IRC log of wot-td on 2016-10-26

Timestamps are in UTC.

07:05:47 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #wot-td
07:05:48 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/10/26-wot-td-irc
07:06:25 [kaz]
present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Daniel_Peintner, Dave_Raggett, Gregg_Kellogg, Uday_Davluru, Yingying_Chen
07:06:53 [kaz]
present+ Takuki_Kamiya
07:12:20 [kaz]
present+ Sebastian_Kaebisch
07:13:09 [kaz]
scribenick: yingying_
07:13:10 [dsr]
dsr has joined #wot-td
07:13:14 [kaz]
scribe: Yingying
07:13:15 [dsr]
present+ Dave
07:13:20 [yingying_]
present+ Yingying_Chen
07:13:27 [uday]
uday has joined #wot-td
07:13:29 [kaz]
agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-ig/2016Oct/0014.html
07:13:38 [yingying_]
Meeting: WoT TD restructuring meeting
07:13:44 [yingying_]
Chair: Sebastian
07:14:29 [yingying_]
[Sebastian is going through the agenda]
07:14:36 [yingying_]
Topic: Logistics
07:15:15 [yingying_]
Sebastian: All the use cases and proposals regarding on the TD are all on github.
07:15:39 [yingying_]
...there are many going on. The deadline for closing for this action is next week.
07:15:54 [yingying_]
...does it make sense to extend one week?
07:16:28 [yingying_]
...We need put in new information to current practice document.
07:16:53 [yingying_]
...We need also sometime to implement it. And online PlugFest preparation also needs time.
07:17:25 [yingying_]
...please use github repository to add your stuff regarding the TD>
07:17:33 [yingying_]
s/>//
07:17:45 [yingying_]
Topic: Discussion about JSON-LD 1.1
07:18:03 [yingying_]
Sebastian: there is a github issue on it from Dave.
07:18:09 [Victor]
Victor has joined #wot-td
07:18:18 [kaz]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/259 issue-259
07:19:55 [yingying_]
...what will JSON-LD 1.1 impact the TD?
07:20:24 [yingying_]
...which we would like to see in JSON-LD 1.1? what kind of opportunities are there?
07:20:37 [yingying_]
...could you introduce yourself @1?
07:20:57 [yingying_]
@1: I am the editor of JSON-LD 1.1.
07:21:17 [sebastian]
sebastian has joined #wot-td
07:21:20 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/ JSON-LD 1.0
07:21:27 [kaz]
s/1.1/1.0/
07:21:35 [kaz]
s/@1:/gregg:/
07:21:57 [yingying_]
...I am trying to put things forward in the community group. There are request index format for accessing data.
07:22:15 [yingying_]
...array form is not already convenient.
07:22:24 [yingying_]
...language can be used as index.
07:22:40 [yingying_]
...for using index token there are several ways.
07:23:20 [yingying_]
...the key value is id and the object value will be no definitions.
07:24:11 [yingying_]
...the idea is to have a top level index that object whose keys were ids
07:24:30 [yingying_]
...best practices for doing that will be indicated.
07:25:16 [yingying_]
sebastian: main perspective is that TD should be a format that should be very easy to use such that the web developer use it just as use other JSON object format.
07:25:33 [yingying_]
...web developers like easy representation and like to use JSON.
07:25:57 [yingying_]
...we can combine these JSON format and can simply integrate the semantics.
07:26:21 [yingying_]
...JSON-LD does not allow you to use it as use JSON.
07:26:35 [yingying_]
...are we going to rely on that?
07:26:42 [dsr]
q+
07:27:08 [kaz]
present+ Victor_Charpeney
07:27:20 [yingying_]
Darko: you are collecting requirements for new version of JSON-LD?
07:27:30 [yingying_]
gregg: just community group no wg.
07:27:55 [kaz]
s/Darko:/Victor:/
07:28:42 [yingying_]
...far too many features to integrate in 1.1 release. one of them is closely related to framing or semantics.
07:29:00 [yingying_]
...beginning of next to start work on it.
07:29:27 [dsr]
q?
07:29:37 [yingying_]
...there are small group and easy to make consensus.
07:29:57 [yingying_]
...2 years the community draft will be ready.
07:30:45 [yingying_]
...the group is actively developing and would be good to track their development
07:31:04 [yingying_]
sebastian: is there something similar to W3C recommendation?
07:31:32 [yingying_]
gregg: we need a wg chartered with updating JSON-LD.
07:31:37 [sebastian]
sorry Dave, you will be the next
07:31:55 [yingying_]
...short timeline there could be but couldn't say yet.
07:33:16 [Victor]
q+
07:33:23 [sebastian]
ack D
07:33:24 [kaz]
ack d
07:33:52 [yingying_]
dave: we need to build way of using JSON for web developers. timeline is critical. Now we will setup WG to develop TD spec. The time would be short.
07:34:14 [yingying_]
...we can use their proposals and feed into JSON-LD later.
