See also: IRC log
<fsasaki> scribe: fsasaki
jörg heuer introduces the workshop
jörg: why is Siemens interested in the WS topic?
scribe: Siemens organized in 4
sectors: industry, energy, health care, infrastructure &
cities
... we realized: we need to think across the verticals
... web of thing activity is a lot about crossing domains
... we need to "to understand the elephant called web of
thing"
... we'd like to exchange our perspectives and uses of the
term
dave: w3c: creating open
standards under royalty free patent policy
... standardization + pre-standardization activities in
business groups and community groups
... internet of things is focusing on sensors etc.
... we hope to form a group opinion what the "web of things"
is
... web has been around for 25 years now
... it is the most interoperable platform across devices
today
... the web has transformed the way we communicate - web of
things will do the transformation hopefully again
... why are we here today? there is fragmentation in the
technology area around "wot"
... we want to discuss: what kind of open standards are
needed?
... what application domains + use cases are relevant?
... what role should W3C take?
... we had many submissions, thanks a lot for that
... we have panel sessions + break out sessions. Each session
leader is responsible for taking notes and for reporting
back
... we need those minutes for the WS minutes
... over 100 participants and many major companies - also lots
of breakout topics, see the wiki linked from the agenda
first speaker johannes hund
johannes: there is a lot of
processes across industry domains, involving multiple
stakeholders
... there are key enablers. increasing processing power and
communication facilities
... example: smart gird application "virtual power plants"
(VPP)
... loosely coupled control over "distributed energy
resources"
... main application is the aggregation of data and
orchestration
... many stakeholders are participating in the scenario: grid
opeator, power plant, metering operator etc.
... operator wants to control the energy flow, but for energy
traiding that may lead to contradictions
... we need an automation system
... currently we have only a collaboration system
... we are using chatt protocols like XMPP
... example of vertual power plant with distritributed
storage
... antother use case: charging of electric vehicle
... there is the vehicle, charging spot, user, energy provider
etc.
... so again many user interact
... for automation a system in the eNterop project was
developed
... so what drives wot and what does it enable?
... many stakeholder come from automation point of view and
from collaboration
... and some aspects to realize that is possible with existing
web technology
... we need to provide an extensible framework
... does not need to cover all use cases
... need to encompass security etc.
... we have breakout sessions that show such activities
jörg: thanks, johannes - questions?
pablo: when we did web services
in the 90s
... it was focusing on workflows
... then more interaction came up
... but we stil don't have a good way to push information
... as you said: internet of things is closer to social
networks
... we need to realize that the traditional web services don't
fit for this
jörg: exactly
scribe: with xmp you can break
out the things that are modeled with soap services
... into patterns that fit in applications
Yusuke: my point of view here is
as a member of W3C EXI working group
... we expect that billions of devices will be connected to the
internet
... one aspect of the volumen: E-Waste
... some part of the devices will produce waste
... there will be some early innnovators, some may last long,
some may fail
... we cannot update or re-publish the "big things"
... there are candidate wot standards [list of various
standards from ISO and others] - they are defiend in XML / UML
data models relying on XML Schema
... these things are not so smart and cool, but we can use them
to build reliable applications
... focus on the bottom layer: what are the things, how they
can interact, how to assure their sustainability
... some of you may think: XML is not ready to be used on
devices
... example of wot application using xmpp (=XML protocol)
... the XML is encoded as EXI, that is: binary XML for
interchange
... EXI can be used as alternative to XML. because it is binary
the encoder does not need to think about encoding, spacing /
newlines etc.
... because EXI uses XML Schema as a source of grammer, it is a
state machine that can be implemented in a tiny way
... XML is ready for "things"
... need to define: what a device is, data model of things,
communication model
... recent activities from EXI working group
... have published as a proposed recommendation: EXI profile
for efficient use of memory
... also grammar exchange format (under discussion)
... example of trick for implementing xml schema based
communication on tiny devices
... from a certain point of view XML is just a text
... the interpretation comes with the data model
... certain devices don't need to know all parts of the
model
... if we can do that we can have a significant reduction of
XML schema or EXI grammar size
... such tricks can help to enable XML & standard based
communication on tiny devices
... so: wot may require some standards that we can rely on to
build long lasting cool applications
... such a standard will require data model description
language like XML Schema
... json is good to but it has less ability to describe data
models
... XML is a good approach - it has been created by W3C (= us).
