IRC log of wot on 2021-03-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:02:34 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wot
12:02:34 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-irc
12:03:35 [GMLEE]
GMLEE has joined #wot
12:04:09 [kaz]
Meeting: WoT-IG/WG vF2F Meeting in March - Day 4
12:04:17 [kaz]
Agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_March_2021#Monday_March_22
12:04:30 [Mizushima]
Mizushima has joined #wot
12:04:40 [mlagally_]
mlagally_ has joined #wot
12:05:00 [kaz]
present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Gyu_Myoung_Lee, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Laally, Philipp_Blum, Tetsushi_Matsuda
12:05:15 [kaz]
present+ Ege_Korkan
12:05:34 [mjk]
mjk has joined #wot
12:06:31 [McCool]
McCool has joined #wot
12:06:48 [kaz]
present+ Michael_Koster, Tomoaki_Mizushima
12:07:35 [McCool]
https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_March_2021#Architecture_.2B_Profiles_.28Lagally.29_.282h20min.29
12:08:04 [kaz]
(scribe so far: Ege, Kaz, Daniel, Sebastian, McCool)
12:08:42 [sebastian]
sebastian has joined #wot
12:08:55 [kaz]
present+ Ryuichi_Matsukura
12:09:10 [kaz]
zakim, who is on the call?
12:09:10 [Zakim]
Present: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Gyu_Myoung_Lee, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Laally, Philipp_Blum, Tetsushi_Matsuda, Ege_Korkan,
12:09:13 [Zakim]
... Michael_Koster, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Ryuichi_Matsukura
12:10:03 [matsuda]
matsuda has joined #wot
12:10:42 [kaz]
topic: Guest
12:10:57 [kaz]
mm: we have a guest from ITU-T, Gyu Myoung Lee
12:10:59 [cris]
mc: skipping the opening slides, guest are notified with the w3c normatives
12:11:27 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20170801/ W3C Patent Policy
12:11:46 [kaz]
i/skipping/scribenick: cris/
12:11:59 [kaz]
i/we have a/scribenick: kaz/
12:12:09 [cris]
ml: I'm really happy to have participants from ITU-T. Important for our work in wot use cases
12:12:10 [kaz]
topic: Agenda for today
12:12:21 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_March_2021#Monday_March_22 Agenda wiki
12:12:43 [kaz]
topic: Use Cases - ITU-T
12:12:52 [cris]
... we should look if there are any gaps in our use case document thanks to the input of ITU-T
12:13:16 [cris]
ml: please observe the queue
12:13:18 [dape]
dape has joined #wot
12:13:18 [kaz]
s/... we should/ml: we should/
12:13:52 [kaz]
s/topic: Use Cases - ITU-T//
12:14:20 [kaz]
s|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_March_2021#Monday_March_22 Agenda wiki||
12:14:22 [cris]
ml: open discussion about alignment between w3c WoT and ITU followed by architecture implications of ITU-T hub
12:14:29 [kaz]
s|topic: Agenda for today||
12:14:31 [cris]
... should we add anything to the agenda?
12:14:41 [cris]
... ok
12:14:42 [kaz]
i|I'm really|topic: Agenda for today|
12:14:52 [kaz]
i|I'm really|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_March_2021#Monday_March_22 Agenda wiki|
12:14:58 [kaz]
rrsagent, make log public
12:15:09 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:15:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:15:15 [kaz]
present+ Christian_Glomb
12:15:20 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:15:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:15:56 [cris]
ml shows a document that contains a review of ITU-T standards.
12:16:21 [kaz]
i/ml shows/topic: Use Cases - ITU-T/
12:16:45 [ryuichi]
ryuichi has joined #wot
12:16:48 [kaz]
i|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/main/CONTRIBUTIONS/ITU-T-Use-case-summary.md Results of ITU-T SG20 WoT document analysis|
12:16:49 [dezell]
dezell has joined #wot
12:16:54 [cris]
mm: I focused on framework of the web of things document and the ITU-T WoT service architecture
12:16:59 [dezell]
present+ David_Ezell
12:17:09 [cris]
... main question what is an object?
12:17:27 [kaz]
present+ Michael_Koster
12:17:29 [cris]
... hub is referred as broker in the document
12:17:35 [kaz]
present- Michael_Laaly
12:17:41 [kaz]
present+ Michael_Lagally
12:17:54 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:17:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:18:16 [cris]
... we don't emphasize hubs in our documents. I think we should
12:18:35 [kaz]
present+ Ryuichi_Matsukura
12:18:37 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:18:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:19:00 [kaz]
Chair: McCool
12:19:00 [cris]
... the describes abstract functions that could be mapped to hardware in different ways.
