IRC log of wot on 2023-07-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

11:58:05 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wot
11:58:09 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/07/26-wot-irc
11:58:12 [kaz]
meeting: WoT-WG/IG
11:58:19 [kaz]
chair: Sebastian/McCool
11:58:32 [McCool]
McCool has joined #wot
11:58:34 [kaz]
present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Mahda_Noura
12:01:25 [ktoumura]
ktoumura has joined #wot
12:01:27 [mahdanoura]
mahdanoura has joined #wot
12:02:23 [kaz]
present+ Sebastian_Kaebisch, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster
12:02:27 [sebastian]
sebastian has joined #wot
12:02:50 [kaz]
present+ Ege_Korkan
12:03:05 [Ege]
Ege has joined #wot
12:03:13 [kaz]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#26_July_2023
12:03:22 [kaz]
present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
12:03:46 [Mizushima]
Mizushima has joined #wot
12:04:34 [mjk]
mjk has joined #wot
12:06:33 [McCool]
scribenick: McCool
12:06:47 [kaz]
q+
12:07:12 [kaz]
ack k
12:08:48 [McCool]
topic: Minutes
12:08:55 [McCool]
https://www.w3.org/2023/07/19-wot-minutes.html
12:09:52 [McCool]
sb: new policy, will not going into details, chairs have reviewed and fixed some issues already
12:09:52 [kaz]
q+
12:09:52 [matsuda]
matsuda has joined #wot
12:10:19 [kaz]
ack k
12:10:30 [kaz]
present+ Tetsushi_Matsuda
12:11:06 [McCool]
kaz: do need to let people know where drafts are
12:11:15 [kaz]
i|do|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1102 proposed policy for minutes review|
12:11:31 [McCool]
mm: indeed, and also the minutes policy is still only "proposed", so let's scan them quickly
12:13:09 [McCool]
sb: any objections to publish?
12:14:29 [McCool]
sb: no objections, publish
12:14:57 [McCool]
mm: let's also see if we can make that minutes policy official, starting with finishing the draft PR, then a CfR...
12:15:07 [McCool]
topic: quick updates
12:15:11 [McCool]
sb: none
12:15:17 [McCool]
topic: upcoming events
12:15:27 [Ege]
q+
12:15:29 [McCool]
sb: some vacations, etc. documented on the wiki
12:15:40 [McCool]
... also public holidays in Japan, e.g. Obon
12:15:56 [McCool]
sb: let's discuss cancelling that week
12:16:02 [McCool]
... in mid-August
12:16:43 [cris_]
cris_ has joined #wot
12:17:14 [McCool]
mm: let's indicate that Security and Discovery are not cancelled
12:17:37 [McCool]
sb: also note, Security call will be moving starting the week after next
12:17:45 [dezell]
dezell has joined #wot
12:17:49 [McCool]
... to address a conflict that Mahda has
12:17:57 [dezell]
present+ David_Ezell
12:18:02 [cris_]
q+
12:18:20 [McCool]
topic: charter
12:18:23 [Ege]
q+
12:18:27 [kaz]
s/upcoming events/upcoming events and schedule changes/
12:18:31 [McCool]
sb: regarding review status, any news?
12:18:33 [kaz]
q+
12:18:56 [McCool]
... I have not heard if we are in AC review yet
12:19:21 [McCool]
ege: meeting in W3C calendar expiring, we need to update them
12:19:59 [kaz]
i/meeting in/topic: calendar/
12:20:30 [kaz]
present+ David_Ezell
12:20:32 [McCool]
mm: yes, true, I will fix
12:20:32 [kaz]
ack e
12:20:55 [kaz]
s/calendar/schedule changes - revisited/
12:20:57 [McCool]
cris: scripting may also have some cancellations also
12:21:52 [McCool]
sb: ok, let me document that
12:22:21 [kaz]
ack c
12:22:23 [McCool]
cris: last three weeks of august, scripting will be cancelled, not sure about next week
12:22:50 [McCool]
s/not sure about next week//
12:23:55 [kaz]
ack k
12:24:08 [sebastian]
q?
12:24:09 [McCool]
mm: anyway, I will fix the calendar, and will add task leaders as organizers
12:24:16 [kaz]
i/anyway/kaz: need to clarify who to update the calendar/
12:24:17 [kaz]
q+
12:24:20 [McCool]
sb: back to charter status...
