WoT-WG/IG – 11 October 2023

Meeting minutes

Logistics

Sebastian: today, 2h meeting, policies first
… but want to note there will be also a short pres from Ege on Facilitation Training from TPAC later

Policies

Sebastian: there are five listed PRs for policy proposals

Sebastian: last week there were some updates in the PRs, so the PRs effectively have the latest version of the policy proposals

Policy 1127 - Async Decisions

Sebastian: there were a lot of changes to this, e.g. about having a related issue for each PR

Sebastian: do we have any open discussion or questions?

<kaz> PR 1127 - [Policy] Move async-decision.md from "proposals" to "policies"

Sebastian: as we know, Ben Francis did the first proposal a few years ago, then Ege did an updated version, and we discussed previously

<kaz> proposed async-decision.md policy

Sebastian: added here are also policies to differentiate editorial and normative changes, with relaxed rules for editorial changes

Kaz: would be good to have issue first, then consensus, then PR

McCool: would like to clarify that this applies only to deliverables

Kaz: The text at the top says "this policy is limited to individual documents or deliverables"

McCool: ok, so best to remove "documents or" in both place.

Kaz: there is another instance of document

McCool: but it's for supporting document, like an ontology, so it makes sense

Kaz: can we also review the "Normative Changes" section?
… key points are there are three steps: issue, review, merging

Kaz: seems to give the editors a lot of power

McCool: I think the intention is that the editors' decisions should reflect the consensus of the group

Kaz: so "how to reflect the group consensus" should be described too

McCool: could add a point at the start of the normative section about "In the following, the Editor's decisions should reflect their understanding of the consensus of the group."

Kaz: yes, that addresses my point

Sebastian: anything else?
… if not, shall we merge?

Kaz: good as a starting point, we can improve later if there are issues

Sebastian: hearing no objections, approved and merged

Policy 1128 - Chair's Decision Process and Quorum

<kaz> PR 1128 - [Policy] Move chair-decision-process.md from "proposals" to "policies"

<kaz> proposed Chairs policy

Sebastian: PR1128
… there are already some general W3C guidelines, added a reference

Sebastian: (reviews PR)

McCool: have voting, but only in exceptional circumstances; also only applies to one topic, and can be considered a test run

<kaz> W3C Process - 5.2 Consensus Building

Kaz: given current situation, don't need detailed decision policy, can follow W3C policy
… only issue is if all chairs can't join

Kaz: worst case we can just wait

Sebastian: usually don't have urgent topics

Kaz: latest W3C Process Document has a detailed policy we should follow

Daniel: current policy is tailored to three chairs, if that changes, what happens? Will have to change it.

McCool: in my opinion the important part here is the quorum, 2/3
… it would be ok to remove the voting part imo

Kaz: W3C policy does have detailed procedure, formal objections, etc.
… what this really says is the third person is ok with deferring their choice to the other two if not available

McCool: propose we review the (newish) W3C policy and try to revise this to remove the voting if possible
… but table this one for now

McCool: think we can simplify to reach Kaz's intent

Policy 1129 - Group Decisions

Sebastian: PR1129

<kaz> PR 1129 - https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1129

<kaz> proposed group decision policy

Sebastian: this is a clarification of what is in the charter, defining a few terms like "Working Days"

McCool: so main policy here is already in the charter, this is just a copy for reference; the important part here are the clarifications

Kaz: all the text is defined by the charter.

McCool: would be fine with replacing all the text within "Group Decisions" in the first part with a link to section 8 of the charter

<kaz> WoT WG Charter - 8. Decision Policy

McCool: also, want to make clear I think 1wk should be our "standard", 2wks is the exception

Sebastian: any objections to merging?
… hearing none, will merge and adopt the policy.

Policy 1130 - Policy Adoption

<kaz> PR 1130 - [Policy] Move policy-adoption.md from "proposals" to "policies"

Sebastian: we should probably have started with this one...
… guidelines and process for new policies

<kaz> proposed policy adaption policy

McCool: two points; first, an issue first would be more consistent with async policy
… second, 5/10 working day discussion is a bit redundant, we have another policy for that

Ege: async is for deliverables, though

McCool: yes, I just think it would be good to be consistent

<cris_> +1 for mentioning changing/updating

Ege: does this include changing of policies?

Sebastian: will add that

McCool: note that since we are making significant changes to this policy, we should follow the group decision policy, which requires a CfR, etc.

