Meeting minutes
Lagally: combined Architecture/Profile call
Minutes
Kaz: we've reviewed the minutes
Lagally: just quickly skim them
approved
Architecture
PR 873
PR 873 - Remove Section 7 assertions
merged
PR 875
PR 875 - Change Log for updates from WD 2022-09-07
merged
Issue 867
Issue 867 - Siemens-Logilab implementation description
<Ege> https://
Ege: not done yet
Kaz: to make sure, this is an issue on the Implementation Report, so another Issue for the wot-testing repository to be made, and another PR for wot-testing to be made
Ege: right
Lagally: let's talk during the Testing call later too
Kaz: suggest you create an Issue on wot-testing now
Ege: ok
Issue 877
Issue 877 - Update CR version with change log
Kaz: what do you mean by this Issue 877?
Lagally: applying the latest updates on the Change Logs to the static HTML for publication
Kaz: ok
Lagally: any volunteer to generate a PR for this Issue 877?
(none yet)
Lagally: (adds "by CR transition" label)
Problem with the Implementation Report
Implementation Report for the WoT Architecture spec
Kaz: the assertions are sorted by the ID name
… but all the assertions from the WoT Architecture spec is to be checked manually
… so it would be better to have the assertions not sorted by the ID name
… simply checking the assertions one by one based on the order of the appearance is fine
Lagally: agree
Kaz: let's talk about this issue during the Testing call again
Profile
Implementation Report
Lagally: (shows the consolidated assertion list including the information on which implementation passes which assertion)
… generated from the inputs from implementers
… node-wot, webthings-gateway and wot-webthing
Lagally: would like to get more inputs
Ege: Consumers to be implemented from scratch
Lagally: let's talk about the Consumer later
Kaz: during the Testing call?
Lagally: yeah, details to be discussed during the Testing call
… for this call, we'd assume potential Consumer implementations
Ege: we should see the definition of "Consumer" first
… humans can read the data and respond as well
… also some automatic tool can handle the data
Kaz: do we want to talk about that NOW?
Lagally: want to quickly check the definition of "Consumer" so that we can ask people for help
Kaz: OK. BTW, which document are you showing now?
Lagally: the Implementation report for the Architecture, which includes description on Consumer implementations
<mlagally> WoT Architecture 1.1 Implementation Report
Kaz: ok
PR 316
PR 316 - Adding Common constraints for accessibility
Lagally: common constraints for accessibility
Ege: title is required for TD
… we have description field as well
… should be also considered
… language negotiation should be also considered
Lagally: we have requirements for Consumers
… this is only a requirement to TD
… recommendation for multi-language too
Ege: do a Profile Thing conform to the TD?
Lagally: that's a basic assumption
<Ege> https://
<Ege> https://
Kaz: from my viewpoint, having "6.1 Accessibility" as one of the subsections within this section right before "6.2 Units" and "6.3 Date format" is a bit odd
… there is a mixture of contents, wide review viewpoints and concrete fields
… might be OK as a starting point, but would be better to restructure this section (including only two assertions for Accessibility, title and description)
Lagally: right
… would just start with this
… would like to remove the first sentence about the "title" field
… this is conditional description
… would be better to add more clarifications
… e.g., information for screen reader software to be added
Ege: assertions should be testable
Lagally: we can expand the text
Kaz: given the current situation, it would be better to add a simple Editor's Note on the need for the assertions on Accessibility here within the section "6. Common Constraints"
… starting with the currently proposed two assertions is fine
… but we should add an Editor's Note here
Lagally: ok
… can outreach Janina as the APA Chair so that we can get inputs
Ege: merging this PR 316 itself is fine
… but assertions should be testable
… so don't understand the intention to merge it
Kaz: we're already out of time
… so should stop the discussion here
to be honest, we're delayed with the WoT Profile spec work, and we're not at the stage of thinking about the assertions' testability yet.
… my suggestion is again adding an Editor's Note saying we need input from the Accessibility group on what to be considered about the Accessibility for WoT Profile
Lagally: ok
… (adds an Editor's Note)
Ege: don't understand the intention about this yet
Kaz: if there is any problem with Testing, let's continue the discussion during the Testing call later
Lagally: any objections to merge this PR 316?
(no objections, and PR 316 merged)
[adjourned]