IRC log of wot-td on 2023-12-06
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:05:21 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wot-td
- 15:05:25 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-irc
- 15:05:28 [kaz]
- meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF
- 15:05:38 [kaz]
- present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan, Mahda_Noura
- 15:06:40 [dape]
- dape has joined #wot-td
- 15:10:21 [JKRhb]
- JKRhb has joined #wot-td
- 15:12:58 [cris__]
- cris__ has joined #wot-td
- 15:13:03 [kaz]
- present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Jan_Romann, Luca_Barbato, Michael_Koster
- 15:13:05 [mjk_]
- mjk_ has joined #wot-td
- 15:13:28 [JKRhb]
- scribenick: JKRhb
- 15:13:46 [JKRhb]
- topic: Agenda Review
- 15:14:00 [JKRhb]
- ek: In the binding templates part there are a lot of PRs
- 15:14:08 [JKRhb]
- ... but we can add them to the agenda once we get there
- 15:14:23 [JKRhb]
- ... then we have a lot for TD next
- 15:14:27 [kaz]
- q+
- 15:14:41 [JKRhb]
- ... we have prepared the agenda in advance, does anyone have any other points?
- 15:15:11 [JKRhb]
- kaz: Please make sure that the agenda includes Michael McCools points regarding WoT resources
- 15:15:19 [JKRhb]
- ek: I'll add it to the agenda
- 15:15:21 [kaz]
- agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#December_6.2C_2023
- 15:15:26 [JKRhb]
- topic: Minutes Review
- 15:15:36 [kaz]
- i|In the b|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#December_6.2C_2023 agenda for today|
- 15:15:43 [kaz]
- ack k
- 15:15:48 [JKRhb]
- ek: I glanced over them, look good to me
- 15:15:57 [JKRhb]
- ... (scrolls through the minutes)
- 15:16:01 [kaz]
- i|grance|-> https://www.w3.org/2023/11/29-wot-td-minutes.html Nov-29|
- 15:16:06 [JKRhb]
- ... any objections to approving them?
- 15:16:06 [kaz]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 15:16:10 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:16:11 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:16:19 [JKRhb]
- No objections, minutes are approved
- 15:16:23 [JKRhb]
- topic: Cancellations
- 15:16:48 [JKRhb]
- ek: I won't be available from December 26 until January 2
- 15:16:52 [JKRhb]
- ... common in Europe
- 15:17:03 [JKRhb]
- ... does anyone prefer to have the calls in this period?
- 15:17:10 [JKRhb]
- ... otherwise I would suggest to cancel them
- 15:17:28 [JKRhb]
- dp: I think there was a general agreement to start again on January 8
- 15:18:10 [JKRhb]
- ek: Generally hearing no objections to the cancellations, then I am going to cancel the meetings and update the W3C calendar
- 15:18:37 [JKRhb]
- ... (cancels the calls in the W3C calendar)
- 15:18:51 [kaz]
- q+
- 15:19:20 [kaz]
- ack k
- 15:19:26 [JKRhb]
- kaz: Just to make sure: Since the calls on January 8 have already been cancelled, your intention is to start again on Jaunary 10, right?
- 15:19:34 [JKRhb]
- ek: Yes, I will come to that shortly
- 15:19:57 [JKRhb]
- topic: TD Call Slot
- 15:20:18 [kaz]
- s/, I will come to that shortly//
- 15:20:20 [JKRhb]
- ek: There have been no objections to the new TD call slot as determined by the doodle poll
- 15:20:38 [kaz]
- i/TD Call Slot/kaz: and the second part on 11th/
- 15:20:55 [kaz]
- i/TD Call Slot/ek: yes, I will talk about that shortly/
- 15:21:10 [kaz]
- i/and the/scribenick: kaz/
- 15:21:17 [kaz]
- i/There have/scribenick: JKRhb/
- 15:21:22 [kaz]
- rrsagent, make log public
- 15:21:26 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:21:28 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:21:42 [JKRhb]
- ... with the results, the current proposals are Wednesday, first hour of the current TD call and Thursday after the main call
- 15:21:50 [kaz]
- q?
