04 May 2016


See also: IRC log


Kaz_Ashimura, Dave_Raggett, Michael_Koster, Daniel_Peinter, Darko_Anicic, Frank_Reusch, Kazuo_Kajimoto, Kazuaki_Nimura, Markus_Jung, Matthias_Kovatsch, N_Wang, Ryuichi_Matsukura, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Takuki_Kamiya, Victor_Charpenay, Yingying_Chen, Natasha_Rooney, Toru_Kawaguchi, Khalil_Abdelmalek, Joerg_Heuer, Dan_Romascanu


<kaz> scribe: Darko

<kaz> scribenick: DarkoAnicic

Call with OCF

<dsr> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-ig/2016May/0009.html

Dave: looking for a colaboration with OCF Platform w.r.t

Markus: involved in work in OCF

Markus affiliated with Samsung

<kaz> auto minutes on ocf presentation

<kaz> kaz: automotive wg meeting in Paris last week

<kaz> ... had a presentation by another Samsung guy, Sanjeev BA, on OCF's work

<kaz> ... OCF IoTivity work on some RESTful framework

<kaz> ... but so far don't have meta data mechanism

<kaz> ... so I suggested they refer to JSON-LD and he agreed

preparation for China F2F

<kaz> Beijing f2f wiki

N_Wang: talking about possible contributions for the next F2F (Alibaba, Academy of Science etc.)

<kaz> kaz: information available on the above wiki page

<dape> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_China,_Beijing#Visa_Invitation_Letters

<kaz> [ Yingying: I just want to remind you that you need to request for the invitation letter asap. ]

All: please request the invitation letter this week in case you plan your trip to China

IG Re-charter

<kaz> New process for draft charter generation

Matthias: explaining the process on using GitHub for editing charter pages

<kaz> Charters repo

<kaz> HTML version of the draft IG Charter

<kaz> kaz: has just put the URL on the IRC above

Dave: we should provide a wiki page with instructions

Matthias: there exists a README file explaining the process

Sebastian: in case of problems, please give your proposal over email and W3C stuff will create a pull request

Dave: initial 4 weeks for the charter are too short

Matthias: we should define the deadline, it works more efficiently

Dave: 3 weeks to get a stable draft and 1 week to get the feedback

kaz: it is not the big difference between the old and the new charter

Matthias: we should create a pull request for each new item/proposal, then we see what is in and is out

Joerg: bigger changes means longer extension?

kaz: yes, so we should make sure whether we would like to add big changes or not.

Joerg: if the agreement is not achieved till July, what are consequences?

Dave: no big risk. We should get the charter right.
... we need to extend the validity date of the current charter

Matthias: Action on Dave to write in the REAMDE the timeline related info

WG Charter

Matthias: are we on track w.r.t WG Charter

<kaz> draft WG charter

Joerg: put emphasis on work on WG Charter (discussed also on the last F2F)

Matthias: look at both charters, and if issues exist, please open the pull request. Deadline - next week.

PlugFest Preparation: Status Reports

<dape> https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/proposals/type-system

Daniel: introducing the new type system
... adding complex data types
... JSON Schema is a preffered solution. Please comment out.
... 2 weeks for comments.
... please post issues as pull requests.

Victor: we have enough time till une 10th to finalize the propsoal.

Dave: to build conesus we need to propose and evaluate different proposal (i.e., not to go faster with certain solutions)

Daniel: to better undestand the raised issues, please use the issue tracker

<kaz> GitHub issue tracker

Victor: please use "Proposal for TD" as a tag

Matthias: please give additional propsoal that can be evaluated during the plugfests

Victor: we focus on JSON Schema without ignoring other proposals
... they will evaluated/reviewd too

kaz: proposals/approaches should be defined based on the group's interest

Matthias: define the problem, and then we will work on different proposals that lead to the solution

Dave: we should research use cases/propsoal beyond the group

Matthias: this is not feasible. More practical is that a stakeholder joins the group and address a use case/proposal

Joerg: let us do things in iterations. Practical evaluations give good insight about problems/solutions, also to externals.

Joerg: we are working on the current practise docuemnt, and the document reflects the current state of matters. In another iteration we can capture the updates.

Joerg: this issue is reappearing, let us capture this in minutes and refer to it later on

<kaz> kaz: we might want to record Dave's concern on further investigation and stronger collaboration with other SDOs and technologies, and think about that at some point

<kaz> ... it would be of course better if we could do that as well

<dsr> My concern is that we aren’t doing a thorough enough job at considering the alternatives

<dsr> The current practice document is focused on finding a single approach for the next plugfest and isn’t a good vehicle for studying the alternatives

Matthias: focus the work on both charters and the architecture document update

Sebastian: there is an agenda point about pub/sub, notification (from Michael Koster), but let us postpone it for the next time

Michael: I will sketch a primer on the topic with timeline, problem statement etc.

<kaz> [ adjourned ]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.144 (CVS log)
$Date: 2016/05/04 13:40:31 $