07:34:30 [kaz]
q+
07:34:49 [yingying_]
...there are quite lot of use cases and requirements that we can feed into the community group.
07:36:25 [yingying_]
victor: community group is working on another version.
07:37:17 [sebastian]
ack v
07:37:25 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/2016/09/wot-wg-charter.html proposed WoT WG Charter
07:37:56 [yingying_]
kaz: proposed WG charter does not say we would like to use JSON-LD, JSON or others.
07:38:36 [yingying_]
...we should compile our requirements for expected updated version to the community group or new created wg for JSON-LD.
07:38:55 [yingying_]
sebastian: yes. it's not mentioned in the proposed charter.
07:39:05 [kaz]
s/others/others specifically. those data models are just examples of possible data models for Thing Description./
07:39:16 [yingying_]
...it's said we need to rely on semantic technology.
07:39:59 [kaz]
q?
07:40:00 [kaz]
ack k
07:40:35 [yingying_]
...it's a difficult thing. 2 important things: 1. JSON-LD is enough to use in TD. are developers satisfied with it? should we go into more details for reviews by web developers.
07:41:04 [yingying_]
...how would you like to communicate with JSON-LD 1.1 community group.
07:41:49 [Victor]
q+
07:42:07 [yingying_]
...another point is whether we need to make changes on it.
07:42:56 [yingying_]
...if people are not satisfied we need to find other solution.
07:43:32 [yingying_]
victor: how big is the community group for JSON-LD 1.1? are there any members who are willing to contribute?
07:44:05 [yingying_]
gregg: hundreds of member. from 5 years people started working on it.
07:45:24 [yingying_]
...could not say now how the group will response to our request. probably after we have a proposal, it could be seen.
07:46:17 [kaz]
-> https://www.w3.org/community/json-ld/participants JSON-LD CG participants
07:46:20 [dsr]
q+
07:46:32 [kaz]
ack v
07:46:41 [yingying_]
...don't know if it's possible to add your own extension to the recommendation.
07:47:21 [yingying_]
...biggest advantage is that active works are going on to support more RDF concept to JSON-LD.
07:47:57 [dsr]
q?
07:48:10 [yingying_]
victor: wondering just contribute to the community group or just rely on their work.
07:48:40 [yingying_]
...about referencing others' work, need to ask W3C staff.
07:48:47 [kaz]
ack d
07:49:25 [yingying_]
dave: we see different targets for TD. Powerful device/gateway can do a lot of things. for constraint device, json-ld is already too much.
07:49:37 [katsu]
katsu has joined #wot-td
07:50:15 [yingying_]
...would be problematic to reference document from community group in the spec.
07:50:19 [katsu]
present+ Katsuyoshi_Naka
07:50:32 [gkellogg]
q+
07:51:06 [kaz]
q+
07:51:10 [yingying_]
victor: I just use JSON for constraint device instead of JSON-LD.
07:51:24 [Victor]
sorry, we've been disconnected
07:51:33 [yingying_]
dave: agree on that point. but need to think about way in JSON-LD for supporting constraint devices.
07:52:27 [kaz]
rrsagent, make log public
07:52:30 [kaz]
rrsagent, draft minutes
07:52:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/10/26-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
07:52:41 [sebastian]
we are back
07:53:14 [kaz]
q?
07:53:17 [kaz]
ack g
07:53:45 [yingying_]
gregg: reasonable to have such an extension for constraint device, giving subset of JSON-LD for that purpose.
07:53:48 [sebastian]
ack k
07:55:07 [yingying_]
kaz: we should clarify our requirements on JSON-LD. maybe not in the TD document but in our UCR document.
07:55:45 [dape]
q+
07:55:48 [gkellogg]
q+
07:55:56 [yingying_]
victor: true. let's try to do that if we need to do that clarification for JSON-LD new version.
07:56:31 [yingying_]
sebastian: JSON-LD just one year usage in plugfest is nice from people's feedback.
07:56:53 [yingying_]
...it's quite accepted and understood by the group.
07:57:29 [yingying_]
...we have to ask more the web developers whether it's ok for current TD structure.
07:58:04 [yingying_]
...for the constraint devices, serialization format and compression format were discussed in the group.
07:58:26 [yingying_]
...EXI wg is also working on it for very constraint devices.
07:59:20 [kaz]
q?
07:59:21 [kaz]
ack d
07:59:33 [yingying_]
daniel: what dave said is not only related to serialization but how to prescribe the features of JSON-LD for constraint devices.
08:00:34 [yingying_]
...I would prefer to use what already exits in JSON-LD rather than starting from scratch again.
08:01:19 [sebastian]
q?
08:01:26 [yingying_]
...creating another new abstract format is not acceptable
08:02:36 [sebastian]
ack g
08:03:20 [yingying_]
sebastian: how to continue the discussion
08:04:08 [kaz]
s/discussion/discussion?/
08:04:29 [yingying_]
...Dave, would it be possible to involve more web developers in the discussion?