12:24:47 [McCool]
kaz: still working with Marcom team on AC review request; will send out this week
12:24:53 [McCool]
... but charter request is approved
12:25:01 [kaz]
s/Marcom/Marcomm/
12:25:04 [McCool]
topic: TPAC Planning
12:25:05 [Ege]
q?
12:25:08 [kaz]
ack k
12:25:14 [McCool]
sb: registration is open
12:25:25 [kaz]
i/back to/topic: WG Charter - revisited/
12:25:34 [kaz]
q+
12:25:45 [McCool]
... is hybrid call; original hotel is full, but they have more rooms in another hotel
12:26:34 [kaz]
ack k
12:26:37 [McCool]
... or rather, some recommendations
12:27:09 [McCool]
kaz: I will be staying at a nearby hotel
12:27:32 [McCool]
sb: need to look more at agenda
12:27:37 [Ege]
q+
12:27:38 [McCool]
... some news on JSON-LD
12:28:13 [McCool]
ege: topics are relevant to the group and community, including VC, other related tech
12:28:17 [kaz]
q+
12:28:37 [kaz]
ack e
12:28:37 [McCool]
... JSON-LD CG will not be meeting, but we can use their CG slot
12:29:00 [McCool]
... but Manu mentioned RCH will be meeting and covers some of these topics
12:29:18 [McCool]
... have asked how many people are interested
12:29:49 [McCool]
... could join coffee break to set exact time; but would rather arrange in advance
12:30:04 [McCool]
ege: I am currently trying to find the appropriate email, etc.
12:30:07 [kaz]
q?
12:30:42 [McCool]
kaz: their proposed time is Monday morning, which I cannot join
12:30:56 [McCool]
... an alternative would be to have a dedicated call before or after TPAC
12:31:18 [McCool]
ege: I also have a conflict Monday with WebAgents
12:31:26 [McCool]
q+
12:31:29 [McCool]
ack k
12:32:24 [McCool]
mm: should we not just ask them to join in one of our slots?
12:33:07 [McCool]
ege: would prefer to meet during TPAC
12:33:17 [McCool]
kaz: who would join?
12:33:34 [McCool]
ege: there are a number of other slots proposed, still working on it
12:33:48 [McCool]
kaz: should also see who can join on Monday...
12:34:08 [Ege]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-linked-json/2023Jul/0010.html
12:34:13 [McCool]
mm: Monday is of the table?
12:34:33 [McCool]
ege: no, not completely, only half the day
12:35:23 [McCool]
kaz: need to see who from our side
12:35:30 [kaz]
s/of the/off the/
12:35:41 [kaz]
s/side/side would join as well/
12:35:43 [McCool]
mm: need to send around a list of all the alternatives and see who can make each one
12:36:27 [McCool]
ege: there is a list in the wiki, but there are other conflicts
12:36:29 [kaz]
q+
12:36:39 [Ege]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-linked-json/2023Jul/0006.html has answers to the topics
12:36:41 [McCool]
... currently the Monday slot is the proposal
12:36:47 [McCool]
... still not finalized, however
12:37:18 [McCool]
sb: won't have a perfect slot, but in favor of a F2F meeting
12:37:31 [McCool]
... we can follow up with another meeting afterwards
12:38:32 [McCool]
kaz: better if the "official" discussion is after, but F2F meeting can be "casual"
12:38:51 [McCool]
... just because not all WoT WG members can attend
12:38:54 [kaz]
ack k
12:38:59 [McCool]
ack m
12:40:31 [McCool]
sb: what about SDW and Privacy?
12:40:58 [Ege]
brb
12:41:07 [kaz]
s/brb//
12:41:14 [McCool]
mm: I think both will happen after TPAC in scheduled calls
12:41:15 [kaz]
rrsagent, make log public
12:41:19 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:41:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/07/26-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:41:55 [kaz]
q+
12:42:07 [McCool]
mm: will also double-check a11y slot, thurs at 1730
12:42:14 [McCool]
sb: what about MEIG?
12:43:06 [McCool]
kaz: joint meeting makes sense, but no specific times
12:43:45 [McCool]
mm: suggest we schedule a "use-case" session, invite appropriate groups to it, including MEIG
12:45:11 [McCool]
sb: adds "Use Cases" to topics list
12:45:21 [McCool]
mm: now we need to decide some times for things
12:45:36 [McCool]
sb: suggest we put agenda at the top where it is easy to find
12:46:11 [McCool]
mm: suggest you throw something together, next week we can look at it and refine
12:46:43 [sebastian]
q?