12:20:00 [cris]
... services are categorized in WoT, Web, and Mash-ups. We don't underlying this differences.
12:20:40 [cris]
ml: you mentioned that ITU-T needs a register service
12:20:57 [cris]
... currently the WoT discovery is work in progress
12:21:17 [cris]
... will we have still this gap when WoT discovery is defined?
12:21:43 [cris]
mm: well, ITU-T needs the registry at the architectural level.
12:22:13 [cris]
... discovery is just finding TDs not register them
12:22:58 [cris]
... and surely not how to manage them
12:24:16 [cris]
... it is intentionally out of scope in WoT discovery.
12:24:26 [kaz]
s/(scribe so far: Ege, Kaz, Daniel, Sebastian, McCool)/(scribes so far: Ege, Kaz, Daniel, Sebastian and McCool; Cristiano, Philipp, and Kaz for today)/
12:24:29 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:24:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:24:46 [kaz]
Chair: McCool
12:24:48 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:24:48 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:25:14 [cris]
ml: about he second bullet in your document. is deployement of Scripting API out of scope too?
12:25:26 [cris]
mm: well similarly to the previous point.
12:25:37 [cris]
... it is a gap in the spec really
12:25:57 [cris]
... like how to provious security parameters (e.g., keys etc.)
12:27:34 [cris]
ml: do we plan future specification of ITU-T document
12:28:48 [cris]
gyu: yes it is possible in two ways. Small clarification or starting a new process.
12:29:17 [cris]
ml: do you think there is interest to align with WoT specification?
12:29:55 [cris]
gyu: we did not use Thing Description to describe our services
12:30:19 [cris]
ml: do you mean to create a mapping document between ITU-T and TD ?
12:31:27 [cris]
... what do you need from w3c side?
12:31:31 [kaz]
present+ David_Ezell
12:31:41 [kaz]
present+ Ben_Francis
12:31:47 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:31:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:32:20 [sebastian_]
sebastian_ has joined #wot
12:32:20 [cris]
gyu: possibly an expert from w3c side and discuss conjunctly an analyses of the two standards.
12:32:34 [cris]
ml: do you have already someone in mind?
12:33:16 [cris]
gyu: we contacted individual editors and experts
12:33:19 [cris]
ml: ok
12:33:36 [kaz]
q+
12:33:43 [cris]
... we'll discuss this topic further in the main call.
12:34:03 [kaz]
q?
12:34:20 [cris]
mc: from our side there are some missing pieces that we would like to add. possibly at the end of the year we could create a new charter dedicated to them
12:34:50 [McCool]
q+
12:35:07 [cris]
kaz: I would start from concrete use-case and idendify the building blocks. Then we could understand which one of them could be mapped to w3c architecture.
12:35:20 [kaz]
ack k
12:35:21 [cris]
ml: we already have a couple of use cases defined
12:36:18 [cris]
mm: echonet and ITU-T WoT look more into smart homes use cases
12:36:37 [cris]
... having real system is a good place to drive requirements.
12:36:55 [cris]
ml: we should have a follow up conversation
12:37:48 [kaz]
s/building blocks/building blocks (within the Architecture spec) or entities (within the existing implementations)/
12:38:16 [kaz]
s/which one of them/which piece within the system or subsystems/
12:38:46 [cris]
mm: I suggest also to review the document and check if we have misunderstood something.
12:38:47 [kaz]
s/mapped to w3c architecture/mapped to the building blocks from the W3C Architecture./
12:38:49 [kaz]
q?
12:38:52 [kaz]
ack m
12:39:11 [cris]
ml: what about scheduling a call in three weeks from now
12:39:29 [cris]
... so that we can have a good plan
12:39:56 [kaz]
s/concrete use-case/concrete scenario based on some concrete use case/
12:40:04 [cris]
mm: it could work, maybe defining homework by email would help
12:40:31 [cris]
ml: let's try to target the week of April 12
12:40:37 [cris]
mm: it is probably fine
12:41:53 [cris]
ml: ok let's create a doodle pool to the define the right timing.