- 15:22:07 [kaz]
- chair: Ege, Koster
- 15:22:09 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:22:10 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:22:42 [JKRhb]
- ... the split of TD and binding templates between the two slots is up for discussion next
- 15:22:53 [kaz]
- i|glance|-> https://www.w3.org/2023/11/29-wot-td-minutes.html Nov-29|
- 15:22:56 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:22:57 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:23:03 [JKRhb]
- ... I will prepare a proposal for a resolution for the new slots
- 15:23:10 [Ege]
- proposal: switch the TD call slots to Wednesday 10am EST (1 hour) and Thursday 9am EST (1 hour)
- 15:23:31 [Ege]
- resolution: switch the TD call slots to Wednesday 10am EST (1 hour) and Thursday 9am EST (1 hour)
- 15:23:34 [kaz]
- i|no objections to|-> https://doodle.com/meeting/participate/id/dwkzgZrd/vote|
- 15:23:35 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:23:36 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:24:13 [JKRhb]
- ek: Any objections to the proposal?
- 15:24:13 [JKRhb]
- No objections, resolution is passed
- 15:24:13 [JKRhb]
- ek: The next question is how to split the topics between the two slots
- 15:24:20 [JKRhb]
- ... might have the benefit of attracting more people
- 15:24:27 [mjk_]
- q?
- 15:24:28 [JKRhb]
- ... who interested in a certain topic
- 15:24:39 [mjk_]
- q+
- 15:24:43 [JKRhb]
- ... otherwise, we could also split the topics in a more flexible way
- 15:24:47 [mahda-noura]
- q+
- 15:24:48 [cris__]
- q+
- 15:25:07 [JKRhb]
- mjk: I think it makes sense to have the adminstrative things in a certain place, not sure about the rest
- 15:25:15 [kaz]
- ack mj
- 15:25:44 [JKRhb]
- ... one proprosal would be to move the adminstrative things to one hour and treat the other one more as a working hour
- 15:25:55 [kaz]
- q+
- 15:26:05 [JKRhb]
- ... so it could rather be a adminstrative/working split rather than a TD/binding split
- 15:26:50 [JKRhb]
- ek: Since we agreed to integrate the binding mechanism into the TD spec, this division is not as clear anyway
- 15:28:05 [kaz]
- ack ma
- 15:28:07 [kaz]
- ack cr
- 15:29:07 [JKRhb]
- mn: Generally, I'm in favor of a split because binding topics tended to not be included in the call. But a more flexible split could also work
- 15:29:54 [JKRhb]
- ca: Depends a lot on the agenda, but given that the agenda is agreed upon beforehand, people can just decide based on the agenda. I think I would prefer flexibility
- 15:30:05 [JKRhb]
- ... most important is to agree on agenda beforehand
- 15:30:06 [kaz]
- present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
- 15:30:52 [JKRhb]
- ek: One common thing mentioned is that we don't have enough time for binding topics, so maybe we can agree on a general separation and then carry over TD topics if needed
- 15:32:47 [JKRhb]
- kaz: I am generally fine with both approaches, but at the current point in time having a general split might work to determine how exactly the split should look like. More importantly, use case and requirements discussion should have more time. Generally, I agree with your proprosal, Ege, but we need to have a more general discussion
- 15:33:03 [JKRhb]
- ek: My initial feeling is to not do a too strict separation
- 15:33:15 [JKRhb]
- ... but people need to know how to arrange their calendar
- 15:33:31 [JKRhb]
- ... so, for example, if they know that bindings will always be on Wednesdays
- 15:33:49 [JKRhb]
- ... we should probably agree on the first topics that should be discussed in a call
- 15:33:55 [JKRhb]
- ... then the rest can stay flexible
- 15:34:00 [JKRhb]
- ... what do people think?