Kaz: agree with McCool that we need to add issues
… later on, we say that discussion should happen during main call
… clarification of process around issues, where discussion happens

McCool: since we are out of time, suggest Sebastian finishes his changes, Kaz reviews offline, and we discuss this again in a week.

Minutes

McCool: we have adapted the review policies for the minutes

<kaz> Oct-4

McCool: kaz have you sent an email on the minutes?

Kaz: yes

<kaz> Kaz's message listing all the WoT minutes

McCool: we can approve them, no objections to approving

McCool: the minutes should be read in advance

Quick updates

IIWoT 2024

McCool: the deadline of the workshop has been extended until the end of October

McCool: new CEO, no more info on that

McCool: for the twitter page, the web page was not even launching at all, age what is the status?

Kaz: let me give a comment about the IIWoT workshop, I'd like to suggest we remove this topic from the "weekly quick updates" and talk about this every week, because the workshop organizers are not really interested in liaison with us. They can simply send a Call for Participation message to the WoT public mailinglists. Also some of the WoT participants of course can provide papers if they want.

McCool: we can remove it from next time and future calls

cris: is anyone planning to do a paper?

Kaz: asking people on the public mailing list would be fine, but we don't need to mention this every week

<cris_> I'm ok removing from the agenda for next calls

McCool: if there are events related to WoT, as a service for members we mention this we need to make it clear that it is not from W3C

McCool: it should be under announcement of outside activitiy

McCool: added a section notices, is this resolve your issue?

Kaz: That's fine. My point is simply that we don't have to mention it every week.

Twitter issue on the WoT Marketing page

McCool: Ege, what is the current status on twitter and your plan?

<kaz> WoT marketing page

Ege: the issue was related to w3c, the whole timeline doesn't work, but putting a static version of the tweet it works

McCool: I think it's fine as long as we keep it up to date

Ege: it's fine since we don't tweet everyday

McCool: we let the marketing group decide for further changes

Meeting Facilitation Training Breakout

<kaz> session proposal

Ege: presents a short summary of the facilitation training breakout at TPAC

Ege: how to better manage meetings and avoid issues
… there is an initial version of the minutes pre-recorded
… the session was hosted by Wendy Reid
… there was something related to scribing, encourage newcomers to be fair. the commands should be explained beforehand
… they mentioned the captions, in zoom it is strongly recommended to enable captions for two reasons
… for people who have issues in understanding or for people who got distracted
… the other point was a side scission about project management
… some mentioned they used Github projects to manage parts of the work
… one thing being used it grouping set of work items or a deliverable into a project
… they also mentioned that as a chair they have a project where they can see items from various TFs
… each TF can bring wider discussions
… another thing was planning agendas
… tracking policies and JSON-LD has also a process
… ege shows an example from cascade level 6

McCool: I think we should follow up on project planning in another session
… I want to see if we need some additional policies on topics like captioning

Ege: I have another category, we should not disturb discussion
… if there is a language issue, one person goes and explains the issue in another language

McCool: I activated the caption, can you see it on the screen

McCool: I don't quite understand who turns on the captions,,, and make sure the translations are accurate, we need to do a bit of testing with zoom and experiment more, but I think there are some possibilities for it

<Ege> https://hackmd.io/@egekorkan/HywdOeEba

McCool: you can create an issue and a process for project manageent

Ege: before doing that we need to understand it a bit more

McCool: let's allocate the time for this next time

<kaz> Meeting facilitation training

Kaz: I have two points, one about this topic itself, the session is being organised in parallel again right now, and this is proposal from the AB. The proposal should be useful and we can quickly skim the discussion durint the meetings. However, we might want to wait a bit before diving in the details.
… from the viewpoint of W3C as a whole, the Project Management Team is discussing how to manage the W3C standardization activities as well.
… So we might want to wait

McCool: how long do we need to wait?

McCool: please update us on project management for next time

Kaz: I'm not sure if we can do such project management trainings quickly, but will provide information when get any updates :)

McCool: if there is any news next week just update us

LinkedIn Account

<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to talk about WoT LinkedIn account (after this topic)

<kaz> LinkedIn Account for W3C WoT

Kaz: Ege and Cristiano, we got response from the MarComm Team on the GitHub Issue about linkdin account. There is already a WoT Group on LinkedIn. However, from the viewpoint of the W3C as a whole, we should have only one account for linkdin service. So need some clarification there.

McCool: and we should use that one account

Kaz: yes. Let's talk about this offline by email.