12:46:54 [kaz]
ack k
12:46:55 [McCool]
ack k
12:47:15 [McCool]
topic: publications
12:47:32 [kaz]
rrsagent, make log public
12:47:36 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
12:47:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/07/26-wot-minutes.html kaz
12:48:10 [McCool]
sb: have 8-10 "supports" for each publication, 1 fix for "non-support" possible, so need about 10 more
12:48:56 [kaz]
q+
12:49:01 [McCool]
sb: regarding the fix, there is a PR
12:49:03 [McCool]
q+
12:49:19 [McCool]
... but we do have proof that it is implemented
12:49:52 [McCool]
kaz: there is a process issue; will have to talk with PLH
12:50:26 [McCool]
kaz: create a PR, but please do not merge it, wait until get confirmation from PLH
12:50:34 [kaz]
ack k
12:51:02 [kaz]
i|registration is open|-> https://www.w3.org/2023/09/TPAC/ TPAC page|
12:51:19 [kaz]
i|registration is open|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf/2023_WoT_TPAC_Agenda WoT agenda|
12:51:27 [sebastian]
https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1858
12:51:34 [kaz]
q+
12:51:44 [kaz]
ack m
12:51:44 [McCool]
mm: generally be careful, changes to the PR->REC at this stage need external approvals
12:52:15 [McCool]
kaz: at this stage, we should not be adding any updates to the spec, unless there is a fatal problem
12:52:59 [McCool]
s/the spec/any document/
12:53:18 [McCool]
s/any document/any deliverable/
12:53:39 [Ege]
q+
12:53:43 [kaz]
ack k
12:54:01 [McCool]
sb: please ping your AC reps to get more votes
12:54:12 [McCool]
... there are many WG members still missing
12:54:27 [kaz]
q+
12:54:36 [McCool]
sb: any other news on publications?
12:54:40 [kaz]
ack k
12:54:41 [McCool]
kaz: notes still in process
12:54:45 [McCool]
topic: joint calls
12:54:55 [McCool]
ege: WoT CG, forgot to mention
12:54:56 [kaz]
s/notes/2 WG Notes/
12:54:59 [McCool]
... for TPAC
12:55:16 [kaz]
s/joint calls/TPAC joint discussion - revisited/
12:55:21 [McCool]
... is linked already, should include in schedule
12:55:32 [kaz]
q+
12:55:43 [McCool]
... there is a document in a PR
12:55:56 [kaz]
ack e
12:56:06 [McCool]
https://github.com/w3c/wot-cg/pull/48
12:56:36 [McCool]
ege: generally, will be mornings on Thursday and Friday
12:58:16 [McCool]
ege: joint call slots are also proposed on WoT WG wiki page
12:59:15 [McCool]
kaz: having separate CG meetings are good, we should also discuss policies about how to transfer ideas and input from CG to WG
12:59:32 [McCool]
... need to satisfy patent policy, etc.
12:59:44 [cris_]
q+
12:59:48 [Ege]
q+
12:59:51 [kaz]
ack k
13:00:11 [kaz]
q+
13:00:19 [McCool]
mm: we need to document an official policy, but basically people have to agree to patent policy
13:00:59 [McCool]
cris: can go the other way for informal discussion
13:01:23 [McCool]
mm: that is ok for policy discussion, but for technical input we need to satisfy the patent policy
13:01:32 [kaz]
ack c
13:01:34 [kaz]
ack e
13:01:36 [kaz]
ack k
13:01:37 [McCool]
kaz: we also need to be fair to those that have paid for membership
13:02:13 [McCool]
topic: press release
13:02:42 [McCool]
sb: had extended meeting between chairs and marketing TF
13:03:00 [McCool]
... defined main points for press release, focusing on important points
13:03:08 [McCool]
... the draft is in the agenda
13:03:52 [McCool]
... we need also to get feedback from Marcom team, and need to get testimonials
13:03:55 [McCool]
q+
13:04:08 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/planning/schedule.md schedule.md
13:04:29 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Press_Release draft narrative
13:05:07 [Ege]
q+
13:05:46 [kaz]
ack m
13:05:52 [kaz]
ack e
13:05:55 [kaz]
q+
13:06:37 [McCool]
mm: summary, 6 weeks, 2 for draft, 2 for CfP, 2 for MarComm review
13:06:46 [McCool]
... need first draft by next week
13:07:18 [kaz]
ack k
13:07:28 [kaz]
kaz: agree
13:07:45 [kaz]
... and would like to confirm that this is very important task as the whole WoT WG
13:08:10 [kaz]
... some smaller group's working on the initial draft would make sense
13:08:15 [kaz]
... like McCool and Koster
13:08:28 [kaz]
... also we need to start to get testimonials
13:08:37 [kaz]
i/agree/scribenick: kaz/
13:08:57 [kaz]
mm: Koster, let's start to work on this together
13:08:59 [kaz]
mjk: ok
13:09:07 [kaz]
mm: can start with outline
13:09:20 [kaz]
... people can give comments if anything is missing
13:10:02 [kaz]
... main big points are "why it's important", "what's new?" and "what's the impact?"
