Meeting minutes
Agenda
McCool: (goes over today's agenda)
Invited Experts
McCool: we have two IE requests, have we heard anything about them, kaz?
Kaz: We scheduled a meeting in two weeks
… during the main call
McCool: What are the names?
Kaz: Charith Perera
… from Cardiff University, will present 10 minutes with 5 minutes Q&A
McCool: Would be great if you could provide a title of the presentation
… there is also a second one, which we will get to another time
Minutes Review
<kaz> June-26
McCool: We went through this in the chairs call, minutes are fine for us
… hearing also no objections here in the call, minutes are approved
Quick Items
Smart Cities IG
McCool: Today is the deadline for the Web-Based Digitial Twins for Smart Cities IG
Kaz: Technically, there are still a few hours left
... more than 20 supports, will probably get through
McCool: should probably schedule a breakout session for the IG at TPAC
Kaz: Will talk to Michael Koster as the Smart Cities IG Chair about that later :)
W3C Calendar System
<dape> https://
McCool: We will really need to clear up the calendar system
… there always issues with cancelled events
Daniel: Events should be explicitly labelled as suspended, as it only comes later, looks a bit silly otherwise
McCool: The same should probably also be done for Architecture then
Meetups
WoT CG
McCool: No updates, since Ege is also not here
WoT-JP CG
Mizushima: No updates regarding the WoT JP CG either
Kaz: Just a reminder that there is going to be a meetup on use case generation in July
Mizushima: I have one comment: The WoT Japanese CG would like to use the WoT IG's official use case template for that purpose, in the WoT JP CG repository. Is that okay?
McCool: You are the task force lead, so you can for example make a resolution, after sending a mail to the mailing list, then we can also have a resolution in the main call. This would be the best way to make sure that there is support. You can use the template as is, but having a resolution is better
Kaz: Note that the main point of Mizushima-san is that the WoT-JP CG would like to use the official template for their events using Japanese language. Even though the template is not finalized yet, that can be tested during the event.
McCool: Usually, we should use English for official standardization, but using a first draft in another language is fine. we just need to make sure that the tranlation is accurate, e.g., uses the correct terminology
… as long as it is clear that the English version is the official one, fine to reuse it for another language
Luca: In any case, the template does not have many authors, so Mizushima-san can just ask the authors for translation/permission, as long as the coppyright rules are respected
McCool: Regarding copyright: The important thing is that the copyright applies to the final version of the document, translations of other versions are fine
Kaz: the details of the reuse of the official use case template to be discussed and confirmed during the Use Cases TF call first, and then can be confirmed during the main call by the whole IG.
Liaisons
McCool: We have two liaisons pending
OPC
McCool: There was a liaison statement to support the new OPC WG on WoT Binding. Last time we reviewed it and sent it off to the W3C Strategy/Liaison Teams
… however, there was some confusion
… need to make sure that everything is alright, Kaz made contact with them
Kaz: Originally, we assumed it was just a liaison statement, but apparently OPC would like to include the statement in the public and official Charter for their new WG.
... So as I suggested on the WoT Chairs list, we should have consulted with Philippe and Coralie again
... I did asked them about this, Philippe also suggested I talk with Coralie, and I've just got a response from Coralie.
... Coralie strongly suggests we make changes to the liaison statement, but I'd like to discuss the detail with the Chairs offline first.
McCool: OPC would like to get our response quickly, so would resolve the issue asap.
... What is the most efficient way to make the changes? My suggestion would be Coralie's providing concrete text for that purpose.
Kaz: Coralie did provide concrete text, and I can copy the updated text on IRC if we prefer.
McCool: Let's do so.
<kaz>
[[
Original statement (group resolution on June 19):
-------------------------------------------------
As a W3C Web of Things Working Group (WoT), we are pleased that the new
OPC Foundation working group will specify the OPC UA Binding for the
Web of Things. We support these efforts and offer through liaison meetings
and/or running PlugFests to review alignment with the latest Web of Things
approaches (e.g., with WoT Binding Templates). An official OPC UA Binding
for the Web of Things provides a new opportunity for simplified integration
of datapoints from OPC UA-based systems into IoT-based applications using
latest Web technologies.
Sebastian added the following affiliation text to the above statement when he responded to OPC:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The W3C Web of Things Working Group is represented by the WoT Co-Chairs
(Michael McCool (Intel), Sebastian Käbisch (Siemens), Michael Koster
(Invited Expert)), W3C Staff Contacts (Ashimura Kazuyuki), and W3C WoT
WG participants
]]
<kaz>
[[
Coralie's suggested statement:
- removing the affiliation text
- adding links for WOT WG and Liaison process
----------------------------------------------
The W3C Web of Things (WoT) Working Group [1] is pleased for the OPC
Foundation working group to specify the OPC UA Binding for the Web of
Things. We offer through liaison [2] as defined by the W3C Process
Document, in the form of meetings and/or running PlugFests, to review
alignment with the latest Web of Things approaches (e.g., with WoT
Binding Templates) because an official OPC UA Binding for the Web of
Things provides a new opportunity for simplified integration of
datapoints from OPC UA-based systems into IoT-based applications using
latest Web technologies.
