IRC log of wot-td on 2024-04-11

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:00:37 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wot-td
13:00:42 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-irc
13:01:01 [JKRhb]
JKRhb has joined #wot-td
13:02:41 [kaz]
meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF Slot 2
13:02:43 [Ege]
Ege has joined #wot-td
13:02:59 [kaz]
present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan, Jan_Romann, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster
13:03:09 [mjk]
mjk has joined #wot-td
13:03:09 [ktoumura]
ktoumura has joined #wot-td
13:04:00 [Tomo]
Tomo has joined #wot-td
13:04:44 [JKRhb]
scribenick: JKRhb
13:04:47 [JKRhb]
topic: Minutes Review
13:05:02 [JKRhb]
ek: Let's start the minutes from last week
13:05:06 [kaz]
q+
13:05:22 [JKRhb]
... the minutes looked good at a first glance
13:05:46 [kaz]
i|Let's|-> https://www.w3.org/2024/04/03-wot-td-minutes.html Apr-3|
13:05:49 [JKRhb]
kaz: Since we had the AC meeting yesterday, we are reviewing the minutes from the last meetings, right?
13:05:52 [JKRhb]
ek: Correct
13:05:59 [cris2]
cris2 has joined #wot-td
13:06:06 [JKRhb]
... there is a leftover abbreviated name
13:06:13 [JKRhb]
... otherwise, they look good to me
13:06:20 [JKRhb]
... does anyone have issues?
13:06:31 [JKRhb]
kaz: Issue has been fixed
13:06:40 [JKRhb]
ek: Good, then minutes are approved
13:06:52 [JKRhb]
... (shows the minutes of the second meeting)
13:06:52 [kaz]
i||-> https://www.w3.org/2024/04/04-wot-td-minutes.html Apr-4|
13:07:04 [JKRhb]
... there have been some IRC formatting issues
13:07:11 [kaz]
i|shows|-> https://www.w3.org/2024/04/04-wot-td-minutes.html Apr-4|
13:07:12 [JKRhb]
... two resolutions in total
13:07:25 [kaz]
rrsagent, make log public
13:07:26 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minute
13:07:26 [RRSAgent]
I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft minute', kaz. Try /msg RRSAgent help
13:07:26 [JKRhb]
... we can approve the minutes, however
13:07:31 [kaz]
s/rrsagent, draft minute//
13:07:32 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:07:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
13:07:41 [JKRhb]
Minutes are approved
13:07:42 [JKRhb]
topic: Agenda
13:07:54 [JKRhb]
ek: There are some weird things in the agenda
13:08:15 [kaz]
chair: Ege, Koster
13:08:40 [kaz]
present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi, Mahda_Noura, Tomoaki_Miushima
13:08:44 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:08:45 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
13:08:51 [JKRhb]
... as we are closer to switching to Github projects for project management, we are marking some points as italic, therefore, the formatting gets messed up
13:08:58 [luca_barbato]
luca_barbato has joined #wot-td
13:08:59 [JKRhb]
... you can ignore it, though
13:09:28 [JKRhb]
topic: TD Next Editor's Draft
13:09:29 [Ege]
https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1997
13:09:35 [kaz]
agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#April_11%2C_2024
13:09:47 [JKRhb]
ek: This is the current state of the PR
13:10:04 [JKRhb]
... currently, it looks as if we are changing the old version
13:10:11 [kaz]
s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1997|-">https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1997|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1997 PR 1997 - Preparation for TD Next Work|
13:10:14 [JKRhb]
... therefore, the PR proposes to change to title
13:10:39 [JKRhb]
... currently, it just adds a "Next", but we can discuss that
13:10:53 [kaz]
i|This is the|-> https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1997.html Preview|
13:10:54 [JKRhb]
... also adds some additional information regarding breaking changes
13:10:57 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:10:58 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
13:11:15 [JKRhb]
... only textual changes, but still important to discuss some points
13:11:25 [JKRhb]
... also did some changes to the README
13:11:28 [kaz]
present+ Luca_Barbato
13:12:13 [JKRhb]
... there are some unrelated changes at the moment, only the ones in the index.html are relevant
13:12:52 [JKRhb]
... would like to hear some comments, whether you like the changes and whether we should use "Next" or "2.0", for example
13:13:08 [JKRhb]
... but this should send the message that we are working on a new version
13:13:12 [Ege]
q?
