
modules,
that
tivity
list
is
within
all
of
those,
so
whether
somebody
is
promoting
an
event
to
the
city
they
promote
in
a
club
whatever
it
is
at.
Some
point
now
will
be
a
question
around.
What's
for
physical
activity
does
this?
Does
this
relate
to
is
really
important
and
really
key,
and
it's
not
only
for
the
promotion
search.
They
can
then
search
from
any
of
the
activities
that
the
user
can
promote.
E
F
E
Any
information
they
want
is
there
for
them.
So
then,
maintenance
grass
becomes
quite
difficult,
particularly
with
the
new
latest
if
it
keeps
growing
and
growing,
and
things
are
added
on
a
kind
of
quarterly
basis
or,
however
quickly
it
is
for
us.
I
owe
them
personally
have
to
go
and
make
sure
that
we're
providing
all
of
that
information,
because
as
soon
as
it's
on
our
internet
and
it's
published
for
the
public,
so
maintenance
promises
is
quite
a
long,
an
arduous
job.
A
Think
we
there
was,
you
gave
me
some
you
mentioned
about
how
you
know
how
things
have
get
onto
the
list,
but
sort
of
the
how
you
make
decisions
there,
so
you
mentioned
you've
got
to
put
it
in
all
of
this
extra
content.
Are
you
saying
that,
for
example,
just
because
something
on
Wikipedia
didn't
mean
that
it
would
necessarily
go
into
the
list
yeah.
E
We
won't
just
add
anything
on
the
list
it
you
know,
I
have
to
be
able
to
find
sufficient
information
from
a
reliable
source
just
because
it's
I
guess
on
a
couple
of
web
links
or
there's
one
one
or
two
clubs
may
be
out
there,
but
if
they're
not
providing
any
information
on
what
that's
for
is
then
I
can't
add
it
to
our
list,
because
it's
not
yeah.
We
need
to
make
sure
what
we're
publishing
is
correct.
A
Yes,
okay,
that's
interesting!
Thank
you,
I
think,
oh,
the
reason
why
I
think
that's
interesting
is
because
it
helps
surface.
You
know
where
we
might
how
we
might
make
decisions
about
the
scope
of
the
list.
You
know
at
what
point
does
something
become
significant
enough
that
it
should
go
into
the
list
and
then
be
shared
with
the
rest
of
the
community?
And
when
is
something
just
you
know
a
very
small
scale
activity
that
might
only
be
in
one.
A
You
know
one
or
two
locations:
there
isn't
significant
yet
significant
in
order
to
be
kind
of
standardized
and
have
some
of
this
extra
and
extra
information
around
it
and
I.
Think
that
connects
to
some
of
some
things
that
been
some
ideas
have
been
has
been
exploring
with
the
work
he's
been
doing,
we've
get
active
and
kind
of
tooling,
and
just
so
fists
more
of
that
kind
of
use
of
the
activities
be
able
to
cover
that
a
bit
now,
Ben
yeah.
F
Sure,
similarly,
on
get
active,
the
categorization
you
know,
activities
to
sessions
is
really
important
because
search
actually
uses
that
directly.
So
if
a
user
searches
for
an
activity-
and
it's
not
spelt
that
the
same
way
or
is
basically
I'm
not
going
to
find
anything
or
also,
they
might
be
presented
with
two
or
three
different
namings
of
an
activity.
So
it
is
problematic
to
not
have
an
activity
list
which
is
kind
of
neat
and
tidy.
F
Which
had
text,
which
was
a
bit
more
flexible,
it
would
still
really
impact
a
discovery
and
the
sports
directory,
which
is
also
an
A
to
Z,
that
we
haven't
got
active
so
yeah,
although
it's
not
blocking
publishing
of
data
of
open
data,
it's
harming
usability
of
that
data,
a
fair
bit.
So
that's
the
that's
the
kind
of
context.
F
So
what
we
need
to
see
is
what
we
need.
What
get
active
needs?
The
ability
to
do
is
to
quite
quickly
sort
out
some
of
the
more
obvious
problems
with
the
list
and
to
go
about
doing
that.
I've
been
doing
some
concept
development
around
a
tool
that
would
essentially
map
bad
activity,
names
to
good
activity
names
and
allow
us
to
iterate
a
list
and
treat
it
as
more
of
an
evolving
thing.