12:41:57 [sebastian]
sebastian has joined #wot
12:41:58 [kaz]
i/we already have/(my point is not generating yet another use case but clarifying the concrete scenario and data transfer, etc., for the existing use cases related to the external standards :)/
12:42:42 [kaz]
q+
12:42:49 [cris]
ml: ok we completed two points of the agenda. Point three could be moved in the next call
12:43:17 [cris]
kaz: which entity in the use case detail is the most important?
12:43:29 [cris]
... we should state it for each use-case
12:43:54 [kaz]
ack k
12:44:33 [citrullin]
topic: Architecture
12:44:37 [kaz]
action: kaz to create a doodle for the next liaison discussion around April 12
12:44:52 [kaz]
s/topic: Architecture/
12:44:56 [kaz]
topic: Architecture
12:45:30 [citrullin]
ml going through the agenda items
12:46:06 [citrullin]
ml: Any other input for the agenda?
12:46:37 [citrullin]
mm: Can we add Hub vs. P2P? Reason for this is the constrained devices topic.
12:46:46 [citrullin]
ml adds it to the agenda
12:47:37 [citrullin]
ml starts with the introduction for the newcomers.
12:47:39 [kaz]
i/which entity in the use case detail is the most important?/agree with McCool, and think we should clarify which entity within the use case scenario does what (possibly with some restriction). The entities should include edge devices as Things, gateways as Intermediaries and applications as Consumers/
12:47:43 [McCool]
q+
12:47:57 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:47:57 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:48:32 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture WoT Architecture 1.1 - Editor's Draft
12:48:44 [citrullin]
ml: We have a couple Todos in the document. So, be aware that we are still working on that.
12:49:01 [citrullin]
ml: We have been focusing on profiles in the recent architecture calls.
12:49:19 [kaz]
i/ml starts with/subtopic: Introduction/
12:49:37 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:49:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:50:03 [kaz]
i/ml going through/scribenick: citrullin/
12:50:09 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:50:09 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:50:22 [citrullin]
ml: We have introduced the thing model.
12:50:37 [citrullin]
ml: There are also several editor notes.
12:50:45 [kaz]
q?
12:50:48 [kaz]
ack m
12:51:26 [citrullin]
mm: It probably makes sense to refer to the other documents, so we don't risk contradicting information.
12:52:23 [citrullin]
mm: There is a secion Core profiles, that name should be just profiles.
12:52:50 [citrullin]
ml: We will have discussions about it and may change it.
12:53:30 [citrullin]
mm: We should introduce another section called architectual pattern or something like that.
12:53:35 [kaz]
https://w3c.github.io/wot-architecture/#core-profile 8.3 Core Profile
12:53:55 [citrullin]
m: I tried to change our policy a bit.
12:54:01 [citrullin]
s/m/ml
12:54:09 [kaz]
present+ Sebastian_Kaebisch
12:54:15 [sebastian]
sebastian has joined #wot
12:54:24 [sebastian]
sorry for beeing late
12:54:39 [kaz]
s/Editor's Draft/Working Repository/
12:55:15 [kaz]
i|We have a couple|-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-architecture/ WoT Architecture 1.1 Editor's draft|
12:55:49 [sebastian]
apologies from Dave too, he will join later
12:56:23 [kaz]
q+
12:58:00 [citrullin]
ml: bf, can I add you to this issue?
12:58:04 [citrullin]
bf: I prefer not to. I don't agree with the specification. I think it shouldn't exist.
12:59:01 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-architecture/#sec-deployment-scenario 10 Example WoT Deployments
12:59:26 [citrullin]
kaz: I think it should be part of the deployment scenario section.
13:00:13 [citrullin]
ml adds a new issue for the architectual pattern topic -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/585
13:00:40 [kaz]
i/I think/clarification on network topology, etc., would be useful for liaison discussion, etc., but I think/
13:00:49 [citrullin]
subtopic: Terminology
13:01:23 [kaz]
s/it should be/it doesn't have to be the normative architecture design, but could be/
13:01:25 [citrullin]
ml: All topics have owners and mm already addressed a lot of topics. Thanks for that.
13:01:43 [citrullin]
mm: My PR solves 3 or 4 of those issues.
13:01:48 [kaz]
s/, but I think/. However, I think/
13:02:15 [kaz]
i|All|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aterminology Terminology issues|
13:02:22 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:02:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
13:02:24 [citrullin]
New terminology for the Binding document? -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/575
13:02:44 [citrullin]
ml: I would advocate to add it to the terminolgy section.