[1] https://
McCool: (reviews the changes in detail)
… I'm okay with the new version, mostly adds references, e.g. to the process document
… "as defined by the W3C process document" might be a bit unnecessary, but in general I am fine with the changes
… let me type that in
<McCool> proposal: Adopt the new text for the statement of support for the OPCF as proposed by Coralie Mercier above.
RESOLUTION: Adopt the new text for the statement of support for the OPCF as proposed by Coralie Mercier above.
McCool: Kaz, can you make sure that Sebastian is aware of this, to not publish the old version?
Kaz: Will do
ETSI
McCool: This would actually be a liaison with the ETSI ISG CIM working group for NGSI-LD
<kaz> ETSI ISG CIM
McCool: as there is already an existing liaison with ETSI, there has been the decision to just "reuse" and update the existing liaison with ETSI
Kaz: We'll discuss the next steps for the liaison on Friday, July 5, and I'll chair the call.
McCool: the meeting doesn't appear on my calendar, so would ping Dave again
Cancellations
<kaz> Cancellations
McCool: As there are a lot people who will go on vacation in July, we need to review which calls can take place. There are only a few official cancellations so far, though (e.g., Marketing call due to Marine Day in Japan)
… we probably want to cancel regular calls in TPAC week in September
… (updates the Wiki)
Kaz: I personally prefer having a recovery week, though
McCool: (enters into the Wiki that the meetings in the week after TPAC are also cancelled)
… the week before I don't want to cancel since there are probably going to be last-minute preparations
PRs
McCool: We made some minor changes in the wot repository, other than that no changes
F2F Planning
<kaz> TPAC 2024
McCool: The registration for TPAC is now open
… Early Bird tickets are much cheaper than regular tickets, online participation stays the same price-wise
… should decide whether we are going to have any breakouts during TPAC
… for example, OPC-UA might be interesting talk about
<kaz> Call for Breakouts (Member-only)
McCool: call for breakouts is now open, so far only five have been submitted, but it is still pretty early
… we had a couple of topics that are worth talking about in the agenda, so I copied these over to the wiki
… maybe we can resolve some of these during TPAC
<kaz> TPAC WoT F2F wiki
McCool: please add your topics and also note down your ability to attend
… just noted that I am not in the list yet
… (adds himself to the list in the Wiki)
WoT Week in Munich
<kaz> WoT Week wiki
McCool: Planning is still ongoing, can pick up some of the topics that are left from TPAC
… need to reapply internally due to the rescheduling
… hope for a very good attendance then
Policies
<kaz> remaining Policy issues
McCool: Not a great turnout today, but I hope that we can resolve a few policy issues today
… there has been a lot of time for people to review them and make comments
… the only issue is that Ege, who proposed both of the policies, is not here
Koster: They are pretty simple and not really controversial, so I think we can take care of them
PR 1181
<kaz> PR 1181 - Assertion id policy proposal
Koster: However, this one actually has a problem because the table is inconsistent with the text
… e.g., binding does not appear there, also "profile" has a different term that is supposed to be used
… I also noted that down in the PR
PR 1193
<kaz> PR 1193 - Article Selection Policy
Koster: The other one can go down, though
McCool: This one has also been reviewed by Cristiano and Jan, who are both here
… (shows and goes through the PR diff)
… so what this means here, is that anything that is not mentioned here should go to the group to review
… I am having no problem with this, does anyone object to this PR?
… seeing no objections, then let me write this down
<McCool> proposal: Adopt the policy proposal in w3c/
McCool: merging this PR will move the policy into the policies folder
RESOLUTION: Adopt the policy proposal in w3c/
McCool: Okay, now we can merge this
… (adds a comment and clicks the merge button)
… I believe there was an issue related to this that we should probably clean up
… but that one has probably been closed automatically
Koster: Yeah, that worked
TF Leads
McCool: Just to mention this again: We have a lot of meetings suspended, which we should resume at some point
… people should think about whether they want to become a task force lead
TF Reports
No reports
Profile
McCool: We have 10 minutes left that we can spend on the Profile discussion
… however, we have a low turnout and people involved in the binding discussion are not present, e.g. Ege
… the only thing we can discuss is whether we there have been previous results in the discussion with Ege. Luca, do you have any updates here?
Luca: They talked about moving the Profile call adjacent to the TD call, and they agreed to do that
McCool: Which slot do you prefer?
Luca: Since there is already the toolchain discussion slot, we could either move it to Thursday or use the 30 minutes after the main call
McCool: We should probably make a doodle since I have a lot of conflicts
Kaz: I was originally proposing using part of the TD call itself for discussions related to both Profile and TD
McCool: We could do that, but Ege suggested that the TD agenda is already quite full
… I guess we cannot make a decision on the timing yet and we need to resolve that in the TD call
Luca: Can you prepare a doodle for that, Kaz?
McCool: Would be nice to collect information about potential conflicts and to see whether people are available
Kaz: So you mean a slot different than the current TD slots?
McCool: Yeah, a doodle for all the half hour slots adjacent to the TD calls, just to gather information
… and then Ege and Luca can make a decision based on that information
Kaz: Including the second half of the former testing and the current tooling slot?
McCool: I think so, yeah, as testing is currently off the table
AOB
McCool: I think we are out of time, any other business?
Kaz: Just to make sure: Since Ege is not available, do we cancel the first TD call today?
Koster: I am okay with cancelling
McCool: Okay, TD call is cancelled
… any other business?
McCool: Let's adjourn
[adjourned]