12:02:12 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot
12:02:12 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/26-wot-irc
12:02:47 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ben_Francis, Dave_Raggett, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster, Michael_McCool, Tomoaki_Mizushima
12:03:01 <barryleiba> 43%
12:03:30 <kaz> present+ Matthias_Kovatsch
12:03:42 <kaz> present+ Barry_Leiba
12:03:45 <barryleiba> Yay!
12:04:05 <kaz> present+ Yongjing_Zhang
12:04:18 <kaz> scribenick: McCool
12:05:04 <tokuyama> tokuyama has joined #wot
12:05:47 <kaz> Chair: Matthias, McCool
12:06:03 <yongjing> yongjing has joined #wot
12:06:52 <dape> dape has joined #wot
12:07:01 <McCool> agenda: mozilla's contribution, f2f recap if time
12:07:03 <ohura> ohura has joined #wot
12:07:23 <kaz> present+ Ryuichi_Matsukura
12:07:23 <McCool> last week no mtg due to people travelling
12:07:30 <k_nimura> k_nimura has joined #wot
12:08:40 <mkovatsc_> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#26_July_2017
12:08:54 <McCool> note: ocf liaison meeting suspended in favor of protocol binding meeting, which a doodle will be sent out for shortly
12:09:08 <kaz> present+ Daniel_Peintner(IRC_only)
12:09:44 <achille_zappa> achille_zappa has joined #wot
12:09:59 <naka> naka has joined #wot
12:10:42 <kaz> present+ Achille_Zappa
12:10:44 <McCool> johannes won't be able to contribute to node-wot/SA, so we will have to figure out how to fill in
12:10:46 <mjkoster> mjkoster has joined #wot
12:11:08 <McCool> topic: Mozilla, Ben Francis, Web Things proposal/contribution
12:11:27 <McCool> matthias: see overlap, complementary parts
12:11:59 <McCool> matthias: status, roadmap, main concepts, etc.
12:12:11 <achille_zappa> present+ achille_zappa
12:12:16 <kaz> present+ Kazuaki_Nimura
12:12:18 <McCool> ben: until further notice
12:12:22 <benfrancis> https://hacks.mozilla.org/2017/06/building-the-web-of-things/
12:12:37 <McCool> Mozilla is not a member of this group, but contributes elsewhere
12:13:19 <kaz> present+ Masato_Ohura, Keiichi_Tokuyama
12:13:24 <McCool> blog post: consider Web as unifying application stack
12:13:47 <McCool> three integration patterns (from Web Thing model from prior proposal)
12:14:01 <McCool> patterns: direct, gateway, and cloud
12:14:23 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot
12:14:36 <McCool> three different levels can expose a "WoT API"
12:14:50 <McCool> Mozilla's project Things
12:15:04 <McCool> three parts: Things Cloud, Things Gateway, Things Framework
12:15:23 <McCool> so far, have implemented an OSS implementation of Things Gateway
12:15:41 <McCool> also have a TLS tunneling service to Things Cloud
12:16:22 <McCool> Web Thing API - mention ongoing work at W3C, IETF, and
12:16:49 <McCool> this work has a lot in common with previous and current work on "Web of Things", but more concrete
12:17:11 <McCool> have specific definitions in terms of encoding (JSON), API, etc.
12:17:40 <McCool> Web Thing API description includes properties, actions, events; also links
12:18:03 <McCool> "Thing Description"
12:18:09 <McCool> also define a Web Socket API
12:18:18 <McCool> six basic message types
12:18:29 <McCool> keep payloads as consistent as possible with the REST API
12:18:48 <McCool> main issue with WS is that you have to invent your own protocol
12:18:58 <McCool> also section on Web Thing Types
12:19:11 <McCool> have some built-in types, just like HTML has built-in-tags
12:19:20 <McCool> idea is that you could extend these with semantic tagging
12:19:28 <McCool> with JSON-LD
12:19:52 <McCool> discussing whether with JSON-LD 1.1 whether we can implement this
12:20:09 <McCool> Mozilla wants to figure out best way to collaborate
12:20:26 <McCool> going back to formal objection...
