Meeting minutes
minutes
<kaz> Feb-9
Sebastian: feb 9 minutes
… ed call, japanese cg, tpac 2022, publication status, ...
ege: what about tpac questionnaire?
McCool: will update later; initial one was to the chairs only, ...
Sebastian: also talked about testing, ITU-T presentations, ITRF mtg
Lagally: small typo (corrected)
Sebastian: any objections to publish?
… hearing none, will be published.
editor's call
Sebastian: terminology discussion
… need clarification on Physical/Virtual, etc.
WoT-JP CG
Mizushima: planning to hold an open event on ECHONET collaboration on March 11
… details tbd
conformance statements for Notes
Sebastian: for scripting, but may apply to others
McCool: two cases: drafts, and WG recommendations (as opposed to W3C recommendations)
Daniel: mostly the same, but does not make sense to define an API without normative statements
… so would like to proceed with this
Kaz: W3C process has changed a bit, so is ok to publish normative statements in a note
… but need to make decision as a group
… so WG as a whole is still reponsible, and we need an explicit resolution
<kaz> W3C Process 2021 - 6.4. The Note Track (Notes and Statements)
Sebastian: may have to discuss in a separate meeting
Lagally: understand what we are trying to accomplish; but would want to avoid Scripting API is required
… don't want to constrain how servients are implemented
Daniel: that is not the plan; more "if you want to be compliant with this document", but is not saying is required
Lagally: someone *could* go ahead and do something functionally equivalent in a different
… just want to split implementation
McCool: discovery has a similar issue; right now only a "SHOULD" assertion, so WoT Things are not required to implement discovery
… could do something similar for scripting, but with a MAY
Lagally: or at least a clarification
Cristiano: note we use Web IDL, so while our examples are in JS in fact the definition does apply to other languages, e.g. Java
<dape> +1
Sebastian: see also use of IDL for Dom, etc.
Kaz: please see the updated process document (link above) and review
… and think about whether we want to do this, and perhaps have a resolution next week
McCool: suggest we do a call-for-resolution on the email list
TPAC
Sebastian: request from W3M about hybrid meeting: virtual or physical
… deadline is March 28, still some time
… in chairs call, we thought it would be good to gather input from the group, eg. with an anon doodle call
… gather input over the next few weeks
Kaz: we talked about this last week as well
… from W3M viewpoint, want to establish feasibility quickly
… so please start to think about it from your viewpoint
… we could also create a similar questionnaire
McCool: and then collate inputs. I would also not wait until the very last minute
Kaz: so far, only a few responses, not very excited about physical meetings
… most are "unlikely"
Kaz: depending on response, if most chairs say "unlikely", probably need to cancel physical mtg
McCool: regardless, the choice is between fully virtual and hybrid, so remote attendance will be available either way
Sebastian: ok, will collect input until mid-March, then make a decision
ACTION: kaz to generate a similar questionnaire for the group participants
charters
Sebastian: ig charter done, WG 4mo extension done, 12mo extension still in progress (waiting for sec and privacy wide review)
McCool: note there is a PR, we need to make a small change to the WG charter
Sebastian: this just updates the URL to point to an intermediate page rather than directly at our web page
McCool: new template, better to do what they expect
Sebastian: any objections to merge?
… hearing none, merging
decision process
Sebastian: to we still want to keep this here?
McCool: suggest we defer this to the fall when we discuss our new charter
… a new process might make things more efficient, but in the short term it will be disruptive, and we just don't have the bandwidth
… I do generally agree that having a clear, documented decision process is important
… and we do need to take into account the opinions of those who cannot make meeting regularly
… and we DO have a problem with some PR languishing...
… but, I think we need to defer
Lagally: proposal was to have an async process, had specific implications on how long we could discuss an issue
… many examples when we had long discussions in issues that went off track
… at some point the chair needs to be able to call for a conversion
… so I don't "mainly agree with this proposal"
Sebastian: well, github does have tools for making decisions which we are not using
… and would be good not to lose time, but agree there are some important decisions which cannot be made with github
… propose that we should clarify this in the task forces, "culture" which is followed
… but new charter can include
McCool: just wanted to say we should table this for now and move on
Lagally: final issue: what does "thumbs up" mean?
Sebastian: correct, need to write down what you mean, don't just do the thumbs up
… w3c may have some guidelines
<sebastian> https://
publications
Sebastian: WD for TD 1.1 is on the way, possibly by end of this week
… UC is also on the way?
Kaz: right, but in progress
Sebastian: last week we also added last set of normative additions to TD 1.1, including dataResponse and global URI definitions
… stable, so called the normative freeze
… schedule update
<kaz> Updated scheduel
McCool: was PR against schedule for updates, merged
… included updates to Discovery dates
Sebastian: feature freeze for Architecture?
Lagally: not yet, some open PRs
Sebastian: expect this week?
Lagally: hopefully, depends on conversations this week
McCool: should update schedule to give exact dates for plugfest
<kaz> wot-thing-description Issue 1396 - Complete TAG/Security Wide Review Request
<kaz> wot-thing-description PR 1397 - WIP: Explainer 1.1
McCool: so we need to make decisions about how to do explainers
… one big file, separate files, put in web page
Lagally: I like the web page, short and simple
McCool: my concern is we have to add some more information which might clutter up the web page
… e.g. related standards, code examples, etc. etc.
Cristiano: most people want a short intro, but some people want more info
… maybe keep simply intro, but add links or a menu to other content
McCool: could add links to content we develop...
Sebastian: agree that if we develop material, we should use it
… also think that having information in one place would be useful
… and think we should extend the current web page
McCool: propose we discuss in marketing, but to be clear, is a high priority
… need to complete by end of next week at the latest
any other business
Sebastian: overtime, any other important items?
Kaz: sent out reminder about CG chair selection procedure to CG list; Ege and Cristiano, please respond, restarting nomination
McCool: AB Board wants to meet about LE restructuring; proposed for March 23
Koster: meeting proposed with ASHRAE, standard for building, 223, also connected to BACNET
… still organizing
… some issues about URIs
… not expecting that to happen today
Sebastian: adjourn