13:02:59 [citrullin]
mm: Also discovery. I think it is a core thing.
13:03:21 [citrullin]
mm: One question. Are those terms defined in other documents as well?
13:04:17 [citrullin]
mm: Should we redefine them or just refer to TD 1.1?
13:05:18 [citrullin]
ek: The idea is to remove the td context extension.
13:05:30 [kaz]
q?
13:05:30 [citrullin]
ml: Let's create an issue for it.
13:05:34 [kaz]
ack k
13:05:37 [kaz]
q+ seb
13:05:42 [citrullin]
sk: You can also add the thing model description.
13:05:42 [kaz]
ack seb
13:06:25 [citrullin]
sk: We should have a single definition.
13:06:52 [citrullin]
ml: I think we already spent some time to define the thing model in the architecture.
13:07:10 [citrullin]
sk: We should check, if it is the same as in the TD document.
13:07:58 [citrullin]
ml creates an issue for it -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1072
13:08:20 [McCool]
q+
13:08:28 [citrullin]
ml: TD Fragment and partial TD
13:08:45 [citrullin]
ml: We discussed this and added it to the document.
13:08:49 [kaz]
q?
13:08:52 [kaz]
ack m
13:08:58 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:08:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
13:09:35 [citrullin]
mm: I don't disagree with the definition. To be aligned with the JSON specification we should name it JSON element.
13:09:43 [citrullin]
ml: I think we already discussed this topic.
13:10:17 [citrullin]
mm: I don't think it is the end of the world, it would just be more align with the JSON specification.
13:10:59 [citrullin]
ml: Have you dealt with the system terminology?
13:11:13 [citrullin]
mm: I haven't yet. It isn't in my PR yet, but I want to take a look into it.
13:12:09 [citrullin]
mm: I want to solve as many terminology issues in my PR as possible. At least the non contriversal ones.
13:13:09 [citrullin]
ml: It would be good to not introduce new terms.
13:13:16 [citrullin]
mm: You are right, some might be contriversal.
13:13:41 [citrullin]
ml: I am not comfortable with TD Fragment to TD Element.
13:14:00 [kaz]
i|I want to|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/582 PR 582 - WIP: Terminology update|
13:14:06 [citrullin]
ml: Please take it out and introduce another PR for it.
13:14:09 [citrullin]
mm: Okay, will do.
13:15:07 [citrullin]
mm: We also need to cleanup the confusion with Thing description and Thing description directory.
13:15:28 [citrullin]
ml: We should have an additional call about this.
13:16:51 [mjk]
Digital Twin usually includes modeling of the physical system
13:17:10 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/530 Issue 530 - Incorporate Discovery terminology into terminology section
13:17:32 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/581 Issue 581 - Consolidate usage of gateway, edge and hub
13:18:13 [rzr]
any interest in modeling Digital twins ?
13:18:30 [rzr]
I made some experiments on this
13:18:38 [citrullin]
mm: I added a definition for edge device. We probably have to review them.
13:18:40 [rzr]
+ hi
13:19:01 [Ege]
Ege has joined #wot
13:19:06 [rzr]
ok
13:19:32 [citrullin]
rzr, you were ask to speak up in the webex call.
13:19:43 [citrullin]
But you are not in the call, we guess.
13:19:59 [rzr]
is it open to public ?
13:20:25 [rzr]
sorry I don't want to distrub your call, we can chat later about it
13:20:38 [citrullin]
That was the consens in the call as well :)
13:21:51 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/582 going back to PR 582 again
13:22:14 [citrullin]
ml added a comment to the PR -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/582
13:22:46 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/583 PR 583 - fix a typo
13:22:47 [citrullin]
ml: It is just a simple typo. I really would like to merge it.
13:23:10 [benfrancis]
rzr: Using an IRC channel as an IRC channel has confused people ;) On the webex call mlagally_ invited you to join a future architecture call to discuss https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf
13:23:16 [citrullin]
mm: Don't let get into the IPR thing and just change it ourself.
13:24:32 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/583 PR 583 merged after marked as editorial
13:25:07 [citrullin]
subtopic: Accessibility
13:25:11 [rzr]
benfrancis (IRC): thx but i am not granted to access this call, I'll read the log on matrix/irc
13:25:15 [kaz]
i/https/kaz: can merge it after marking it "editorial" if it's really editorial/
13:25:27 [citrullin]
ml: This was a topic from the APA meeting.
