See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribenick: kaz
<scribe> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_WebConf#Agenda_of_next_WoT_IG_WebConf:_20_July_2016 agenda
sk: Matthias and Joerg are
traveling, Johannes will join later
... some important points
... there was a Comm TF call today
... IG deriverables
... TPAC
... implementation phase
... next call
-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/13-wot-minutes.html Day 1 minutes
-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/14-wot-minutes.html Day 2 minutes
ka: will do the action from 13th on TPAC breakout
sk: demo room as well
ka: another item for Joerg to invite Scott Jensen from Google to the WoT IG call
sk: will see his intention
... another item for Daniel to check with implementers about
PlugFest participants
dp: some of them participated in PlugFest
ka: are you generating the list?
dp: already have a list and am generating messages to contact them
ka: we would like to invite
Yongjing from Huawei to our call for the oneM2M
discussion
... will check the minutes to see some more possible
actions
sk: ok
... during the breakouts, we got proposals
... the moderators should put the summary on the wiki
... Panasonic have sent some slides
ka: maybe the moderators can put the summary on the GitHub: https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/meeting-results/beijing-f2f
sk: right
... or at least should add links to the wiki
... the meeting went very successful
... we could show many interactions on different things from
different companies
... outcomes we discussed were good
... regarding the PlugFest, having pictures and scenarios was
great
... all the participants should provide resources
-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/wot-f2f/photos/ Photos from the Beijing meeting
ka: shares the link to the photos
sk: there was discussion on the
template for the PlugFest demo
... Taki has volunteered
... we should use that template for the future PlugFests
... people who are not sure about "WoT" have difficulty to
understand our work
... audience may be understand what the difference with the
current situation
... nice to show devices working together
... but how to show the difference from the previous
approaches?
dp: maybe we can start to list
things and what the goal is
... for each bullet item
sk: can show some slides
... (shows "PlugFest Scenario" slides)
... we showed 3 different scenarios
... also the 4th scenario with Lemonbeat
... scenario 1 - 'hello WoT'
... scenario 2 - 'full WoT'
... scenario 3 - 'mini automation'
... these slides were presented to the audience
... but quite hard to understand the background
... so nice to have more projectors
... one screen for one location
-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/13-wot-minutes.html#item06 Next PlugFest Prep
-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/13-wot-minutes.html#item06 Next PlugFest Prep
ka: we had discussion on next PlugFest preparation on the first Day
dp: we can project multiple scenes on the big wall
sk: it depends on the infrastructure of the TPAC venue
yc: comments on PlugFest
... people were wondering about what PlugFest was like
... would be good to have description on what PlugFest is like
and the demo scenarios beforehand
sk: more than what is already documented
yc: the host required us for text
beforehand
... also summary document on PlugFest
... what it's like and the purpose
... would be better to have that kind of information
sk: having more generic
information would be a good idea
... also what the benefit of "WoT"
... thanks for the input
ka: who should generate that kind of information?
sk: each participant in PlugFest
should do that
... Joerg has already made proposal that each demo should have
a poster
... and the implementers should explain the scenario
ka: two directions: (1) detailed description on each demo and (2) primer introduction for PlugFest in general
da: we already have our Current
Practices document as a resource
... also Taki has volunteered to generate a template
sk: we should have a link on the wiki
ka: and Yingying's second point was providing introductory document to newcomers who are not familiar with our work
sk: ok
... any other questions on the Beijing meeting?
... please note that we had demonstrations by CETC including
camera, robot, printer, etc.
... nice to see what is going on
xq: comment on the Beijing
meeting
... sent a document on Thing Description
... will update the wiki tomorrow
da: tx
... good idea to have your resource
... I can put the link on the wiki for you
ka: I can do that as a W3C Team Contact
-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/20-wot-comm-minutes.html Comm call minutes (member-only)
yc: 4 topics
... 1. Flyer
... Dave will review the draft and then send it to the whole
group
... I'll generate some timeline for it till TPAC
... 2. Liaison
... Dave, myself, Daniel and Kaz will update the list
<yingying_> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-ig/2016Jul/0002.html
yc: regarding oneM2M, I sent a
message on Yongjing's participation in our call to Matthias and
am waiting for response
... 3. Outreach for W3C Members for the WG Charter
... 4. Events
... Dave will create a Member wiki page on the events
... that's all
sk: saw the email on oneM2M
... good to have them on our call
yc: should be a dedicated web conf
sk: which day?