13:13:31 [mahda]
mahda has joined #wot-td
13:13:41 [JKRhb]
kaz: Basically, you copied all the content from the Binding Template side to the TD document, right?
13:13:51 [JKRhb]
ek: No, that is not included in this PR
13:14:20 [JKRhb]
kaz: Okay. We should also update the list of editors by the way
13:14:44 [JKRhb]
ek: Will update that when we will move the content of the Binding Templates over
13:15:07 [cris2]
q+
13:15:10 [kaz]
q-
13:15:11 [Ege]
ack c
13:15:12 [JKRhb]
... for editors, we should have a separate discussion as well, e.g. regarding authors vs. editors
13:15:22 [dape]
dape has joined #wot-td
13:15:30 [JKRhb]
ca: Nothing more to add, like the direction of the PR
13:15:54 [luca_barbato]
q+
13:15:54 [kaz]
present+ Daniel_Peintner
13:15:56 [mahda]
present+ Mahda_Noura
13:15:58 [cris2]
q+
13:15:59 [JKRhb]
ek: Any opnions on 2.0 vs Next?
13:16:13 [JKRhb]
s/opnions/opinions/
13:16:22 [JKRhb]
lb: I guess we can already go for 2.0
13:16:37 [JKRhb]
... but that could even be done as a second step
13:16:47 [JKRhb]
... you already did a lot of work here
13:17:02 [JKRhb]
ek: Would be a small change, though
13:17:29 [JKRhb]
ca: Not having a strong opinion, "Next" would give us more flexibility
13:17:35 [kaz]
q+
13:17:43 [JKRhb]
... but then again, 2.0 is still in the charter
13:17:47 [kaz]
ack lu
13:17:49 [kaz]
ack cr
13:18:01 [JKRhb]
mjk: We can start with our semantic versioning at any time
13:18:29 [mjk]
q?
13:18:34 [kaz]
q-
13:18:59 [JKRhb]
kaz: Given that our charter only says "TD update", we can go with "TD Next" and then think about the title as a second step as Luca mentioned, then again everyone seems to be okay with 2.0
13:19:04 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/2023/10/wot-wg-2023.html WoT WG Charter
13:19:32 [kaz]
s/then again/I personally think/
13:19:44 [JKRhb]
ek: Regarding the context URL, we should use a temporary one, I will create an issue for that
13:19:46 [kaz]
s/mentioned,/mentioned./
13:19:57 [kaz]
s/with 2.0/with 2.0, though./
13:20:04 [JKRhb]
... will also try to fix the large amount of unrelated changes.
13:20:06 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:20:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
13:20:17 [JKRhb]
... (adds a comment to the PR)
13:20:37 [JKRhb]
... will fix these issues and then merge it asynchronously
13:20:44 [kaz]
i|will|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1997#issuecomment-2049680815 Ege's comment|
13:20:46 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:20:47 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
13:20:55 [JKRhb]
topic: Toolchain Discussion
13:21:12 [JKRhb]
ek: There have been some discussions but nothing new here
13:21:39 [JKRhb]
... Mahda is looking into using LinkML and will present some initial results in one of the next meetings
13:22:13 [JKRhb]
... there is a related PR in the Binding Template respository related to the toolchain which we can use as the basis for the discussion
13:22:19 [JKRhb]
subtopic: Modbus PR
13:22:41 [JKRhb]
ek: I have noticed some bugs in the toolchain that should need to be fixed
13:23:12 [JKRhb]
... so in the Modbus binding, we have a context, ontology and a JSON Schema
13:23:30 [mahda]
q+
13:23:40 [JKRhb]
... there are some inconsistencies between ontology and the resulting Binding Template
13:23:54 [JKRhb]
... caused by a bug where the tool was lowercasing everything
13:24:20 [JKRhb]
... causing an implementation to be wrong if it looks at the implementation or the JSON Schema
13:24:37 [JKRhb]
s/implementation/specification/
13:25:27 [JKRhb]
... another example was a typo in the JSON Schema, where an "s" was missing, causing bugs when read by a machine
13:25:36 [Ege]
q?