13:25:32 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:25:32 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
13:25:39 [citrullin]
mm: I think there is a wider review process.
13:26:10 [benfrancis]
q+
13:26:20 [citrullin]
mm: I think when we get a more solid specification, we should request a review.
13:27:02 [citrullin]
bf: Regarding rzr. He is not a member. We should contact him.
13:27:06 [citrullin]
ml: Yes, we can do that.
13:27:39 [citrullin]
subtopic: other spec contributions
13:28:07 [McCool]
q+
13:28:27 [kaz]
ack ben
13:28:28 [kaz]
ack mc
13:28:36 [citrullin]
mm: As part of IETF, there is a new draft, but I think we might want to take a look into it.
13:29:08 [citrullin]
system lifecycle with registration -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/555
13:30:47 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:30:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
13:31:07 [citrullin]
subtopic: security considerations
13:31:14 [citrullin]
ml: Do we need to do anything here?
13:31:36 [citrullin]
mm: I created a section for this. Should we put it into the main architecture document?
13:32:08 [citrullin]
ml: We have a security and privacy considerations section in the specification.
13:34:19 [citrullin]
ml adds issue 587 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/587
13:35:03 [McCool]
the IETF draft on onboarding and boostrapping: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sarikaya-t2trg-sbootstrapping/?include_text=1
13:35:25 [kaz]
[5min break; then Profile discussion]
13:35:29 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:35:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
13:36:33 [kaz]
present+ Dave_Raggett
13:40:15 [kaz]
scribenick: kaz
13:40:21 [kaz]
topic: WoT Profile
13:40:34 [sebastian]
sebastian has joined #wot
13:40:43 [kaz]
ml: (shows the agenda slide)
13:40:54 [kaz]
... Introduction
13:40:58 [kaz]
... device categories
13:41:02 [kaz]
... constraints
13:41:07 [kaz]
... canonicalization
13:41:16 [kaz]
.. discussion on one/multiple profiles
13:41:24 [kaz]
... review/discussion of FPWD feedback
13:41:37 [kaz]
s/.. dis/... dis/
13:42:05 [McCool]
q+
13:43:28 [kaz]
ml: anything else?
13:43:42 [kaz]
mm: should start with the scope of "WoT Profile"
13:43:55 [kaz]
... wouldn't take too much
13:44:18 [kaz]
... related to the topic on one profile or multiple profiles
13:44:21 [sebastian]
q+
13:44:46 [kaz]
ml: ok
13:44:57 [kaz]
ack mc
13:45:24 [kaz]
ml: (adds "scope of WoT Profiles" to the agenda for today)
13:45:42 [kaz]
mm: should have discussion on that first
13:45:45 [kaz]
ml: ok
13:45:47 [kaz]
ask s
13:46:03 [kaz]
sk: would see that we have consensus about "Profile"
13:46:29 [McCool]
q+
13:46:33 [kaz]
... would like to keep it simple
13:46:38 [kaz]
q?
13:46:42 [kaz]
ack s
13:46:45 [kaz]
s/ask s//
13:47:21 [kaz]
mm: yeah, that's why wanted to put it as the first topic
13:47:44 [kaz]
subtopic: WG Charter
13:47:56 [kaz]
ml: (explains excerpts from the WoT WG Charter)
13:48:18 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/2020/01/wot-wg-charter.html WoT WG Charter
13:48:30 [McCool]
q+
13:48:39 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:48:39 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
13:49:07 [sebastian]
q+
13:49:41 [kaz]
mm: want to say "implementations" here means "finite number of implementations"
13:50:11 [kaz]
... please don't assume it means "vertical"
13:50:17 [kaz]
q?
13:50:21 [kaz]
ack m
13:50:30 [McCool]
q+
13:50:44 [kaz]
sk: each IoT product also has this
13:51:00 [kaz]
... not really see if we want to have "Plug-n-Play"
13:51:08 [McCool]
s/assume it/assume context/
13:52:03 [kaz]
... what if we have no clue on semantics
13:52:24 [McCool]
s/finite number of implementations/finite implementability - a developer needs to know in advance the set of technologies they need to include in their implementation, and this should be a finite set/
13:52:38 [kaz]
... we can also narrow the scope to communication, etc.