Rather
than
trying
to
kind
of
reach
this
kind
of
definitive
list
to
kind
of
treat
it
more.
As
an
evolving
ever-changing
thing.
F
There's
a
couple
of
problems,
one
is:
is
that
doesn't
take
into
account
what
people
are
actually
searching
for
or
what
people
are
actually
categorizing
their
their
activities
as
so
we
might
have
I
mean
just
a
good
analogies.
Is
that
tomatoes
with
the
vegetables
in
the
supermarket,
because
people
aren't
looking
at
it?
People
aren't
looking
for
tomatoes
in
the
fruit
section,
so
we
need
a
way
of
matching
it
to
what's
actually
out
there.
F
It's
a
way
of
quite
frictionlessly
working
with
the
list
and
assigning
hierarchies
and
removing
categories
which
don't
make
a
lot
of
sense
and
changing
synonyms.
It's
we
basically
had
a
really
good
look
at
the
list.
That's
out
there
now
that's
available
is
open
data
identified
the
key
problems
and
then
future
development
around
solving
that
and
so
with.
F
F
We've
kind
of
been
looking
at
it
more
from
well.
If
everyone
has
a
similar
problem,
then
why
can't
this
be
done
in
an
aggregated
level
or
maybe
even
an
open,
active
level
as
a
way
of
collaboratively
evolving
a
list
so
that
it's
not
just
based
on
theory?
And
it's
not
just
based
on
the
expertise
which
is
in
this
group
that
it's
mapped
to
the
live
available,
open
data?
That's
out
there.
B
And
just
one
thing
so
having
been
demoed
the
tool
that,
unfortunately,
is
not
able
to
show
today
to
leonid
riously-
and
I
guess
one
thing
that
struck
me
from
looking
at
that
was
the
ease
in
which
you
can
collaborate
on
the
list
with
the
knowledge
of
which
what
data
is
available.
So
you
know
there
are
300
sessions
of
this
thing.
Is
it
the
same
as
that
thing
and
doing
it
in
a
kind
of
the
ease
in
which
you
can
navigate
a
hierarchy?
B
Categorize
things
in
a
hierarchy
almost
like
we
were
trying
to
do
in
the
spreadsheet,
but
with
real
data
attached
to
it
and
in
a
way
that
people
can
actually
like,
if
he's
doing
stuff,
to
literally
go
yeah.
Okay,
that
is
what
that
is,
and
I'll
drag
it
over
here
and
and
and
some
common
process
around
it.
I
guess
was
the
discussion
that
that
was
the
interesting
thing,
at
least
for
me
and
listening
to
that
before,
and
so
how
can
we
as
a
community
collaborate
better
around.
A
A
That's
got
kind
of
well-defined
content
in
it
so
that
it
can
drive
these
kind
of
eh-2-zed
lists
and
also
I
think
support
some
level
of
data
integration,
but
then
there's
also
a
need
to
be
able
to
more
quickly
more
rapidly
do
mappings
between
activity
names
in
order
to
improve
discovery
in
services
like
get
active,
and
that
might
need
to
be
done.
You
know
on
a
very
quick
turnaround.
A
You
know
that
it
might
be
want
to
make
changes
and
was
daily
to
kind
of
deal
with
quality
issues
that
are
coming
up
in
the
published
data
and
it
feels
like
there's
a
that's,
a
different
kind
of
way
to
change
them.
If
we
wanted
to
publish
a
more
kind
of
stable
you'd
list,
there's
kind
of
lots
of
lots
of
scope
to
kind
of
do
things
in
between
those
two
extremes.
I
think
we
definitely
need
better
tooling.
A
It
feels
like
adding
kind
of
mappings
and
synonyms
is
something
that
could
easily
be
kind
of
effectively
crowd-sourced.
But
if
we
wanted
to
have
a
more,
you
might
need
a
more
rigorous
approach
to
some
of
the
kind
of
hierarchy
and
structure
exist,
particularly
as
people
are
starting
to
base
websites
around
it,
because
you
know
somebody
making
an
arbitrary
change.
That
list
could
end
up
having
impacts
on
quite
a
few
different
applications.
So
having
some
review
around
that
I
think
would
be
useful.