This WS is a good place to discuss what we should have
... EXI is one example, it is just a tool to realize wot. Main
point is: we cannot make standards for everything
... the actual domain specific standards should be discussed
e.g. in OASIS (e.g. for health care = HL7)
... maybe the WS can help to make a meta standard, that should
be interoperable
q/a
yusuke: depending on the domain,
sustainability is more or less important
... e.g. for smart phones less important, for train systems
more
Masaki: my story is based on
nation wide implementation, not research
... I am in charge of smart meters in japan, from technical
specification to implementation etc.
... this september we will start adoption in Tokyo area
... in 8 years all japan meters will "speak" IP
... my role is to address parameter adoption
... the japanese parameter specification sometimes receives
complaints from international partners
... one must understand that Japan's ECHNOET lite power meter
is not domestic
... a very unique approach which can provide many opportunities
for you as well
... you can download technical spec of ECHNOET LITE from the
web
... ECHONET LITE will be IEC standard. 200 companies are in
ECHONET consortium, including oversea companies like IBM
... we have close relationsship also in Asia
... step by step we will cover many areas, so now we must
discuss with America + Europe
... ECHONET LITE is a liaison partner in W3C, want to discuss
with you how to move forward
<mcf> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2014/02/wot/agenda.html#agenda
[Demo about ECHONET Lite]
masaki: ECHONET commands to turn on / turn off light
s/\. now/.. now
[air conditioner is talking]
masao: about HEMS interop test centre
<scribe> .. ongoing interop test case #1
<scribe> .. new business model "smart house"
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: being
commercialized
... we need to discuss open standards like ECHNONET Lite on the
open web platform
philippH: why is it LITE? What was the HEAVY counterpart?
masaki: ECHONET did not support
IP
... and another difference: ECHONET was not open, E. LITE
is
<mcf> Nick Allott
<mcf> (nquiring minds)
nick: three contexts: webinos
project, niquiring minds, and ubiapps
... IP licensing costs in radio technology - currently too
expensive
... you as IOT operator don't have IP support since it is too
expensive from power and licensing perspective
... 2nd comment: speed is essential
... 3rd point: if you talk about IoT, interop - you should
re-use what is available
... we need to see what is good, put it together and address
the challenges
... IOT challenges: first connecting devices
... using TLS gives you security, encryption etc.
... second: provenance
... we are using PKI. every connection is based on a mutually
authenticated connection via TLS and using PKI
... third: access
... need to be able to control data access
... we picked XACML from OASIS
... then: addressing (remote)
... how to address the sensor / capability on a different
device
... the URI needs to be clever - not every domain will resolve
to a specific IP address
... the sensor only sometimes may be connected
... so need to be smart on how to produce an URI for this
situation
... fith: discovery
... a lot of stuff is available
... since IOT is constrained we need to be careful. we are
using FEATURE-URI
... nice thing about it: it is extensible, URI based - everyone
can specify their needs
... then: capability
... I as an APP developer - how do I act on data
... the developer wants a Javascript API
... you can talk about IOT protocols, there is a lot of tech
out.
... the only way to manage this diversity is to have a
functional abstraction
... then: invoking: nice to call a capability from a
browser
... for IOT to work: I want to invoke from other systems
... we are using JSON-RPC
... it allows to access a sensor between devices
... with total flexibility of using javascript
... advanced topic: address local, global protection
... policy sync
... handle legacy issues
... at the end there is no single point of control in the
architecture
... this is one of the biggest task that W3C could deal with in
the IOT space
... if W3C will engage in the space, how much of the problem
will be in scope? that is what I want to know at the end of the
workshop
jeff: what are the 2-3 things we should focus on quickly?
nick: simple javascript
abstraction
... and a security model
... I have seen things fail if people don't address that
upfront
[short summaries of demo slots]
now coffee break + demos
<kaz> scribenick: kaz
-> http://www.w3.org/2014/02/wot/papers/owada.pdf Paper
-> Slides tbd
shigeru: (Polling Manager)
... polling manager publishes how many apps are interested in
each resource
... (WebAPI)
... WAMP protocol
... an application named "Moe-kaden"
... IoT service and cute character
... (Demos)
... two videos
... 1st, RPC demo
... recognizes your voice input
... 2nd, PubSub demo
... distributing manuals
... ECHONET Lite emmulater
... in case of errors, manuals will be shown interactively
Q&A
ken: kensaku komatsu from NTT
Communications, Japan
... home server
... discover the home network server?