13:25:48 [JKRhb]
... these are examples where our current tooling causes issues
13:25:58 [kaz]
i|I have|-> https://w3c.github.io/wot-binding-templates/bindings/protocols/modbus/index.html#function Modbus Binding Template - 4.4 Function
13:26:06 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:26:07 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
13:26:13 [JKRhb]
mn: This is related to a recent issue
13:26:33 [JKRhb]
... in the TD repository
13:26:44 [JKRhb]
... issue number 1988 to be precise
13:27:00 [JKRhb]
... caused by a different naming in the context and the ontology file
13:27:13 [cris2]
+1
13:27:25 [cris2]
q+
13:27:28 [kaz]
q+
13:27:36 [JKRhb]
ek: In the future, there should simply be no possibility to make this mistake
13:27:53 [JKRhb]
... another change in the PR is that I added Cristiano as an editor
13:28:05 [Ege]
q?
13:28:07 [Ege]
ack m
13:28:10 [JKRhb]
... also fixed some capitalization issues
13:28:27 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1988 wot-thing-description Issue 1988 - td:hasInstanceConfiguration used in JSON-LD context is not in the ontology
13:28:29 [JKRhb]
ca: One thing: While you explaning the changes, I noticed something
13:28:40 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/359 wot-bindig-templates PR 359 - Modbus fixes
13:29:13 [JKRhb]
... you mentioned that an "s" was missing, so maybe the Schema was wrong but the ontology was right
13:29:34 [JKRhb]
... maybe we need to double check the terms and use plural if required
13:29:58 [JKRhb]
ek: So you are saying that we need to check with the Modbus specification
13:30:25 [JKRhb]
ca: The fix itself is correct, so maybe we can add a follow-up issue and check again later
13:30:44 [JKRhb]
ek: (adds a comment to the issue)
13:30:46 [Ege]
q?
13:30:54 [JKRhb]
... thank you, good point
13:31:37 [JKRhb]
kaz: Thank you very much for your hard work, but at least for the discussion today I am a bit confused, maybe we need to make it a bit clearer what the actual issue was
13:32:02 [JKRhb]
... so there is an issue in the TD repository, but a PR in the Binding Template repository
13:32:44 [JKRhb]
... so we need to clarify what is wrong on which side and if there is an issue in the TD specification, we might need to consider issuing an errata
13:33:06 [JKRhb]
ek: So this is only on the side of the Binding Templates repository
13:33:18 [JKRhb]
... so we don't need an errata, I think
13:33:42 [JKRhb]
... otherwise, it is a human error, one letter makes a big difference
13:33:50 [JKRhb]
... no one has noticed it so far
13:34:08 [JKRhb]
kaz: This implies that we might need an even nicer review mechanism as well
13:34:27 [JKRhb]
ek: True, but it would also be nice if there was no way to make this mistake
13:34:57 [JKRhb]
kaz: We could maybe document this and add it to the review policy at some point as well
13:35:14 [JKRhb]
ek: (updates his comment in the PR)
13:36:18 [JKRhb]
... I will not merge this PR so far, please also have look at the changes, Cristiano
13:36:29 [JKRhb]
... then we can go to the next topic
13:36:53 [JKRhb]
topic: Project Management Discussion
13:37:31 [Ege]
https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1990
13:37:36 [JKRhb]
ek: Did not have time to look into versioning again, therefore I would propose going forward with the project management
13:38:01 [kaz]
s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1990|-">https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1990|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1990 PR 1990 - Simplified lifecycle diagram|
13:38:03 [JKRhb]
... in the PR above we propose a simplification of the process I discussed with the chairs
13:38:25 [JKRhb]
... the diagram was a bit too complicated at the top
13:38:35 [JKRhb]
... should be a bit easier to understand now
13:39:08 [JKRhb]
... also making sure that we have branching based on the decision
13:39:21 [JKRhb]
... also, the whole process is now issue-driven
13:39:48 [JKRhb]
... issues might be delegated to the use case TF
13:40:35 [kaz]
q+
13:40:40 [JKRhb]
... if an issue is accepted, it will be prioritized and assigned, work will be done via PRs
13:40:50 [kaz]
ack c
13:40:58 [JKRhb]
ca: Looks good to me
13:41:14 [JKRhb]
kaz: Thank you very much for this part as well!
