<scribe> scribenick: kaz

<scribe> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_WebConf#Agenda_of_next_WoT_IG_WebConf:_20_July_2016 agenda

sk: Matthias and Joerg are traveling, Johannes will join later
... some important points
... there was a Comm TF call today
... IG deriverables
... TPAC
... implementation phase
... next call

Recap Beijing f2f meeting

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/13-wot-minutes.html Day 1 minutes

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/14-wot-minutes.html Day 2 minutes

ka: will do the action from 13th on TPAC breakout

sk: demo room as well

ka: another item for Joerg to invite Scott Jensen from Google to the WoT IG call

sk: will see his intention
... another item for Daniel to check with implementers about PlugFest participants

dp: some of them participated in PlugFest

ka: are you generating the list?

dp: already have a list and am generating messages to contact them

ka: we would like to invite Yongjing from Huawei to our call for the oneM2M discussion
... will check the minutes to see some more possible actions

sk: ok
... during the breakouts, we got proposals
... the moderators should put the summary on the wiki
... Panasonic have sent some slides

ka: maybe the moderators can put the summary on the GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/meeting-results/beijing-f2f

sk: right
... or at least should add links to the wiki
... the meeting went very successful
... we could show many interactions on different things from different companies
... outcomes we discussed were good
... regarding the PlugFest, having pictures and scenarios was great
... all the participants should provide resources

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/wot-f2f/photos/ Photos from the Beijing meeting

ka: shares the link to the photos

sk: there was discussion on the template for the PlugFest demo
... Taki has volunteered
... we should use that template for the future PlugFests
... people who are not sure about "WoT" have difficulty to understand our work
... audience may be understand what the difference with the current situation
... nice to show devices working together
... but how to show the difference from the previous approaches?

dp: maybe we can start to list things and what the goal is
... for each bullet item

sk: can show some slides
... (shows "PlugFest Scenario" slides)
... we showed 3 different scenarios
... also the 4th scenario with Lemonbeat
... scenario 1 - 'hello WoT'
... scenario 2 - 'full WoT'
... scenario 3 - 'mini automation'
... these slides were presented to the audience
... but quite hard to understand the background
... so nice to have more projectors
... one screen for one location

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/13-wot-minutes.html#item06 Next PlugFest Prep

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/13-wot-minutes.html#item06 Next PlugFest Prep

ka: we had discussion on next PlugFest preparation on the first Day

dp: we can project multiple scenes on the big wall

sk: it depends on the infrastructure of the TPAC venue

yc: comments on PlugFest
... people were wondering about what PlugFest was like
... would be good to have description on what PlugFest is like and the demo scenarios beforehand

sk: more than what is already documented

yc: the host required us for text beforehand
... also summary document on PlugFest
... what it's like and the purpose
... would be better to have that kind of information

sk: having more generic information would be a good idea
... also what the benefit of "WoT"
... thanks for the input

ka: who should generate that kind of information?

sk: each participant in PlugFest should do that
... Joerg has already made proposal that each demo should have a poster
... and the implementers should explain the scenario

ka: two directions: (1) detailed description on each demo and (2) primer introduction for PlugFest in general

da: we already have our Current Practices document as a resource
... also Taki has volunteered to generate a template

sk: we should have a link on the wiki

ka: and Yingying's second point was providing introductory document to newcomers who are not familiar with our work

sk: ok
... any other questions on the Beijing meeting?
... please note that we had demonstrations by CETC including camera, robot, printer, etc.
... nice to see what is going on

xq: comment on the Beijing meeting
... sent a document on Thing Description
... will update the wiki tomorrow

da: tx
... good idea to have your resource
... I can put the link on the wiki for you

ka: I can do that as a W3C Team Contact

Recap from today's Comm TF call

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/20-wot-comm-minutes.html Comm call minutes (member-only)

yc: 4 topics
... 1. Flyer
... Dave will review the draft and then send it to the whole group
... I'll generate some timeline for it till TPAC
... 2. Liaison
... Dave, myself, Daniel and Kaz will update the list

