12:05:24 RRSAgent has joined #wot-uc 12:05:28 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/04/18-wot-uc-irc 12:05:32 meeting: WoT Use Cases 12:05:40 chair: Lagally 12:05:55 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Michael_McCool, Tomoaki_Mizushima 12:06:17 q+ 12:06:35 topic: housekeeping 12:07:29 ml: let's review minutes from April 4 and 11 12:08:12 ack k 12:08:57 kaz: I think we already reviewed April 4 12:08:58 i/let's/scribenick: McCool/ 12:09:08 ml: I see, ok, no agenda 12:09:15 -> https://www.w3.org/2023/04/11-wot-uc-minutes.html Apr-11 12:09:18 ... so let's just look at April 11 12:09:24 s|-> https://www.w3.org/2023/04/11-wot-uc-minutes.html Apr-11|| 12:09:26 -> https://www.w3.org/2023/04/11-wot-uc-minutes.html Apr-11 12:09:44 ... seems to be some formatting issues that need to be corrected 12:09:53 kaz: formatting issues have been corrected 12:11:31 ml: also a deletion that was not applied 12:11:34 kaz: fixed 12:11:58 ml: approve? 12:12:06 ... no objections, will publish 12:12:25 topic: schedule 12:12:39 ml: given that people are busy with testing, etc. should we change the schedule 12:13:04 q+ 12:15:34 mm: need to prioritize PR critical paths, think polcies and work items should be discussed after that, in late May 12:15:58 kaz: we also need to consider organization of documents, including use cases 12:17:18 s/use cases/use cases. That work should be done in parallel with the wrapping up for the 1.1 specs. So we should clarify our timeline for both directions, 2.0 prep and 1.1 wrap-up in our schedule./ 12:17:58 ml: coming to the question here about use cases, makes sense to suspend for now, and take work up with new charter 12:18:28 mm: so we stop for now, define the new policies, and then proceed in the new charter under whatever new policies we decide 12:18:47 +1 kaz 12:18:50 q+ 12:20:51 kaz: suspending use case collection and document collection is fine, but when do we start and stop? 12:21:29 q+ 12:21:30 q+ Ege_Korkan 12:21:31 ack k 12:22:11 q- E 12:22:17 mm: how about we meet a month from now? 12:22:19 present+ Ege_Korkan 12:22:26 Ege has joined #wot-uc 12:23:01 ml: also, want to say due to a management change won't be able to contribute as editor for TFs 12:23:17 q+ 12:23:27 ack ml 12:23:41 ... so need to wrap up things 12:24:33 q? 12:24:35 q? 12:24:44 mm: we are also loosing other people, so generally have to reorg 12:25:02 ack k 12:25:21 kaz: resources always limited, will have to decide what we can do based on that 12:25:39 q+ 12:26:12 ml: oracle is not pulling out of WoT, however 12:26:20 q? 12:26:20 ack k 12:28:13 mm: ok, so we should pause the UC calls and update the readme to say contibutions are paused while we adjust policies 12:28:28 rrsagent, make log public 12:28:32 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:28:34 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/18-wot-uc-minutes.html kaz 12:32:36 q+ 12:35:17 ack 12:35:22 s/ack// 12:35:24 ack k 12:35:27 scribe+ 12:36:31 kaz: again, just saying "suspending the TF" is vague, because we need to continue the discussion on our policy and procedure. Having initial discussion during the WoT main call is also fine, but that kind of plan should be also clarified there./ 12:36:45 s|there./|there.| 12:37:04 +1 kaz 12:38:16 q+ 12:39:28 ack k 12:42:08 mm: think we need to define overall process first, before we discuss internal details of UC TF procedures 12:42:49 i/think we/scribenick: McCool/ 12:42:51 ml: can look at other standards groups for requirements process, eg. DVB consortium has a good process 12:43:48 ... there is a commercial group that gathers commercial requirements, then these are approved by steering board (members from other TFs). 12:43:56 q+ 12:44:30 mm: we definitely need a process that lets us prioritize for industry adoption 12:44:33 ml: right 12:45:12 kaz: can look at other SDOs, also IETF, ISO, etc; however, most important part is our own intentions 12:45:20 q+ 12:45:55 kaz: we should clarify as WG the basic policies about what kinds of ideas to be obtained from what kind of people and how 12:46:06 ... in my mind can be quite simple 12:47:09 mm: I think we are clear on the goal: wide industry adoption 12:47:24 ... but I'm not convinced it's clear how to get there 12:47:49 ml: would not necessarily survey all other SDOs, just giving an example 12:48:23 q+ 12:48:41 ml: we have to avoid just adding a bunch of features without motivation 12:48:50 ack k 12:49:01 ack m 12:49:10 ege: what do the other W3C groups do 12:49:40 ml: my understanding is that groups are self-organizing 12:49:41 q+ 12:49:46 ack e 12:50:20 kaz: have been working as a team contact for a long time and for many groups 12:50:43 ... all those groups have started with use cases and as part of liaisons with external SDOs 12:51:09 ... but relationships with external orgs is getting more and more complicated 12:51:43 ... what should be clarified is something like what ML is showing (@@link) 12:52:36 ack k 12:53:29 https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/225 12:53:44 mm: do think we need to work harder on gathering stakeholders and contributions 12:54:42 mm: do want to say that UC document is a good baseline for future work 12:54:53 s/mm:/ml:/ 12:55:19 q+ 12:55:59 mm: want to say we appreciate your contributions and hope that you next project is interesting! 12:57:39 kaz: myself also; but if not working on use cases, need to think about policy 12:57:50 q- 12:57:55 mm: that is my intention 12:58:24 s/about policy/about policy, procedure and strategy for the next Charter period./ 12:58:30 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:58:32 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/18-wot-uc-minutes.html kaz 12:58:50 topic: Next calls 12:59:04 q+ 12:59:24 ack k 12:59:52 s/topic: Next calls// 12:59:54 [adjourned] 13:00:06 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:00:08 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/18-wot-uc-minutes.html kaz