13:42:16 [dape]
q+ to minor: step 8 and 9 seem to be flipped
13:42:30 [kaz]
ack k
13:44:00 [JKRhb]
dp: Just noticed that steps 8. and 9. are flipped, but it is not a big issue
13:44:00 [dape]
ack dape
13:44:00 [Zakim]
dape, you wanted to minor: step 8 and 9 seem to be flipped
13:44:09 [JKRhb]
ek: Sure, can adjust this quickly
13:44:33 [JKRhb]
... (adds a comment to the PR)
13:44:59 [JKRhb]
... I mean, even in this diagram, steps 1 and 2 are from left to right
13:45:09 [JKRhb]
... any other points or rejections to the PR?
13:45:23 [JKRhb]
... then I will fix these points and merge asynchronously
13:45:41 [JKRhb]
ek: The other actual thing I wanted to discuss is starting to work this way
13:46:03 [JKRhb]
... we have the table and did some categorization, e.g., regarding use case relevance
13:46:26 [JKRhb]
... once we have the UC template, we can do that as well
13:46:27 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/fea27c285a44b85e0ef875a50719a426e5a5c9c3/proposals/project-management/project-management.md Rendered MD
13:46:40 [JKRhb]
... but in the other aspects, we can already start working this way
13:46:48 [kaz]
q+
13:46:57 [JKRhb]
... do we need a TF resolution for that?
13:47:19 [JKRhb]
... I think working this way will make the things we work on more visible
13:47:40 [dape]
dape has joined #wot-td
13:47:43 [JKRhb]
kaz: I think giving a quick presentation during the main call would make sure
13:47:58 [kaz]
s/sure/sense/
13:48:07 [JKRhb]
... also we can ask Michael Koster for his opinion
13:48:36 [JKRhb]
mjk: I just agree
13:49:03 [JKRhb]
ek: (updates his comment)
13:49:25 [JKRhb]
s/TF resolution/main call resolution/
13:50:07 [kaz]
scribe+
13:51:14 [kaz]
topic: PR 1998
13:51:27 [cris2]
+1
13:51:40 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1998 PR 1998 - Adding ignored paths to GH Action to match prettierignore for prettier changes
13:51:51 [kaz]
(no objections and merged)
13:51:58 [kaz]
topic: PR 1999
13:52:19 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1999 PR 1999 - Term inconsistency among the ontology and context file
13:52:27 [kaz]
ek: is this PR ready?
13:52:35 [kaz]
mn: PR itself is ready, I think
13:52:47 [kaz]
... but still need to look into Prettier
13:53:10 [cris2]
q+
13:53:17 [dape]
q+
13:54:01 [kaz]
kaz: would confirm the changes
13:54:09 [kaz]
ek: kind of bug fixes
13:54:30 [kaz]
... moving the description on hasConfigurationInstance and then renamed it
13:54:33 [JKRhb]
JKRhb has joined #wot-td
13:54:33 [kaz]
ack k
13:54:41 [kaz]
ca: right
13:55:11 [kaz]
... note the changes include the resources (td.ttl)
13:55:16 [dape]
dape has joined #wot-td
13:55:27 [kaz]
ack c
13:55:31 [kaz]
ack d
13:55:50 [kaz]
dp: might need an Errata, maybe...
13:55:58 [kaz]
q+
13:56:26 [dape]
ack dape
13:56:35 [kaz]
... we can fix the bug but there was a bug within the spec
13:56:52 [kaz]
ek: right, but the spec HTML itself was correct
13:58:15 [kaz]
kaz: so no issue or problem with the index.html of TD spec
13:59:15 [kaz]
... but related resources like ontology/td.html and ontology/td.ttl files are to be fixed
13:59:26 [kaz]
... so it might make sense to describe that on the Errata
14:00:01 [kaz]
... also we should think about what to be handled by the versioning mechanism and what to be handled by the Errata mechanism as part of our policy
14:00:04 [kaz]
ek: good point
14:01:09 [Ege]
q?
14:01:12 [Ege]
ack k
14:01:28 [kaz]
... for this problem itself, we should have a follow-up PR for the resources
14:01:50 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1999#issuecomment-2049762587 Ege's note
14:01:55 [kaz]
[adjourned]
14:01:59 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
14:02:01 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/04/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
16:27:52 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wot-td