13:53:04 [McCool]
s/this should/this must/
13:53:18 [sebastian]
ack s
13:53:50 [kaz]
ml: semantic interoperability and semantic PnP would be nice
13:54:26 [kaz]
mm: actually, the Charter description implies "more than one" profile
13:54:31 [kaz]
ml: ok
13:54:48 [kaz]
... we have three profile use cases
13:55:11 [McCool]
mm: just want to point out the charter uses "profiles" in the plural and explicitly assumes there may be more than one
13:55:13 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/ use case draft
13:55:23 [McCool]
s/explicitly/implicitly/
13:55:59 [kaz]
ml: Use case: multi-vendor system integration out of the box interoperability
13:56:26 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/index.html#multi-vendor 5.2 Multi-Vendor System Integration - Out of the box interoperability
13:56:55 [kaz]
ml: as a device owner, developer, cloud provider, ...
13:57:28 [kaz]
... the model here is multiple vendors adapt to a standard
13:57:47 [kaz]
... this should be possible without device-specific customization
13:58:13 [kaz]
... Use Case: Cross Protocol Interworking
13:58:20 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/index.html#X-Protocol-Interworking 5.4 Cross Protocol Interworking
13:58:49 [McCool]
q+
13:58:49 [kaz]
ml: examples in smart home, smart city, ...
13:58:57 [kaz]
-> Use Case: Digital Twin
13:59:09 [sebastian]
q+
13:59:25 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/index.html#digital-twin 5.3 Digital Twin
13:59:45 [kaz]
ml: Conclusion in the Architecture call on 21 Jan. 2021
14:00:11 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/2021/01/21-wot-arch-minutes.html
14:00:34 [kaz]
q?
14:00:36 [kaz]
ack m
14:00:43 [kaz]
mm: we should focus on use cases
14:00:53 [kaz]
... some of them apply WoT in general
14:01:03 [mjk]
q?
14:01:34 [kaz]
... within certain use case, some specific protocol would be applied
14:01:55 [kaz]
... a use case for that purpose is digital twin
14:02:42 [kaz]
... let's just focus on the context first
14:02:49 [kaz]
ml: ok
14:02:50 [kaz]
q?
14:03:32 [kaz]
sk: have problem with the use cases for profile discussion
14:03:39 [kaz]
ack s
14:04:04 [kaz]
ml: let's do some simulation for TD then
14:04:32 [kaz]
... we have to make some basic assumption
14:04:43 [McCool]
q+
14:04:46 [kaz]
sk: don't see the description yet
14:04:47 [kaz]
q+
14:05:01 [kaz]
mm: digital could apply all the WoT
14:05:19 [kaz]
... digital twin is one context
14:05:28 [citrullin]
q+
14:05:36 [kaz]
... we should clarify what context to be used
14:05:57 [kaz]
... the constraints applied to everywhere should be "Core"
14:05:59 [kaz]
ack m
14:06:37 [citrullin]
q-
14:06:59 [McCool]
s/should be "Core"/should be included in the basic specifications, not in a profile that only applies to one context/
14:08:09 [kaz]
kaz: would repeat my point for liaison discussion here :) @@@
14:08:25 [kaz]
ml: that's related to device capability
14:08:42 [kaz]
... would see profile requirements with more than supporter
14:09:36 [McCool]
q+
14:09:41 [kaz]
ack k
14:09:53 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/main/REQUIREMENTS/profile-requirements.md requirements for Profile
14:10:22 [kaz]
ml: interoperability, limit and reduce complexity, ambiguities, ...
14:10:35 [kaz]
mm: some of them might be "nice to have"
14:10:44 [kaz]
... should clarify our actual requirements
14:11:08 [McCool]
mm: some of these are absolute requirement, some are nice-to-haves, some belong in general goals for WoT (eg. eliminate ambiguity)
14:11:53 [kaz]
mm: would like to describe the issue on the goals and scope
14:12:30 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/73 wot-profile issue 73
14:12:39 [kaz]
mm: (goes through the issue 73)
14:12:58 [kaz]
... we need to
14:13:04 [kaz]
s/... we need to//
14:14:04 [kaz]
... we need to think about the context and narrow the scope
14:14:26 [kaz]
... we also should pick up one specific profile
14:14:38 [kaz]
... and would like to propose we start with the hub concept
14:14:47 [benfrancis]
q+
14:14:53 [kaz]
ack m
14:15:21 [kaz]
... we don't worry about P2P interoperability
14:15:43 [kaz]
... having narrower scope would mean we would have more concrete answers
14:16:34 [kaz]
... limited to what we have experience
14:16:44 [kaz]
... let's talk about narrowing the context
14:16:51 [kaz]
... and let's pick one
14:17:07 [citrullin]
q?
