– DRAFT –
WoT-IG/WG

Main call

Minutes

<kaz> June-28

McCool: as announced by email, I'd publish them if no objections

<no objections>

Quick updates

<none>

Upcoming events

<kaz> Cancellations

McCool: We need to cancel some meetings on July 10 and 17 due overlaps

Charter review status

Kaz: The procedure is (1) Strategy Team review (which is done), (2) TiLT Team (which is ongoing) and then (3) AC review (to be done; requires one month review).

McCool: Let's discuss it when the review is finished

McCool: Given the timing we cannot start the new charter before September

Kaz: We need 1.5 months or more, so I'm asking 2-month extension to the TiLT Team.

McCool: I prepared the PR to update the charter draft

McCool: I changed the start date to September 1st

McCool: All the deadline for the deliverable did not change

Kaz: We need some more months to finalise the planning

Kaz: so we should use the remaining 1.5 months for the planning discussion so that we can start the standardization work by September

McCool: Any objections to land the PR?

<McCool> w3c/wot-charter-drafts#117

<no objections>

<McCool> proposal: merge w3c/wot-charter-drafts#117 which updates the end date of the new charter to Sept 1 and deletes the link to the detailed planning document.

RESOLUTION: merge w3c/wot-charter-drafts#117 which updates the end date of the new charter to Sept 1 and deletes the link to the detailed planning document.

<consensus on merging>

TPAC Planning

Ege: There is to be interest to discuss with the JSON-LD team to have a joint session
… even more with the relationship with json-schema

McCool: There are already joint-session scheduled for WoT + JSON-LD

Ege: The breakout session involve more groups

Kaz: We should clarify what to discuss on the breakout session and the joint session

Ege: we might need a new standard thus why the breakout session is needed

Sebastian: I support having this discussion on the breakout session

McCool: Let's put the details in the wiki and discuss the next time

Publication

McCool: What's the status kaz

Kaz: I've contacted the Webmaster in charge, we should be able to publish them by tomorrow if there aren't problems, or next Tuesday otherwise

Press releases

McCool: Press release is not an automatic process and we need to provide information and justify the press release

McCool: We can start collecting proposals and have a draft narrative

Sebastian: would be nice to have press release
… since it has more resonance

Kaz: I agree, we need a proper narrative

McCool: I'll prepare a draft PR

McCool: Some example applications would be nice to put in there

Sebastian: The marketing team should have good input

McCool: Should the Marketing TF start drafting?

Kaz: Would be good to have a sale speech to our intended audence, so not just talking about new features but a full story

McCool: Let's discuss on the Marketing call

<Ege> w3c/wot-marketing#425

Meetups

McCool: do we have meetups planned?

Ege: Mostly on talking stage
… but end of July

Kaz: JP CG is planning to have an event on Security in a few months and more regular smaller meetings in parallel

TF reports

Luca: I have some fixes pending for TD 1.1, but might be a general topic on how to fix those issues

Ege: Michael could you join the meeting?

McCool: Cannot today but if there are issues I can reply offline

Kaz: Michael Koster may help as well

McCool: This meeting can be considered close and we swich chairs and meeting

Planning

<sebastian> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf/2023_WoT_Next_Charter_Detailed_Planning#Day_5:_July_5.2C_2023

Minutes

Sebastian: Is the group fine with the past minutes?

<kaz> https://www.w3.org/2023/06/23-wot-minutes.html

<nobody against>

<kaz> https://www.w3.org/2023/06/20-wot-minutes.html

<kaz> https://www.w3.org/2023/06/21-wot-minutes.html

<kaz> https://www.w3.org/2023/06/22-wot-minutes.html

<kaz> https://www.w3.org/2023/06/23-wot-minutes.html

Pending issues and pr

<kaz> remaining PRs on wot repository

<sebastian> https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Detailed+Work+Items%22

Sebastian: we have two options: #92 and #93, they depends on a decisions on what to do with Profile

Ege: if we take Option 1, it first involves putting more defaults in the Protocol bindings

Ege: I find Option 1 more realistic since we do not have lots of workforce on Profile

McCool: We can consider Option2 later

Kaz: I'm ok with Option 1 as starting point
… but I'd suggest to move the two PR to the bindings repository
… this is part of the bigger WoT specification refactoring
… based on the new industry use-cases
… focusing on making the specification more readable

Kaz: this discussion should be handled in the next charter technical discussion

Luca: +1

McCool: We can ask Ben to move the two options during the detailed document as discussion items for later

<Mizushima> +1 kaz

Policy proposal

<sebastian> PR 1093 - Policy Proposal Process

McCool: Regarding Chair policy, the PR clarifies what Attending can mean
… Regarding policy adoption, I proposed some clarification on Working Days, and what's the span of a day
… also added something about archiving the rejected proposals

<kaz> policies/README.md

<kaz> proposals/policies/policy-adoption.md

Sebastian: Should be also a reason provided by a policy is rejected

McCool: Please add a suggestion to the PR about it

Kaz: we can use this PR as initial so it should land as draft

<small changes to the PR according to the feedback>

Kaz: regarding the chair decision part, we should have more discussion
… w3c as whole is working on consensus, I'd avoid majority vote

McCool: It is a last ditch fallback, in case we cannot have consensus

McCool: Let's mark also that section as draft

Ege: Are the chair minutes public?

McCool: Some minutes should not be public since some topics are reserved, but the outcome should be public

Sebastian: if there are no objections I'd land the PR as template, we'll call for a resolution once the document is ready

<no objections, merged>

Liaison proposal

<sebastian> -> PR 1095 - Liaison Documentation Template PR 1095 - Liaison Documentation Template

Sebastian: this is another template
… for Liasons/Relationship with other organizations

Sebastian: Are there any comments about it?

Ege: Might be good to name it as template.md

McCool: There is a directory per liason, this file is just for the README.md

Mizushima: Who proposes the liason ?

Sebastian: is anyone against it?

<nobody, merged>

Architecture planning

<sebastian> PR 1096 - Architecture Planning

McCool: This PR may wait since it is not complete

Kaz: for the next charter period we should consider industry usecase/needs and use the remaning time for the current charter to plan how to interact with them.

Sebastian: Let's merge the PR as draft as we did for the other PRs.

Kaz: I'm OK to merge this PR as well (as an initial proposal) with the title of "DRAFT", and we need to continue detailed discussion during the TF calls based on concrete use cases and requirements.

[adjourned]