... what kind of mechanism?
shigeru: device will be automatically discovered using ECHONET Lite, etc.
ken: but you use WAMP as well?
shigeru: one possibility is using UPnP, etc.
ken: so the Web browsers should use UPnP, etc.
shigeru: right
<mcf> Ryuichi Matsukura, Fujitsu -- Service platform with Web based interface to control devices
-> http://www.w3.org/2014/02/wot/papers/matsukura.pdf Paper
-> Slides tbd
ryuichi: (Background)
... devices connected to network
... home security, healthcare, HEMS
... a "service platform" manages the interaction
... (What is the service platform?)
... advantages
... without the service platform, apps depend on different
device interfaces
... the service platform makes it easier to use multiple
devices
... (Deployment of service platform)
... two types of deployment
... aggregate type and distribute type
... (Functional architecture)
... three categories
... ITU-T SG 13 work
... will become a standard by the end of 2014
... device adapters
... three categories: app execution, device operation, remote
management
... if there is a trouble, notice will be sent to the
user/admin
... (Devices applicable to service platform)
... basic devices
... air conditioner class has properties like operating status,
operating mode
... basic devices support std interfaces like ECHONET Lite,
KNX, SEP 2.0
... (Basic device operation)
... home gateway converts device commands
... virtual devices correspond to objects
... s/objects/device objects/
... (Device operation without device object)
... non-basic device can also get connected
... (Sample applications for service platform)
... 24 facilities with 28 kinds of 820 devices
... ECHONET Lite is used
... (Conclusion)
... service platform can flexibly connect with multiple
services and multiple devices
... WoT framework should support existing devices
... (Video demo)
... Web interface
... push "living room"
... realtime video image
... remote interface for the air conditioner
... would show the details later
Q&A:
dsr: discovery?
ryu: ECHONET Lite has that mechanism as well
(dsr checks where the memory stick is)
-> http://www.w3.org/2014/02/wot/papers/ricardo.pdf Paper
-> Slides tbd
ricardo: programming device
ensembles
... (Today's IOT programming model...)
... embedded computing
... device centric
... statically partitioned
... constrained by device capabilities
... vendor-specific solution
... scale limited
... (WoT model should evolve...)
... ensemble programming
... everything is a resource
... sensors, actuators
... devices and capabilities
... app runtimes and app services
... apps are dynamic
... resource discovery
... multiparty authorization
... remote workers
... e.g., owner of the building, sensors, etc.
... off-loading computation
those are three particular areas to consider
scribe: (Discover "nearby"
sensors)
... need APIs
... hide the details
... intelligent container
... location sensor for cargo
... URL for resources
... could be global advertisement
... discovery phase must be semantic
... concept of "near"
... meets the criteria
... the semantics of "near" includes "local"
... what is the permission?
... user managed access
... fundamental hypothesis is "you don't know anything"
... (Off-load intensive computation)
... we propose using workers model
... (Putting it together...)
... intelligent container
... (Our tam is ready to participate and contribute in these
areas)
... discovery, authorization , code off-loading
Q&A:
jeff: tx for interesting
presentation
... well-defined areas
ricardo: UMA is IETF
standard
... publicly available
jeff: remote support?
ricardo: yes
dsr: demo during the breakout
-> http://nodered.org/ web site
<jeff> Jeff: Are some of the new areas such as remote support available in a public document
dave: (Node-RED)
<jeff> Ricardo: We have worked on such areas, mostly it is error handling (e.g. no resource available) that needs to be added to the Workers spec. We can provide that.
dave: (Why Node-RED)
... IoT does not have a one-size-fits-all solution
... (We need tools...)