13:10:26 [kaz]
... avoiding vendor lock-in
13:10:47 [kaz]
... two big topics for "what's new": TM and Discovery
13:10:54 [Ege]
q+
13:10:56 [kaz]
q+
13:11:00 [kaz]
ack e
13:11:08 [kaz]
ek: should be some sort of relation
13:11:22 [kaz]
... not new but building up based on something
13:11:31 [kaz]
... improvement for something
13:11:49 [kaz]
mm: good point
13:12:05 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/2020/04/pressrelease-wot-rec.html previous press release
13:12:13 [kaz]
mm: (shows the previous press release)
13:12:28 [kaz]
... we need an updated diagram as well
13:12:38 [kaz]
... something like the narrow-waist picture
13:12:47 [kaz]
q?
13:12:57 [kaz]
ack k
13:14:17 [mjk]
q+
13:14:50 [kaz]
kaz: for all the big points here, specifically, "what's new?", describing what we've done in a "top-down" manner would be important
13:15:12 [kaz]
... easy and automatic generation of the system would be a keyword for that purpose
13:15:17 [kaz]
mjk: right
13:15:21 [Ege]
+1 to mjk
13:15:25 [kaz]
... easy/automatic would be good
13:15:27 [mjk]
ack m
13:15:54 [kaz]
... also could mention what kind of improvement applied in addition to TM and Discovery
13:15:59 [kaz]
mm: ok
13:16:04 [kaz]
... Koster and I have to work on that
13:16:10 [kaz]
... regarding testimonials
13:16:28 [kaz]
... bunch of software there
13:16:32 [kaz]
... want to talk about SDOs
13:16:48 [kaz]
... ECHONET, Conexxus, IPA DADC, etc.
13:17:07 [kaz]
s/IPA/OPC UA, IPA/
13:17:09 [Ege]
q+
13:17:20 [kaz]
... would have testimonials
13:17:23 [kaz]
ack e
13:17:45 [kaz]
ek: what about companies using the technologies who are not Members?
13:17:46 [kaz]
q+
13:18:01 [kaz]
mm: press release is basically for the Members
13:18:15 [kaz]
... the question is if we need to mention them by name
13:18:27 [kaz]
ek: any companies working on WoT
13:18:47 [kaz]
mm: we could generate a draft and ask the W3C Team for review
13:18:57 [kaz]
... you have a list of companies
13:19:00 [kaz]
q?
13:19:11 [kaz]
... possibly 5-6
13:20:37 [kaz]
kaz: it's odd to mention non-Member companies' names would be odd
13:21:48 [kaz]
... though we can mention SDOs or OSS projects as we did for the previous press release
13:21:53 [kaz]
mm: yeah, we should be careful
13:22:07 [kaz]
... we mentioned Eclipse within our previous press release
13:22:13 [kaz]
ack k
13:22:15 [kaz]
q+
13:22:38 [kaz]
mm: also, nice to have a page of "users of WoT"
13:22:46 [kaz]
... can point a page as a whole
13:23:15 [kaz]
q?
13:23:21 [Ege]
brb
13:23:27 [kaz]
... let's work on the draft
13:23:27 [kaz]
s/brb//
13:23:33 [kaz]
q?
13:24:19 [kaz]
kaz: for the next step, please move this draft narrative to the GitHub so that we can continue the discussion
13:24:21 [kaz]
mm: ok
13:24:26 [kaz]
... is the wot repo ok?
13:24:31 [kaz]
kaz: yes, that's fine
13:25:02 [kaz]
mm: we have some basic testimonials on the wot-testing repo
13:25:28 [kaz]
sk: need upper manager's approval
13:25:44 [kaz]
mm: it's a chicken/egg problem...
13:25:51 [kaz]
... need to get MarComm review
13:25:55 [kaz]
sk: ok
13:26:12 [McCool]
topic: other topics
13:26:19 [kaz]
scribenick: McCool
13:26:24 [McCool]
sb: need to wrap up so we can do planning
13:26:49 [McCool]
sb: anything from TFs?
13:26:50 [Ege]
q+
13:26:58 [McCool]
mm: will be covering sec and discovery in planning
13:27:00 [kaz]
q+
13:27:02 [kaz]
ack k
13:27:03 [kaz]
q+
13:27:09 [kaz]
ack e
13:27:24 [McCool]
ege: some PRs in TD - group resolutions, also PR/REC issue
13:27:55 [McCool]
kaz: resolution for TD update - how will we do? can we do that today?
13:28:11 [McCool]
mm: can we do it via email?
13:28:32 [McCool]
kaz: email was a little vague, and there was a "fatal" error in assertion text
13:29:07 [McCool]
mm: should consolidate all changes also
13:30:21 [McCool]
mm: suggest TD draft a consolidated set of changes, send out an email with a call for resolution, discuss next week, have group resolution in two weeks
13:31:33 [McCool]
mm: let's lower that to one week for the CfR, that is allowed
13:32:22 [kaz]
scribenick: mahdanoura
13:32:24 [McCool]
scribenick: mahda
13:32:33 [kaz]
scribenick: mahdanoura
13:32:49 [mahdanoura]
Topic: Testing
13:33:05 [mahdanoura]
sb: talk about profiles and how to continue
13:33:22 [sebastian]
https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/main/planning
13:33:24 [mahdanoura]
...McCool did already some analysis
13:33:48 [kaz]
s/Testing/Planning/
13:34:21 [mahdanoura]
... it shows how the architecture is related and considered, Sebastian beatified a bit
13:34:25 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/planning/WoT_2.0_Map.pdf Overview of WoT 2.0 plans
13:34:59 [mahdanoura]
sb: profile discussions and one PR open asynchronous decision making is open
13:35:25 [mahdanoura]
sb: is the PR ready to go age?
13:36:13 [mahdanoura]
ege: reviews received from McCool and Cris, there is one thing remaining from Sebastian, two editors should approve the PR
13:36:30 [mahdanoura]
... what if two invited experts approve
13:36:40 [kaz]
q+
13:36:51 [mahdanoura]
...who are editors?
13:37:49 [McCool]
q+
13:37:51 [kaz]
-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-charter-drafts/wot-wg-2023-draft.html#decisions Decision Policy within the Charter
13:37:53 [kaz]
ack k
13:38:07 [mahdanoura]
mm: we should review this in the chair meetings
13:38:32 [mahdanoura]
...ege should finish his changes, and if it looks good we would merge, and do final approval
13:38:32 [Ege]
q+
13:38:40 [McCool]
ack m
13:38:51 [kaz]
q+
13:38:55 [kaz]
ack e
13:39:07 [mahdanoura]
RESOLUTION: IE is also included
13:39:57 [mahdanoura]
kaz: based on AB request, IE have identical access permission of member only information
13:40:24 [mahdanoura]
... how to choose IE's
13:40:30 [mahdanoura]
mm: we need a policy for this
13:40:33 [kaz]
ack k
13:40:59 [kaz]
s/of member/for Member/
13:41:06 [mahdanoura]
mm: use case requirements should be discussed today
13:41:28 [kaz]
s/based on AB request/as PLH sent out to the Chairs list/
13:41:29 [mahdanoura]
mm: uploaded an earlier version to Github, how we handle use case requirements
13:41:36 [kaz]
s/IE have/IEs will have/
13:41:41 [mahdanoura]
...we discussed in the security group
13:41:55 [mahdanoura]
...w3c asks from us to have requirements
13:42:07 [mahdanoura]
...and state whether those RQ have been satisified
13:42:37 [kaz]
s/how to/so the question is not "whether IEs should have the same right (because they already have the same right) or not, but how to/
13:42:39 [mahdanoura]
...we have large numbers of RQ's but do not have use cases, and vice-versus
13:42:53 [mahdanoura]
...the use case often have redunancies
13:43:05 [mahdanoura]
...most often the use-cases are technology-dependant
13:43:22 [mahdanoura]
...the correct way is to think of use-cases in terms of end users
13:43:36 [kaz]
s/redunancies/redundancies/
13:43:59 [kaz]
s/use-cases/use cases/
13:44:05 [kaz]
s/use-cases/use cases/
13:44:38 [mahdanoura]
...there is the use-case document, made various attempts to capture use cases
13:44:40 [sebastian]
q+
13:44:54 [mahdanoura]
...but the template is complicated to writing the RQ's
13:45:49 [mahdanoura]
...in security TF, we discussed how to deal with use cases and RQ's
13:45:51 [kaz]
s/RQ's/requirements/
13:45:52 [kaz]
