See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribenick: dsr
Matthias: we may need to discuss the architecture document, so please add an agendum for that
Anyone have any quick updates?
Kaz: I’ve updated the main IG wiki page with the timing information for the task force calls
<kaz> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_Page#WebConf_Meetings
McCool: Please respond to the doodle poll on the security task force call if you’re interested.
Matthias: the W3C MarComm team are considering our proposal for the landing page etc. You usually have a landing page for the activity and different styled pages for the constituent groups.
We want to make the landing page the same style as the group pages.
I haven’t heard back from them other than that they are considering this more generally across the W3C website.
Matsukura-san provides a status report.
McCool: hotels are very expensive for the week TPAC is taking place, so please book your accommodation soon!
Michael Koster has looked into the cost of booking a room for the plugfest. It is not incredibly expensive but we need to get some sponsorship to cover it.
I have yet to hear back from Amazon on providing a room or sponsorship. Intel can’t help this time.
Kaz: can we ask Fujitsu whether they could provide a meeting room for the plugfest.
Matsukura-san agrees to ask Taki-san about this idea.
McCool: we should also list the ideas we expect for the Wednesday demos during the plenary break outs
We need to organise plenary breakout(s).
<kaz> TPAC schedule
Matthias: we are looking for a demo room for half a day or a full day
Kaz: I will check with the TPAC organisers about the demo room for Wednesday
<kaz> ACTION: kaz to ask the w3c meeting planner team about demo on wednesday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/08/16-wot-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-114 - Ask the w3c meeting planner team about demo on wednesday [on Kazuyuki Ashimura - due 2017-08-23].
McCool: I see that my pull request has been applied. I see that Matthias’s pull request on the diagrams is pending resolution of a conflict
mkovatsc: I am working on resolving the conflict and fixing the sectioning corruption
McCool: I commented that we need to improve the terminology and have proposed some definitiions for several terms
mkovatsc: I will provide an iteration over these definitions
kaz: we’ve had some discussion on the review process and am seeking to clarify this.
We can exploit the HTML diff tool to help with this. and we should add that policy to all the deliverable repo, e.g., README.md
<kaz> review procedure discussion (member-only)
McCool: it would be helpful to provide more elaborate instructions in the README.md file for the repo
Zoltan will provide an update to the readme file for review next week.
Sebastian reports on the thing description task force.
We are updating the draft, but there remains lots more to do.
An open question is how to describe validation constraints, e.g. SHACL or JSON Schema …
I will be on holiday for the next 2 weeks, so Taki-san will take over moderation of the TD work
The plan is to stabilise the vocabulary section this Friday
We have further discussion to progress the sections on security, eventing and so forth
McCool: I don’t think the security work is ready to be merged into the TD, and I would rather you keep the security section as is for now
sebastian: I am looking to McCool to provide a pull request for the security section when ready
<kaz> TD discussion during the Editors call (member-only)
McCool shows the draft pull request which isn’t quite ready
Kaz: when do you think the security pull request for TD will be ready?
sebastian: there are many open issues, and I will be away for 2 weeks …
kaz: We can at least review the level of issues and distinguish "issues to be resolved before FPWD" from others
McCool: the draft should state open questions where we’re seeking input
<kaz> kaz: that's also possible
McCool: We may have something
ready for the security section pull request in two to three
weeks. Mid-September seems a good bet
... I suggest we go ahead with the FWPD for the thing
description and provide an updated draft in a month’s time
<kaz> kaz: +1
zkis provides a status report on the scripting task force
We had a discussion on whether to provide an interface to access the thing description
<kaz> Scripting report
We also discussed the role of explicit API vs objects with methods with the same names as the thing’s actions etc.
We could have a two layered approach, e.g. including a means to support software updates.
We need to clarify the benefits of standardising the scripting API
We talk a lot about interoperability but not so much about negotiation
McCool: in my updates to the thing description, I’ve made it clear that the fundamental standard is for thing descriptions, and scripting is perhaps secondary
We need to ensure that the thing description and scripting documents are aligned and consistent
Please help by reviewing the documents.
zkis: we need about two weeks to deal with ourstanding issues on the scripting draft
kaz: we might want to think about Matsukura-san’s ideas for the plugfest and its implications for our various documents
<kaz> Matsukura-san's proposal
McCool: I will put this on the
agenda for next week’s WoT main call.
... the binding templates task force met.
The security task force is rescheduling its teleconference and working on the structure of the document
kaz: I will send a reminder on
the poll for the new time slot mentioning the 2 preferred slots
(Mon. 9pm and Wed. 10pm)
... meeting adjourned …