... Node-RED can fill that up
... visiting the web site: http://nodered.org/
... (actually localhost)
... (draw a diagram and generate JavaScript
automatically)
... e.g., sending an email
... (Node-RED is)
... app generation tool
... (Node-RED is NOT)
... an enterprise strength application runtime
... (Inject node, Debug node, ...)
... (Node-RED animation)
... (From the edge of...)
... (Function Node)
... (Easy to wrap any npm module into a pallete node)
... (demo on localhost again)
... IRC node to WebSocket
... works and easy
... (Live Wordcloud)
... (Live Dashboards)
... (From the edge of the network...)
... (... to the cloud - IBM Bluemix)
... easy to move flows
... (Wiring the internet of things
Andreas Harth, KIT: need parameter description?
scribe: how to maintain?
... who defines?
dave: actual messages are described here (type and ID description)
Andreas Harth, KIT: have to convince people to write the descriptions?
Johannes Hund, Siemens: schema for input/output?
dsr: can talk during breakout sessions
Jon Nordby, The Grid: working on protocols
scribe: interested to talk with you
-> http://www.w3.org/2014/02/wot/slides/kajimoto.pdf Slides
kazuo: (WoT Applications around
CEs)
... many possibilities
... smart house example
... (Wonder Live Box 2020)
... smart home business globally
... working with house manufacturers
... using ECHONET
... the system works with the other companies' devices as
well
... convenient, relaxed and high quality life in the near
future (in 2020)
... (WoT Model Description and APIs)
... abstract architecture
... right side is the physical world
... vertualization of devices
... application cloud APIs to control vertualized devices
... that is type 1 interface
... type 2 interface is device APIs
... there are those two different types of APIs
... (Comparison of App-Cloud API and Device API)
... cloud might be an agent of device
... both types are important
... we'd like to contribute to type 1
... (Physical Control Protocol Independency)
... many physical control protocols
... but they should be independent from app cloud APIs
... (Variety of App-Cloud API Description)
... our current system is based on JS assuming WebSocket
... trying to support various mechanisms
... (Type of App-Cloud API)
... four types of APIs
... (Concern)
... WoT is our dream
... but there is some concern
... safety issues, privacy issues and business/security
issues
... if somebody controls my air conditioner, that's not
good
... also an app might be able to peep the others' houses
... user authentication might be better
... better to provide both open API and authority managed
API
Q&A:
-> http://www.w3.org/2014/02/wot/papers/goix.pdf Paper
-> Slides tbd
laurent: concept is mentioned by
Ericsson some years ago
... 2009
... (Smart Social Spaces)
... issues we're facing
... smart objects
... smart social spaces
... (Smart Social Spaces: our vision from IoT to (S)WoT)
... integration of IoT with the Web is limited
... (S.W.O.T on SWoT: so what?)
... activity streams
... each of things is an entity
... identity and relationship
... missing data model
... having discussion on social web of things
... coming up these days
... (Social Web of Things: (some) features & issues)
... cloud-based notifications
... local space notifications
... common issues: SN account vs object addressing, access
control ad audience targeting, information filtering,
interaction paradigms
... temperature information is not of users' interest
... internationalization
... concurrent (multiple) access
... sharing one thing with many people
... (BUTLER Smart Office trial)
... FP7 BUTLER project
... (Current standardization activities: Open Mobile
Alliance)
... white paper on "social web of things"
... (Our interest within W3C)
... web of things wg focusing on "Things"
... social web wg focusing on "social"
Q&A:
Dave Conway-Jones: interesting
scribe: the way works today is
each social services are separate
... should work for multiple parties
... that's the purpose of OMA work
[ lunch ]
<marie> scribe: Marie
<scribe> scribenick: marie
[presenting breakout discussions]
<ph> scribe: ph
<marie> scribenick: ph
Q (Joerg, Siemens): with constrained devices you may need hardware support - how does this work out?
A: some constrained devices cannot handle all the standards, others can - if device cannot handle, need gateway to handle standards, and prop protocol, which may not provide security
security may not always be needed in local situation
Q (Jeff, W3C): on automotive as best practice - they are hybrid apps - we have automotive bg in w3c - have you looked at that? same conclusions?
A: right now apps are testing the market
in automotive - car industry spending lots of money not for current use cases, but prepare for more
any function car has should be available via api to developers
massive hypothesis, they are testing it with "toy solutions"
Q (Andreas Harth): when i unlock car, why do i have to login to the cloud? why can't i talk to car directly?
A: business decision by car manufacturers - they are sensitive about crm store - not in the cloud, but in the data centers of vendors
<dsr> [note that the monohm talk was cancelled as they weren't able to get here]
Q (Joerg, Siemens): did you look at standardisation?
A: W3C is part of this project - wrt trust: our vocabularies are based on W3C results
also follow linked data approach - from linked data to linked services
Q (Joerg): do you have deployed applications?
A: not yet - testing with three different use cases - two smart cities - one for example on ski slopes - weather forecast from the slopes - also retail use case
<marie> See the breakout wiki: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Web_of_Things_Workshop_Breakout_Sessions
Andreas Harth (KIT): Scripting in the WoT - how to specifiy interplay between sensors using rules
if sensor x has value y, do z
Dave Raggett, W3C: Service Description for the Web of Things - need way to describe services, what they depend on, what they export ... parallels to linux packaging
Erik Wilde (Siemens): very close to what Dave has proposed - if you had service descriptions, how do you interact with these services - Atom inspired
interaction models for the web of things
also relation to social web wg - and activity streams - can wot infulence what happens in that wg, use it etc.
Alessio (Innova): Business model for WoT - buy and sell objects - some platforms already exist, but are they sustainable?
Jens Haupert (DFKI): Digital object memories for WoT - store information with object throughout its lifecycle
Dominique Guinard (Evrtyhng): The Web of Things Friendly Label - guidelines for device builders and cloud services builders
inspiration from JS world where there are frameworks for building scalable apps
Hauke Perterse (Free University): Application layer protocols and data encoding for constrained devices - want to have end2end connenctivity to constrained devices - look at emerging protocols that are more efficient than standard web protocols (http, xml based)
Johm Massonn (Ericsson): Privacy in the Web of Things - lot of data on WoT will not be protected - home sensors give detailed information on how we live -
<kaz> Erik's slides
<marie> scribe: marie
<scribe> scribenick: marie
@@: service descriptions should focus on developers needs - simple APIs are prefered
scribe: also foucs on relevant
market places
... let's focus on reviews, payments details, etc.
[minutes of this breakout session were already sent to dsr]
Erik Wilde: may be those models are able enough, and cover most if the usgae scenarii
scribe: within Siemens, scenrios
include home and office contexts, acting as hubs where we would
gave a transversal interaction services
... exposing the services in a uniform way
... all is in fluc anyway. The social Web WG is starting, so
I'd recommend to check what's happening in that space
... also, let's explore how to reach out to this social web
group from with what was discussed during this wsp
[this breakout session minutes are also avail.]
Alession Gugliotta: standards for APis, standards for hardware developers, as well, as reuse of existing standards (security, etc.)
scribe: we also discussed revenue models and suggested some
[minutes to be sent]
Dominique Guinard: (has slides)
scribe: we felt that coming up
with a label was important, since becoming an upstream
topic
... WoT should be the app layer of the IoT
... we looked at several freindliness layers ... may be come up
with a set of guidelines
... what should be friendly? devices, clouds, etc. May be have
a WoT friednly stamp
... what would a bare minimum to have a friendly device?
... we also talked about different protocols
... and that there should be support to all of those and that
bridges between those should be avail.
... finally, the findability layer
... how do I find my device on the Web
... reuse what's already in place, such as Web security
... thinking to create sth like schema.org for the IoT
... encapsulated Web objets including the data and the
metadata
[breakout session notes to be sent later]
@@: around 12-13 people. Strong agreemnt that this is a strong issue, but also an hard issue to solve
scribe: different regulations in
dieffrent countries do exist
... need o find breaches to pursue legal actions
... some people believe that regulations are the only way
... others say that regulators miss the point
... right to revoke data access is a minimum need
... group thought that W3C shoudl play a role to draft a policy
data
(notes to be mailed out)
Jörg: what technologies and what enable these technologies
[introducing panelists]
Charampalos Doukas, CreateNet
CD: purpose of my talk is how to
bridge Web to the IoT
... it's up to dev. and siftware producers to select the
best
... about W3C contribution: it can identify solutions to the
app level
... the COMPOSE approach is to use JSON and meta tags
... to describe REST inside messages... W3C to standradize a
schema?
