Meeting minutes
New Member
McCool: I'd like to introduce Mahda Noura from Siemens
Mahda: did my PhD at University of Chemnitz, Germany
… topic was about composing devices and use complex functionalities
McCool: can you share your security experiences
Mahda: in my web engineering group we dealt with security
Sebastian: Mahda will support the security TF and TD TF
Minutes
<kaz> July-12
McCool: any objections on the minutes?
no
Quick Updates
McCool: are there any updates?
no
Schedule & Cancellations
<kaz> Cancellations
McCool: there will be security and discovery meetings next week
McCool: are there any cancellations?
seems not the case
McCool: are there any national holidays?
… please let us know
Kaz: there is Japanese Obon season mid August. I'll add information for that later.
Ege: somewhere else the schedule were provided
McCool: we should delete the Event section at the main wiki
Kaz: and then you can copy the "please check the calendar" link below to that section
<MM updates the call logistic section>
Update Charter WG review status
McCool: W3C TiLT review completed and charter has been approved
… the AC review will start shortly
Kaz: please ping your AC to support the Charter
Sebastian: would be good that we use the time during the extension also for technical discussions
… especially for Note based deliverables
McCool: when we get the charter approval earlier we can start earlier
Kaz: we need clearifications of the policy, document refactoring, use cases/requirements handling, etc. for next charter work first
TPAC23
<kaz> TPAC registration page
McCool: early bird is past
… remote participants have the same rate, but in-person will have increased rates
<kaz> TPAC WoT agenda
McCool: Let's check the agenda
… we have big topics which should in the agenda
… there are some joint meetings plant such as with JSON-LD and SDW
… there is a breakout topic proposal that relates to TD
<McCool> w3c/
Ege: I contacted the chairs of JSON-LD CG this morning
<kaz> s/Json-Ld/JSON-LD/
Ege: there is a JSON-LD CG meeting at TPAC planned
… but seems there is no WG meeting
<kaz> JSON-LD WG
<Ege> https://
Kaz: The question here is not whether it's the JSON-LD WG or JSON-LD CG, but rather whether we could invite the key people or not. If this is not possible we can also organize a meeting before or after TPAC
Daniel: I follow JSON-LD mailing list, it seems the planned meeting at TPAC is not sure. Depends how many people can attend
<dape> https://
David: Ivan Hermann would be also good candidate
Kaz: Right. Pierre-Antoine is another possibility from the Team. So my question is what is the reponse so far to the JSON-LD group so far?
McCool: Just sent message this morning
Kaz: please take me in the loop, I can help
McCool: there will be meeting with Accessibity, so far planned for Thursday, 17:30-18:30
McCool: MEIG/PBG is organized by Kaz
Kaz: Regarding MEIG and PBG, they can't make the WoT session as the whole groups but their Chairs are very interested. So we can invite the Chairs to our session to have discussion on "potential services based on WoT platform in general".
McCool: there is a meeting with WebAgent CG
… Sebastian gives an intro to WoT
Ege: is this meeting already confirmed?
Kaz: please discuss how WebAgent can be part of the WoT use cases
McCool: do you think there is Digital Twin IG meeting during TPAC?
Kaz: yes, I like to share a breakout idea
Publictions
McCool: please ping your AC to vote on the PRs
… questionary is also linked within the PR
McCool: how about the Note publications
Kaz: I will start the Charter AC review process and then I will take care of the Note publications
Ege: That's related to TPAC: I received a email from W3C to invite observers such as Sick AG, Schaeffler, and Deutsche Telekom
McCool: we should check the room numbers
Kaz: please include me also here in the discussion about possible observers
Sebastian: shall we reserve some time in the agenda to ask the observers about use cases etc
McCool: we should do this
… please add some time in the agenda
Press Release
McCool: we didn't join the Marketing call this week
<Ege> +1 from my side to combine the calls
<Ege> brb
McCool: lets have a joint call, marketing and chairs call next week
Kaz: The Press Release text should be generated by the whole WG, but I'm OK with the Chairs and the Marketing TF collaboratively generating the initial draft first
Kaz: press release is relevant for the whole group. but we can start with the text in the marketing call and bring it back to the core team
McCool: lets start the call 1h earlier (7-9 Eastern) and use the whole Marketing slot as well.
Other Topics
McCool: any topics?
Ege: for TD TF we have 4 PRs where we need group agreement before merging
McCool: are they relvant for REC?
Ege: yes
McCool: please provide the link for the agenda
… if they only editorial that should be ok. We need to decide about the resolution process
… send email and wait 2 weeks for getting feedback?
<kaz> wot-thing-description PR 1843 - Fix well known operation types only
Kaz: 3 PRs are minor, one is more major (#1843). TD TF should explain more about this PR. Next week we should discuss this in detail
… TD TF already did the resolution. we need WG resolutions
… if we think this is ok, I can talk with PLH. The question is making the decision today or next week.