yc: the point is that they're
holding their f2f meeting this week
... so Yongjing would like our response urgently
sk: where is the meeting? which time zone?
yc: Montreal
ka: US Eastern
... the conclusion from today's comm call was, asking Yongjing
to talk with oneM2M guys first and get back to us with their
feedback and join our call
sk: we have less participants
today
... so maybe we should have the joint call next week or
after
... would be good to have a call some time in the afternoon in
Europe given the time difference
... some morning time in Montreal
ka: let's wait for their response after Yingying sends a message
sk: ok
... any other comments?
(none)
sk: not sure when/which documents
could be fixed
... we have to discuss this next week when we have more
participants
ka: maybe we can send an email to the editors and ask for their opinions
sk: sounds good
ka: can do that
sk: we've already talked about the possible demo room
ka: whole Wednesday? or just for the breakout session?
sk: should assume the whole day
ka: ok
... will ask about the possibility of a room for whole day
Wednesday
fr: shows slides: Feedback from
implementation phase
... we'll have a WG for WoT
... Building n-WoT-Stacks
... and Implementing WoT Stacks
... (The Embedded Marketplace)
... 8/16 bit MCR are not at the end
... many new products
... (Which memory and performance is needed for the WoT
stack?)
... 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit
... less memory like 16KB to 32, 64 and 128
... even 384KB
... (Flexibility of WoT-Stacks regarding device
categories)
... WoT Servient and WoT Client
... what would be the appropriate size?
... 128? 256? or 512?
... next question is we'll have many WoT Clients
... device memory is limited for clients
... we have to make some requirements for systems
... findings/questions:
... high size of library needs memory
... high memory requirement and powerful MCU reduce the
coverage of WoT regarding IoT market volume
... prices of future solutions must be lower than today
... limited size of WoT-Stack (library) is needed (small is
beautiful)
... which size for individual device behavior
... high coverage of devices is needed to fulfill WoT
mission
sk: tx!
... we have to take it account about MCU's memory size
... very important topic
... this kind of limitation, e.g., 32KB
... important for the future WoT developer
fr: one comment
... if you have a small client
... for some small activity
... maybe we can reduce the memory size
sk: what we can do for
standardization is how we can make presentation
... TD so far means streaming processing so far
... we've been thinking about devices who are capable
... optimized encoding for WoT applications might be needed
fr: not only binary but very
challenge
... we want to access various data silos
... state machines
dp: profile for limited
devices?
... we already have considered some profiles
... caused the library size limited
... sometimes you don't need complicated profile depending your
use case
... we need to decide how to handle profiles on top of the
basic stack
fr: not clear at the moment
... questions?
<Xueqin> what's the problem?
ka: maybe we could add an item on memory/library size to the PlugFest template?
sk: MCUs have restricted
resources
... what is the balance?
... good to think about the minimum resource the WoT Servient
rely on
... very difficult question
fr: could have something on the WG Charter?
sk: maybe you can generate some proposal?
fr: maybe after my vacation
-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Roadmap wg roadmap
ka: please note that we can
gather information on MCU requirements, but I don't think that
would become a W3C Recommendation
... probably this information should go part of the Current
Practice document, e.g., an appendix section
dp: if it goes into the Current Practice document, we can discuss it separately from the WG work
ka: right
-> https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-exi-profile-20140909/ EXI profile
ka: if we wanted to generate that
kind of REC track document, we could do
... but we need more discussion within the group
dp: also this document itself is a bit different from what Frank is suggesting
sk: let's continue the discussion
fr: will be on vacation next
week
... have some colleagues but not available next week
sk: ok
sk: overview of action items
[Kaz]
... WoT IG: deliverables closing, Editor for Tech
Landscape
... TPAC in Lisbon: demo room on Wed.
... microcontroller implementations for the WG Charter?
dp: all the group participants are encouraged to share information/slides
sk: add that
[ adjourned ]