... I'll show a demo tomorrow - check it out
... links of interest: glue.things, cloud foundry, Node Red...
if you want to play with our platform, go to
mobiledemo.compose-project.eu
Matthias Kovatsch, ETH Zurich
MK: "Let the WoT begin at the
device level" is mysimple statement
... device interoperability
... usability of the Web to create new and more complex
apps
... creating value, optimizing processes are the goals
Markus Isomäki, Nokia
MI: my statement is "Interaction
between Web clients and 'Constrained' Smart objects"
... withing the owp, we are missing the ability to communicate
with these devices
... the CoAP protocol - an API for that would be useful
Milan Patel, Huawei
MP: items of considerations in
order to choose core techs for the WoT
... message today, that let's reuse as much as we can
... every device/sensor out there should be LTE connected
... having gateways allows protocol transmissions, and a
certain level of security as well
... providing to dev. effective toolkits
... consistency of data sets across use cases
... privacy should not be a barrier to innovation
Charles Eckel, Cisco
CE: real time communications,
video conferencing, etc. is my background/experience
... comm between apps and network, with additionnal devices -
how are these are going to exist and operate in an optimal
way
... network providers need to support a wide range of
apps.
... apps to interact directly with the network
... the network should give back the information on the
devices' constraints
Jörg: quite different perceptions on the panel topic
<ph> scribenick: ph
<marie> scribe: Philipp
Mathias: ...
<dsr> Charles: Money will be a big driver of what gets deployed.
Charles: web of things is presentation of information, understanding it - money will be a driver - desire of people to share information could be a driver -
Milan: most applications have human end consumer from brainstorming i've done today and earlier - strong driver for wot is power of mashing together data from different sources
and add value - health, energy, disability, sports, .... - there will also be devices interacting with each other
Markus: don't see open standards in industry right now - many silos - web just used for representation of data to the user - interaction with the device pre-determined by the vendor
more opennes driven by developers and potential to mash up data coming from different vendors - something single vendor silos are not able to do
Matthias: a lot of people already noticed silos don't work - coap was designed to connect devices using web patterns - oma has device management standards - created lightweight m2m standard that builds on top of coap -
there is also ipso alliance - smart objects connected through ip
Joerg: is there a definition of web of things? is part of internet of things? do we have same understanding? What is difference between IoT?
Matthias: web and internet
relation is same as wot iot relation - web is application layer
of internet - wot plays same role for iot
...
Markus: pretty good definition - there's a bit of utopia in there, but I think it's reachable looking at the success of the web
Milan: web of things is what will add value to the internet of things
Charles: web of things will bring iot to vast amount of people - just like web did for computer usage - for everyone
Charalampos: web of things is the user side of internet of things - web of things is using technologies that browsers can communicate with
Joerg: would like to open it up a little - we observed that APIs are needed to get developers interested - others said to focus on protocols - Markus, where do you see balance between API and protocol technology?
Markus: protocols are just the necessary tools - Web has worked well without introducing many new protocols - there is webrtc standardisation that required new comm protocol (UDP, RTP)
if we want to enable local comm with constrained devices we may need some new protocols in the web platform
we have xmlhttpreqest API right now - maybe we need sth new
or a higher level API where you don't need to think about protocol
but additions should be minimal
COAP is on that path in my opinion
Wolfgang Daust(?): regarding protocols - things means something physical - it has not only a sensor, but also an actuator - completely different from a human being - different response times
the new thing is relationship to time - it matters for things
Charles: i agree with that - that's why I mentioned network constraints
you may want to know what is realtime and what is just bulk sensor data
Charalampos: not a matter of a new protocol - it's not web on things, but of things - some decisions can be done locally
Joerg: on the application layer, what are the technologies we see as part of web of things - we talked about cross-vertical integration - what technologies are available to descsribe information we are exchanging, and to describe the services
"please no new protocols" - are we already there?