- 15:34:05 [JKRhb]
- ca: Sounds alright to me
- 15:34:08 [kaz]
- s|to have a more general discussion|clarification on how to organize TD/Binding discussion in general.|
- 15:34:17 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:34:18 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:34:42 [JKRhb]
- ek: (adds a summary of a possible direction to the Wiki)
- 15:35:08 [Ege]
- q?
- 15:35:12 [kaz]
- ack k
- 15:35:36 [JKRhb]
- ... I am mentioning "Bindings" here to make clear that it is not necessarily about the binding mechanism but can also be about specific protocol bindings like Modbus, for example
- 15:35:46 [JKRhb]
- ... so this is decided for now
- 15:35:56 [JKRhb]
- ... does anyone have more comments in this regard?
- 15:36:07 [JKRhb]
- No comments
- 15:36:11 [JKRhb]
- topic: TD 1.1
- 15:36:35 [kaz]
- q+
- 15:36:57 [JKRhb]
- kaz: Maybe we could start with the publication of the specification
- 15:37:10 [JKRhb]
- ek: TD 1.1 is a now a W3C Recommendation
- 15:37:26 [Ege]
- https://www.w3.org/press-releases/2023/enhanced-web-of-things-connects-diverse-iot-ecosystems/
- 15:37:31 [JKRhb]
- ... thanks to everyone, I think the final document is now in a great shape
- 15:37:47 [JKRhb]
- ... there is an official press release, which you can you use to let people know
- 15:38:19 [kaz]
- i|TD 1.1 is|-> https://www.w3.org/TR/2023/REC-wot-thing-description11-20231205/ WoT Thing Description 1.1 Recommendation|
- 15:38:28 [kaz]
- s/a now a/now a/
- 15:38:36 [JKRhb]
- subtopic: WoT TD 1.1 Resources
- 15:38:52 [kaz]
- s|https://www.w3.org/press-releases/2023/enhanced-web-of-things-connects-diverse-iot-ecosystems/||
- 15:38:55 [JKRhb]
- ek: The resources table is wrong at the moment
- 15:38:59 [kaz]
- i|Resources|-> https://www.w3.org/press-releases/2023/enhanced-web-of-things-connects-diverse-iot-ecosystems/ Press Release|
- 15:39:03 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:39:05 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:39:47 [JKRhb]
- ... currently, there is only the .ttl file mentioned for the Thing Model (?) but not the HTML file
- 15:40:10 [JKRhb]
- mn: Is this related to the svg file issue?
- 15:40:21 [JKRhb]
- ek: Probably, yes
- 15:40:41 [JKRhb]
- ... I will update the issue to deal with empty TM documents in general
- 15:40:57 [kaz]
- q+
- 15:40:58 [JKRhb]
- s/(?)//
- 15:41:24 [JKRhb]
- ... (updates TD issue 1385)
- 15:41:43 [kaz]
- i|The resources|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-resources/blob/main/td/v1.1/README.md TD 1.1 resources|
- 15:41:49 [JKRhb]
- ... we can update the files and then update the table accordingly
- 15:42:01 [kaz]
- i|The resources|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-resources/blob/main/td/v1/README.md TD 1.0 resources|
- 15:42:03 [JKRhb]
- ... the SVG does not necessarily have to be updated, however
- 15:42:05 [JKRhb]
- q+
- 15:42:08 [Ege]
- q?
- 15:42:20 [JKRhb]
- ... then we can update the redirections
- 15:42:28 [kaz]
- ack k
- 15:42:48 [JKRhb]
- kaz: Just for the record: This only concerning TD version 1.1, right?
- 15:42:52 [JKRhb]
- ek: Yes
- 15:43:07 [JKRhb]
- jr: And this is about the TM ontolology, right?