A
So
these
are
some
of
the
issues
that
I
think
we
need
to
be
kind
of
digging
into
in
a
bit
more
detail
and
also
around
coming
back
to,
and
the
makers
point
around
kind
of
ongoing
maintenance
to
make
sure
that
the
list
is
sustainable
and
tooling
can
help
with
that
sustainability.
But
if
we
are
going
to
put
some
governance
around
it,
then
we
need
people
in
the
community.
You
are
happy
to
take
on
roles
there
to
help
with
that
management,
because
really
you
need
content
experts.
You
people
were
close
to
this
on
a
daily
basis.
G
Just
to
add
to
that
I
mean
as
we've
as
we've
seen
already,
the
actual
structure
of
the
list
and
the
format
that
the
list
takes
is
is
will
vary
based
on
the
use
case,
I
mean
a
member
of
the
public
who
has
no
knowledge
at
all
of
the
hierarchies
that
you've
got
and
you
have
used
for
you
to
know
for
you
to
classify
activities.
They
don't
really
care
about
how
it's
classified.
G
I
know
for
a
fact
that
for
global
who
are
a
part
of
of
no
of
the
group,
the
open
active
group
have
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
tooling
that
they
use
for
them
to
take
usage
data
and
based
on
the
name
and
and
all
sorts
of
other
data.
They
already
map
it
through
to
a
standard
list.
I
think
we
did
get
that
list
and
through
when
we
were
working
on
those
previously.
But
I,
don't
know
if
it
was
incorporated
into
the
draft
at
that
stage.
G
G
Do
absolutely
get
Ben's
point
that
a
general
search
mechanism
that
websites
could
employ,
as
as
part
of
the
data
user
side
of
things
is,
is
going
to
be
invaluable,
but
I
also
think
that
we
that
we
should
take
the
opportunity
to
be
a
bit
stricter
on
on
on
the
physical
publishers
and
say
that
that
they
should
do
a
better
job,
classifying
all
of
the
data
that
they're
publishing,
because
whenever
it
gets
down
to
you
trying
to
determine
a
a
type
activity
by
the
product
name.
In
effect,
you
are
never
going
to
win.
G
G
Yeah
I
think
I
think
if
we
tried
to
do
something
based
around
the
product
name,
we
are
definitely
going
to
be
straying
into
a
high-maintenance
environment
because
people
are
always
going
to
be
coming
up
with
new
product
names.
New
brand
names
and
they'll
always
be
trying
to
reinvent
things
to
try
and
get
a
better
marketing
spin
on
something.
G
So
I
would
tend
to
say
that
it
that
we
would
be
better
served
by
trying
to
get
all
the
publishers
to
tag
all
of
their
data
with
a
stricter
hierarchy
and
then
having
the
front
end
users
searching
using
tags
and
and
and
and
all
sorts
of
synonyms
and
rich
text,
and
things
like
that
on
those
hierarchies
to
then
try
and
narrow
it
down.
Did
you
mean
X,
Y
Z,
so
that
hot
dogging,
for
example,
could
be
a
synonym
for
kayaking?
G
B
B
Looking
at
statistics
about
legislators,
and
so
you
have
like
a
big
focus
of
they've
split
out
classic
things
like
get
back,
get
back
to
netball,
whatever
it's
called
once
a
call
back
so
back
to
netball
is
actually
on
there
as
a
specific
activity.
At
that
level.
I
was
obviously
in
context
we're
talking
about
here.
B
I
guess
came
around
when
the
process
was
going
on
in
terms
of
incorporating
that
and
but
one
of
the
things
that
we
struggled
with
VMD
and
this
the
stuff
that
the
chains
representing,
but
also
in
terms
of
the
data
that
they
have.
Is
that
there's
a
lot
of
activities
in
in
ex-husband
dance,
which
are
a
bit
weird
niche
and
are
hard
to
categorize
Kluber
size.
For
example.
You
know
night
nightclub
exercise
is
a
thing
it's
if
you
want
to
do
publicize,
you
want
to
do
publicize.
B
B
The
name
of
the
game
is:
let's
make
the
activity
itself
as
fun
and
interesting
and
accessible
as
possible
and
distinguish
it
from
other
activities,
and
so
you
end
up
with
some
like
Zumba,
rising
to
the
top,
because
they
become
really
popular
and
others
that
are
kind
of
not
so
well
known,
still
being
unique.
