12:00:23 RRSAgent has joined #wot-profile 12:00:27 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/01/11-wot-profile-irc 12:03:11 ryuichi has joined #wot-profile 12:03:33 mlagally has joined #wot-profile 12:03:35 Mizushima has joined #wot-profile 12:04:10 meeting: WoT Architecture/Profile 12:04:24 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Michael_McCool 12:06:34 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 12:11:15 McCool has joined #wot-profile 12:11:49 scribenick: McCool 12:14:01 topic: Minutes 12:14:14 ml: minutes from Dec 22 meeting 12:14:18 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/index.php?title=WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf&action=edit§ion=17 12:14:55 i|minutes|-> https://www.w3.org/2022/12/22-wot-arch-minutes.html Dec-22 Architecture minutes| 12:15:10 ml: note this was a combined arch/profiles meeting 12:15:31 ml: as it was all architecture, let's review it in the arch call tomorrow 12:15:46 topic: WD Publication 12:15:48 q+ 12:15:56 ml: made a resolution, where are we with publication? 12:16:17 kaz: unfortunately, was not able to publish during holiday 12:16:23 ack k 12:17:03 ... still also working on CR publications, but Profile WD also not done 12:17:09 topic: Schedule 12:17:38 mm: will be proposing a 4mo extension today, to May 31 12:18:27 mm: for Profiles, to get to PR would need CR in first two weeks of March at latest 12:19:09 ... however, have 2wk internal WG review, so end of Feb need CR candidate 12:19:50 mm: with other things going on, probably 4 to 5 meetings 12:21:58 ml: (captures some notes in agenda wiki) 12:22:08 ml: what about a testfest? 12:22:20 mm: probably don't need one for other specs, but ok to focus on profile 12:22:42 ... but we should resolve any descoping prior and have a clear WD 12:23:55 topic: Contributions 12:24:04 ml: some new PRs 12:24:29 ml: PR #346 12:24:52 ... add clarification on server behavior for webhooks 12:25:24 ml: feel it is a useful clarification, says consumer provides both client and server behavior 12:25:56 mm: feel it does address the issues cited and should be merged 12:26:10 ml: concur, let's merge 12:27:02 i/PR #346/subtopic: PR 346/ 12:27:16 ml: rest is WIP; what about #314? 12:27:18 i|PR #346|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pull/346 PR 346 - Add clarification on server behavior of webhook consumer| 12:27:29 mm: I need some time to catch up on the comments on #314 12:27:33 i|#314|subtopic: PR 314| 12:27:50 dape has joined #wot-profile 12:27:52 topic: Testfest results 12:28:03 i|#314|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pull/314 PR 314 - Allow auto security scheme for other permitted security schemes| 12:28:58 https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot-profile/main/testing/report.html 12:29:08 ml: (generates rendered version of report) 12:29:19 q? 12:29:30 present+ Daniel_Peintner 12:29:57 s/https/-> https/ 12:30:11 ml: let's look at the at-risk items in the report 12:30:23 s/html/html Rendered version of the draft Implementation Report for WoT Profile| 12:30:35 s/Profile|/Profile/ 12:30:44 rrsagent, make log public 12:30:48 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:30:49 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/11-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz 12:32:45 mm: should also look at categories, e.g. TD ones can in theory be automatically validated 12:33:04 q+ 12:33:05 ... profile-abstract-1 also might have two sub-assertions 12:35:44 ml: then there is the a11y assertions 12:36:03 mm: these are relatively easy to satisfy, we just need people to state 12:37:11 dape: don't think we can say node-wot satisfies this... 12:37:41 mm: to be clear, node-wot is a framework for building things, we want to evaluate these on concrete Thing implementations 12:37:56 ... so would be on, say, a coffee machine 12:38:09 dape: but from point of view of node-wot would never fulfill 12:38:31 ... so hard to give it a "pass" from node-wot 12:38:46 ml: it is also a conditional requirement, IF you have a deployment 12:39:12 ... that may be used by users with disabilities 12:39:30 ... so a coffee machine built with node-wot can be compliant 12:39:38 present+ Sebastian_Kaebisch 12:40:26 mm: again, node-wot by itself is not an implementation 12:40:43 dape: right, we need someone else *using* node-wot to be able to report on this 12:41:04 q+ 12:41:18 ack d 12:41:44 sebastian has joined #wot-profile 12:42:01 kaz: understand point, but want to understand dape's position; is like browser, provides general framework 12:42:54 ack k 12:43:12 ... so should somehow consider node-wot an implementation 12:43:24 q+ 12:43:47 ack k 12:44:21 s/not an implementation/not an implementation of "WoT Thing" or "WoT Consumer"/ 12:45:44 s/an implementation/an implementation of WoT, though WoT by itself is not an implementation of "WoT Thing" or "WoT Consumer"./ 12:45:59 rrsagent, make log public 12:46:03 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:46:05 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/11-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz 12:46:57 s/again, node-wot by itself is not an implementation of "WoT Thing" or "WoT Consumer"/again, node-wot by itself is not an implementation/ 12:47:00 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:47:01 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/11-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz 12:47:32 ml: for all security schemes, is a problem 12:47:40 s/is like browser/is like Chromium for browser implementations/ 12:47:40 mm: most probably it is oAuth 12:47:43 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:47:44 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/11-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz 12:48:03 dape: yes, problem is schemes that require human input 12:49:10 mm: we could remove the security schemes that require human input... but keep e.g. the oAuth flows (I believe client) that don't 12:49:27 ml: let's create an issue to look into this 12:49:56 mm: I can do, will have to engage with Ben, since I think the code flow requirement came from Ben 12:50:16 ... but will also think about how this relates to bearer tokens 12:50:59 s/oAuth/OAuth/ 12:52:29 mm: security bootstrapping has PRs under discussion 12:53:01 ... I think we need to clean up discovery vs. normal operation "auto" 12:53:07 chair: Lagally 12:53:09 ml: links 12:56:08 mm: we need to add some structure here to capture test results for each table row 12:56:25 ... since it is unlikely that a single TD will have all of these link types, nor is it expected 12:56:42 ... but we would expect a set of TDs that would "cover" these 12:57:07 q+ 12:57:30 ... suggest making child assertions for each row 12:57:40 ack k 12:58:15 kaz: would be good to improve the spec itself... 12:58:50 mm: in TD, table rows can be marked as assertions, but the format is different here 12:59:18 ... but will see if I can figure out how to mark these up with at-risk formatting, etc. 13:00:42 ... similar issue for media types 13:00:44 s/would be good to improve the spec itself.../agree that is important, and it would be nicer to improve the spec itself based on that structural clarification./ 13:00:48 q+ 13:01:01 q- 13:01:37 [adjourned] 13:01:42 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:01:43 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/11-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz 13:01:54 present+ Ryuichi_Matsukura 13:01:56 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:01:57 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/11-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz