12:54:59 RRSAgent has joined #wot-td 12:55:03 logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-irc 12:59:17 meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF - Slot 2 13:00:47 rrsagent, make log public 13:00:51 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:00:53 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:01:18 present+ Kaz_Ashimura 13:01:23 present+ Ege_Korkan 13:02:05 chair: Ege, Koster 13:03:23 JKRhb has joined #wot-td 13:04:06 Tomo has joined #wot-td 13:04:11 luca_barbato has joined #wot-td 13:04:21 present+ Jan_Romann, Daniel_Peintner 13:04:29 present+ Luca_Barbato 13:05:33 Ege has joined #wot-td 13:05:50 dape has joined #wot-td 13:07:17 mahda has joined #wot-td 13:07:18 present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi, Mahda_Noura, Tomoaki_Mizushima 13:07:20 cris has joined #wot-td 13:07:29 scribenick: cris 13:07:34 present+ Michael_Koster 13:07:41 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:07:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:07:48 topic: Agenda 13:07:48 present+ Mahda_Noura 13:08:02 q+ 13:08:16 ege: today will have some quick notes at the beginning and then dive deeper into the discussion about binding mechanism 13:08:22 kaz: I have short updates 13:09:05 ... in last main call we discussed about profile and we should talk about next steps 13:09:09 ege: ok 13:09:13 s/about // 13:09:19 topic: minutes review 13:09:34 -> https://www.w3.org/2024/06/26-wot-td-minutes.html June-26 13:09:38 ege: we mostly talked about plug fest 13:09:42 ... I have follow ups 13:09:55 ege: I noticed an empty section 13:09:58 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#July_4_2024 13:10:00 ... I don't why 13:10:15 s/I don't why/I don't know why/ 13:10:22 ... just small fixes 13:11:15 ... any other mistakes? 13:12:03 ... minutes approved 13:12:22 topic: Profile discussion next week 13:12:33 q+ 13:12:40 ege: there are open points regarding TD in the Profile task force 13:12:57 q- 13:13:05 ... but there is no much of attendance from the TD task force. 13:13:15 ... when should we discuss this points? 13:13:17 s/small fixes/small fixes around the "Tooling" section/ 13:13:24 ... kaz or luca which are the current options? 13:13:29 q+ 13:14:01 luca: the idea is to devote half of slot to the items that are shared between TD and profile 13:14:05 ... we can make progress 13:15:19 ... we should try to cover both sides of the coin: make everything correct in profile and beign able to extend TD 13:16:14 kaz: I created a doodle pool to find another slot 13:16:16 ack k 13:16:24 ... but re-using TD call slot is also possible 13:16:27 ege: we can 13:16:38 ... but I'd like to have a dedicated slot 13:16:41 mjk has joined #wot-td 13:16:43 ... either before or after 13:17:48 q? 13:17:51 ... share td call with profile might be good for exceptional topics 13:17:53 s/I created a doodle pool to find another slot/my original expectation was also reusing part of the TD calls for Profile-related discussion, but McCool mentioned TD agenda was already full during the main call yesterday, and I got an action to generate a doodle to see another slot right before or after TD calls/ 13:18:04 ... we need another slot 13:18:32 q+ 13:18:42 ege: I would try to find this slot 13:19:03 ... and only as a second option share td time 13:19:14 kaz: ok 13:19:21 s/but re-using TD call slot is also possible/but if you all are actually OK with reusing part of the TD call, that still can be an option/ 13:19:23 ack k 13:19:31 ... as discussed in the main call I'll create a doodle pool 13:19:42 topic: WoT week plugfest 13:20:24 ege: in the agenda a created points to keep an eye on for WoT week plugfest 13:20:37 ... however I don't want to copy and paste them everytime 13:20:45 ... where should I place them? 13:20:54 s/as discussed in the main call I'll create a doodle pool/that's inline with the decision during the main call yesterday, and I ca create a doodle poll. I just wanted to confirm the direction mainly with Ege since you were not there at the main call./ 13:21:04 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:21:05 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:21:42 q+ 13:21:48 present+ Kunihiko_Toumura 13:22:36 q? 13:22:39 ack c 13:22:46 cris: don't we have a dedicated place for plugfest organization? 13:22:59 ege: yes we usually use the events folder in the wot-testing repository 13:23:32 ... I'll move it there 13:24:00 topic: Initial connection 13:25:19 ege: I'm working on updating the marmaid schema to draw.io 13:25:44 ... this is also useful for writing in the spec 13:27:24 ... I won't make an example for all wot operations in every protocol 13:27:28 cris: that's ok 13:27:46 ... it's only needed for reference of the reader 13:27:53 topic: Binding templates 13:28:05 ege: we should get rid of everything that has a todo label 13:28:30 s/Binding templates/Binding templates registry mechanism/ 13:29:01 ... first point is the lifecycle 13:29:20 ... I propose to use the last policy that was accepted in the WG 13:29:33 ... it's about errata 13:29:39 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:29:40 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:30:09 ... there is a point which mention what happens if the WG is not avaible 13:30:28 s/avaible/available/ 13:30:50 ... I suggest to add that if the WG is not active anymore the W3C team takes over and can decide 13:31:01 cris: +1 13:31:18 q? 13:31:18 q+ 13:32:03 kaz: we can also involve the CG 13:32:19 ... we can talk with Philip 13:33:19 ... that is a good topic for breakout section with Verifiable Credentials in the TPAC 13:34:15 s/we can also involve the CG/probably the W3C Project Management Team should handle the registry at that time, but maybe we could think about a dedicated CG for that purpose./ 13:34:45 s/we can talk with Philip/I think we should talk with Philippe about what would be the best solution at some point./ 13:34:49 Proposal: If the WoT WG does not exist anymore, the W3C Team or their delegated entity becomes the custodian. 