13:00:12 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot
13:00:16 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/01/17-wot-irc
13:00:16 <kaz> meeting: WoT WG Charter - Day 2
13:03:47 <MIzushima> MIzushima has joined #wot
13:03:54 <dape> dape has joined #wot
13:04:47 <ryuichi> ryuichi has joined #wot
13:05:22 <Ege> Ege has joined #wot
13:05:46 <ktoumura> ktoumura has joined #wot
13:06:18 <mlagally> mlagally has joined #wot
13:06:35 <mlagally> zakim, who is on the call?
13:06:35 <Zakim> Present: (no one)
13:06:52 <mlagally_> mlagally_ has joined #wot
13:07:50 <McCool> McCool has joined #wot
13:09:01 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Ben_Francis, Christian_Glomb, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster, Michael_Lagally, Tomoaki_Mizushima
13:09:13 <kaz> scribenick: kaz
13:09:53 <kaz> kaz: we should clarify our policy on the WG activity, deliverables and contributions (potentially from outside of the WG)
13:10:09 <kaz> ... when will we talk about that?
13:10:12 <kaz> ... today, tomorrow or Thursday?
13:11:24 <kaz> mm: we'll talk about liaisons tomorrow
13:11:44 <kaz> ... and discuss the policy as well
13:11:52 <kaz> kaz: what about the W3C internal groups?
13:12:00 <kaz> ... included in the liaison discussion?
13:12:03 <kaz> mm: yeah
13:12:07 <kaz> kaz: ok
13:12:44 <kaz> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Agenda_Day_2_-_Jan_17
13:12:48 <kaz> topic: WG Extension
13:12:58 <kaz> mm: we made resolution for 4mo extension the other day
13:13:12 <kaz> ... and then had some more discussion
13:14:26 <McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/69222db249f3a7308ccb846ac83c6e4d1915e9cc/charters/wg-2021-extension-plan.md
13:14:40 <kaz> s/https/-> https/
13:14:42 <cris> present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi
13:14:49 <kaz> s/.md/.md draft updated schedule/
13:14:59 <kaz> mm: Kaz, when to publish the CR drafts?
13:15:13 <kaz> kaz: found yet another problem with the auto publication system
13:15:23 <kaz> ... so manual publication would be quicker in the end
13:15:37 <kaz> ... so expected pubdate is Thursday, Jan 19
13:15:39 <kaz> mm: ok
13:16:01 <kaz> ... (goes through the draft schedule on PR 1049
13:16:05 <kaz> s/49/49)/
13:16:24 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1049 wot PR 1049 - Update wg-2021-extension-plan.md
13:17:10 <Ege> q+
13:17:17 <kaz> mm: the issue is that expected REC date is June 29, which exceeds the 4mo extension
13:17:22 <dezell> present+ David_Ezell
13:17:32 <kaz> ... so PLH suggested we aim 6mo extension instead
13:17:47 <kaz> ... but Sebastian would like to stick to 4mo extension
13:17:51 <mlagally_> q+
13:18:02 <kaz> ek: Siemens is concerned about 6mo extension
13:18:17 <kaz> ... would start new work on OPC UA, ASHRAE, etc., asap
13:18:19 <kaz> q+
13:18:21 <kaz> ack e
13:18:31 <kaz> present+ Ben_Francis
13:18:46 <mlagally_> q-
13:18:48 <mlagally_> q+
13:18:51 <kaz> mm: can we ask to start the new Charter on June 1 if possible?
13:20:28 <kaz> kaz: yes
13:20:41 <kaz> ... on the other hand, if we miss the deadline with 4mo...
13:23:13 <kaz> mm: wouldn't it be impossible to publish PR by the end of the Charter period
13:23:29 <kaz> ... and publish the REC after the rechartering?
13:23:38 <Ege> mm: Do we need resolution as WG for REC transition?
13:24:07 <kaz> i/Do we/scribenick: Ege/
13:24:27 <Ege> mm: let's give people time until tomorrow
13:24:28 <McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1049
13:24:31 <kaz> q+
13:24:45 <kaz> q- later
13:25:19 <kaz> zakim, who is on the call?
13:25:19 <Zakim> Present: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Ben_Francis, Christian_Glomb, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster, Michael_Lagally, Tomoaki_Mizushima,
13:25:22 <Zakim> ... Cristiano_Aguzzi, David_Ezell
13:25:27 <Ege> ml: we are microplanning where we already have 1 year extension. Plus or minus 1 month does not change anything. We should increase quality and coverage
13:25:40 <kaz> present+ Ryuichi_Matsukura
13:25:45 <Ege> ... we need better estimate of remaining effort
13:26:05 <Ege> ... what is the phase between PR and REC? what is happening there
13:26:15 <Ege> ... who fixes the issues if there is no WG anymore?
13:26:58 <Ege> mm: For the 3 specs in the PR, I do not expect any major work
13:27:11 <Ege> ... before REC publication, a formal objection can happen
13:27:38 <Ege> ... so no change to the documents
13:27:43 <Ege> ... between CR and PR only testing
13:28:02 <kaz> q?