12:20:37 <McCool> felt certain parts were not mature enough
12:21:08 <McCool> Ben: does this fit within the scope of the WG, IG, or should there be a CG?
12:21:14 <kaz> present+ Katsuyoshi_Naka
12:21:16 <mjkoster> q+
12:21:17 <McCool> how to move forward?
12:21:34 <McCool> matthias: short answers to some questions
12:21:50 <McCool> regarding google, tried to figure out concrete blocker
12:22:11 <McCool> the issue was more dependencies, eg we needed to specify a "main deliverable"
12:22:19 <McCool> which we decided was the Thing Description
12:22:36 <McCool> we also determined that RDF etc is aligned with what Google is doing
12:22:54 <McCool> and, as can be seen with activity on iot.schema.org, Google is interested in this
12:23:30 <McCool> other comments: are lots of other IoT standards out there, we can't try to argue people over to yet another standard
12:23:36 <McCool> issue is domain knowledge
12:23:40 <ktoumura> ktoumura has joined #wot
12:23:54 <McCool> so we want to go down a descriptive rather than a prescriptive approach
12:24:27 <McCool> gateway backend still has a lot of pain in the backend for integration; there is a lot of complexity there
12:24:57 <McCool> but we would like to use patterns from the web to make embedded interfacing easier
12:25:10 <McCool> but... some useful defaults for web interfaces would be useful
12:25:46 <McCool> so,Mozilla's proposal would be a "target proposal" for Web-based APIs
12:26:19 <McCool> long run, want to look at convergence of different technologies
12:26:30 <McCool> but this will take time... look how long it took for the web
12:26:43 <McCool> ben: want to sell idea of WoT to web developers
12:26:58 <McCool> our experience is that some things will appeal to them, others will put them off
12:27:01 <taki> taki has joined #wot
12:27:16 <McCool> our concern is that semantic web technologies can make things look too complex
12:27:32 <McCool> so... want something simple as the first view for web developers
12:27:47 <McCool> so... see plain JSON encoding as good complement to current work
12:27:58 <McCool> want to avoid too much complexity
12:28:22 <dsr> q+
12:28:26 <McCool> current proposal has a log of x-agnostic components which add a lot of complexity
12:28:48 <McCool> matthias: in work on charter, also got this feedback...
12:29:12 <McCool> some parts are fuzzier than they should be, but as we have done the work things have become clearer
12:29:36 <McCool> for instance, for scripting API, in principle should be language-agnostic
12:29:48 <McCool> but what we work on right now, and what will be in first spec, is JS
12:29:57 <McCool> and is concrete
12:29:58 <kaz> present+ Taki_Kamiya
12:30:11 <McCool> similar to what's in web browsers
12:30:47 <McCool> we are aiming for a narrow waist... using Thing abstraction for everything, including system services
12:31:13 <McCool> SA overall is optional as well: people don't have to implement, but has been very useful
12:31:26 <McCool> other issue was RDF, etc.
12:31:53 <McCool> we do want a mode where people can work with a hard-coded vocabulary and can avoid the complexity of full RDF
12:31:55 <dsr> q?
12:32:30 <McCool> ben: personally skeptical of SA, have seen similar work... feel it is the wrong layer of abstraction to standardize
12:32:45 <McCool> should be about linked resources and web APIs
12:33:04 <McCool> but do understand that is the current charter
12:33:20 <McCool> what mozilla wants to figure out is the best way to collaborate
12:33:45 <McCool> matthias: first, we are looking at other serializations of TD
12:34:04 <McCool> we have been using JSON-LD, which comes for "free"
12:34:22 <McCool> but we have also been discussing others, eg. a plain JSON serialization
12:34:35 <McCool> this can definitely be done in IG, but maybe in WG
12:34:40 <kaz> Meeting: WoT IG/WG
12:34:58 <McCool> other part is protocol bindings
12:35:05 <McCool> Moz proposal is prescriptive
12:35:37 <McCool> but, if we do a web-style interface, if "defaults" does something like Moz's proposal, then TD should be simple
12:36:03 <McCool> ben: provides metadata, but also links to resources
12:36:15 <McCool> our take on WoT is that is gives things URLs
12:36:29 <McCool> but they don't think it makes sense to extend to non-web protocols
12:36:58 <McCool> matthias: WG charter definitely covers serialization formats for TD
12:37:12 <McCool> schedule is part of the reason we pushed back
12:37:18 <McCool> right now JSON-LD works...