13:34:55 s/that is/also, that is/ 13:35:17 s/section with/breakout or a joint session/ 13:35:29 Resolution: If the WoT WG does not exist anymore, the W3C Team or their delegated entity becomes the custodian. 13:35:39 q+ 13:36:08 ack k 13:36:16 kaz: I suggest updating the resolution text 13:36:24 Tomo has joined #wot-td 13:36:26 ... with "we would like to propose" 13:36:45 Proposal: For the potential binding registry, we would like propose the requirement of "If the WoT WG does not exist anymore, the W3C Team or their delegated entity becomes the custodian." 13:36:59 Proposal: For the potential binding registry, we would like to propose the requirement of "If the WoT WG does not exist anymore, the W3C Team or their delegated entity becomes the custodian." 13:37:12 Resolution: For the potential binding registry, we would like to propose the requirement of "If the WoT WG does not exist anymore, the W3C Team or their delegated entity becomes the custodian." 13:37:32 s/Credentials in the TPAC/Credentials, etc., during TPAC./ 13:37:48 s/Resolution: If the WoT WG does not exist anymore, the W3C Team or their delegated entity becomes the custodian.// 13:37:55 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:37:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:38:11 mahda: spotted a typo 13:38:58 s/the resolution text/the proposed resolution text since we don't have the registry itself yet./ 13:39:02 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:39:04 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:39:12 ege: next point is more technical 13:39:43 q? 13:39:51 ... the requirement is obvious -> there should not be two bindings regarding the same protocol 13:40:07 ... but what happens when you have two ecosystems? 13:40:10 i|we should get rid of every|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/registry-analysis/Readme.md Registry analysis including draft policy 13:40:13 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:40:15 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:40:21 ... for example protocol over another application protocol like coap 13:40:44 ... still in this case there should not be two bindings competing witch each other 13:41:11 q+ 13:41:14 ... we can use a layered approach 13:41:27 ... a binding can refer another binding 13:41:40 q+ 13:42:13 mjk: this is the right direction 13:42:33 ... it's important that if another binding that needs coap does not change what is in coap 13:42:41 i|I'm working on up|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/2025 Issue 2025 - Extending the initial/reusable connection examples| 13:42:42 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:42:44 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:43:09 ... probably there is no such thing as a pure coap binding 13:43:16 ... maybe they are just default 13:43:27 ... same goes for http 13:43:31 ack mjk 13:43:45 i|in the agenda a cre|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Wiki_for_WoT_Week_2024_planning WoT Week in November| 13:43:47 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:43:48 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:44:16 q+ 13:44:17 ege: pure binding can be use for testing 13:44:55 i|my original|-> https://www.w3.org/2024/07/03-wot-minutes.html#t20 Profile discussion during the WoT main call on July 3| 13:44:57 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:44:58 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:45:08 ack c 13:47:08 cris: I guess in the end the only mechanism that works to assure no duplicates is that the reviewer is incharge of verifing common parts with other bindings. 13:48:44 luca: what needs to be clear is that once you take the namespace is up to you to control it 13:48:57 ... and nobody else can re define 13:49:05 ... or add keywords 13:49:51 ... remember that if is not the registry then is not conformant 13:50:37 s/incharge/in charge/ 13:51:10 s/re define/redefine/ 13:51:14 ege: another thing to discuss is defaults 13:51:31 ... ocf can change defaults for coap ? 13:51:49 luca: it is a topic for degraded consumption 13:52:15 ... if a consumer understand ocf then it applies its defaults 13:53:04 q? 13:53:05 Ege1 has joined #wot-td 13:53:05 q+ 13:53:13 q+ 13:53:50 luca: otherwise it might refuse to use the form 13:54:39 ege: it depends 13:54:56 ... with ocf you could be verbose and still be used by a generic coap 13:55:00 ... consumer 13:55:59 luca: you can duplicate forms 13:56:18 ... one for ocf an the other for coap 13:57:22 s/ocf an the other for coap/OCF and the other for CoAP/ 13:57:29 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:57:30 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:57:51 luca: for the future we should declare which binding the form is using. 13:59:59 maybe OCF, LWM2M, etc. should all be profiles and not bindings 14:00:19 cris: I would not create a new binding just because it changes a bunch of default in the lower leve 14:00:32 cris: +1 to mjk's point 14:01:10 +1 to cris point 14:01:25 kaz: I was thinking about the relationship with profile, it could be included in the next TD-Profile call 14:01:43 ... the question here is similar to language dialects 14:02:47 maybe bindings choose a protocol driver and profiles define API patterns 14:02:59 ... we need more concrete variantions and use cases 14:03:26 ... we can keep track of this with separated github issues 14:03:52 ack k 14:03:56 ack c 14:03:57 ack l 14:04:26 ege: AOB?= 14:04:29 ege: nothing 14:04:35 [adjourned] 14:04:40 s/?=/?/ 14:04:53 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:04:54 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/04-wot-td-minutes.html kaz