IRC log of wot-discovery on 2023-06-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:02:14 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wot-discovery
14:02:18 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/06/26-wot-discovery-irc
14:02:24 [kaz]
meeting: WoT Discovery
14:03:07 [kaz]
chair: McCool
14:03:25 [kaz]
present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Kunihiko_Toumura, Tomoaki_Mizushima
14:04:02 [kaz]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Discovery_WebConf#26_June_2023
14:07:12 [kaz]
scribenick: kaz
14:07:40 [kaz]
topic: Minutes
14:07:54 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/2023/05/29-wot-discovery-minutes.html May-29
14:08:01 [kaz]
mm: (goes through the minutes)
14:08:35 [kaz]
approved
14:08:52 [kaz]
topic: Planning
14:09:16 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1094 wot PR 1094 - Discovery Planning
14:09:30 [kaz]
mm: (goes through the proposed plan for Discovery)
14:10:11 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/discovery-planning/planning/Discovery/work-items.md Discovery/work-items.md
14:10:52 [kaz]
mm: possible work item on sort-by filtering (was taken out at the last minute, but relates to query filters)
14:12:52 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-charter-drafts/wot-wg-2023-details.html wot-charter-drafts/wot-wg-2023-details.html
14:13:35 [kaz]
mm: (add some more updates to work-items.md based on the items within wot-wg-2023-details.html)
14:13:51 [kaz]
... right now, the information model is based on the TD
14:14:44 [kaz]
... around "break "improvements" into smaller individual work-items so they can be prioritized"
14:15:17 [kaz]
... validation
14:15:20 [kaz]
... TD versions
14:15:25 [kaz]
... version selection
14:15:58 [kaz]
... not sure how to handle that at the moment, though
14:16:23 [kaz]
... then "improve security"
14:16:29 [kaz]
s/validation/"validation"/
14:16:35 [kaz]
s/TD versions/"TD versions"/
14:16:51 [kaz]
s/version selection/"version selection"/
14:17:12 [kaz]
q+
14:17:56 [kaz]
... would like to put some placeholder item to the "Prioritized List" as well
14:19:21 [kaz]
ack k
14:20:09 [kaz]
kaz: Technically, we should be able to get clarifications based on the new use cases for the next Charter
14:20:11 [kaz]
mm: yeah
14:20:34 [kaz]
... we should think about how to deal with the use cases within the WoT Architecture spec too
14:20:37 [kaz]
kaz: right
14:21:11 [kaz]
... the description about use cases within the WoT Architecture spec can be transferred to the Use Cases document
14:21:19 [kaz]
q?
14:22:03 [kaz]
s/new use cases/new use cases and requirements/
14:23:35 [kaz]
mm: (goes through the discussions on PR 1094)
14:23:54 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1094 wot PR 1094 - Discovery Planning
14:24:20 [kaz]
mm: (goes through the "Priority List")
14:24:31 [kaz]
s/Priority/Prioritized/
14:25:04 [luca_barbato]
luca_barbato has joined #wot-discovery
14:26:40 [kaz]
... (makes "9. "Linting mechanism for TD" lower priority)
14:27:56 [ktoumura]
q+
14:28:17 [kaz]
ack kt
14:28:29 [kaz]
toumura: another proposal on a work item
14:28:54 [kaz]
... we could improve the interoperability with different protocols
14:29:07 [kaz]
mm: would be a good addition
14:30:24 [kaz]
... (adds an item for "Prioritized List" as item 19)
14:30:37 [kaz]
... Additional Introductions
14:30:48 [kaz]
... to be researched but support additional ecosystems
14:31:02 [kaz]
... examples: MQTT, OPC UA
14:31:13 [kaz]
... (commits those additions)
14:31:36 [kaz]
... let's now prioritize the things
14:32:14 [kaz]
... need some query mechanism because downloading everything would not make sense
14:32:20 [luca_barbato]
q+
14:32:32 [kaz]
present+ Luca_Barbato
14:32:54 [kaz]
... would be high-priority and make it the highest
14:34:11 [kaz]
lb: btw, you don't need to specify concrete number for enumeration
14:34:56 [kaz]
... we could get away from the JSON query mechanism and think about some basic query mechanism instead
14:35:16 [kaz]
mm: we could have some query filter function instead
14:35:30 [kaz]
q?
