Meeting minutes
Past Minutes
Ege: We note the changes to be done on IRC and then kaz will edit accordingly if needed
Ege: Usual editing for the names
<overall review>
Ege: Consensus on the Minutes?
Ege: To recap: names and merging `minutes` and `minutes review`
<approved with those changes>
Zoom Links
Ege: I added the links to the calendar event to the wiki, the actual date should be ignored
Discussions
Ege: We invited parties to discuss more on what are the expectations in TD.next
Ege: Today Luca will present some pain points with the current specification
Ege: The presentation can be small and we will schedule in the next weeks (not the next since we have the detailed charter planning)
Detailed Charter Planning
Ege: I do not have more information, Sebastian do you have more information?
Sebastian: The plan is to have the meeting next week <checking the agenda>
<Ege> https://
Ege: This is the document we will discuss about
Ege: I expect to have around 3 hours for the discussion
Ege: If people are able to prepare a presentation on the parts of this document would be great
Luca: I have some concerns on some items and we could find time to work on something together with you (Ege)
Ege: <Adds presentation items on the wiki>
Cristiano: This presentation has to be done to the next week or the next weeks?
Ege: Next week want to refine the charter document, but the next weeks we want to have more presentations
Cristiano: I have some feedback with the experience with Discovery
Cristiano: We can refine the list after Luca's presentation
Sebastian: Two topics here
… One about what we should discuss the early beginning of the Charter
… how shall we manage the content of the TD document
… the document is generated parsing also the ontology and the whole process in complex
… we might find a simpler process
Cristiano: It is definitely a good topic to discuss
Ege: We note the people who are interested on the topic, at least one kickstarts the discussion
Sebastian: The second topic is about how about to optimise the workforce we have
… I suggest to not have so many many meetings in the week
… and concentrate on the TD topics first
… so the API and Discovery TF can work on the TD output as soon as it is done
… we could make a timeline
… so we see when the other task forces can start working
Ege: <Updates the document and recaps>
Ege: We could talk also about which protocol bindings to prioritise
Cristiano: Manageable Actions is also a topic of interest
Luca: +1
Sebastian: Next week we should not go into technical details
… the discussion should be more on the problem and not the possible solutions
Ege: I will prepare a shared document so it can be a joint presentation
Project Management
Ege: We prepared a github project with all the deferred to 2.0 issues
Ege: We should make sure everybody can access it
Ege: <shows the github project interfaces>
Ege: We can use it to manage the increasing complexity of the specifications
Sebastian: I like the project approach, we should make sure to filter the issues for planned features and not issue/questions
Luca: The project system in github is just a set of views, as long we label the issues correctly it will work fine
TPAC Agenda
<Ege> https://
Ege: The information seems already correct
Thing Description 1.1 Proposed REC
<Ege> w3c/
Ege: It is still wip
Sebastian: There is a section TBD
Ege: We discussed the PR in the Main call with a resolution, I'll contact Michael about it
Issues by rec transition
Ege: the issues are minor changes and we can address them off-meeting
Presentation by Luca
<Ege> https://
Luca: <showing slides; will be shared later>
Luca: Presentation topic: TD Pain Points
… the current TD spec is not uniformity
… it is unclear how to mange other specification
… we have also problems with the subspecifications such as profil and bindings
Luca: about the uniformity, the TD spec. has different meaning "of one" or "array"
Luca: affordances are not uniform
… input is in property and action, output in event, action, property
… event has 3 data schemas, property just inherits but no term
<sebastian> ok, Im back
Luca: action input and output are somewhat similar but events have different, namely data and dataResponse
Ege: the observation is correct. the input and output is the opposite
Cristiano: I can also confirm this problem. It would be nice if you link also the related issues
… this topic I like to start first in the new TD
Luca: I just prepared the presentation to start the discussion
… but not everything have to be addressed. Maybe it can be read differently
Luca: Property implies that the change is immediate and syncronous, even if it is never the case
Luca: Action cannot be subscibed
… a work around can be to define a Property that match a Action
Ege: do you mean the approach more coneptional?
Luca: its more about the status of the action
Sebastian: we will work on this topic in the next charter
Cristiano: agree with Sebastian. Topic has a history.
… I would not define a seperate property
… in JS properties defined with a promise and we cannot wait them
Luca: if you use a property, this is not immediate and is not synchronous
Ege: ok, I understand the issue now better
Luca: uriVariables clash badly with input
… in forms, response and additionalResponse fields that clash with dataResponse/data and output
… form does not have a way which parts of the Affordacne DataSchema should be map to its protocol
… uriVariables seem to be additive over the Affordance DataSchema
Ege: I agree, what is needed. is. a binding mechanism
Cristiano: I'm also agree with this points.
Koster: +1 what Chris said
… we have different places which can show up, such as in header, url etc
Luca: TD is mainly relied on JSON-LD
… but the spec says that TD can be processed without a JSON-LD processor
… we like to serialize TD in not-json (e.g CBOR)
… we should be clear how we can ensure interoperability
Sebastian: there is a history about the JSON serialization requirement and JSON-LD serialization requirement
… it is a compromise as specified in the spec
Luca: we do not have a concept about the concept of degraded bahavior regading consumption of something. chould be topic for next charter
Luca: dataSchema is related to the json-schema, but it is unclear if it is a subset or a superset
Ege: we should be very clear about this what you mentioned. First we need to fix the version first.
Cristiano: agree with Ege. we need a better explaination
Ege: thanks luca for the presentation. Very helpful
… other businesses?
Luca: this was just part 1 there will be another parts
adjourn