12:06:54 RRSAgent has joined #wot-script 12:06:58 logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/11/06-wot-script-irc 12:07:00 meeting: WoT Scripting API 12:07:27 scribenick: JKRhb 12:07:28 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Daniel_Peintner, Jan_Romann, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Zoltan_Kis 12:07:41 topic: Minutes Review 12:07:48 -> https://www.w3.org/2023/10/23-wot-script-minutes.html 12:07:52 dp: I quickly checked the minutes 12:07:59 ... we had a very short call last time 12:08:13 ... we mostly discussed integrating PRs that were made for the publication branch 12:08:25 ... I looked into it and prepared a PR for that 12:08:32 q+ 12:08:35 ... other than that, the minutes look to me 12:08:50 ... if there are no objections, then I would ask Kaz to publish 12:09:07 kaz: The call was very short indeed and we did not approve the minutes of the meeting before 12:09:12 ack k 12:09:15 ... so we need to do that as well 12:09:23 s/html/html Oct-23/ 12:09:37 -> https://www.w3.org/2023/10/02-wot-script-minutes.html Oct- 12:09:41 dp: (adds the minutes from Obtober 2nd to the Wiki) 12:09:43 s/Oct-/Oct-2/ 12:09:58 ... (shows the minutes from that meeting) 12:10:13 ... I think they are fine as well, so we can make both minutes public 12:10:23 chair: Daniel 12:10:27 Minutes are approved 12:10:32 topic: PRs 12:10:34 rrsagent, make log public 12:10:38 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:10:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/06-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 12:10:53 dp: I would skip the TS-related PRs, since Cristiano is not here 12:12:12 ... and the first PR deals with the adjustment of WoT definitions which might require more discussion 12:12:29 subtopic: PR 511 12:13:02 regrets+ Cristiano 12:13:29 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/511 12:13:50 dp: This is a very simple PR that came from other specs as well 12:14:02 ... is regarding Zoltan's affiliation 12:14:19 ... requested by Michael McCool, changes "Intel" to "Intel Corp." 12:14:34 ... are you fine with the changes, Zoltan? 12:14:59 zk: The changes are okay for me 12:15:12 dp: Then I will merge 12:15:17 PR is merged 12:15:26 subtopic: PR 513 12:15:36 dp: This is one is probably a bit more tricky 12:15:48 ... aligns TypeScript definitions with discovery API 12:15:50 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/513 12:15:55 ... changes look fine to me 12:16:03 s|pull/511|pull/511 PR 511 - fix: "Intel" usage to "Intel Corp."| 12:16:36 s/513/513 PR 513 - feat!(typescript): align TypeScript definitions with Discovery API/ 12:18:17 jr: PR simply aligns TS definitions with specification 12:18:38 ... we had some discussion regarding constructors in interfaces 12:19:23 dp: We should maybe postpone adding a constructor to the ThingDiscoveryProcess interface 12:19:38 zk: We should resolve the constructor discussion first 12:19:59 dp: Adding constructors to interfaces was a bit new to me 12:20:33 zk: Constructors are nice for testing, but we should not add them if we don't have a strong use case 12:20:58 ... in general, we should use factories instead 12:21:12 ... we should investigate why we decided to add constructors in the first place 12:22:00 ... we already have factories, which is a simple enough approach 12:22:32 dp: Then I would ask you to update the PR, Jan, and remove the constructor 12:22:49 ... one thing we need to do is changing the version number of the TypeScript definitions 12:23:46 zk: Just to clarify: If someone creates a new ConsumedThing via a constructor, an error should be thrown, we should add a test case for that 12:23:51 kaz has joined #wot-script 12:24:05 dp: I think in node-wot, we don't even have a constructor defined 12:25:32 jr: I think we don't have it in the TS definitions, but in the spec for ExposedThing 12:25:54 dp: A constructor is defined for ConsumedThing in the spec 12:26:03 ... I think we have a consensus to remove it 12:26:43 ... (adds a comment to PR 513 with the result of the discussion) 12:26:55 zk: We also need to adjust the prose as well 12:27:21 dp: This is something we should do in a separate PR 12:27:55 ... the only thing we should do is adjusting the ThingDiscoveryProcess and bumping the version 12:28:08 ... will review again later and approve once changes are made 12:28:32 zk: We need an issue to summarize the points 12:29:06 dp: There was an oversight of us not adjusting the TypeScript definitions to the prose 12:29:25 ... specification was correct, only TypeScript definitions weren't correct 12:30:17 zk: Is it possible to reference the PR where the changes to the specification were made? 12:30:27 dp: That is a good point 12:30:58 ... there is no reference to the PR yet, the description should be updated 12:31:20 jr: Will do 12:31:55 subtopic: PR 515 12:32:06 dp: Related to the PR before 12:32:21 ... similar change to the constructor 12:33:25 jr: This is actually obsolete after the discussion, 517 has been opened as an alternative 12:33:41 dp: (Adds a comment and closes 515 in favor of 517) 12:33:46 subtopic: PR 517 12:34:04 dp: This PR now only adjusts the specification text 12:34:28 ... also still need to review it, adjusts prose and WebIDL 12:34:42 zk: "Construct" is replaced with "create" 12:34:52 ... prose is mostly kept the same 12:35:02 ... I think this looks pretty good now 12:35:18 dp: Do you want to make any further reviews? 