Meeting minutes
Minutes review from June 5th and 6th
<kaz> June-5
<kaz> June-6
Ege: any changes?
… minutes are approved
WoT week plugfest
<kaz> Plugfest during WoT Week in Nov
Ege: we have 2 full days for testing
… for unknown things and to show people what we have
… think about what features we should prioritize for development so as to have them ready for the plugfest
Ege: any input?
Kaz: do we want to include asynchronous actions?
Cristiano: +1 on sync actions, initial connection might be a candidate
… can we update the topics if we change our mind before then?
Ege: yes, we might make progress on some topics and not need as much testing
Cristiano: also error handling with additional responses
Ege: also other use cases for additional responses
Cristiano: how does it map between protocol and application?
Ege: any other priorities?
Koster: data mapping from binding to interaction
Luca: we haven't discussed it enough to be ready for testing
Ege: there is some new interest in this topic
Luca: OK, let's make time to make progress
… Also would like to look into degraded consumption
Ege: this will define what happens when a consumer doesn't understand some keywords
Ege: we can define "normative consumption" for what will be required
Luca: it's more than just interoperability, but that is the goal
Cristiano: +1 for normative consumption. It's more about interaction than consumption
Ege: yes, agree
Cristiano: what about the discussion on meta operations and multiple operations
… meta operation for observing changes to the TD
<Zakim> Luca, you wanted to react to cris
Luca: that one requires a way to identify a TD vs. the thing it describes
Tomoaki: testing the server and client connection model for scope of smart home and smart city - how to use WoT in a service model
Kaz: regarding Mizushima-san's comment, we should think about user scenarios for features
… also we should get developers viewpoint on error handling, default behavior and additional responses
Mahda: semantic annotation using rdf:type assigns multiple types to a TD, causing confusion as to how the different types apply
Ege: good input, we will need to prioritize for testing
… and categorize
… some categories noted in the github issue
… anything else, do we want to look at specific protocols?
… OK, no more input, let's move on
Tooling
Ege: fixing "blank state" installation issues
... also separating the single LinkML model into different models matching current ontologies.
JSON Schema adoption
Ege: the direction is that we can reference JSON Schema directly as long as we reference a specific version
… is there anything more to consider?
Kaz: There will be further discussion and improvement but for now we can use a reference to a specific version
Ege: Propose to use the latest "stable" version
Kaz: we can follow the style of integration used by the VC document
<kaz> VC JSON Schema spec
Ege: we may need a stronger reference
… any more discussion points?
Initial connection
Issue # 2025
<kaz> Issue 2025 - Extending the initial/reusable connection examples
Ege: used the Mermaid integration to create a flow diagram (in the issue)
… made cases for point to point and for a broker intermediary
Ege: any comments?
Cristiano: this looks fine
… it would also be useful to show different operations over MQTT
Luca: the Mermaid diagram doesn't show the persistent connection very well
… started to define how a proxy would work and Mermaid is missing features for this
Ege: please paste some examples
Luca: mainly is missing colors to show another dimension of the persistent connection vs. subscriptions
Luca: pasted example showing how a proxy can maintain a persistent connection to the device and handles connections from multiple consumers
Ege: there are different TDs for the different levels
Luca: there are different layers with different scope, onboarding vs ongoing communication
<cris> +1
Ege: we will use this drawio file showing the connection
Ege: we are on time, any other business?
… call adjourned, thank you all