- 15:43:09 [JKRhb]
- ek: Yes
- 15:43:25 [kaz]
- i|Just|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-resources/blob/main/td/v1.1/README.md TD 1.1 resource table|
- 15:43:26 [JKRhb]
- ek: After the update, we can remove the Draft annotation from the README
- 15:43:30 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:43:31 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:43:37 [JKRhb]
- ... for TD 1.0, that should already be possible
- 15:43:52 [JKRhb]
- ... (updates the README file for TD version 1.0 accordingly)
- 15:44:22 [kaz]
- q+
- 15:44:25 [JKRhb]
- ... (includes the changes in wot-resources PR 18)
- 15:44:29 [JKRhb]
- ack j
- 15:44:42 [JKRhb]
- ... can we do it here or should we do it in the main call?
- 15:44:56 [kaz]
- ack k
- 15:45:03 [JKRhb]
- kaz: We can do it here since version 1.0 is already published, but we should also do it for version 1.0
- 15:45:20 [kaz]
- s/the Draft a/the "Draft" a/
- 15:45:23 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:45:24 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:46:02 [JKRhb]
- ek: (merges wot-resources PR 18)
- 15:46:02 [JKRhb]
- topic: Binding Templates
- 15:46:07 [JKRhb]
- subtopic: PR 298
- 15:46:31 [JKRhb]
- ek: This has gone through a lot of a reviews, thank you everyone for that
- 15:46:34 [kaz]
- i|merges|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-resources/pull/18 wot-resources PR 18 - Removing draft from 1.0 resources|
- 15:46:38 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:46:40 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:46:46 [JKRhb]
- ... there is some points open, which we can have a look at here
- 15:46:50 [JKRhb]
- ... (opens the diff)
- 15:47:56 [JKRhb]
- .... there is one comment regarding "automatic" validation, which we could remove
- 15:48:22 [JKRhb]
- q+
- 15:48:39 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:48:41 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:49:39 [JKRhb]
- The group discusses editorial changes and Ege updates the PR accordingly
- 15:50:50 [kaz]
- i|This has gone|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/298 PR 298 - Add additional explanations to vocabulary creation guide|
- 15:50:51 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:50:52 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:50:58 [JKRhb]
- ek: There is one comment by Cristiano regarding the mapping.ttl and the SHACL file
- 15:51:35 [JKRhb]
- ca: The context.jsonld (?) is doing the actual mapping, that is what I meant here
- 15:52:05 [JKRhb]
- ... hadn't had the time to make a concrete proposal, we can move this into an issue, though
- 15:52:30 [JKRhb]
- ek: The rest should be resolved, then I am going to merge this and create an issue for the last comment
- 15:52:45 [JKRhb]
- s/last/remaining/
- 15:53:02 [JKRhb]
- ... (creates the issue)
- 15:53:10 [JKRhb]
- ... with that done, I think we can merge
- 15:53:45 [JKRhb]
- ... (adds a link to the new issue and resolves the open comment)
- 15:53:53 [JKRhb]
- ... any objections to merging?
- 15:54:16 [JKRhb]
- No objections, merging
- 15:54:24 [JKRhb]
- subtopic: PR 324
- 15:54:46 [JKRhb]
- ek: Very small PR, proposes to add Jan as a Codeowner for the CoAP binding
- 15:55:10 [JKRhb]
- ... Kaz has adjusted the Editor's list on GitHub
- 15:55:23 [kaz]
- i|Very|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/324 PR 324 - Adding Jan Romann to CoAP codeowners
- 15:55:28 [kaz]
- q+
- 15:55:32 [JKRhb]
- ... there is ongoing discussion among the chairs how to maintain this list
- 15:55:32 [Ege]
- ack j
- 15:55:41 [JKRhb]
- kaz: I am not objecting to the change
- 15:56:07 [kaz]
- ack k
- 15:56:31 [JKRhb]
- ... but generally asking, this is about the Editor's group on GitHub, right?