Meeting schedule changes

Cancellations

McCool: 23rd of November there is an holiday and will be a cancelation if we have a session

McCool: we should really make some progress on use case
… security and architecture

McCool: anyone having holidays for future weeks?
… nobody

DST changes

<kaz> Daylight Saving changes

McCool: make sure you use the official invites due to daylight savings

McCool: reschedule TD call, we leave the TD call where it is now until the daylight saving for now
… we can postpone it after the daylight saving
… we can have two special meetings that are not recurring for the use cases

McCool: anybody have any thoughts on this plan?

Mizushima: it is hard for me to participate at that time

McCool: in general it's always difficult, we have a 3hour slot, which is in the evening in Japan. the other option is to have it earlier which would be too early in pacific time, or we put it later but it would go later in Europe

McCool: Mizushima-san, do you have another proposal

Mizushima: if it is later I can join

McCool: if we have it an hour later would it would work for you?

Mizushima: 2 hours later would work

McCool: I think that's ok, we could have the meeting at 9 eastern

Kaz: conflicts with Ege, Koster and myself.

McCool: on Thursday what are your conflicts?

Kaz: we should think about who is expected to join this call, having as better people as possible there would be better

McCool: my thought was to look at security and discovery, and make a template for later work, it's really about organising requirement process

Kaz: this proposed Thursday call, we can change the slot to get more participants

McCool: I think we should roll out these two meetings, I want ideally to get discovery people to show up, we want to create a template to execute on the plan I presented at TPAC

Kaz: I'm also OK if this proposed use case calls is for preparation in October and we can change the slot to get more people later.

McCool: I'm okay with making it 09:00 eastern, and have preparation discussion at that time.

McCool: any objections on me doing this?

Ege: what slot is it, is this after TD coordination call?

Kaz: yes right after that

Ege: sometimes Ege and Cris may not join because of the WoT CG meetings, but they are not regular

McCool: should we do this an hour later?

Ege: depends on the speaker

McCool: MIzushima does 9 pm work for you?

MIzushima: yes

McCool: kaz are you fine with this time?

Kaz: is the conclusion 9 pm JST?

McCool: yes

Kaz: then it won't work for me

McCool: lets schedule the next one for 22:00 JST and the week after that we can change to avoid the conflict

McCool: it won't be a re-occuring meeting after that

New IG Charter

McCool: IG charter end December 31 this year

McCool: as this takes long, we have to start now, the review process takes long time
… if we finish the draft by end of October, we might make it
… do we need even an IG? we need to look what an IG does

Daniel: yesterday we looked into that yesterday in the Marketing calll

McCool: we need to look what the IG does not, I think the use case requirement could be a WG activity or a CG activity...

McCool: we need to start by reviewing the IG thing, can we do this in the main call or do we need another slot?

McCool: I think trying to squeeze it in the main call won't work
… propose date 18 Oct to discuss

<Ege> +1

McCool: does anybody object this additional slot to discuss this next week?

Kaz: that is what I mentioned in TPAC about clarifying the roles of IG, CG and WG

<kaz> (none)

REC preparation

TD

McCool: what is the status of the REC publication

<kaz> PR 1897 - Adjust affiliations

Press Release

McCool: press release is not quite ready, we need another week
… we have the actual documents themselves and the resources to cleanup

Resources

McCool: I noticed the TD group re-oragnized thing, now two directories for organising the TD for the different versions

<kaz> wot-resources PR 2 - Add td folder structure

<McCool> wot-resources PR 1 - Proposed Structure Example

McCool: any objections to merge those PRs?

(none)

<Ege> +1 to merge

McCool: we need to complete the staging in each TF and create PRs in wot-resources to transfer all the resources

Press Release - revisited

<kaz> Draft Press Release

McCool: there are several pending PRs for press releases, I have added a label, but there are 3 open PR's that we need to discuss

<kaz> PRs with "Press" label

McCool: we are still waiting for the testimonial from Oracle, we will still wait another week
… there are some editorial changes from Koalie, I think we should merge them, I am happy with these
… she actually merged some sentences with a "and" conjuction
… she also merged some another sentence, but they are two completely different topics, I personally would like to revert this change
… I will do a review, and we will get back to this
… the final PR is an old one from Michal legally, for changing the title of the marketing
… I have no strong opinion on either way on the wording
… we could finalise next week
… we are in the middle of the 2 weeks for WG cfR review period

Kaz: for the Japanese version I'll help the Japanese team

McCool: it's going to take at least a week