12:35:41 zk: We should all have another look 12:35:49 ... then we can probably decide next week 12:35:52 i|Related to the PR before|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/515 PR 515 - feat(typescript): add constructor to ConsumedThing interface| 12:35:59 ... let's keep it open for now then 12:36:14 subtopic: PR 514 12:36:21 i|This PR now only ad|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/517 PR 517 - feat!: remove constructor from ConsumedThing interface| 12:36:22 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/514 12:36:25 dp: This is a very simple PR, I guess 12:36:47 ... in issue 497, we noticed that Kaz made some changes to the publication documents 12:36:56 s/514/514 PR 514 - refactor: Update working draft with changes done for note2 publication/ 12:37:01 ... I essentially took out of them was is necessary to adjust in general 12:37:29 ... there was one PR that added the "defer" attribute to the script tag loading ReSpec 12:37:40 ... other than that, the GitHub API URL has changed 12:38:03 ... so mostly aligns with published documents 12:38:15 ... Cristiano approved it 12:38:23 zk: You can just merge it 12:38:36 dp: (adds a comment and merges the PR) 12:38:54 Merged, issue 497 is automatically closed by the PR 12:39:00 topic: Issues 12:39:11 dp: I haven't selected dedicated issues yet 12:39:24 ... is there anything you would like to discuss? 12:39:36 I haven't had time to look and group them 12:39:53 s/I haven't had time to look and group them/... I haven't had time to look and group them/ 12:40:13 subtopic: Issue 512 12:40:39 dp: There is this issue that deals with the script by Kaz that removes duplicated IDs 12:40:52 ... resolves the issue with the conformance classes 12:41:14 ... from my point of view, keeping the conformance classes makes sense from a developer's perspective 12:41:21 ... do you have any opinions on that? 12:41:29 i|There is this|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/512 Issue 512 - Add perl script (for fixing duplicate IDs) to master/release folder| 12:41:32 zk: I am also in favor of keeping the conformance classes 12:41:48 dp: That is good to hear, then we could simply close the PR 12:42:19 q+ 12:42:23 zk: This was also something mentioned by McCool, having conformance classes gets rid of the need for multiple documents 12:43:08 ck k 12:43:13 s/ck k/ 12:43:15 ack k 12:43:16 kaz: I am okay with adding the script in general, but we should have an updated README.md that details how to fix the ReSpec issues in general 12:43:22 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:43:23 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/06-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 12:44:09 dp: That's correct, if we add the script, then we should document how to use it 12:44:22 q+ 12:44:33 ... do you have time to create a simple PR to add a short documentation text how to use it? 12:44:58 kaz: There is a Makefile that documents how to use it, maybe we can add a one-line description based on that Makefile 12:45:24 dp: There were two PRs I've seen, one adds the script and one adds the Makefile 12:45:43 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/blob/main/releases/note2/fix-id.pl Perl script 12:45:46 -> @@@ 12:45:50 kaz: That can simply be copied to or linked from the README 12:46:16 s|@@@|https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/blob/main/releases/note2/Makefile Makefile which shows how to use the script| 12:46:17 dp: Do we want to put it in the "Releases" folder or the main README? 12:46:28 q+ 12:46:31 ... I think it is more related to Releases, but let me know what you want to see 12:46:44 ... we are missing a README in the releases folder anyway 12:46:54 ... so my suggestion is to add this README in there 12:46:58 zk: But we have a README 12:47:32 dp: There are only READMEs for specific releases, not in the general directory 12:47:46 kaz: Would make sense to add a README under /releases 12:47:59 ... that README should include instructions how to use the script 12:48:11 ... and how to create the static HTML files 12:48:18 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/tree/main/releases wot-scripting-api/releases 12:48:53 ... we can use the template from the TD repo and the script 12:48:58 dp: I will do that 12:49:10 ... is that okay for everyone? 12:49:15 zk: It's okay 12:49:20 i|I will|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/main/publication/README.md wot-thing-description/publication/README.md| 12:49:27 ... and have a README in every directory 12:50:00 s/template/README.md/ 12:50:15 dp: Is it then okay to close the discussion on conformance classes? And the corresponding PR? 12:50:18 zk: Yes 12:50:29 s/and the script/as a template, and can add how to use this Perl script to that./ 12:50:38 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:50:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/06-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 12:51:19 dp: (closes PR 502 and issue 506, adds a comment to PR 502 with a summary) 12:52:17 subtopic: Issue 516 12:52:39 i|Yes|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/502 PR 502 - refactor: move WoT definitions up in a single place| 12:52:42 This issue can also closed, since we concluded in the discussion that we don't use constructors, neither in WebIDL nor in TypeScript 12:53:10 i|Yes|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/506 Issue 506 - Re-evaluate the conformance classes| 12:53:21 ... since they are synchronous, while factories are asynchronous and can be used instead 12:53:28 s/This issue/dp: This issue/ 12:53:30 ... is it fine for everyone to close this issue? 12:53:52 i|This issue|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/516 Issue 516 - Add a constructor to both the WebIDL and TypeScript definitions of the ExposedThing interface| 12:53:55 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:53:57 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/06-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 12:54:33 jr: Closing it is fine by me 12:54:33 dp: (Closes the issue) 12:54:40 topic: AOB 12:54:54 dp: I would like to close early, any other business? 12:55:01 There is no other business 12:55:12 [adjourned] 12:55:23 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:55:24 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/11/06-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 13:55:38 kaz has joined #wot-script 14:27:37 kaz has joined #wot-script 14:48:38 kaz has joined #wot-script 14:50:52 Zakim has left #wot-script 15:01:38 kaz has joined #wot-script 16:01:30 kaz has joined #wot-script 17:14:43 kaz has joined #wot-script 17:35:42 kaz has joined #wot-script 19:54:55 zkis_ has joined #wot-script