- 15:57:02 [JKRhb]
- ek: Yes
- 15:57:12 [JKRhb]
- ... since there are no objections, merging
- 15:57:16 [kaz]
- s/as a Codeowner for the CoAP binding/as a Codeowner for the CoAP binding within the CODEOWNERS file/
- 15:57:20 [kaz]
- ack k
- 15:57:26 [JKRhb]
- subtopic: Merged PRs
- 15:57:58 [JKRhb]
- ek: For the sake of transparency, based on our asynchronous decision policy, I merged three editorial PRs
- 15:58:02 [kaz]
- s/Kaz has adjusted the Editor's list on GitHub/Kaz has updated the GitHub Team for Editors as well./
- 15:58:06 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:58:07 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:58:25 [JKRhb]
- subtopic: PR 325
- 15:58:52 [JKRhb]
- ek: This PR adds the BACnet binding to the table in the Binding Templates document
- 15:58:55 [kaz]
- i|For the sake|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3Abacnet+label%3AEditorial Editorial changes|
- 15:58:59 [JKRhb]
- ... it got several reviews
- 15:59:15 [JKRhb]
- ... and approvals, merging this one
- 15:59:23 [kaz]
- i|This PR ad|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/325 PR 325 - Add BACnet to tables|
- 15:59:27 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 15:59:28 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 15:59:34 [JKRhb]
- subtopic: PR 323
- 15:59:42 [JKRhb]
- ek: There was some discussion about this one
- 16:00:05 [JKRhb]
- ... most comments have been resolved, but I just see that there is a new one
- 16:00:17 [JKRhb]
- dp: I don't know where it comes from actually
- 16:00:21 [kaz]
- i|There was|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/323 PR 323 - Fix some typos in Modbus|
- 16:00:23 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:00:24 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 16:00:34 [JKRhb]
- ... didn't do any change here, committed the changes via the GitHub UI
- 16:00:47 [JKRhb]
- ek: I think these are just whitespace changes
- 16:00:50 [JKRhb]
- q+
- 16:01:44 [JKRhb]
- jr: Maybe it is related to line endings?
- 16:01:57 [JKRhb]
- dp: Unlikely, since it is comitted via the UI
- 16:02:18 [JKRhb]
- ca: My OS is sometimes making these changes, but should not have happen on GitHub
- 16:03:06 [JKRhb]
- ek: Probably an error caused by GitHub, but we can fix this later
- 16:03:12 [JKRhb]
- ... (merges the PR)
- 16:03:20 [dape]
- scribe: dape
- 16:03:46 [dape]
- SUBTOPIC: PR 331
- 16:04:04 [dape]
- EK: PR went though some reviews
- 16:04:25 [dape]
- CA: there is 1 last pending issue
- 16:05:35 [dape]
- ... 2 open issues we can handle in a follow-up PR
- 16:06:22 [dape]
- ... Note: XSD does not have ontology -> hard to understand how those terms are defined
- 16:06:59 [dape]
- ... Mahda suggested revisions
- 16:07:18 [dape]
- MN: Understood Cristianos comment
- 16:07:35 [dape]
- ... not sure about name individual or classes
- 16:07:48 [dape]
- ... we could use them as name individual
- 16:08:05 [dape]
- ... the other comment I had was about consistency
- 16:08:27 [dape]
- ... w.r.t. oneOf
- 16:08:47 [dape]
- CA: I think we can tackle it in follow-up PR
- 16:08:53 [dape]
- ... suggest to move on with this PR as is
- 16:09:15 [dape]
- s/though some reviews/through some reviews
- 16:09:34 [dape]
- MN: SHACL uses enum, right?
- 16:09:38 [dape]
- CA: Not sure..
