14:24:46 RRSAgent has joined #wot-td 14:24:50 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-irc 14:25:00 meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF 14:26:05 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan, Jan_Romann 14:26:39 present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi 14:28:05 rrsagent, make log public 14:28:08 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:28:10 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:28:18 chair: Ege 14:28:54 mjk has joined #wot-td 14:29:22 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#September_27.2C_2023 14:30:45 present+ Michael_Koster 14:30:50 chair+ Koster 14:31:00 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:31:01 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:32:15 scribenick: JKRhb 14:32:37 topic: Agenda 14:32:48 ek: (goes over today's agenda) 14:33:00 i|goes|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#September_27.2C_2023 agenda for today| 14:33:09 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 14:33:48 ... maybe we should prioritize the agenda on Thing Description, the PRs regarding the 1.1 publication are very important 14:33:52 ... anything else? 14:34:24 mk: We should have the resource questions resolved, and then afterward discuss TPAC, I agree 14:34:31 topic: Minutes Review 14:34:33 -> https://www.w3.org/2023/09/20-wot-td-minutes.html Sep-20 14:34:56 ek: I went through the minutes, they look fine, thank you for fixing the remaining issues 14:35:02 ... does anyone else have anything to fix? 14:35:12 No comments, minutes are approved 14:35:20 topic: Thing Description 1.1 14:35:37 subtopic: PR 1844 14:35:59 ek: There was a discussion if we should allow the op value be an empty array 14:36:15 ... Luca mentioned that in other places an empty array is allowed 14:36:35 ... I went through all the array types in TD and there is some inconsistency 14:37:09 ... however, some values cannot be fixed, e.g., required, since it is defined this way by JSON Schema 14:37:16 i|There was|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1844 PR 1844 - Update schema to not allow empty op array| 14:37:23 ... there was also an discussion with Thomas Jaeckle in the PR 14:37:25 rrsagent, make log public 14:37:29 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:37:30 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:38:08 ... where he explained that in their software, they are adding something to an empty array in TM and always start with an empty one 14:38:23 ... so we cannot mandate that the array should always be non-empty 14:38:43 +1 14:38:59 ... so based on the discussion, my suggestion would be to only change op for now and then go through all of the other fields again in the next charter and document it for now 14:39:08 ... Luca also has agreed to that 14:39:25 ... so we can create an issue now and then follow up on the topic later 14:39:36 ... the PR itself only changes the JSON Schema by the way 14:39:41 ... any comments? 14:39:46 ... then I will merge the PR 14:39:56 ... (adds a comment and merges the PR) 14:40:23 ... (creates an issue to follow up on in the next charter) 14:41:59 subtopic: PR 1881 14:42:14 ek: This is another PR that is only making changes to the ontology 14:42:22 ... fixes an issue spotted by Sebastian 14:42:32 ... about the base URI 14:42:49 ... but he made the changes to the resulting index.html document 14:42:59 i|This is|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1881 PR 1881 - TD ontology fix v2| 14:43:06 ... which is why Cristiano applied a proper fix to the ontology 14:43:23 ... maybe you can explain Cristiano? As I see the comments are mostly resolved yet 14:43:32 ca: The PR does two things: 14:43:50 ... changing AnnotationProperties to DataProperties 14:44:05 ... these are changes Mahda and I agreed on in a previous PR 14:44:19 q? 14:44:42 ... DatatypeProperty have certain advantages over AnnotationProperties 14:45:10 ... my question is now, how to include the schema:rangeIncludes property 14:45:18 ... as raised by Mahda 14:45:29 ... I did not add it yet since I was not sure 14:45:40 ... as it needs to be a URI 14:46:10 ek: I think profile already includes a URI 14:46:43 ... the double anyUri or Array of anyURI is a bit annoying 14:46:53 ... for now we cannot change it, though 14:47:13 ca: I think I also spotted some other properties that feature this rangeIncludes 14:47:46 ... if we don't add them it is not an error, if we add it and it should be wrong, then it would cause problems for others, though 14:48:29 ... in the cancellation property, there is a similar problem 14:48:49 ... there we also have no rangeIncludes 14:48:59 ... would not be the first one that does not include it 14:49:11 ... but it is an objectProperty 14:49:26 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:49:27 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:50:36 i|I think I also|(Ege goes through the Editor's draft: https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/ )| 14:50:41 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:50:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:51:18 ca: To address Mahda's comments, we would need to add a rangeIncludes URI, but it is not actually correct, since we have some arrays in some places 14:51:25 present+ Mahda_Noura 14:51:55 Mahda has joined in the meantime, Cristiano gives a summary of the discussion so far 14:52:43 mn: Why can't we simply put the range as an anyUri? 14:52:50 ca: It is not a URI, though 14:53:01 ... however, then we are not modelling the array case 14:53:04 -> https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/#table-vocabulary-terms-in-thing-level Table 3 - Vocabulary Terms in Thing Level 14:53:16 ... also, a URI is not necessarily a URL 14:53:38 mn: I then need to check how to model this if have two types 14:53:45 ca: Can we merge it for now? 14:54:35 mn: Sure, syntactically it is fine, but not semantically, since you need both domain and range. We can merge it now and add a Todo to follow up on it later 14:54:48 ek: (adds a comment to the PR) 14:55:12 ca: The PR also adds the possibility to render the AnnotationProperties correctly by the way 14:55:24 ... adding an Annotation Property section 14:55:47 ... for the TD I left two Annotation Properties, let's leave them there for now and maybe change them later 14:56:22 ek: There should be another header in the ontology document as well right? 14:56:35 ... (goes through the PR diff and finds it eventually) 14:57:07 ek: Any objections to merging this? 14:57:33 ... I will quickly add a follow-up issue and assign it to Mahda 14:58:14 ... (merges the PR, creates the issue) 14:58:49 (Mahda leaves) 14:59:16 subtopic: Resources and Namespaces 14:59:41 s/Mahda has/(Mahda has/ 14:59:45 s/so far/so far)/ 14:59:51 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:59:52 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 15:00:08 ek: We have the NAMESPACES.md file to describe the current and the desired state regarding namespaces 15:00:24 i|NAMES|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/main/NAMESPACES.md NAMESPACES.md| 15:00:42 ... for the desired state we will wait until everything has been moved to the wot-resources repository 15:01:11 ... in the main call we had a resolution to create the repository for resources 15:01:40 ... in the TD repository, we will be using the publication folder tentatively for resources 15:03:00 ... the question is which kind of folder structure we want – should we follow the one from the master branch or create a different one? 15:03:42 ca: I don't have a strong preference 15:04:46 ek: There is the question where the static versions of the files should go 15:05:10 ca: If the WoT resources are static or a vault, we should only have one file 15:05:17 ... otherwise there will be confusion 15:05:53 ... of course there might be a bit of confusion that the same file is available under two URLs, but we should add some documentation then 15:07:15 ek: (adds a comment to NAMESPACES.md explaining that some of the same changed files are used for both TD 1.0 and 1.1) 15:07:57 ... is anyone opposed to quickly adding this note? 15:08:19 No objections are raised, Ege commits the changes to the main branch 15:09:29 ek: That means we can merge this PR (1862) now, moving the context and JSON schema file to the publication/rec folder 15:09:36 ... any objections to merging the PR? 15:10:00 q+ 15:10:59 kaz: Tentatively, this is fine, but for TD 2.0 we should think about a URL like /ns/wot/ without the date and maybe add an alias 15:11:01 ack k 15:11:30 ek: I agree, already looks a bit funny that we are using a URL with an outdated year 15:11:32 ... (adds a comment and merges the PR) 15:13:09 ek: Similar changes are applied for TD 1.1 in PR 1863 15:13:31 ... here, we also need to update the schema since we just changed them 15:14:18 s|/ns/wot/|www.w3.org/ns/wot/ as the base URI| 15:14:25 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:14:26 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 15:14:32 q+ 15:15:30 scribenick: mjk 15:16:32 i|1863|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1863 PR 1863 - Add tentative rec11 resources| 15:16:36 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:16:38 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 15:20:04 q? 15:20:07 jr: wondering about "1.1" from "td-context-1.1.jsonld" 15:20:17 ack k 15:20:18 jkr: maybe there could be a script to check for consistency 15:20:48 i/jkr/ek: that means JSON-LD 1.1./ 15:21:15 s/JSON-LD 1.1./not WoT Thing Description 1.1 but JSON-LD 1.1./ 15:21:20 ege: note that the 1.1 in the context file name refers to JSON LD 1.1 15:21:42 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:21:43 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 15:21:49 ege: any more comments? 15:22:25 ege:L any objections to merging #1863? 15:22:33 s/L// 15:22:38 ... merged 15:24:00 subtopic: PR# 1886 REC version preparation 15:24:11 q+ 15:24:33 ege: an errata link is required 15:25:03 kaz: the errata URL is required for 1.0 also, and links to github issues 15:26:48 ege: the errata is in the main branch, and doesn't change with version 15:27:01 kaz: we can use errata11 for example 15:27:16 ... this is the basic problem with reusing the repository 15:27:45 ege: we would need to version the github issues also 15:28:07 kaz: 1.1 is a minor update so can use the same repository 15:29:19 kaz: we can fix this after publication 15:30:07 ... will talk with webmaster 15:31:53 ege: how do we manage references to other specs? 15:32:10 kaz: we will preassign URLs and know what they are 15:32:31 ... we will know the publication dates 15:32:42 s|we can fix this after publication|note that https://www.w3.org/TR/wot-thing-description/ will be automatically redirected to WoT Thing Description 1.1.| 15:33:10 ege: creating an issue for versioned errata documents 15:33:38 s/Description 1.1./Description 1.1. So probably it would be safer to use "errata.html" for TD 1.1, and let TD 1.0 REC use "errata10.html" or something like that./ 15:35:03 ... we should use the non-versioned file name for the most recent file 15:35:33 ... this is the complication with the automatically redirected URLs 15:35:44 ... I will look into it after this call 15:36:19 topic: binding templates 15:36:41 subtopic: vocabulary creation guide PR #298 15:38:24 i/... we should/kaz: probably we should/ 15:38:24 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:38:25 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 15:38:31 ege: I have reviewed and it looks good 15:39:08 cris: mjk should review to see if it answers questions 15:39:37 i|I have|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/298 PR 298 - Add additional explanations to vocabulary creation guide| 15:40:23 ege: can we merge #282? 15:40:44 ... merge conflict, needs rebase 15:42:20 subtopic: PR #209 bacnet binding 15:42:36 ege: is there anything to explain and review? 15:43:08 mjk: no new content until we add the resources files 15:43:53 ege: a new author is added, should we add to codeowners? 15:44:16 q+ 15:45:59 ... we will wait until the PR is merged to add the 3rd editor to the codeowners file 15:46:01 ack k 15:47:33 q+ 15:47:44 ack j 15:49:57 kaz: OK to add the third editor at this time, but need to address the general case of third party contributors ird party contributi 15:50:21 s/contributi/contributors 15:51:07 subtopic: PR #296 - align JSON Schema for Modbus binding 15:51:46 cris: if there are any other misalignments, please let me know 15:52:06 q? 15:52:09 ack k 15:52:16 i|296|(Kaz has sent an invitation to fennibay for joining the wotwg-editors team)| 15:52:20 ege: AOB for today? 15:52:58 i|if there|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/296 PR 296 - Modbus: align the schema with the current ontology| 15:53:00 ... adjourned 15:53:01 ack k 15:53:06 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:53:08 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/09/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz