12:03:10 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-uc
12:03:14 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/01/24-wot-uc-irc
12:03:23 <kaz> meeting: WoT Use Cases
12:04:00 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Ege_Korkan, Michael_McCool, Kunihiko_Toumura, Mahda_Noura, Michael_Koster
12:05:01 <kaz> scribenick: kaz
12:05:01 <Ege> Ege has joined #wot-uc
12:05:34 <kaz> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_UseCase_WebConf#January_24th.2C_2024
12:05:39 <kaz> topic: Minutes
12:05:54 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2024/01/17-wot-uc-minutes.html Jan-17
12:06:27 <kaz> tm: (goes through the minutes)
12:07:07 <kaz> approved
12:07:35 <kaz> topic: Process
12:07:58 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/main/Process.md Process.md
12:08:21 <kaz> tm: have updated the Process.md based on the discussion during the previous call
12:09:00 <kaz> ... regarding "who to provide input"
12:09:12 <kaz> ... any volunteer proposers are welcome
12:09:30 <kaz> ... not only WoT IG but also WoT WG, WoT CG, WoT-JP CG, ...
12:09:51 <kaz> .. also would like to think about the updated template for the use case desription
12:10:02 <kaz> s/desription/description/
12:10:11 <kaz> q+
12:10:14 <mahda-noura> present+ Mahda_Noura
12:11:05 <luca_barbato> luca_barbato has joined #wot-uc
12:12:03 <kaz> mm: there are several GitHub issues like Ege's also
12:12:23 <kaz> kaz: would suggest you go through your updated Process proposal based on the previous discussion quickly
12:12:28 <McCool> would like to suggest we look at proposal from ege/toumura regarding user stories before we dive into the template, may need multiple templates
12:12:32 <McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/257#issuecomment-1907308039
12:12:39 <McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/261
12:12:40 <kaz> ... then go through the GH issues including Ege's
12:13:02 <kaz> ... then talk about possible updated template after that
12:13:17 <kaz> q+
12:13:40 <kaz> ack k
12:13:41 <cris_> cris_ has joined #wot-uc
12:14:49 <kaz> @@@ kaz to move McCool's point here
12:15:26 <kaz> present+ Luca_Barbato, Cristiano_Aguzzi
12:17:29 <kaz> subtopic: Process update
12:23:14 <kaz> tm: have update the description on Process.md based on the discussion during the previous call
12:23:20 <kaz> ... for each phase
12:24:16 <Ege> q+
12:24:32 <kaz> q+
12:24:48 <kaz> ack e
12:26:15 <kaz> ack k
12:26:45 <kaz> ek: will start with use case template or gap analysis?
12:27:14 <kaz> kaz: should start with the updates on use cases, requirements and gap analysis on Process.md at high level first
12:27:39 <kaz> ... then GitHub issues around gap analysis next
12:27:57 <kaz> subtopic: Use Case Definition updates
12:28:21 <McCool> q+
12:28:26 <kaz> tm: added some description on possible use case template
12:28:49 <kaz> ... based on the discussion during the last call
12:29:31 <kaz> qq+
12:30:00 <kaz> ack k
12:30:00 <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to react to kaz
12:30:33 <kaz> ... also added some description about determining the use cases
12:31:24 <kaz> ... should evaluate if the proposed use case is typical/atomic
12:31:43 <kaz> ... then categorize duplicated use cases into one
12:31:58 <kaz> mm: agree post-process is important
12:32:22 <kaz> ... we should also think about how to extract information from the use case description
12:32:22 <kaz> q+
12:32:55 <kaz> ... we should extract user story as well
12:33:03 <kaz> ack m
12:33:08 <cris_> q+
12:35:01 <McCool> what I said: felt overall idea of assigning someone to shepherd the process for each use case is good
12:35:19 <McCool> ... but expanding template for use case itself has not been productive in the past
12:35:23 <kaz> ack k
12:35:37 <kaz> kaz: agree
12:35:40 <McCool> ... I think we should focus on process of how to extract requirements from use cases, which tend to be generic
12:35:48 <kaz> s/kaz: agree//
12:35:49 <kaz> kaz: agree
12:36:01 <kaz> ... and he's also trying to do so
12:36:11 <kaz> ... so let's ask him to skim the whole story first
12:36:13 <McCool> q+
12:36:42 <kaz> ca: do we always create a use case?
12:36:53 <kaz> ... or sometimes some simple story?
12:36:55 <kaz> q+
12:37:01 <kaz> ack c
12:37:13 <kaz> mm: user story should be the starting point
12:37:26 <kaz> ... e.g., I need this capability as a user
12:37:59 <kaz> ... motivating the use case
12:38:10 <kaz> ack m
12:38:25 <kaz> ... captures stakeholder's need
12:39:01 <McCool> q+
12:39:24 <kaz> ack k
12:39:50 <kaz> mm: sometimes could allow to start with missing features
12:40:03 <kaz> ... not only top-down but also bottom-up approach
12:40:14 <Ege> +1 to mm and ca
12:40:18 <cris_> 1+ plus if we consider that we a good amount of cases of this bottom up approach from already existing issues
12:40:19 <kaz> q+
12:40:22 <kaz> ack m
12:40:24 <McCool> ack m
12:41:42 <kaz> kaz: can understand the need
12:41:53 <kaz> ... but we could start with the top-down flow first
12:42:03 <kaz> ... and then think about bottom-up flow later
12:42:19 <kaz> ... I think Mizushima-san's point is defining what to be clarified during which phase
12:42:25 <kaz> ... regardless the direction
12:42:30 <kaz> tm: right
12:42:48 <kaz> ... we should be able to handle the bottom-up approach as well
12:43:14 <kaz> ... but anyway we need to clarify stakeholders' needs at the use case phase
12:43:33 <kaz> ... so would start with the use case phase
12:43:55 <Ege> q+
12:43:57 <kaz> ... and requirements extraction based on the use case descriptions
12:43:58 <kaz> ack k
12:44:18 <kaz> ek: would get one clarification
12:44:41 <kaz> ... CG participants can't issue a Pullrequest directly
12:44:52 <kaz> ... how can they provide ideas then?
12:44:57 <kaz> q+
12:44:58 <kaz> ack e
12:45:10 <kaz> tm: several methods, I think
12:45:58 <kaz> ... note that it's not really good for them to just submit proposals
12:46:12 <kaz> ... we need further help from them about later phases as well
12:48:01 <kaz> kaz: we can accept inputs from non-Member CG participants as well
12:48:22 <kaz> ... UCR document is an IG deliverable and we don't care about the W3C Patent Policy for that
12:48:43 <kaz> ... we already handle inputs fromn non-Members using the Markdown template
12:49:01 <kaz> ... then include the HTML version into the UCR document later
12:49:11 <kaz> tm: right
12:49:23 <kaz> ... we need to let them know how to make contributions
12:50:20 <kaz> ... then the WoT IG's Use Cases TF need to evaluate their proposals and then include them into the UCR document as HTML
12:50:26 <kaz> q?
12:50:28 <kaz> q-
12:50:30 <kaz> q+
12:50:48 <kaz> kaz: the Process.md should describe that flow as well
12:51:27 <kaz> ack k
12:51:37 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
12:51:42 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
12:51:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/01/24-wot-uc-minutes.html kaz
12:51:52 <kaz> topic: Gap analysis
12:52:01 <kaz> tm: got several issues from Ege
12:52:12 <McCool> q+
12:52:46 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/258 Issue 258 - [Process] Not proceeding to feature definition if there is no gap
12:53:14 <kaz> mm: we need a document on the current features
12:53:31 <kaz> ... agree we should not accept proposals which are already covered
12:54:10 <kaz> ... btw, I think user stories are good way to see the gaps also
12:54:28 <kaz> ... see issue 261 also
12:54:41 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/261 Issue 261 - Thoughts from the TD Use Case Discussions
12:54:42 <kaz> q+
12:56:22 <kaz> ack m
12:56:23 <kaz> ack k
12:56:39 <kaz> kaz: partly agree but we need to define "gap analysis" a bit more
12:56:56 <McCool> q+
12:56:59 <kaz> ... use story is important but it's already required for the use case definition phase as the starting point
12:57:49 <kaz> ... my understanding on what Mizushima-san meant by "gap analysis" is evaluating if the requirements extracted from the use cases are already covered by the existing WoT standards or not
12:58:03 <kaz> ... but we still need to clarify what we mean by "gap analysis"
12:58:23 <kaz> mm: I meant requirements by "user story" here
12:58:29 <Ege> q+
12:58:33 <kaz> ack m
12:58:55 <kaz> ek: last week some discussion on use cases
12:59:01 <kaz> ... outreach and standardization
12:59:14 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/257
12:59:18 <kaz> ... need some discussion around concrete information
12:59:46 <kaz> q|
12:59:49 <kaz> q_
12:59:51 <kaz> q+
12:59:55 <kaz> ack e
13:00:39 <kaz> s/q|//
13:00:42 <kaz> s/q_//
13:01:52 <McCool> time check: 1 past, time to move to main call
13:01:54 <kaz> ack k
13:02:17 <kaz> mm: how to proceed?
13:02:40 <kaz> ... can Mizushma-san provide some Issues/PRs for us to give comments?
13:03:10 <kaz> kaz: we're still at a brainstorming phase
13:03:28 <kaz> ... so we should rather listen to Mizushima-san's update first
13:03:38 <kaz> ... then give our opinions after that
13:04:02 <kaz> ... when we get a bit more stable proposal, we can start to use GitHub Issues/PRs as usual
13:04:07 <kaz> [adjourned]
13:04:12 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
13:04:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/01/24-wot-uc-minutes.html kaz
13:13:41 <cris_> +1 for a policy doc
13:20:04 <cris_> cris_ has left #wot-uc
13:56:26 <ktoumura> ktoumura has left #wot-uc
15:06:29 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-uc
15:44:08 <mahda-noura> mahda-noura has joined #wot-uc