<yingying_> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-ig/2016Jul/0002.html

yc: regarding oneM2M, I sent a message on Yongjing's participation in our call to Matthias and am waiting for response
... 3. Outreach for W3C Members for the WG Charter
... 4. Events
... Dave will create a Member wiki page on the events
... that's all

sk: saw the email on oneM2M
... good to have them on our call

yc: should be a dedicated web conf

sk: which day?

yc: the point is that they're holding their f2f meeting this week
... so Yongjing would like our response urgently

sk: where is the meeting? which time zone?

yc: Montreal

ka: US Eastern
... the conclusion from today's comm call was, asking Yongjing to talk with oneM2M guys first and get back to us with their feedback and join our call

sk: we have less participants today
... so maybe we should have the joint call next week or after
... would be good to have a call some time in the afternoon in Europe given the time difference
... some morning time in Montreal

ka: let's wait for their response after Yingying sends a message

sk: ok
... any other comments?

(none)

IG Deriverables

sk: not sure when/which documents could be fixed
... we have to discuss this next week when we have more participants

ka: maybe we can send an email to the editors and ask for their opinions

sk: sounds good

ka: can do that

TPAC in Lisbon

sk: we've already talked about the possible demo room

ka: whole Wednesday? or just for the breakout session?

sk: should assume the whole day

ka: ok
... will ask about the possibility of a room for whole day Wednesday

Feedback from implementation phase - Frank

fr: shows slides: Feedback from implementation phase
... we'll have a WG for WoT
... Building n-WoT-Stacks
... and Implementing WoT Stacks
... (The Embedded Marketplace)
... 8/16 bit MCR are not at the end
... many new products
... (Which memory and performance is needed for the WoT stack?)
... 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit
... less memory like 16KB to 32, 64 and 128
... even 384KB
... (Flexibility of WoT-Stacks regarding device categories)
... WoT Servient and WoT Client
... what would be the appropriate size?
... 128? 256? or 512?
... next question is we'll have many WoT Clients
... device memory is limited for clients
... we have to make some requirements for systems
... findings/questions:
... high size of library needs memory
... high memory requirement and powerful MCU reduce the coverage of WoT regarding IoT market volume
... prices of future solutions must be lower than today
... limited size of WoT-Stack (library) is needed (small is beautiful)
... which size for individual device behavior
... high coverage of devices is needed to fulfill WoT mission

sk: tx!
... we have to take it account about MCU's memory size
... very important topic
... this kind of limitation, e.g., 32KB
... important for the future WoT developer

fr: one comment
... if you have a small client
... for some small activity
... maybe we can reduce the memory size

sk: what we can do for standardization is how we can make presentation
... TD so far means streaming processing so far
... we've been thinking about devices who are capable
... optimized encoding for WoT applications might be needed

fr: not only binary but very challenge
... we want to access various data silos
... state machines

dp: profile for limited devices?
... we already have considered some profiles
... caused the library size limited
... sometimes you don't need complicated profile depending your use case
... we need to decide how to handle profiles on top of the basic stack

fr: not clear at the moment
... questions?

<Xueqin> what's the problem?

ka: maybe we could add an item on memory/library size to the PlugFest template?

sk: MCUs have restricted resources
... what is the balance?
... good to think about the minimum resource the WoT Servient rely on
... very difficult question

fr: could have something on the WG Charter?

sk: maybe you can generate some proposal?

fr: maybe after my vacation

-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Roadmap wg roadmap

ka: please note that we can gather information on MCU requirements, but I don't think that would become a W3C Recommendation
... probably this information should go part of the Current Practice document, e.g., an appendix section

dp: if it goes into the Current Practice document, we can discuss it separately from the WG work

ka: right

-> https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-exi-profile-20140909/ EXI profile

ka: if we wanted to generate that kind of REC track document, we could do
... but we need more discussion within the group

dp: also this document itself is a bit different from what Frank is suggesting

sk: let's continue the discussion

fr: will be on vacation next week
... have some colleagues but not available next week

sk: ok

Agenda for the next call

sk: overview of action items [Kaz]
... WoT IG: deliverables closing, Editor for Tech Landscape
... TPAC in Lisbon: demo room on Wed.
... microcontroller implementations for the WG Charter?

dp: all the group participants are encouraged to share information/slides

sk: add that

[ adjourned ]