- 16:09:51 [dape]
- ... I don't think so
- 16:10:03 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:10:04 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 16:10:26 [dape]
- EG: Let's create a new issue for it
- 16:10:37 [kaz]
- i|PR went t|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/331 PR 331 - feat(modbus): introduce modbus type and byte/word order|
- 16:10:37 [dape]
- s/EG:/EK:
- 16:11:09 [dape]
- EK: I think we should check other bindings (besides Modbus) as well
- 16:11:13 [kaz]
- q+
- 16:11:36 [Ege]
- https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/339
- 16:11:46 [dape]
- ack JKRhb
- 16:11:46 [Ege]
- ack j
- 16:12:26 [dape]
- Kaz: Not sure about expectation of implementations
- 16:12:49 [dape]
- ... processor handling this additional type?
- 16:13:00 [dape]
- EK: basic processor probably not..
- 16:13:14 [dape]
- ... node-wot has drivers for protocols
- 16:13:37 [dape]
- Kaz: those mechanisms should be clarified
- 16:14:00 [dape]
- EK: Correct, we just barely do this
- 16:14:33 [dape]
- Kaz: We tend to assume node-wot as typical implementation .. need to check others
- 16:14:50 [dape]
- ... could add Editors node as well
- 16:15:55 [kaz]
- s/n .. n/n but n/
- 16:15:57 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:15:59 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 16:16:05 [Ege]
- q?
- 16:16:05 [Ege]
- ack k
- 16:16:42 [dape]
- EK: PR 331 looks good -> merging
- 16:16:43 [kaz]
- s/Not sure about/Can understand potential need for those features, but still not really/
- 16:16:46 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:16:47 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 16:16:54 [dape]
- ... for the open 2 issues I will create issues
- 16:17:27 [dape]
- EK: arghh , merge conflict
- 16:17:46 [dape]
- CA: given it is about ontology .. we could merge either way.
- 16:18:03 [dape]
- ... anyhow, let me re-generate the onotology
- 16:18:29 [dape]
- EK: Ok, great.. Cristiano can merge PR once conflict is resolved
- 16:18:58 [dape]
- TOPIC: TD Next
- 16:19:22 [dape]
- SUBTOPIC: Project Management: How do we organize the work?
- 16:19:29 [dape]
- EK: Let's recap
- 16:19:46 [dape]
- ... common agreement was that 1 person gets amount of work
- 16:19:51 [dape]
- ... for a given time
- 16:20:06 [dape]
- ... making sure person is working on it...
- 16:20:14 [dape]
- ... or work is split
- 16:20:47 [dape]
- ... prioritization should be also possible
- 16:21:21 [dape]
- EK: for example
- 16:21:25 [Ege]
- https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/31
- 16:21:51 [kaz]
- q+
- 16:22:10 [dape]
- ... everyone should see the topic board
- 16:22:19 [mahda-noura]
- +1
- 16:22:31 [dape]
- Kaz: using Github management capabilities might be useful
- 16:22:50 [dape]
- ... anyhow, we need to have clear procedure definition
- 16:22:59 [dape]
- ... and template
- 16:23:05 [dape]
- EK: Procedure is fine
- 16:23:15 [dape]
- ... not sure about template
- 16:23:54 [dape]
- <Ege showing GH capabilities>
- 16:24:31 [dape]
- EK: "Moving" issues allows to assign persons
- 16:25:06 [dape]
- ... created tasks can be assigned
- 16:25:37 [dape]
- ... moving issue/task to "Sorted" once we have know what we have to do
- 16:25:45 [kaz]
- i|Procedure is|-> https://github.com/w3c/strategy strategy pipeline
- 16:25:57 [dape]
- ... "In Progress" shows issues being worked on etc
- 16:26:09 [kaz]
- i/and template/and template like the W3C Strategy Team's Incubation Pipeline/
- 16:26:33 [dape]
- ... "In Progress" column should stay small per person
- 16:26:39 [kaz]
- i|Procedure is|-> https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues/new/choose Issue template|
- 16:26:40 [dape]
- ... and simple
- 16:26:51 [dape]
- ... no experience so far with it.. so feedback is welcome
- 16:26:58 [dape]
- CA: Looks good
- 16:27:09 [dape]
- ... we should try how it works out
- 16:27:37 [kaz]
- s|https://github.com/w3c/strategy|https://github.com/w3c/strategy/projects/2|
- 16:27:41 [dape]
- EK: We can also create subtopic while keeping the overall topics as well
- 16:27:47 [kaz]
- q+
- 16:27:58 [JKRhb]
- q+
- 16:27:58 [dape]
- Kaz: I am not objecting
- 16:28:21 [dape]
- ... we need to use specific template/procedure
- 16:28:29 [dape]
- ... and how to review etc
- 16:28:45 [kaz]
- s/we need/but we need/
- 16:28:53 [dape]
- EK: Yes, we should document it
- 16:29:25 [dape]
- Kaz: W3C uses it as well
- 16:29:35 [dape]
- ... for chartering process
- 16:30:14 [dape]
- JR: Benefit is to have issues from multiple repositories
- 16:30:32 [dape]
- ... e.g., issues coming from security
- 16:30:53 [dape]
- ... there might be other topics as well
- 16:31:08 [dape]
- EK: Good point
- 16:31:21 [dape]
- q?