;-)
(main call part adjourned)
Planning
Document structure
<kaz> Sebastian's slides for last week
<SK showing the slides from last week>
Sebastian: We could not finish overview last week
… about deliverables and their context
… we considered layered approach
… major building block is TD
… related to bindings
… discovery to find/identify TDs
… security aspect is cross layer
… what is missing: Scripting API, Profile, ...
Sebastian: Let's start with Scripting API
… where is the right place?
… I think on same level as TD
McCool: Agree
… set of things on same level
… sidebar activities
Cristiano: Agree with the level
… why no arrow to TD?
… there is some dependency
Sebastian: I am okay putting arrows... but we did not put arrows between Arch and TD either
McCool: There are dependencies ... but I think it is implied
… relationship is implied by stack
Cristiano: I am fine.. just not very clear at the moment
McCool: the current arrows are more like "registry" arrows
Kaz: I am okay with keeping as is
… need to define what arrows/relationship means
… maybe later
… now we should discuss the content of each module first
Ege: We should highlight whether building block is mandatory
… at the moment we don't say it
McCool: Discovery is optional.. stated in documents
… TD is the only mandatory spec right now
McCool: w.r.t. Profile.. I would put it between TD and Discovery
McCool: Security schemas (modular extensions) should be handled in a similar fashion as bindings right now
Sebastian: In TD we need to describe these (security) mechanisms too
McCool: Correct
… without REC process
Cristiano: past showed strong relation between protocol & security
… e.g., oAuth in http binding
McCool: security schemes work with adding @context
Cristiano: Profile might be somewhat similar
McCool: Yes, logically we could have registry for profile
Cristiano: Another comment w.r.t. "stack"
… profile should not be *under* TD
McCool: Yes, maybe discovery needs to go somewhere else in the drawing
… optional sidebar features
McCool: In the end there should be more profiles
Ege: point about security and binding raised from Cristiano
… security is related to protocols
… profiles are more complex.. since it is about restricting the TD
… bindings are about existing protocols
Kaz: From my view point we don't need this kind of detail today
… for today
… concentrate on building blocks
… keep "Profile" in backlog for today seems fine also
Ege: w.r.t. registry for profiles we should be careful
… not having as many profiles as possible
<McCool> +1 agree with Ege that we should minimize # of profiles, so a registry is not necessarily appropriate
Ege: would hurt interoperability
Koster: More bindings help interoperability
Koster: More profiles hurt interoperability
Koster: security would be shared.. e.g., between HTTP and CoAP
… the API might be different
… the overall direction is good
McCool: agree limiting number of profiles
… REC process for profile.. is painful but maybe the right way
Kaz: We need further discussion w.r.t. Profile
… that's why I recommended to put it in backlog
Sebastian: Question about sharing security schemes in binding
McCool: security relevant to a single process can be in binding document
… generic sec schemes can go into TD
Sebastian: We should allow for "external" protocol bindings
… for example other SDOs
… following the binding mechanism we specify
Kaz: We should allow that kind of extensibility
… w.r.t. security: we need security mechanism in TD spec.
… need security portions in all the documents
… for next week we need to think what kind of security is needed
Sebastian: I think we can conclude this for today
… and take another look next week
wot PR 1106
Ege: With M. Koster I plan to take a look at it in TD call
… restructuring with categories
… use-cases/issues per feature
… to have an understanding of topic area
… "timeseries" is a good example.. since there exist multiple issues and use-cases
Sebastian: I think we can merge this PR
Kaz: I agree with merging
… starting point for further discussions
Sebastian: Okay, let's merge
wot PR 1107
Sebastian: Another PR 1107, Social Media Policy
Ege: We have already a policy in marketing wiki
… was part of a group resolution
… my suggestions is to merge this since we have group resolution
… it is going to proposal directory
Kaz: Technically policy should be handled in one area... Github or Wiki
… now it is difficult to see a diff
Ege: Once merged, wiki text will be removed
… content has not been changed
Sebastian: Okay then let's merge the PR 1107
wot PR 1108
Sebastian: Asynchronous decision policy proposal PR, 1108
Sebastian: I don't think we can find agreement today
… it is about using Github features etc
Ege: Initially submitted by Ben Francis
… overall idea is to use GitHub more
… for non-normative changes one okay is enough
… for normative changes two okays are enough (not the same company)
… what if editor is not active .. different rules
… if no consensus can be reached -> postponed to web meeting
<McCool> (time check; also, I have another call to go to)
Sebastian: I ask everyone to take a look at this PR
… final decision next week
Kaz: Agree to talk about this next time
Sebastian: Will share/update the slides about architecture view
[adjourned]
Ege: Start TD call 10 past