12:37:45 <McCool> but on the roadmap we definitely would be willing to look at other serializations
12:37:54 <McCool> ben: in terms of timelines...
12:38:30 <McCool> plain JSON format can be fairly quick if based on concrete model rather than trying to encode general-purpose abstract model
12:38:51 <McCool> ben: but, things are still in flux; not sure it will be stable soon
12:38:53 <dsr> q?
12:39:00 <McCool> matthias: so that sounds more like IG work
12:39:26 <McCool> q?
12:39:31 <mkovatsc_> q?
12:39:47 <kaz> q+ yongjing
12:39:50 <kaz> ack y
12:39:54 <mjkoster> ack m
12:40:04 <McCool> q+
12:41:29 <kaz> ack d
12:41:38 <dsr> http://iot.mozilla.org/wot/
12:41:51 <McCool> dsr: see that positioned this as w3c submission
12:42:00 <McCool> do you still want to go down that formal path?
12:42:09 <kaz> q+
12:42:13 <dsr> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/proposals/dsr-td/json-to-ld-dsr.md
12:42:22 <McCool> also noticed that spec is very similar to what dsr proposed a while back
12:42:48 <McCool> and that provides a route to connect this to what we are doing
12:43:01 <McCool> think there is a way to connect this to what we are doing in both ig and wg
12:43:03 <kajimoto> kajimoto has joined #wot
12:43:09 <kaz> present+ Kazuo_Kajimoto
12:43:09 <McCool> ben: thanks for all the lively discussion
12:43:24 <McCool> ben: not sure which route makes sense
12:43:47 <McCool> ben: what is the most productive thing to do here?
12:43:48 <mkovatsc_> q+
12:44:20 <McCool> ben: major difference is presence of links in TD...
12:44:27 <McCool> had discussion on github
12:44:39 <McCool> are those links part of TD or provided separately
12:44:57 <mkovatsc_> q?
12:44:59 <McCool> dsr: there are links elsewhere, are part of the overall story
12:45:18 <kaz> ack mccool
12:46:07 <dsr> Member submissions is a benefit for W3C Members, but in this case it seems clear that the submission would be directed to the WoT IG/WG, so a formal submission isn’t needed
12:46:25 <kaz> +1
12:49:31 <kaz> @@@mccool's point on descriptive api
12:50:02 <mkovatsc_> q?
12:50:14 <mjkoster> if anyone is interesten in what the IETF is doing, please come participate
12:50:33 <kaz> s/interesten/interested/
12:51:20 <mjkoster> the discussion BEn refers to is already taking place in the relevant bodies in IETF
12:51:24 <mkovatsc_> q?
12:51:28 <mjkoster> s/BEn/Ben
12:51:56 <McCool> kaz: would also to thank Moz for the contribution
12:52:07 <McCool> would also like to mention there are several paths and collaborations
12:52:25 <McCool> for instance, auto Wg has been looking at something similar for web sockets
12:52:40 <McCool> probably best solution is to bring this directly to ig
12:52:49 <McCool> ben: auto wg reminded me...
12:52:53 <kaz> ack k
12:53:06 <McCool> is a good example of offline or local collaboration
12:53:16 <McCool> and security etc is a big problem...
12:53:26 <McCool> having issues with HTTP, DNS, etc.
12:53:45 <McCool> kaz used to work at auto wg
12:53:51 <mkovatsc_> q?