Charalampos: there are efforts to describe sensors semantically - how to describe services is also important so that they can be reused easily
Matthias: we can learn from the
web - many services that are easy to discover - use linking -
many ways to describe services - microformants, schema.org, ...
something is emerging - we still need some experience with wot,
but am confident that we can pick one of the existing
approaches
...: we talked a lot about data - but things can have logic
embedded as well - but they are constrained - constraints are a
difference between web of things and web of services
requires rule engines embedded into these things
Charles: one of the presentations this morning discussed this well - data will be passed into the cloud to do crunching - if thing has more capacity, can do computation ittself
Charalampos: ...
Matthias: question is where you put your RESTful API - ... - can push it into the cloud
to save money
on device
Johannes: is electrical vehicle a thing, or too big? what is a thing in WoT?
Matthias: in Web, you link resources together - resources can be composed - you can make it as big as you want, but also drill down do lowest sensor
Markus: similar to question: what is a resource?
Joerg: ... what are your expectations towards W3C?
Matthias: core components that made the web evolve - html - missing something like html for things - good representations, internet media types - should be reusable for many domains - not a model for each domain
should have core data model that can be reused and specialised
protocols we need more - also api - today web defined by what's in a browser - would like have a coap api, or even better a REST API
Markus: web sockets have brought asynch comm - webrtc bringing in p2p and realtime - communication with constrained devices still missing - COAP API - device apis there has been a lot of work already
there will be more of that
how do you describe services and resources third area of work
Milan: identifying technologies that are applicable to wot and iot w3c should do - w3c has re-examined technologies whether they fit mobile - should ask question again - are technologies wot friendly - how to make subtle changes so we can accomodate it given market is massive
Charles: I hope W3C won't do a whole bunch of new protocols - W3C should focus on APIs, data models
also something to replace inefficient polling - some sort of notification
Charalampos: would like to see more events like this, more open to developers - need to listen to their needs
Joerg: fog has cleared - look out of the window - there is some light
but still a little foggy
important to continue to talk to each other and continue conversations we started also after tomorrow evening
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Tokio/Tokyo/ FAILED: s/\. now/.. now/ Succeeded: s/slosts/slots/ Succeeded: s/conected/connected/ Succeeded: s/stic/stick/ Succeeded: s/sensors/sensors)/ Succeeded: s/,,./.../ Succeeded: s/demo/demo on localhost/ Succeeded: s/@@@/Andreas Harth, KIT/ Succeeded: s/@@@/Andreas Harth, KIT/ Succeeded: s/###/Johannes Hund, Siemens/ Succeeded: s/@@1/Jon Nordby, The Grid/ Succeeded: s/future/future (in 2020)/ Succeeded: s/Dave/Dave Conway-Jones, IBM/ Succeeded: s/dave:/Dave Conway-Jones/ Succeeded: s/Jones/Jones:/ Succeeded: s/Q (??)/Q (Andreas Harth)/ Succeeded: s/buiy/buy/ Succeeded: s/Appllicaiton/Application/ Succeeded: s/1é/12/ Succeeded: s/iOt/IoT/ Succeeded: s/ap/app/ Succeeded: s/is a /is my/ Succeeded: s/CUAP/CoAP/ Succeeded: s/what/that/ Found Scribe: fsasaki Inferring ScribeNick: fsasaki Found ScribeNick: kaz Found Scribe: Marie Inferring ScribeNick: marie Found ScribeNick: marie Found Scribe: ph Inferring ScribeNick: ph Found ScribeNick: ph Found Scribe: marie Inferring ScribeNick: marie Found ScribeNick: marie Found ScribeNick: ph Found Scribe: Philipp Scribes: fsasaki, Marie, ph, Philipp ScribeNicks: fsasaki, kaz, marie, ph Present: many many people Agenda: http://www.w3.org/2014/02/wot/agenda.html Got date from IRC log name: 25 Jun 2014 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/06/25-wot-minutes.html People with action items:[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]