13:00:41 RRSAgent has joined #wot-td 13:00:46 logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-irc 13:02:11 meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF - Slot 2 13:02:23 Ege has joined #wot-td 13:02:25 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan, Jan_Romann, Luca_Barbato 13:02:38 dape has joined #wot-td 13:02:50 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#July_10_and_11%2C_2024 13:03:15 present+ Daniel_Peintner, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster 13:03:32 chair: Koster, Ege 13:03:36 scribenick: Ege 13:03:56 mjk has joined #wot-td 13:05:17 Tomo has joined #wot-td 13:05:58 topic: Agenda Review 13:06:17 ek: we will start with binding reqs, then refactoring, data mapping 13:06:35 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 13:07:32 topic: Binding Registry Analysis 13:08:01 ek: we have merged the PR which had TODOs 13:08:30 i|we have|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/registry-analysis/Readme.md [DRAFT] Registry Mechanism Analysis 13:08:35 rrsagent, make log public 13:08:36 ... thus we have two PRs that move things around 13:08:40 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:08:41 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:08:50 https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1199 13:09:09 ek: first removing the draft from the title 13:09:53 https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/egekorkan-patch-10/registry-analysis/Readme.md 13:09:55 s|https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1199|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1199 wot PR 1199 - Remove requirements| 13:10:02 ... also ti removes the requirements part from the document 13:10:22 s/also ti/also it/ 13:10:28 s|https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/egekorkan-patch-10/registry-analysis/Readme.md|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/egekorkan-patch-10/registry-analysis/Readme.md Preview| 13:10:34 https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/376/ is moving that deleted content to binding template reop 13:10:39 s/reop/repo 13:10:52 rrsagent, please draft the minutes 13:10:54 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html JKRhb 13:11:00 rrsagent, make log public 13:11:21 https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/blob/21ec3001d8d1c1e16207704d20188461aa4484d6/registry-requirements.md 13:11:49 q+ 13:11:55 ack k 13:12:00 ... I have added the mention that until the html doc is ready and there are no todos, this md can stay 13:12:07 kaz: thank you. This is good direction 13:13:00 ek: the process document analysis will come later 13:13:51 topic: Refactoring of Binding Section 13:13:52 https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/2030 13:14:44 s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/2030|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/2030 PR 2030 - Binding Examples Refactoring| 13:15:53 I have addressed https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/#binding-examples and the appendix with examples 13:16:10 cris has joined #wot-td 13:17:53 -> https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/2030.html#example-tds-bindings Preview - A. Example Thing Description Instances with Protocol Bindings 13:18:02 ek: I have moved the examples in the beginning all to the appendix 13:18:38 ... all examples have the same intro part 13:18:44 q? 13:20:03 topic: Design Decisions 13:22:06 ek: McCool was documenting the requirements of the current discovery document 13:22:28 https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/#discovery 13:23:28 luca_barbato has joined #wot-td 13:23:33 q+ 13:25:30 mjk has joined #wot-td 13:25:35 q? 13:25:38 ek: we thought that we can tackle this since we have issues about this such as https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1889 and https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1824 13:25:55 ... we can have some ui elements that clearly explain why there is a feature and mark it as a requirement 13:26:21 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:26:22 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:26:49 lb: having multiple per affordance is clear. Multi protocol or multi security for example 13:26:49 present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi 13:28:17 q? 13:28:17 q+ 13:28:17 ... however in the case of jpeg or png, both data would be semantically same but not the same information would be provided 13:28:18 i|we can have|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1889 Issue 1889 - Documenting Design Decisions| 13:28:45 i|we can have|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1824 Issue 1824 - Make more explicit what to expect regarding Forms for the same affordance| 13:28:48 ... we need to define what means similar 13:28:51 