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