08:05:15 [yingying_]
dave: we are lack of channels to reach out web developers community. We maybe can more use the open source projects.
08:05:17 [sebastian]
q?
08:05:54 [kaz]
q+
08:06:00 [yingying_]
...some experiments are more research focus. We still need to attract more SMEs to the group.
08:08:23 [yingying_]
sebastian: after TD restructuring, for this more flexible, easier to use than the original version, we need to reach out the community to hear their feedbacks.
08:08:39 [kaz]
q?
08:09:12 [yingying_]
dave: we could find more people who have experiences on it.
08:11:04 [yingying_]
kaz: we could reach out for W3C members more for comments on it.
08:11:48 [yingying_]
sebastian: thanks a lot for gregg to call in late in the night.
08:12:08 [yingying_]
...it would be nice to contact gregg for anything related to JSON-LD.
08:12:16 [kaz]
s/comments on it./comments on it, but the detail should be discussed and planned within not this TD Restructuring TF but the WoT Comm TF./
08:12:39 [kaz]
s/for W3C members/for W3C Members and non-Member communities/
08:13:15 [yingying_]
Topic: Properties vs Actions
08:14:32 [yingying_]
[sebastian is going through the properties vs actions table]
08:15:11 [yingying_]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/255 issue 255
08:15:59 [yingying_]
sebastian: we should rely on URI which is more flexible.
08:16:38 [yingying_]
...what are you thinking about it?
08:17:31 [yingying_]
...another approach is @id proposed by victor. However it's not so commonly used by web developers. I would recommend the URL.
08:17:40 [yingying_]
s/URL/URI/
08:17:46 [kaz]
q?
08:17:49 [kaz]
ack k
08:17:52 [kaz]
q+ dsr
08:17:53 [kaz]
ack d
08:18:09 [yingying_]
dave: do we need more terms what is the URI for? what is the relationship?
08:18:30 [yingying_]
...to identify endpoint, URI is generic.
08:18:52 [yingying_]
victor: URI here is the identifier for the resource.
08:19:09 [yingying_]
...maybe more precise term for it?
08:19:22 [yingying_]
dave: the scope and value for this URI?
08:20:07 [yingying_]
victor: endpoint is more related to service but now it's related to resource. More opinions on it?
08:20:51 [yingying_]
dave: I think URI is fine for that.
08:21:16 [yingying_]
[some discussions on the URI proposal]
08:21:55 [yingying_]
sebastian: I would close this issue.
08:22:29 [yingying_]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/254 issue 254
08:23:16 [yingying_]
sebastian: everybody agreed on it. My proposal is to move this issue to the discussion on lifecycle which is led by kajimoto-san.
08:24:05 [kaz]
i/254/topic: Other issues/
08:25:06 [yingying_]
[sebastian summarized the benefits for having the template]
08:25:24 [yingying_]
sebastian: my suggestion is to close this issue.
08:25:59 [yingying_]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/264 issue 264
08:26:39 [yingying_]
sebastian: please comment on this new issue.
08:27:13 [yingying_]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/256 issue 256
08:27:36 [yingying_]
sebastian: could dave give some update on the compound properties issue?
08:27:55 [yingying_]
dave: would be useful to collect use cases on it.
08:28:10 [yingying_]
sebastian: could you also post your proposal on it?
08:28:20 [yingying_]
dave: I will dig it out on the github.
08:28:42 [yingying_]
-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/263 issue 263
08:29:39 [yingying_]
sebastian: UI field proposed in TD. Please comment on it.
08:30:37 [yingying_]
...these are all the issues. please continue working on it. I will send the status of the github issues to IG mailing group.
08:31:13 [yingying_]
...extend the deadline for 1 week.
08:32:06 [yingying_]
...next week we will have a review on what the new TD looks like.
08:32:24 [yingying_]
...thank you.
08:32:30 [yingying_]
[adjourned]
08:32:43 [yingying_]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:32:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/10/26-wot-td-minutes.html yingying_
08:35:24 [yingying_]
rrsagent, make minutes
08:35:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/10/26-wot-td-minutes.html yingying_
08:50:35 [yingying_]
rrsagent, make log member
08:51:53 [yingying_]
rrsagent, make log public
11:51:49 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #wot-td
11:57:29 [kaz]
kaz has joined #wot-td
12:12:15 [yingying]
yingying has joined #wot-td
12:15:29 [yingying_]
yingying_ has joined #wot-td
12:39:20 [ying_ying]
ying_ying has joined #wot-td
12:48:27 [yingying]
yingying has joined #wot-td
12:52:23 [yingying_]
yingying_ has joined #wot-td
13:52:08 [taki1]
taki1 has joined #wot-td
15:29:18 [taki1]
taki1 has left #wot-td
15:32:17 [kaz]
kaz has joined #wot-td
15:55:55 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #wot-td
16:04:01 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #wot-td
16:34:56 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #wot-td
16:42:05 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has joined #wot-td
17:03:18 [gkellogg]
gkellogg has left #wot-td