Meeting minutes
Guests, New Members
McCool: any news on the new IE applicants, Kaz?
Kaz: no
Minutes
<kaz> June 19
McCool: any objection to the minutes of June 19th?
(none)
Quick Items
Smart Cities IG
<kaz> AC review ongoing till July 3 (Member-only)
McCool: deadline for AC Review is July 3, what is the status?
Kaz: We got 22 supports already
Editors
<McCool> proposal: Confirm Luca Barbato and Ege Korkan as new Editors for UC Note for the Use Case and Requirements document.
RESOLUTION: Confirm Luca Barbato and Ege Korkan as new Editors for the Use Case and Requirements document.
<kaz> June-26 Use Case TF discussion
<McCool> proposal: Change status of Michael Lagally and Ryuichi Matsukura to Previous Editors for the Use Case and Requirements document.
RESOLUTION: Change status of Michael Lagally and Ryuichi Matsukura to Previous Editors for the Use Case and Requirements document.
Notices
McCool: any announcements?
(none)
Meetups
McCool: anything planned for Japanese CG?
<kaz> s/Japanese meetups/Japanese CG/
Mizushima: We have planned a use case meetup, but the details are not ready yet
Liaisons
Kaz: I am working with 30 teams, on the NGSI-LD with the FIWARE guys we continued the discussions, my name will be put there
McCool: NGSI-LD is not the official name
Sebastian: are the meetings taking place every week on Friday, or are they bi-weekly
Kaz: bi-weekly
McCool: I think the problem is that the meeting invitation that is provided is not bi-weekly and needs to be changed
Kaz: In any case once there becomes a collaboration between WoT and NGSI-LD, we can manage the time
Errata
<kaz> errata-management.md
McCool: the Errata policy is now in effect
Ege: I will do now the PR
Meeting Schedules
<kaz> Cancellations
McCool: We will have a chairs call on July 1st, and we will have a Wednesday call next week eventhough it's a holiday in the US, and July 15th is cancelled
McCool: We should also add TPAC week to the cancellations
<kaz> schedule.md
McCool: We should check the schedule also, we are behind in the use cases and requirements due to missing 5 meetings. Other than that, discovery is schedules for mid-December however we are not active there
McCool: we need to make sure we are on schedule for the whole process and discuss that, maybe could be an agenda for TPAC
F2F Planning
<kaz> schedule.md
McCool: We did add the F2F event in the schedule
Sebastian: updates on the F2F event, the Wiki page has now been updated, the location, public transportation information
Sebastian: we wanted to initially get some discounts on the hotels that are in the area, however this is costly for Siemens, so please check the hotels yourself and decide
<Ege> ack
Sebastian: there is also a link to the public transportation in Munich
<kaz> Wiki for WoT Week on Nov 25-29
Sebastian: we need to decide whether we want a full day or a half day on the last day
Ege: if you are staying longer, you could also use the Deutschland Ticket for getting around
McCool: I think we should focus on the TPAC agenda, and any overflow we can cover in the WoT F2F meeting
<kaz> Wiki for TPAC
Kaz: would be better to have the links for the TPAC 2024 wiki and WoT Week wiki on the schedule.md too
McCool: Please do add your suggested topics to the WiKi for TPAC organization
Document Refactoring
McCool: We had a discussion in the use cases TF, and were wondering where the requirements actually go, should the architecture be a REC document or not.
<kaz> Where do requirements go?
<kaz> What is the role/status of Architecture?
<kaz> How can we better organize Profiles?
<kaz> Do we have to wait until UC&R is a Note before implementing features?
McCool: my opinion would be that, architecture should be the main entry point and understanding WoT, they should get a summary and motivation of WoT, could be an informative document, published as Note.
Ege: I am aligned, I think there should not be overlap between documents, and keep architecture as an informative note, should be an explainer for all. It should be a timeless document and not require too much changes, because we cannot generally change our design decisions, should not be too long
Kaz: I suggest we record all the main points from the use cases
McCool: we should volunteer to make a PR, and everyone can make comments
McCool: any volunteers?
<sebastian> <sorry, I had Internet blackout at home>
McCool: I could do it
McCool: the PR should capture the proposal and ask people for comments. In a month or two we need a resolution
<Ege> +1 on PR :)
Kaz: As a starting point you could create a template based on the four questions, and everybody including you can put their points
<Ege> +1 for concrete proposal
<kaz> June-26 UC call discussion
McCool: we were discussing the UC&R, do we have to wait until we publish it officially? I think it would cause delays, if we merge a user case and requirement we have a consensus and should work on it.
McCool: I think when we publish a note, that is sort of an external thing, and it's more for external consumption
McCool: any comments on this?
McCool: merging PR in the UC documents as a sort of consensus
<McCool> proposal: Use merging of a PR into the UC&R document that there is consensus on a requirement.
Kaz: would be easier to handle the discussion if we wait, but we need to look at the charter schedules. But if we work at the same time, we need to take care
McCool: We probably want to discuss the requirements one by one...
Kaz: I am not objecting, but we need to clarify the procedure
McCool: when we merge the PR that should be the record of concensus, but we need to have a process, it could be as simple as sumarizng the requirements and ask people for comments, and ask people for one or two weeks to comments. I think that should be faster than waiting for the Note to be published
<McCool> proposal: Use merging of a PR into the UC&R document that there is consensus on a requirement. PRs for requirements should be tagged as "Requirement" in the usecases repo and notification of new requirement PRs made in the main call, with a 2-week period for review.
mizu: I think we have not started to collect use case yet, but I would like to collect use case immediately. btw, which do you mean by a consensus for technical requirements or functional requirements?.
McCool: we need to document our existing requirements
Ege: I do not want to wait for a Note, and in case a use case and a requirement is not ready, we can mark it as draft
McCool: I think what you are saying is that we consider the editors draft as the functional requirement document
McCool: we have to clarify the template, this is something that I could leave off the details, but I want to get a consensus on the overall mechanism
Kaz: I am basically overall with the direction, but given the progress of the use case this proposal is okay for the internal group, but we cannot make the work public to the whole world yet, otherwise we will get too many backlog proposals from the world.
<McCool> proposal: Use merging of a PR into the UC&R document as the indication that there is consensus on a requirement. PRs for requirements should be tagged as "Requirement" in the usecases repo and notification of new requirement PRs made in the main call, with a 2-week period for review. Requirements that have not yet been published in a Note should
<McCool> be marked with "Draft."
Ege: I think we should not over engineering it
<McCool> proposal: Use merging of a PR into the UC&R document as the indication that there is consensus on a requirement.
Kaz: we have not clarified how to start the requirements discussion in the UC&R TF
McCool: when we merge a PR in the editors version, we can use that as a record that we have accepted that requirement by the group.
<McCool> proposal: Use merging of a PR into the editor's version of the UC&R document as the indication that there is consensus on a requirement.
<Ege> +1 to the proposal
<kaz> in the main call directly without having no discussion within the UC TF
Kaz: the final decision should made by the whole WG and IG, but making important decision in the main call is odd, since we already have the UC&R call.
<Tomo> +1 for kaz
McCool: let's revisit this topic next time
Policies
ek: need to clarify what "Editors" mean
McCool: let's clarify our policy
Profile
<mahda> I need to leave, thanks all
Kaz: McCool was proposing there should be some discussion Profile during the TD call
McCool: Ege mentioned TD call is already full
… but can have some discussion there
[adjourned]