14:35:32 [kaz]
ack l
14:35:35 [kaz]
q+
14:35:48 [kaz]
... very simple package of query mechanism
14:36:31 [kaz]
... or search for some particular ID
14:37:03 [kaz]
lb: could use JSON Pointer
14:37:54 [kaz]
mm: "sort by" functionality might be necessary
14:38:14 [kaz]
... also need to see how bit/expensive the mechanism would be
14:38:52 [kaz]
... note that currently, we can do is downloading everything from the Directory
14:39:01 [kaz]
... but if the data is huge, it would not make sense
14:39:05 [kaz]
q?
14:40:37 [kaz]
... Directory works as a hub for a small area with a few devices or a large number of devices
14:40:57 [kaz]
s/a large/for a big area with a large/
14:41:06 [kaz]
q?
14:41:18 [kaz]
lb: mostly depending on the implementation
14:41:55 [kaz]
mm: the feature would impact the implementations
14:42:19 [kaz]
lb: related to how we constrain the resources
14:42:59 [kaz]
... my mental model is that my DNS could answer the DNS query
14:43:38 [kaz]
mm: we need to consider various possible mechanism all over the world
14:43:51 [kaz]
q?
14:46:21 [kaz]
ack k
14:47:06 [kaz]
kaz: I tend to agree with McCool
14:47:41 [kaz]
... However, we need to look into concrete use cases including a larger environment with many devices from various industries before diving into the detail
14:49:04 [kaz]
... so for today, I'd suggest we define two big categories, (1) higher priority and (2) lower priority, and then put this item into the higher priority category
14:49:20 [kaz]
lb: think this is a "Nice to have" feature
14:49:36 [kaz]
kaz: maybe we can say "This is nice to have" today
14:50:04 [kaz]
... and should see if it's necessary after clarifying actual use cases and requirements
14:50:28 [kaz]
mm: (reorganize the items into "Higher priority" and "Lower priority")
14:51:07 [kaz]
... parsing and validation should be higher priority
14:51:17 [kaz]
... since we don't have concrete mechanism so far
14:53:11 [kaz]
... what about Geolocation?
14:53:31 [kaz]
kaz: "Geolocation" itself is part of properties rather than the mechanism
14:53:56 [kaz]
... so I think it would make more sense to handle this as part of the smarter query mechanism
14:54:00 [kaz]
mm: that's possible
14:54:50 [kaz]
kaz: and I'd agree handling geolocation would be important and should be part of the Higher priority category
14:55:18 [kaz]
mm: then next, "Onboarding"
14:55:31 [kaz]
... could be part of security
14:55:33 [luca_barbato]
q+
14:55:48 [kaz]
s/could be/could be handled as/
14:56:00 [kaz]
... would put this under "Middle priority"
14:56:00 [kaz]
ack l
14:56:17 [kaz]
lb: "Onboarding" should be handled differently
14:56:35 [kaz]
... not part of the Discovery mechanism itself
14:56:52 [kaz]
mm: myself wouldn't disagree
14:57:10 [kaz]
... but so far, we've been discussing Onboarding as part of Discovery
14:57:24 [kaz]
q+
14:57:36 [kaz]
... let's put it under Middle now
14:58:00 [kaz]
kaz: agree
14:58:21 [kaz]
... and as usual, we could clarify how we should handle it after clarifying use cases a bit more
14:58:22 [kaz]
ack k
14:58:40 [kaz]
mm: (commits changes so far)
14:59:03 [kaz]
... would like to continue to work on this work-items.md a bit more before merging it
14:59:06 [kaz]
q+
14:59:37 [kaz]
kaz: that's OK
15:00:03 [kaz]
... but maybe it would be easier to manage the discussion if we merge the current PR 1094 today
15:00:12 [kaz]
... and then create another PR for further discussion
15:00:16 [kaz]
ack
15:00:22 [kaz]
mm: yeah, that's possible
15:00:41 [kaz]
... but would prefer continuing some more discussion on this PR 1094 itself
15:00:44 [kaz]
kaz: ok
15:00:56 [kaz]
[adjourned]
15:01:02 [kaz]
rrsagent, make log public
15:01:33 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:02:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/06/26-wot-discovery-minutes.html kaz
17:27:47 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wot-discovery