14:17:09 [kaz]
ml: tx for creating this issue 73, first
14:18:09 [kaz]
[[
14:18:11 [kaz]
Assume the hub has a relatively large memory capacity and capability for consuming Thing Descriptions.
14:18:11 [kaz]
Assume endpoints will not, themselves, consume Thing Descriptions.
14:18:13 [kaz]
]]
14:19:03 [cris]
q+
14:19:18 [kaz]
mm: we can have a Hub as a Consumer
14:19:23 [kaz]
ack b
14:19:30 [kaz]
bf: tx from me as well
14:19:55 [kaz]
... "hub" as the first profile proposed by McCool here
14:20:32 [kaz]
... included in the Mozilla's Member submission
14:21:38 [kaz]
... but what I want to have is concrete description how to communicate with devices
14:21:40 [McCool]
q+
14:21:59 [kaz]
ml: gateway also could have some restriction
14:22:20 [kaz]
... how to handle big TDs in that case?
14:22:44 [kaz]
bf: actual size of TD should be relevant for housekeeping
14:22:47 [citrullin]
q+
14:22:57 [sebastian]
q+
14:23:01 [kaz]
ml: what do you guarantee how big TD can be handled?
14:23:14 [kaz]
... can safely reject the TD?
14:23:28 [kaz]
... what would happen otherwise?
14:23:47 [kaz]
bf: you don't have "maximum size" for Web pages. right?
14:23:56 [kaz]
q+
14:24:12 [kaz]
... don't see difference with WoT from that viewpoint
14:25:24 [kaz]
(some more discussions on possible use case settings)
14:25:57 [mjk]
q?
14:26:22 [kaz]
mm: I used terms of "edge" and "hub"
14:26:47 [kaz]
... we assume "consumer" is relatively bigger
14:26:54 [McCool]
s/edge/endpoint/
14:26:56 [kaz]
bf: agre
14:27:06 [kaz]
s/agre/agree/
14:27:23 [kaz]
ack mc
14:28:11 [kaz]
ack c
14:28:33 [McCool]
mm: think we should just define "context" as "a set of assumptions"
14:28:37 [kaz]
q+ citrullin
14:28:41 [kaz]
ack cris
14:29:28 [kaz]
ca: concern on using a generic concept at the protocol level
14:29:28 [McCool]
q+
14:29:39 [kaz]
... maybe would be better to narrow the scope
14:30:46 [kaz]
ml: what kind of payload to be handled could be additional constraints
14:31:36 [kaz]
q- later
14:31:41 [kaz]
ack s
14:31:56 [kaz]
sk: this is not a real argument
14:32:29 [kaz]
... want to agree with McCool here except concentrating on HTTP, CoAP and MQTT, though
14:32:43 [kaz]
s/, though//
14:33:11 [kaz]
ack s
14:33:28 [kaz]
ml: should work on websocket as well?
14:33:41 [kaz]
sk: another possible future protocol as well
14:33:56 [kaz]
... no restriction on possible protocol to be mentioned here
14:34:48 [kaz]
... maybe Ben can work on draft text for that
14:34:53 [kaz]
bf: can work on it
14:35:11 [kaz]
ml: what is the fundamental problem then?
14:36:00 [McCool]
q?
14:36:14 [kaz]
sk: would propose separating the document into (1) technology with HTTP+JSON and (2) others
14:37:28 [kaz]
ml: (goes through the section 4)
14:37:37 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#the-profiling-profile 4. Profiling Mechanism
14:38:00 [kaz]
bf: would suggest we remove the profile section and concentrate on the protocol binding section
14:38:17 [McCool]
q?
14:38:33 [kaz]
ml: protocol binding within the WoT Profile draft is just a placeholder at the moment
14:38:55 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#protocol-binding 5.2 Protocol Binding
14:39:05 [sebastian]
q+
14:39:11 [dape]
q+ to limiting *known* terms/constructs might not help in all cases
14:40:21 [kaz]
ml: creating a profile for HTTP+JSON would be helpful, though
14:40:47 [kaz]
... the goal of TD is defining the datamodel
14:41:44 [kaz]
bf: but the current description withing the "WoT Core Data Model" would add complicity
14:42:08 [kaz]
mm: main issue is the motivation
14:42:29 [kaz]
... and what is the accomplishment
14:42:47 [kaz]
... need to be clear about what to accomplish
14:43:48 [kaz]
... we need a documentation for developers
14:43:55 [kaz]
q?