- 16:31:24 [dape]
- ack kaz
- 16:31:27 [dape]
- ack JKRhb
- 16:32:54 [dape]
- SUBTOPIC: Analyses
- 16:33:10 [dape]
- EK: No news
- 16:33:18 [dape]
- SUBTOPIC: Use Case Analysis and Requirement Extraction
- 16:33:41 [kaz]
- q+
- 16:33:45 [dape]
- EK: Shortly mention in main call
- 16:34:07 [dape]
- ... should extract requirements from use-cases
- 16:34:16 [dape]
- s/Shortly mention/Shortly mentioned
- 16:34:20 [kaz]
- -> https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/13 WCAG
- 16:34:43 [kaz]
- s/WCAG/WCAG2ICT Note Update/
- 16:35:17 [kaz]
- i/https/subtopic: Project management - revisited/
- 16:35:34 [kaz]
- kaz: sorry but found another example for GitHub project
- 16:35:50 [kaz]
- subtopic: Analysis - revisited/
- 16:36:16 [dape]
- EK: looking at existing use-cases
- 16:36:37 [dape]
- ... how did it happen for security ?
- 16:37:01 [dape]
- JR: In discovery case it was already linked
- 16:37:12 [dape]
- ... not sure about security
- 16:37:25 [dape]
- MN: started the work for security
- 16:37:39 [kaz]
- s|subtopic: Analysis - revisited/|subtopic: Use Case Analysis and Requirement Extraction - revisited|
- 16:37:39 [dape]
- ... had table for use cases
- 16:37:41 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:37:42 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 16:37:48 [dape]
- ... we had 4 categories
- 16:38:01 [dape]
- ... use case linking to category
- 16:38:17 [kaz]
- q+
- 16:38:21 [dape]
- EK: categories were coming from where?
- 16:38:28 [dape]
- MN: General categories
- 16:38:54 [dape]
- ... if for use-cases category was missing we added new category
- 16:39:11 [dape]
- EK: I think we have categories already
- 16:39:29 [Ege]
- https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/main/USE-CASES/security-categories.csv
- 16:39:52 [dape]
- MN: columns are the categories in the CSV
- 16:40:26 [dape]
- ... afterwards we want to define the requirements
- 16:40:46 [dape]
- ... discovery is different.. there are no categories
- 16:41:29 [dape]
- JR: discovery had a pre-existing list
- 16:42:22 [dape]
- ... Section 4.3.6.1 in discovery spec
- 16:42:35 [kaz]
- q?
