W3C

– DRAFT –
WoT-WG/IG

17 January 2024

Attendees

Present
Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, Luca_Barbato, Mahda_Noura, Michael_Koster, Michael_McCool, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Tetsushi_Matsuda, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
David
Chair
Koster, McCool, Sebastian
Scribe
kaz, luca_barbato, sebastian

Meeting minutes

Minutes

<kaz> Jan-10

McCool: We already reviewed them, let's quick scan them

McCool: Any corrections?

<none>

IIWoT Workshop

McCool: Cris can you provide a overview?

Cristiano: I did not participate, but my colleague did. I'll have a full summary by next week.

Kaz: Please think of what we can get from this kind of events: Use Cases, Other kind of feedback ...

Cristiano: There were 3 papers about WoT we can use

Quick Updates

McCool: I started to cleanup the pages, any objections to continue?

Ege: From the CG there is a WoT tutorial, and it is a review period for it

Meeting Schedule Changes

McCool: If any meeting in week 12-16 Feb is not canceled please state it.

Ege: No plan to cancel Marketing and TD

McCool: UC call the 14th is canceled?

Mizushima: Yes

McCool: The main call is also canceled

Kaz: We should have the TF leaders update the cancelation list monthly

McCool: I agree

Schedule

<kaz> schedule.md

McCool: The past years got archived

McCool: We should add some milestones in the schedule

Kaz: We need to update the schedule based on the TF progress in the future, how to do that?

Kaz: The current charter started in October 2023 and in October 2025

<kaz> WoT WG Charter

Use Case discussion restarted

<kaz> proposed WoT WG spec generation process (discussed during the WoT Use Cases call)

McCool: To move items from different TF, please open issues on the main wot repo

WG Planning

Policies

McCool: We should have a extended call next week after the main call to discuss all the policies

McCool: Jan 24th

TF leads

McCool: Also we should cover Task Force Leaders changes

Project management

<Ege> w3c/wot-thing-description#1954

Ege: We have the current issues, but we can split it in multiple issues

McCool: If we create a policy we can discuss it next week

Kaz: We had discussion about project management in the UC call. There are several levels of project management. We should clarify policy, procedure and definition around project management next week.

F2F

McCool: Sebastian do you have updates regarding the plugfest?

Sebstian: No, next week I'll have information

Resources

McCool: In Discovery we made progress in rendering html, but we found bugs that require updating the ttl files

McCool: It is possibly also a policy task, to uniform our behaviour

McCool: Do we have proposals on how to manage versioning and managing resource updates

<McCool_> wot Issue 1166 - [Policy Proposal] Versioning Resources

Ege: I linked in the TD proposal in the issue

McCool: We can add to the policy meeting next week

Ege: I can prepare a draft proposal, please have a look at the td versioning document and provide feedback first

Kaz: suggest we have joint discussion between Discovery and TD during the next TD call on Thursday, Jan 25

Meetups

WoT CG

Ege: There is a meetup open for all about Digital Twins

Ege: There is a tutorial being worked on in the CG

<Ege> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-web-of-things/2023Dec/0009.html

Ege: it is currently in review, everybody should already received an email, you may provide feedback

Kaz: Technically, the CG is a different group from WG and IG, please consider what input can be provided to the WG and IG from CG.

WoT JP CG

<Mizushima> Web-based Smart Cities Tutorial

Kaz: We have a compass page ready, it is japanese-only right now though

Kaz: Are planning a security-related seminar in March

Liaisons

McCool: Our Liaisons page needs to be completed/reorganized. Also W3C collaboration page to be updated.

Action Items

McCool: We should archive all the done items

Marketing Task Force around Mastodon

Ege: We almost got as many followers as in Twitter, we still plan to keep Twitter for now

UC Task Force

Mizushima: We discussed the process to produce the Use Case documents, next week we will have the UC call

<kaz> [ break for 10 mins ]

IG Charter Discussion

Agenda

Koster: try to complete the charter discussion today
… there are some PRs from Sebastian
… any other topics?

Ege: there is a relationship document. still marked as draft.

<kaz> relationship document

Ege: we need discussion if we agree on this document

<MK edits the agenda>

IG Charter Overview

<there is an issue that gives an overview and a diff of the previous charter version>

<mjk> Strategy Issue 440 - [ig/wot] Web of Things Interest Group rechartering

McCool: what about the Nordic CG as part of the communities for outreach?

<sebastian> Kaz: there is no comment so far from the Nordic CG, so we can think about them later

Relationship draft

<sebastian> relationship.md proposed by Ege

<kaz> Process.md proposed by Mizushima

Ege: there is no update on the document

Koster: is it already aligned?

Koster: we can't go through all, I think is a good overview of the relation
… are there any concerns?

Kaz: it's already merged as draft. We can update and fix it later

Ege: Note there is some overlap between Mizushima's proposed Process.md and my concolidated relationship.md
… So created an issue to consider alignment between those documents.

w3c/wot-usecases Issue 260 - [Process] Aligning with Relationship between groups document

Mizushima: I'm also aware there're two different documents related to each other.
… we should discuss the issue

Koster: agree, we should have more discussion before we go to merge this

Koster: we should align this with Use Case discussion next week

Kaz: next week we won't have IG discussion but will talk about WG plannig, so the next opportunity would be Jan 31
... today we should check the remaining PRs, let's come back to the relationship document discussion if some of the PRs require. If the discussion get too big, we can continue that in 2 weeks.

PRs

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#141

<Update Marketing and Outreach>

Koster: explains also the relationship of the Marketing TF to the CGs
… any objections on this PR?

no

Daniel: we need to fix a grammar issue

<PR is merged>

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#138

<Updates W3C Groups and External Organizations>

Sebastian: list is just in sync with the WG charter

Koster: maybe we should be more clear about external binding specification

Sebastian: we can update the OPC UA entry

<MK removes a sentance>

Koster: to create a bininding, there is no special relationship needed

Koster: any objection to merge this PR?

no

<PR is merged>

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#137

<Update text for Plugfest and Testing>

Sebastian: PR explains the process of PlugFest and Testing. It makes this more clear what is the difference.

Koster: There is a comment from MM.

McCool: yes, suggest to change the last edited sentance in the PR.

<Koster updates the PR>

Kaz: We should mention that Testing is for Candiate Rec or Propsed Rec
… we should also call this "feature testing" only. Then "Recommendation documents" should read "Recommendation Track documents

<Koster changing this in the PR>

Ege: testing does not conflict with diagram

<Koster edits the PR>

Koster: any other comments? objections?

<PR is merged>

Koster: I think , we have a version of the charter that can be reviewed
… mybe we need to update the scope summary box

<kaz> Draft WoT IG Charter

Issues

Koster: let's check the remaining issues if can be closed

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#135

Koster: was addressed by the PRs; going to close

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#128

Koster: Will be done when all other changes are in

Kaz: should add a label like "after the draft Charter fixed" to identify this. (and done)

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#125

Koster: is addressed; going to close

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#124

McCool: issue can be closed

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#123

Koster: can be closed; any objection?

no

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#122

Koster: needs to be addressed
… I will take care of it

w3c/wot-charter-drafts#121

Koster: I will also check this

McCool: Last remaining issues is not a big deal. When can handle this in the next main call.

Koster: good point

McCool: we can then do a call for resolution in the next main call

Kaz: We can have high-level discussion quickly during the main call next week. On the other hand, if the discussion need detailed analysis, e.g., going back to the relationship.md, that should be done in 2 weeks.

Koster: that's right. we can try to discuss this within 15min next week, otherwise we will continue discussion on January 31

<kaz> [adjourned]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 221 (Fri Jul 21 14:01:30 2023 UTC).