12:00:56 RRSAgent has joined #wot-script 12:00:56 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/12/13-wot-script-irc 12:01:38 meeting: WoT Scripting API 12:03:09 dape has joined #wot-script 12:03:47 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Daniel_Peintner, Zoltan_Kis 12:04:05 Mizushima has joined #wot-script 12:04:33 cris has joined #wot-script 12:04:45 present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi 12:05:07 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Scripting_API_WebConf#Agenda 12:05:28 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 12:05:42 scribenick: zkis 12:06:34 Previous minutes: https://www.w3.org/2021/12/06-wot-script-minutes.html 12:06:47 i/Prev/topic: Minutes/ 12:07:17 DP: minutes look good 12:07:38 no objections, minutes approved 12:08:00 Topic: publication 12:08:13 DP: updated Note in early 2022 12:08:38 DP: it was discussed that we can merge PRs right away, don't need to wait for the call 12:09:38 ... we apply this for editorial PRs 12:10:30 Topic: holidays 12:11:10 DP: this is the last Scripting call this year 12:11:22 s|this is|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Cancellations Cancellations section of the WoT main wiki| 12:11:24 ... the last main call will be this and next week 12:12:02 DP: so next Scriping call is on Jan 10, 2022 12:12:16 Topic: PRs 12:12:27 SUBTOPIC: Mark repo as host of note track work 12:12:28 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/359 12:13:49 KA: it's mainly fixing a typo 12:14:00 ZK: we should have fixed that long time ago 12:14:07 DP: no objections, merged 12:14:24 SUBTOPIC: Allow only one subscription per affordance 12:14:25 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/356 12:20:02 DP: asking if subscriptions internal slots contain names or objects 12:20:14 CA: contains names of the subscriptions 12:20:38 ZK: only the name of the internal slots is misleading, but this short form is fine 12:22:07 DP: then there are some minor typos 12:22:08 link to the implementation -> https://github.com/eclipse/thingweb.node-wot/blob/b0bcbc6794113646086097669750284ae6e99e61/packages/core/src/consumed-thing.ts#L60 12:24:03 ZK: so it's a Map in the impl, 12:24:09 CA: should work like a set 12:28:51 DP: right, the implementation respects the spec 12:29:28 DP: will be merged when the minor typos fixed 12:29:31 TOPIC: Issues 12:29:45 SUBTOPIC: Rename Use Cases section 12:29:46 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/355 12:30:59 q+ 12:31:38 ZK: could make a PR, using "Developer use cases" name, and link to the Use Cases doc 12:33:46 -> https://www.w3.org/TR/?title=api W3C specs with the title including "API" 12:35:25 KA: still don't understand why should we use "Use Cases", checked other specs 12:36:33 -> https://www.w3.org/TR/2021/WD-geolocation-20211124/ e.g., Geolocation API 12:37:36 -> https://w3c.github.io/web-nfc/#use-cases 12:38:08 s/cases/cases NFC API 12:40:23 ZK: there was another spec, too, but it's also possible to list the use cases without calling them in a section like "Use Cases" 12:41:42 s/other specs/other specs, and most of them didn't use "Use Cases" as a title of this kind of content. maybe "examples of APIs" or something like that./ 12:45:50 KA: Developer use cases, maybe possible, but not sure if it's the right term 12:46:38 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_case 12:47:38 CA: developer use cases fit well, since it explains what we want, then the API described how we do it 12:50:03 DP: this got escalated beyond utility, we should make a decision 12:52:58 ZK: DP should make a decision, otherwise the group chairs can make a decision 12:53:18 DP: we cannot put Scripting use cases in the Use cases document 12:53:29 DP: "Developer use cases" is OK for me 12:53:40 DP: if that is OK with Kaz 12:54:07 KA: we should check with Michael Lagally 12:54:19 s/Michael Lagally/PLH/ 12:54:22 ... and the usage of "Use Cases" in W3C 12:55:16 ZK: it seems we cannot make a decision today, we can defer it before publication 12:55:28 s/we should/as I mentioned, I don't really think that is the right term for this content, so if we really want to use that term, would suggest we/ 12:57:04 SUBTOPIC: Conformance section necessity 12:57:05 https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/354 13:00:19 KA: some of the group notes used to be REC track documents and still have Conformance sections, but should be removed 13:03:19 DP: we need the Conformance spec, for if someone implements it, it has to respect the defined conformance classes 13:03:45 KA: the group notes cannot use normative language 13:04:04 DP: needs to be discussed with PLH, we need the Conformance section 13:05:54 ZK: we might need to put the spec back to the REC track 13:06:10 KA: correct, if we want normative spec 13:06:21 ... will check again 13:06:28 DP: adjourned 13:07:10 rrsagent, make log public 13:07:15 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:07:15 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/13-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 13:18:45 zkis_ has joined #wot-script 13:36:31 Mizushima has left #wot-script 14:33:25 Zakim has left #wot-script