And
then
you
know:
if
someone
wants
to
go
and
do
Bikram
yoga,
they
will
be
a
bit
crummy.
B
Ok,
because
it's
the
same
moves
in
order,
as
you
do
every
week
and
every
Center
a
bit
like
you
know
similar
things
that
where
it's
always
the
same
and
and
if
you
want
to
do
hot
yoga,
it's
different
every
time.
And
so,
if
you
want
to
do
get
go
and
do
Bikram,
you
can
do
it.
Your
eyes
close
to
8:30
in
the
morning
is
part
of
your
morning,
routine
or
whatever,
because
you
know
it
so
well
you
want
to
go,
do
become
yoga,
it
might
be.
B
The
hot
yoga
is
available,
but
I
guess
the
consumer
expectation
would
be
to
distinguish
those
things
because
they
are
packaged
differently
because
they
are
different
and
so
from
the
EMD
perspective.
There's
a
granularity
problem
because
we
almost
want
to
say
club
size,
Bikram
yoga,
so
people
can
find
those
things,
but
I
totally
understand
the
point
of
well.
But
then
how
do
we
keep
this
up
to
date?
A
Okay,
that's
I
think
that's
really
interesting
kind
of
context.
There
around
the
know
different
different
criteria.
They
might
apply
to
something
being
kind
of
significant
enough
to
be
in
the
list
and
I.
Think
there's
there's
a
lot
of
this
that
we
need
to
kind
of
pick
over
in
a
bit
more
detail,
which
is
why
I
was
proposing
a
workshop
I,
which
I'm
still
still
keen
to
do.
How
many
of
you
here
would
be
interested
in
attending
that
assuming
we
can
get
a
suitable
date
for
people?
B
A
Was
hoping
to
at
least
get
a
group
together
in
a
room,
I'm
kind
of
mindful
I?
Don't
want
to
kind
of
exclude
anyone,
so
it
may
be
that
we
maybe
I
should
be
looking
at
doing
it
in
a
couple
of
locations
or
doing
a
face-to-face
one
and
then
online
one
as
well,
but
I
just
think
we
can
have
a
higher
bandwidth
conversation
and
do
some
kind
of
posted
work
and
stuff
to
kind
of
get
some
tunes
quicker
in
terms
of
washer.
A
My
screen
here,
the
kind
of
things
that
I
always
thought
we
could
kind
of
dig
into
is
some
of
this
discussion
around
governance
and
maintenance
of
the
list.
So
how
do
we
make
sure
that
what
we're
building
is
sustainable?
You
know,
even
if
we're
just
building
tooling,
rather
than
a
date
set
there's
there's
some
sustainability
issues
to
consider.
I
think
we're
in
agreement
that
we
need
better
tooling
to
support
some
collaboration,
so
this
might
be
an
opportunity
for
event
shared
what
he's
been
working
on.
A
There
are
also
some
existing
open
source
tools
to
support
creation
of
these
kinds
of
taxonomy.
So
I've
got
a
short
list
that
I
need
to
review
to
see
whether
they
might
be
suitable
for
our
needs,
but
they
all
have
some
element
of
managing
hierarchy,
new
terms,
adding
kind
of
documentation
to
terms
etc.
A
A
A
Our
next
call
is
on
the
13th
of
December,
which
we're
going
to
be
focusing
on
booking,
so
Sammy
has
been
doing
some
research
around
booking
in
the
sector,
so
we
want
to
share
kind
of
our
findings
and
have
a
discussion
about
how
we
move
that
strand
forward
as
well.
We're
also
I
think
planning
to
have
a
workshop
around
booking
as
well
in
the
new
year
and
get
together
some
people
who
are
both
publishing
and
using
data
to
you
know
again
to
have
a
kind
of
more
detailed
discussion
around
that
and
share
some
requirements
again.
A
That
won't
be
too
will
be
excluding
anyone,
it'd
be
an
open,
invite
and
we'll
be
reporting
outputs
of
that
back
to
the
group
and
continuing
the
discussion,
and
this
in
this
form,
so
I
think
I
will
probably
wrap
up
there
unless
anyone
has
any
any
final
comments
and
shake
your
heads.
If
that's
so
there's
nothing.