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:28:53 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:29:09 ... http with json or coap with cbor, once you deserialize the content, it is exactly the same 13:29:27 q+ 13:29:51 ... once there are lossy content types, then there will be different information 13:30:30 s/http/HTTP/ 13:30:32 s/json/JSON/ 13:30:35 ... we should have a limit on how different information two forms can provide for the same operation 13:30:36 s/coap/CoAP/ 13:30:40 s/cbor/CBOR/ 13:30:47 ... and same affordance 13:32:04 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:32:05 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:32:34 q+ 13:32:42 ack lu 13:33:57 q+ 13:34:49 luca_barbato has joined #wot-td 13:35:36 ... do we want to enforce that same operations of an affordance give similar information (to a degree) or say that they have to give the exact same information (thus png and jpeg would not be accepted) 13:35:40 q? 13:36:00 ca: tnks 13:36:21 s/tnks/this applies to input as well? 13:36:32 lb: That is different though 13:37:28 s/png and jpeg/PNG and JPEG/ 13:37:35 ... when you are giving input, you know what input you are giving. There is only one. In output, two consumers can get a different output based on the form 13:38:10 s/on the form/on the Form/ 13:39:20 ca: it is possible to provide the wrong header if you choose the wrong form 13:40:25 lb: if you have multiple input possibilities, you would send the one you want and the Thing should accept it 13:41:21 q- 13:41:21 ... if the consumer always get the lossy output, over time, its knowledge can diverge 13:42:28 ack c 13:43:05 https://github.com/eclipse-thingweb/node-wot/issues/854 13:44:11 ek: I would like to get a section that explains the reason why we have multiple forms and when you should design a TD with multiple or not 13:44:13 s|https://github.com/eclipse-thingweb/node-wot/issues/854|-> https://github.com/eclipse-thingweb/node-wot/issues/854 node-wot Issue 854 - Handle form content-type client side| 13:44:51 q? 13:45:56 ack d 13:46:09 dp: we should explain how to create TDs but not put rules on how the TD must be designed 13:46:19 ... this will get too complex to specify on our side 13:46:52 ... it will depend on the use case 13:47:03 q? 13:47:10 good point dp 13:47:25 profiles can be more restrictive 13:47:33 ... like the discussion on post or put, we let people pick what they want 13:48:33 kaz: this is good starting point but we need to more clarification 13:48:53 ... we also need to explain how to specify the consumer's preference on the data it wants to get. 13:49:01 ... we should have examples of devices and types of data 13:49:15 s/need to more/need more/ 13:49:18 ack k 13:49:41 topic: CoAP Observe Subprotocol 13:50:40 jr: in issue 348, we came to the conclusion that subprotocol for coap observe would not be needed 13:50:53 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/353 wot-binding-templates PR 353 - Replace cov:observe subprotocol 13:51:24 ... it can be always assumed since the protocol mechanism works like that 13:52:57 jr: also we are adding that you should not observe multiple properties at the same time 13:53:37 ... also there is a new draft called coap pubsub which can give reason to use subprotocol field 13:54:03 ... there is also Series Transfer Pattern (STP) in the works 13:54:08 q+ mjk 13:54:49 mk: CoAP pubsub is about setting up a mechanism to do publish and subscribe like in qtt 13:54:53 s/qtt/mqtt 13:55:14 ... maybe we can just reuse observe mechanism 13:56:26 ek: should meta operation capability depend on the Thing capability? 13:56:34 jr: yes I have added this as a recommendation 13:57:09 s/mqtt/MQTT/ 13:57:19 ack m 13:57:22 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:57:23 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:57:50 ek: so the observe option is always there in the request, the Thing may not have it and respond accordingly? 13:58:04 jr: yes and the Consumer program would not notice 13:58:25 s/for coap/for CoAP/ 13:59:07 ek: Maybe this can be generalized, i.e. if there is only one way to do something, it can be always assumed 13:59:11 i|in issue 348|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/348 wot-binding-templates Issue 348 - Constraints for the use of cov:observe| 13:59:14 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:59:16 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:59:52 ek: let's wait for Klaus. I will also try to review 14:00:06 ek: AOB? 14:00:14 i/AOB/topic: AOB/ 14:00:55 (none) 14:00:57 [adjourned] 14:00:59 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:01:00 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/07/11-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:01:28 JKRhb_ has joined #wot-td 14:03:21 JKRhb__ has joined #wot-td 14:03:54 JKRhb_ has joined #wot-td 15:59:14 Zakim has left #wot-td