Meeting minutes
Organizational
Kaz: would suggest we have one-hour call for TD for a while during this extended period. We can concentrate on urgent bug fixes and planning.
Ege: ok
previous minutes
Ege: names were fixed
… found an error I didn't scribe
… also daniel name is still using his nickname
<kaz> i|kaz: would suggest we have one-hour call for TD for a while during this extended period. We can concentrate on urgent bug fixes and planning.|
Ege: we reached a resolution
… we need to write an email quickly
Kaz: Daniel's name fixed
Ege: any other issues?
… minutes approved
TPAC topics
<kaz> TPAC WoT agenda
Ege: please if you have anyother topic that you want to discuss please edit the agenda
… any other topics to discuss?
Luca: talk about connected protocols would be nice
Ege: do you mean websockets?
Luca: yes doing better with anything that as a connection state
Kaz: ok adding that item
… but it is a big question, and it is related to whole WoT not just TD
Kaz: note that we were planning to have additional vF2F meetings before and/or after TPAC, so those slots might be better opportunity for brainstorming discussion about bigger questions.
… we can still add that kind of topics to the agenda proposals, and talk about that during the main call next week, though.
Cristiano: how to choose a form is another long running question. Should we talk about it?
Ege: we can brainstorm without any restriction, than we can choose
… how to choose a form goes around normative consumption topics.
Cristiano: also manageable actions
Luca: they can be grouped inside Affordance design
Koster: We are making a list of TD items
… we can just refer to the list that we are making
… there is even less ability to get together in tpac so it is better to discuss those topics in other places
… we should point point unique opportunities that TPAC enables and discuss topic related to that
Ege: I think we can use TPAC to resolve long-standing discussions
Kaz: yeah, I agree. We can use the TD work items list and select the ones that make sense, because the work-items.md already has several categories like new features and refactoring.
… TPAC is focused on joint meetings
<Mizushima> +1 for mjk and kaz
Binding Templates publication status check
Ege: we are getting closer
Thing description
Ege: I started creating the Github release for 1.1
… most of it is automatically generated by github
… any objections to do that?
Kaz: ok, but generate the final diff between the previous version and the current one to be sure there is no error.
Ege: yes, I agree. We will come to that
… any other points?
Ege: github release published
… note that we have a git tag now
… so you can use it as reference
Koster: is it the 1.1 release?
Ege: no
Daniel: regarding the publication folder we have the same html
Ege: I linked in the release
Kaz: you should check the diff between wot-thing-description/index.html and wot-thing description/publication/ver11/6-pr/index.html
Ege: note that currently we don't have any diff with 6-pr folder
PRs
<Ege> https://
PR 1853
<kaz> PR 1853 - Update README.md with PR note
Ege: daniel just update the date and readme text
… nothing problematic
… any objections?
PR 1854
<kaz> PR 1854 - Update minor typos in README
Ege: minor typos
… in the README
… any objections?
PR 1844
<kaz> PR 1844 - Update schema to not allow empty op array
Ege: we agreed in the main call that I will send a email
Issues
Issue 1807
<kaz> Issue 1807 - TM namespace not active yet
Ege: TM namespace is not really active
… I tried to understand what we did before
… and I found some issues
… first we didn't document the process
… for example, we somebody go to 2022/wot/td/11 we don't know which content has been served
… it seems that previous TD 1 namespace is serving an updated version of the first context
… last modified was July of this year
… which is weird since it is an old
… td version
… using diff checker I was able to understand that we were pointing to a file in the current main branch
Cristiano: it is ok that is ok to modify td-contex.jsonld
… it is how the render works
Daniel: correct, the renderer generate td-contx-1.1.jsonld
Ege: then right, it should to REC1.0
Daniel: it is a w3c admin problem
Ege: can you have a look at it kaz?
Kaz: we talked about this issue many times
… first we should not use year number
… but just the version
… but given that we are using this notation in the current PR we can't change that right now
… second point is please clarify the mapping between w3c namespace -> github repository
… victor did it
… we can re-do it for 1.1
Ege: I agree with the previous point
… but year notation is suggested by w3c
… where is the mapping the Victor made?
Kaz: As I suggested (I think 6 months ago or so), we can use "https://
Ege: back on the Victor's table, where is it?
Kaz: it is in an issue
<kaz> Namespace URL Guideline
ege checked the table
Ege: that is the problem we are using not tagged link to the files
Cristiano: I agree
Kaz: we can change it in the future
Ege: yes, I agree but now I understand we have a bug
… I'll create a document with the mapping
Kaz: that is good
Ege: with this release we have also json schemas for TM and TDs
… for them we need to allocate a new uris
… we could use content-negotiation to expose schema
… as kaz mentioned we have diffferent options
… see the doc
Cristiano: no content negotiation they are two separate resources
… I would follow the current format, although I don't like it.
Kaz: I'm ok with any kind
… of URI, they are just a way to identify a resource
… I don't like current format, but given that we already published it
… we should follow it
Ege: ok
Cristiano: suggesting td-schema at the end
Ege: what about v1.1-scheme
Cristiano: that also works
Kaz: final decision has to be brought to main call next week
Ege: note that we need just two URI
… one for tm schem and one for td schema
<kaz> WoT Thing Description 1.1 Proposed Recommendation - 4. Namespaces
Kaz: there are two points here: how to handle the URIs and the concrete mapping.
<Ege> proposal: "We agree to use URIs with date for TD 1.1 and 1.0. For TD 2.0 we will reevaluate and possibly change to using /ns approach"
RESOLUTION: "We agree to use URIs with date for TD 1.1 and 1.0. For TD 2.0 we will reevaluate and possibly change to using /ns approach"
Ege: we can brainstorm right now
… and continue async
Kaz: we need to add several lines (one for each new uri) to the specification as well?
Ege: yes that is correct
… but is only in appendix B
… is changing and existing link
Kaz: from our view point it is a minor change, but for the w3c is a big change
… I'm afraid I still need to talk with PLH about this.
Kaz: before that, please clarify the concrete URIs from www.w3.org to be mapped to some URLs from github.com
Cristiano: we need to update the $id field too, but we already tagged the file. How can we correctly link it?
Ege: right that is an issue, I'll think about it.
final agenda items
Ege: planning discussion is moved in the planning meeting
Koster: I agree
... we have the workitems
... we just need to be sure to capture all of them
... for today I was planning to go through usecase and requirement togheters
Ege: any other points?
... ok, we can close the meeting
[adjourned]