12:54:03 <McCool> have also been looking at auto wg as possible use case for WoT work
12:54:38 <McCool> matthias: many topics... most important, perhaps topic on convergence
12:54:51 <McCool> but doesn't feel this will work with prescriptive approach
12:55:03 <McCool> but each ecosystem is still interested in connecting to others
12:55:21 <McCool> so they were interested in descriptive approach
12:55:33 <McCool> so... not pushing them to change their path
12:55:46 <McCool> so see TD as a way to help people converge
12:55:54 <kaz> s/used to work at auto wg/used to work for the auto wg as well, and this wot group has been holding joint meetings at TPAC to think about possible collaboration (e.g., about issues on HTTPS, DNS, WebSocket)/
12:56:11 <McCool> for instance, if less-complex TD results, then will encourage adoption of common patterns
12:56:33 <McCool> ben: to re-iterate, want to get web developers to adopt technology
12:56:56 <McCool> but the more general approach is also more complex
12:57:15 <McCool> ben: is this something that a web developer can "get"?
12:57:29 <McCool> matthias: we have to figure out the best tradeoff
12:57:40 <McCool> maybe we can even consider a "lossy" serialization
12:58:04 <McCool> also have to consider audience: industrial, home, hobby, etc
12:58:24 <McCool> ben: definitely talking about real commercial applications
12:58:39 <McCool> prior experience was with web apps
12:58:54 <McCool> what eventually went out was progressive web apps, was very simple
12:59:00 <McCool> but seeing good takeup.
13:00:15 <McCool> ben: personal observation, new apis are a subset of the work
13:00:28 <McCool> ben: yes, agree it is about finding the right balance
13:00:53 <McCool> matthias: would be nice if we can align it a bit; perhaps break it down into components?
13:01:22 <McCool> main point is that there are just a few things that were issues: hard-coded URLs, must be HTTP, etc.
13:01:34 <kaz> q+
13:01:41 <kaz> ack m
13:01:53 <McCool> want to figure out how to present in a unified way, not create more fragmentation
13:02:20 <McCool> ben: interaction model
13:02:22 <McCool> q+
13:03:01 <McCool> ben: dsr and I were discussing whether there is an enforced URL structure?
13:03:32 <dsr> (more about simplifying the work needed by developers through convenient defaults)
13:03:34 <McCool> matthias: why we went just back to interactions was to make things look more like forms
13:03:45 <McCool> so there was just one way to build things; more flexible
13:03:55 <McCool> makes it easier to add additional interaction patterns later
13:04:46 <McCool> also had thought about URLs for non-HTTP/CoAP protocols
13:04:52 <McCool> could register a URI
13:05:13 <McCool> Matthias: there was also some comments about HTTP2
13:05:29 <McCool> but... "big web" people were not so interested in IoT
13:05:41 <McCool> did not get eventing model right, esp for small constrained devices
13:06:03 <mjkoster> there is plenty of discussion on these questions in IETF and a lot of ideas
13:06:06 <McCool> also, IETF/CoAP working group did look at offline security issues already
13:06:18 <McCool> it may take another decade for HTTP to catch up
13:06:23 <mkovatsc_> q?
13:06:30 <McCool> ack
13:06:47 <McCool> q-
13:06:51 <kaz> ack k
13:07:10 <dsr> q+
13:07:12 <mkovatsc_> q?
13:07:32 <mjkoster> perhaps Mozilla should also participate in the relevant IETF WG for http, CoAP, httpbis
13:08:12 <mkovatsc_> q?
13:08:21 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2017/11/TPAC/schedule.html TPAC schedule
13:08:33 <mkovatsc_> q?
13:08:33 <kaz> s/schedule/schedule fyi/
13:08:41 <kaz> ack d
13:08:45 <McCool> recap: summarize, next steps
13:08:49 <dsr> It would be great to include the Mozilla approach in the next plugfest at TPAC
13:09:06 <McCool> we are both aware of usability tradeoffs
13:09:27 <McCool> it is certainly in the charter to look at alternative serializations
13:09:39 <McCool> can definitely start a tf to look at other serializations
13:09:42 <McCool> q+
13:10:07 <McCool> maybe we can have an additional meeting to get up to speed on current status
13:10:29 <McCool> should get better over the next few months as we nail down first working draft
13:11:01 <McCool> big more long-term, moz will try to look at TPAC participation
13:11:19 <McCool> could look at interoperation between the two approaches
13:11:26 <kaz> [ note that the WoT group will meet on Monday/Tuesday (=Nov. 6/7) during TPAC 2017 in Burlingame ]
13:11:44 <McCool> ben is in the UK, so not "local" in SF
13:12:14 <McCool> also for security TF, need to consider the issues with HTTP
13:12:22 <mkovatsc_> q?
13:12:25 <mjkoster> mjkoster is in Mountain View
13:12:34 <kaz> ack mc
13:12:39 <barryleiba> present-
13:12:42 <barryleiba> barryleiba has left #wot
13:12:50 <mjkoster> ...and would be happy to meet with some of the project members
13:13:29 <kaz> mccool: we're starting the binding tf and think about event handling as well
13:14:00 <kaz> ... should look into Mozilla's proposal as well
13:14:09 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
13:14:35 <kaz> ben: hope it would be better to see what would be the best solution
13:15:29 <McCool> eventing model... less obvious clear single solution
13:16:03 <mjkoster> I want to use MQTT
13:16:17 <McCool> mccool: at any rate, a concrete action we can take is to describe the web socket approach at least
13:16:32 <McCool> dsr: there are various other issues with rebooting, etc.
13:16:51 <McCool> matthias: have to look at what devices are out there
13:17:15 <McCool> ben: eventing is a big challenge, but MQTT is "not the web", so...
13:17:29 <mjkoster> websockets is more sockets than web ;-)
13:17:45 <McCool> matthias: also some IETF activity looking at eventing
13:18:06 <McCool> as said earlier, "big web" is not so much interested in this
13:18:39 <McCool> different approaches with state update (eventual consistency) and "real" events
13:19:11 <kaz> q?
13:19:12 <McCool> ben: also clear that more work needs to happen at IETF to deal with issues with HTTP and DNS, etc.
13:19:35 <McCool> matthias: should be use last ten minutes on update on F2F?
13:19:42 <mjkoster> agree on the IETF comment, would like to see Mozilla participate
13:19:42 <kaz> +1
13:19:44 <McCool> q?
13:20:28 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2017/07/09-13-wot-minutes.html Dusseldorf f2f minutes fyi
13:20:35 <McCool> matthias: next F2F will be at TPAC
13:21:24 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2017/07/wot-f2f/slides/2017_F2F-Dusseldorf-Next.pdf f2f planning
13:22:08 <McCool> ben: wg/ig joint?
13:22:17 <McCool> matthias: yes, some parts are more exploratory
13:22:50 <McCool> note also that IETF is right afterwards in Singapore
13:22:59 <McCool> so we want to avoid doing things after TPAC
13:23:04 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_September_2016,_Portugal,_Lisbon#WoT_IG_Agenda TPAC 2016 agenda fyi
13:23:05 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
13:24:31 <kaz> i|should be use|topic: F2F update|
13:26:55 <McCool> note: we will target IEEE security conference with a separate event, not try to co-locate with F2F
13:27:14 <McCool> note also IETF changed dates to go to Montreal rather than the US
13:27:32 <McCool> Oct next year will be in Lyon
13:28:29 <McCool> matthias: (review of slides on deliverables)
13:28:44 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2017/07/wot-f2f/slides/2017_F2F-Dusseldorf_ModularizationWork.pdf TF work
13:32:19 <mkovatsc_> q?
13:33:25 <kaz> [ adjourned ]
13:33:30 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
13:34:16 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
13:34:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/26-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:57:38 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot
16:30:10 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
17:08:05 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot
17:16:39 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
18:38:50 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
18:44:47 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot
19:56:10 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #wot
20:28:05 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
21:10:00 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot
22:17:08 <naomi> naomi has joined #wot
22:43:57 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #wot
23:05:05 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #wot
23:05:42 <ahaller2> ahaller2 has joined #wot
23:43:29 <Karen> Karen has joined #wot