s/RQ's/requirements/
13:46:06 [mahdanoura]
...in security you have a threat/risks which have to be mitigated
13:46:24 [mahdanoura]
...mitigations are things to do to address risks
13:46:45 [mahdanoura]
...in our security/provacy guidelines the risks are outdated
13:47:02 [mahdanoura]
...identify which use cases have which risks
13:47:41 [mahdanoura]
...we need to have security people go through the use cases and connect the threats, with an external review process
13:48:04 [mahdanoura]
...discovery is more a traditional spec
13:48:14 [mahdanoura]
...geo-location RQ is well-documented
13:48:27 [mahdanoura]
...the plan for discovery is to update the older document
13:49:24 [mahdanoura]
https://www.w3.org/TR/wot-usecases/
13:49:43 [mahdanoura]
mm: in-line the RQ's and link the use cases that motivate them
13:50:27 [mahdanoura]
...we should publish the RQ doc in a separate doc
13:52:24 [mahdanoura]
...suggestion to organise the information better, expand the RQ section in the use case or link
13:52:35 [mahdanoura]
...we do not try to put RQ's in the use cases itself
13:53:04 [mahdanoura]
...we don't use necessarily the template, we give the RQ a name, what it is, and link to at least one use case that motivates it
13:53:33 [kaz]
q+
13:53:40 [kaz]
s/RQ/requirements/g
13:53:40 [mahdanoura]
...general requirements supported by sub-requirements
13:53:46 [Ege]
q+
13:54:47 [mahdanoura]
sb: it makes sense to make the references to the requirements
13:55:10 [mahdanoura]
...how should we differentiate, which use case on a purpose
13:56:18 [mahdanoura]
...struggling with: use case is a big picture of the scenario, when we want to implement the features, is a relation to the big picture needed?
13:56:43 [mahdanoura]
mm: should find general use cases to motivate
13:56:51 [sebastian]
ack s
13:57:18 [mahdanoura]
kaz: agree with McCool proposal
13:58:10 [mahdanoura]
...any kind of mechanism which makes the implementation easier should be described technically in the use case
13:58:19 [mahdanoura]
...we should think about refactoring of the specification
13:58:39 [mahdanoura]
...the technical discussion should be managed with the basic procedure, starting with use cases
13:58:47 [kaz]
ack k
13:58:48 [mahdanoura]
mm: ease of use for whom?
13:59:15 [kaz]
ack k
13:59:19 [kaz]
ack e
14:00:02 [mahdanoura]
ege:interoperability using MQTT for discovery is weird because there are other protocols meant for it, the pipeline is too generic
14:00:50 [mahdanoura]
mm:we have some mission statements, supports interoperability is our mission not use case
14:00:57 [kaz]
q+
14:01:40 [mahdanoura]
mm:this is an example of how to do general requirements, we actually want to support flexible binding mechasnims
14:02:16 [mahdanoura]
ege: for the TD planning the work items should be separated
14:02:26 [mahdanoura]
...we can present this next time due to time issues
14:03:22 [mahdanoura]
kaz:agree with McCool propsal, we can start with general requirements and then detailed ones
14:03:37 [mahdanoura]
...we need to think about how to formulate the structure
14:03:52 [mahdanoura]
...detailed requirement section should be handled seperatly
14:04:15 [kaz]
s/propsal/proposal/
14:04:26 [kaz]
s/we can/it's rather that we can/
14:04:28 [mahdanoura]
mm: we should have a draft and look at a concrete example. The use cases in the main document can be considered as high-level
14:04:47 [kaz]
s/separatly/separately/
14:04:58 [kaz]
q?
14:05:01 [kaz]
ack k
14:05:41 [mahdanoura]
mm: next week to be discussed
14:06:42 [mahdanoura]
RRSAgent, make logs public
14:06:52 [mahdanoura]
RRSAgent, generate minutes
14:06:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/07/26-wot-minutes.html mahdanoura
14:07:32 [kaz]
[adjourned]
14:07:45 [kaz]
(TD call 15mins past the hour)
14:08:02 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
14:08:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/07/26-wot-minutes.html kaz
16:04:20 [bkardell_]
bkardell_ has joined #wot
16:27:09 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wot