<kaz> scribenick: dsr__

Agenda

<mkovatsc> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#15_Feb_2017

Quick Updates

Santa Clara F2F

Report

Finalize Düsseldorf F2F

Technical

New repositories

Editors briefing

Communications TF

Agenda for Next WebConf

We welcome Tony Homer from Intel who was invited to this call by Michael McCool.

<tony> Thank you

Matthias starts the meeting and asks if there are any quick updates. [no one speaks up]

Konica Minolta were due to talk today, but asked for a one week postponement.

Similarly, I am trying to arrange a slot for Fernando Serena to present on the UPM work on a WoT ontology

Santa Clara F2F report

<kaz> draft Santa Clara f2f minutes

Matthias: I posted a high level summary of the outcome from the meeting.

<kaz> Matthias' slides

Mathias summarises the summary

We’ve invited Frank to join Kajimoto-san for the servient architecture document.

For the thing description WG spec we have Sebastian and Taki as editors

Matthias continues with his summary of the slides for the various task forces

The scripting spec will be edited by Johannes, Zoltan and Nimura-san

For the binding templates the editors are Matthias and Uday (pending confirmation)

The security task force won’t produce normative specs but will support the other task forces. We have a charter in github and now need to recruit experts to help with the work.

We also expect to seek help via liaisons including the IETF

Matthias continues with the Interest Group task force plans

The Linked Data and Semantic Processing task force charter - we’re seeking feedback on the charter over the next two weeks

Matthias walks us through the status of the various liaisons

This includes reaching out to the OPC for their work on OPC-UA which includes a graph modelling language analogous to RDF

We’re working with Industrie 4.0 on defining a demonstrator and hope to bring this to the next Plugfest

OPC is also involved in I4.0 and we’re hoping for a synergy

Matthias is looking for collaboration with the T2TRG in respect to hypermedia controls and the potential relationship to actions and error handling

Michael McCool is talk with the OpenFog consortium which could prove relevant to our work.

upcoming face to face meetings

The next one is 15-19 May in Osaka, Japan

We need to add details to the wiki and open a registration form.

Kaz will set up a call with the meeting hosts and include the IG/WG co-chairs

<kaz> ACTION: kaz to generate wiki/registration site for the Ohsaka meeting, and set up local organizing meeting including the host and the co-Chairs [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/02/15-wot-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-101 - Generate wiki/registration site for the ohsaka meeting, and set up local organizing meeting including the host and the co-chairs [on Kazuyuki Ashimura - due 2017-02-22].

The following face to face is in July in Dusseldorf, Germany hosted by Lemonbeat

The poll results suggest 9-13 July

This is timed to precede the IETF meeting

The final meeting this year is 6-10 November in Burlingame, Calfornia as part of TPAC

The following weekend is the IETF

For 2018, we hope to co-locate with a security conference and perhaps the IETF in London, and a meeting in China

For Osaka, we aim to have the RDF model for thing descriptions and editors draft for the WG specs.

For Dusseldorf, a draft test suite and Internet Drafts with security concepts for IETF review

For TPAC in November, release candidates for first public working drafts for the WG

We hope to release W3C Candidate Recommendations by December 2018

Michael: I will be attending the T2TRG meeting in Amsterdam, any one else?

Matthias: I will attend

Matthias talks about some of the IETF security groups we should liaise with

Michael has been talking with people inside Intel on the W3C security task force, but so far no takers as everyone is already busy with other work

Kaz: the WG charter places expectations for early publication of the architecture deliverable, so we need to make that happen

I think the due date for Architecture is June

<kaz> WoT WG Charter

Matthias: I will update the roadmap accordingly and Kaz can put this up on the website

Github repositories for the WG

Kaz has created one repository for each WG deliverable and given the editors update rights

GitHub repositories for the WG deliverables:
... https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture
... https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description
... https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api
... https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates

This is a poll for the editors to pick a joint slot for coordination

<mkovatsc> https://ethz.doodle.com/poll/dabycy4zdewtwqtd

The aim is to train editors on the W3C echidina tool chain for spec publication

Michael: there is interest in US people attending the call, but the current slot is too early.

We’re short of US participation so this matters, and perhaps we can alternate calls to even out the pain

Michael suggests one hour later than now as a possible compromise, or alternating the time slots

Matthias: alternativing slots tends to result in people only attending the calls that suit them

Kaz: similar challenge for auto group, we try to pick the timeslot for next call at the end of the current call

<mkovatsc> (and losing people because they are confused)

Johannes: we tried alternating slots in the IG and it caused considerable confusion, but good ICS files help with people’s calendars

Michael: a good reminder system helps, and to pick somewhat inconvenient but not horrible times to encourage regular participation

Matthias: we should set up a poll to see what is the best compromise

Michael: we should forward the poll to folks at the plugfest and others who are not yet members, but may be interested in atttending if the time is more convenient

Matthias asks Michael to organise the poll

Kaz askes Michael whether he meant the Editors debriefing call or this IG/WG joint call, and actually Michael rather meant the IG/WG joint call slot.

Michael prefers to focus on IG call for now

Dave mentions we need to clarify how to organize IG/WG calls as well (continue to be a joint call? or two separate calls?

Kaz: maybe this call continues as a joint IG/WG call, but WG Task Force calls should be WG members only

This relates to patent policy commitments for REC track items

Matthias: we have a joint IG/WG status tracking call, and WG only calls for each WG task force

Johannes: we need to accomodate the people who are in the task forces, but need to reachout to others

There are no more topics for today, and Matthias adjourns today’s call