13:28:08 <kaz> ack ml
13:28:14 <Ege> ml: I am not proposing to extend due to profiles
13:28:26 <Ege> mm: getting another WD would be good as well
13:28:59 <Ege> ... let's discuss tomorrow when Sebastian is also here
13:29:14 <Ege> kaz: W3M meeting happens at the same time as main call
13:29:48 <Ege> ... so that means that W3M would review this extension next week, taking a bit longer
13:29:53 <kaz> s/W3M/remember W3M/
13:30:53 <Ege> ... I should check with Philipp
13:31:18 <Ege> kaz: we have failed to keep our schedule a couple times. We should be careful about the planning
13:32:10 <kaz> s/week, taking a bit longer/week. I need to talk with PLH again about when to put this as W3M agenda./
13:32:15 <Ege> mm: even if we get 6 months, I do not want to think of the 2 months. It should be a buffer
13:32:23 <kaz> s/couple/couple of/
13:32:47 <kaz> s/about the planning/about the planning this time specifically./
13:32:56 <kaz> scribenick: kaz
13:33:18 <kaz> topic: Registry Track
13:33:41 <kaz> -> @@@ Ege's slides
13:34:20 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/Drafts/#reg-pub W3C Process Document (2023 draft) - 6.5.2 Publishing Registries
13:34:46 <kaz> ek: (goes through his slides, and explain the definition of "Registries" based on the W3C Process Document)
13:36:47 <kaz> q+
13:38:07 <cris> q+
13:38:16 <McCool> q+
13:39:47 <kaz> ack k
13:39:59 <kaz> kaz: before @@@
13:40:37 <kaz> ca: you mentioned the WebCodecs Codec Registry as an exampled
13:40:44 <kaz> ... how to add new entry to it?
13:41:11 <kaz> ek: can use PR for that purpose
13:41:13 <mlagally_> q+
13:41:19 <benfrancis> q+
13:41:23 <kaz> q+
13:41:27 <kaz> ack cri
13:41:28 <cris> ack cris
13:41:34 <kaz> mm: we're talking about the mechanism
13:41:50 <kaz> ... can think about several possibilities
13:42:07 <cris> agree
13:42:19 <kaz> ... Web Codec Registry and FLAC WebCodec
13:42:27 <kaz> ... which would be normative?
13:42:40 <kaz> ek: Registry itself is not normative
13:42:51 <kaz> mm: ok
13:43:17 <kaz> ek: it's just rule of how to manage the table
13:43:34 <kaz> ... like the IANA registry, registries themselves don't do anything
13:43:37 <kaz> q?
13:43:38 <McCool> q?
13:43:41 <kaz> ack mc
13:43:42 <McCool> ack mc
13:44:09 <kaz> ml: why is this proposal made now?
13:44:20 <kaz> ek: can explain some idea on the Binding Templates
13:44:43 <kaz> ... Core document as a REC Track spec
13:45:38 <kaz> s/Core/Core Binding/
13:46:22 <kaz> ml: coming back to the example you show
13:46:34 <kaz> ... if you don't require any WG approval to update the registry
13:46:54 <kaz> ... some company-specific (=non-standard) entry could be added?
13:47:02 <kaz> ek: should be prevented
13:47:28 <kaz> ack ml
13:47:45 <kaz> bf: from practical viewpoint, it would make sense for protocol binding purposes
13:47:56 <kaz> ... my slight concern is potential fragmentation
13:48:14 <kaz> ... might be going to be too easy to create a new binding
13:48:31 <kaz> ... what would be the binding templates to be standardized
13:48:49 <MIzushima> q+
13:49:15 <kaz> ... profiles could be application-specific
13:49:36 <kaz> ... DID also has registry mechanism
13:49:45 <kaz> ... and has similar problem
13:49:48 <kaz> ack b
13:49:59 <cris> +1 for the downsides of applying this to profiles
13:51:16 <kaz> kaz: just a mechanism, see @@@
13:51:17 <McCool> ack k
13:51:55 <kaz> mizu: how do you think the Binding Templates document should be?
13:52:08 <kaz> ek: explain the procedure better
13:52:35 <kaz> ... could use the registry table
13:52:42 <kaz> ... to manage the entities
13:52:57 <kaz> ... and core Binding Templates document as a REC Track doc
13:53:54 <kaz> ... or Core document also a registry track doc
13:54:01 <kaz> ... not sure about the difference at the moment
13:54:42 <kaz> topic: Deliverables
13:55:07 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pulls PRs on the wot repo
13:56:14 <kaz> subtopic: Discovery
13:56:20 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1052 PR 1052
13:57:24 <kaz> mm: (goes through the PR)
13:58:16 <kaz> ... Discovery Updates, Discovery CoAP Directory, Discovery Queries, Discovery Integrity Projection and Geolocation
13:58:29 <kaz> ... Geolocation would impact multiple points
13:58:42 <kaz> ... would ask you all for comments on the PR
13:59:25 <kaz> subtopic: Security
13:59:38 <McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1053
13:59:45 <kaz> s/https/-> https/
13:59:50 <kaz> s/1053/1053 PR 1053
14:00:02 <kaz> mm: (goes through the PR)
14:00:07 <kaz> ... Onboarding
14:00:12 <kaz> ... Security Scheme Ontology
14:00:16 <kaz> q+
14:00:18 <kaz> ack mi
14:00:54 <kaz> kaz: do you mean actual public ontology service by "Security Scheme Ontology"?
14:01:28 <kaz> mm: equivalent security scheme to be handled equally
14:01:49 <kaz> ... just one possible way for that purpose
14:02:20 <kaz> ack k
14:02:34 <kaz> ... will do some more PRs for actual deliverables
14:02:44 <kaz> ... to have further discussion tomorrow
14:02:52 <kaz> [adjourned]
14:02:56 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
14:03:10 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:03:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/01/17-wot-minutes.html kaz