14:43:59 [kaz]
ack mc
14:44:24 [kaz]
... all we need is narrow scope and concrete description
14:44:53 [kaz]
... maybe we could generate a draft using MD and see which part to be applied to the WoT Profile draft
14:45:31 [McCool]
(sorry for jumping the q, citrullin, please jump in as necessary :)
14:45:33 [kaz]
ml: OK with once moving some of the content out from the draft
14:46:13 [McCool]
q+
14:47:04 [kaz]
ack cit
14:49:04 [kaz]
pb: we should think about a standard which can be applied to the future devices/protocols as well
14:49:52 [McCool]
s/standard/future profile/
14:50:10 [McCool]
mm: let's focus on things for now that we have direct experience with and a clear set of needs
14:50:23 [McCool]
... again, something concrete that we can "get in the can"
14:51:10 [McCool]
... however, I agree with citrullin, there is a need to have an "constrained" focused-profile that perhaps deals with these issues... but we can defer, and I think we have to
14:51:15 [kaz]
kaz: @@repeat
14:51:21 [kaz]
ack k
14:51:52 [kaz]
sk: still need the definition on what "core" means
14:51:56 [citrullin]
s/we should think about a standard which can be applied to the future devices/protocols as well/I have a hard time to understand why we use outdated protocols. I think we should focus on the current specification of protocols. If we are going with HTTP, it probably makes sense to go with HTTP2 or 3./
14:53:19 [kaz]
sk: we don't to keep less information within TD rather than big text data
14:53:56 [kaz]
... we should keep out a concept of "core" profile
14:54:18 [kaz]
... though could think about some "generic" information
14:54:35 [kaz]
... all the specific profile to be handled separately
14:54:36 [kaz]
q?
14:54:40 [kaz]
ack s
14:54:42 [kaz]
ack d
14:54:42 [Zakim]
dape, you wanted to limiting *known* terms/constructs might not help in all cases
14:54:56 [kaz]
dp: there are several layers
14:55:13 [kaz]
... quite crucial to have initial setup
14:55:53 [kaz]
... know terms/constructs would not work in some cases
14:56:34 [kaz]
s/know /known /
14:56:52 [kaz]
s/known/limiting known/
14:57:20 [kaz]
q?
14:57:25 [citrullin]
+1 as well, no one guarantees that people will not exceed it. Also there are still different protocols. The market will eventually find a common ground and some protocols will win, other not.
14:57:27 [kaz]
zakim, close queue
14:57:27 [Zakim]
ok, kaz, the speaker queue is closed
14:57:42 [kaz]
ack m
14:57:57 [kaz]
mm: we still have different opinions on Profiles
14:58:08 [kaz]
... need to resolve a lot of things to move forward
14:58:45 [kaz]
... we need a follow-up discussion during the regular Profile discussion
14:59:23 [kaz]
... let's start with one specific profile first
14:59:27 [kaz]
ml: ok
14:59:45 [kaz]
... agree this direction on issue 73 is right one
15:00:13 [kaz]
... please create Merge Request if you think any part of the current draft is not appropriate
15:00:39 [kaz]
... let's continue the discussion during the next Architecture/Profile calls
15:01:11 [kaz]
q+
15:01:25 [citrullin]
Didn't you close it, kaz? ^^
15:01:44 [kaz]
topic: Next meeting
15:01:50 [kaz]
mm: on Wednesday March 24
15:02:33 [kaz]
topic: AOB
15:02:59 [kaz]
kaz: please note that creating actual PRs for Profile discussion before getting consensus wouldn't make sense
15:03:09 [kaz]
... creating issues would be fine, though
15:03:12 [kaz]
mm: ok
15:03:31 [kaz]
... let's start with my issue 73 then
15:03:36 [kaz]
[adjourned]
15:04:49 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:04:49 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:08:38 [dsr]
dsr has joined #wot
15:26:45 [kaz]
s/@@repeat/basically agree with McCool, and would repeat we should clarify our expectations on which entity (Thing, Intermediary or Consumer) does what and has what kind of restriction based on some concrete use case and then clarify our requirements. and then we can see what kind of profile is needed./
15:26:48 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:26:48 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/03/22-wot-minutes.html kaz
17:12:13 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wot