- 16:42:48 [Ege]
- https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/#discovery
- 16:43:25 [dape]
- EK: it seems we need to find the requirements we already have
- 16:43:28 [dape]
- ... strange
- 16:43:33 [dape]
- Kaz: I tend to agree
- 16:43:53 [dape]
- .... use-case directory has already categories
- 16:44:42 [dape]
- ... seems we need to reboot use-case task force
- 16:44:55 [dape]
- ... talking with existing task forces
- 16:45:04 [dape]
- ... to get nice refactoring / description etc
- 16:45:15 [kaz]
- ack k
- 16:45:16 [kaz]
- q+
- 16:45:20 [dape]
- EK: Not sure what we can do as a task force right now
- 16:45:23 [Ege]
- https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/main/USE-CASES/coverage.csv
- 16:45:37 [dape]
- EK: did the coverage work a while ago
- 16:45:51 [kaz]
- s/tend to agree/tend to agree with you, Ege/
- 16:46:24 [kaz]
- s/talking/and the Use Cases TF should talk/
- 16:46:28 [dape]
- ... this is just some sort of categorization
- 16:47:03 [dape]
- ... concerning that it is done differently
- 16:47:11 [dape]
- ... do we have such categories?
- 16:47:18 [dape]
- ... it is more like tagging
- 16:47:19 [Ege]
- q?
- 16:47:32 [dape]
- MN: what do you mean by tagging?
- 16:47:55 [dape]
- EK: not just one category.. but several tags
- 16:48:11 [dape]
- ... I think we need further thinking
- 16:49:27 [kaz]
- s|.... use-case directory has already categories|... wot-usecases/USE-CASES directory and the Use Cases document itself already have categories of use cases. on the other hand, "Public Service", "Private Information", etc., are rather aspects of potential risks./
- 16:49:37 [dape]
- <Ege updating wiki with the links & information that have been collected so far>
- 16:49:39 [kaz]
- s|risks./|risks.|
- 16:49:41 [kaz]
- ack k
- 16:50:56 [dape]
- DP/CA: Did not do/start this work for scripting
- 16:51:07 [JKRhb]
- q+
- 16:51:21 [dape]
- CA: table did not suite the scripting work
- 16:51:41 [dape]
- s/this work/this coverage work
- 16:52:07 [kaz]
- s/suite/suit/
- 16:52:44 [dape]
- JR: Had difficulties to decide whether requirement matches given use-case
- 16:52:56 [dape]
- ... need to work on that as well
- 16:53:10 [dape]
- EK: I had the same impression
- 16:53:24 [dape]
- ... we need something specific
- 16:53:39 [dape]
- MN: Even harder for TD to map
- 16:53:52 [dape]
- ... use-case is more general
- 16:54:04 [kaz]
- i|Even|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/192 wot-usecases Issue 192 - Adding new fields to templates|
- 16:54:07 [mjk_]
- q?
- 16:54:13 [kaz]
- q+
- 16:54:22 [dape]
- EK: we have to go through all use-cases and extract the type of information we need
- 16:54:48 [dape]
- ... this is a huge amount of work
- 16:54:53 [kaz]
- ack JKR
- 16:55:12 [dape]
- ... maybe also contacting people providing the use-case
- 16:55:34 [dape]
- q?
- 16:56:14 [dape]
- ... we need to go back in time why we have some features in the TD
- 16:56:38 [dape]
- Kaz: I agree with you Ege
- 16:56:48 [dape]
- ... we should revive use-case work
- 16:57:12 [dape]
- ... at the moment I think we can start with new use-cases
- 16:57:54 [kaz]
- s/you Ege/you, Ege/
- 16:58:16 [dape]
- EK: As TD task force we can collect what a use-case should have
- 16:58:27 [dape]
- ... any other task force can do the same
- 16:58:42 [dape]
- ... this should lead to a new template
- 16:58:56 [kaz]
- s/new use-cases/new use-cases, and maybe we can pick up some of the important use cases from the existing Use Cases document as a starting point.
- 16:59:03 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 16:59:04 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
- 16:59:16 [kaz]
- ack k
- 16:59:35 [kaz]
- s/As TD/Agree. As TD/
- 17:00:05 [dape]
- [adjourned]
- 17:00:08 [kaz]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 17:00:09 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/12/06-wot-td-minutes.html kaz