27 Jul 2016


See also: IRC log


Kaz, Dave, Michael, Bowen, Daniel, Masato, Matthias, Johannes, Sebastian, Taki, Nan, Ryuichi, Katsuyoshi, Wonsuk, Yingying


<scribe> scribe: dape

<scribe> scribeNick: DP

<kaz> scribenick: dape

Quick Updates

MK: asked Scott Jenson to join
... he can join already next week (last half an hour)

DR: restarting the group was approved by W3C

MK: Any changes we have to think of?

DR: no changes

WG Charter

<kaz> WG charter

MK: beginning of week I incorporated remaining issues
... no open issues on github
... should we ask for the resolution now?

DR: Can share some procedure points

<mkovatsc> http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-wg-2016.html

DR: W3C management might require some changes (eg. relation to other groups)

<mkovatsc> "wide range of scales from microcontrollers to cloud-based server farms"

DR: will let you know if this happens

MK: Last week Frank discussed microcontroller requirements
... charter states this already
... do we need more discussion on this?

DR: Not sure about Franks proposal

MK: Frank reported that we should put more focus on microcontroller requirements

<kaz> [ the current draft charter says "Servers can be provided at a wide range of scales from microcontrollers to cloud-based server farms." ]

MK: I think we have already a statement there which should be sufficient

DR: I agree with sticking to what we have

Kaz: Yes, it is already mentioned in the charter

MK: the technical level should not be covered in the charter

JH: writing minimum footprint in charter is not sensible. Charter is more about goal setting... supporting also microcontrollers
... would see this is covered in current charter

SK: Frank presented slides about microcontroller market (8 bit microcontroller et cetera)
... he was concerned that we don't address this properly
... I think W3C standardization does not propose a technical solutions
... there will be optimized libraries for microcontrollers

MK: Frank is not here.... do not hear concern... looks like people are happy with charter as is...
... microcontrollers are definitely in scope
... Do you agree that charter is ready for AC review?

All: no objections

RESOLUTION: IG believes current WG charter is ready for AC review

Beijing Recap

<kaz> Beijing minutes

MK: Last time issues with action items

Kaz: Should be fixed now
... please look at minutes which can be found at https://www.w3.org/2016/07/13-14-wot-minutes.html
... right in the beginning you will find action itmes

Kaz goes over action items

<yingying_> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-ig/2016Jul/0006.html

YY: we would like to have a joint oneM2M meeting
... we need to agree on date
... the proposed dates are: Aug 31 or Sep 7.
... suggest to have dedicated meeting

MK: Extra slot before or after normal call?

YY: We can decide... just the days were proposed

MK: for me Aug 31 would work

JH: Could setup a poll (doodle) ?

Kaz: yes, can use doodle
... can setup doodle, before and after slot
... talked to SCXML editor
... can join our call (about 10 minutes talk)
... next week?

MK: in the beginning would be ok?

SK: action of (Dave and Sebastian) to investigate on the Optimized JSON Schema no progress yet

MK: can plugin updates to proposal folder on github

SK: can share some updates within 2-3 weeks

DP: Did send email about " to check directly with the implementers and see who have participated in the PlugFests so far"
... got feedback: online plugfest would be good!

MK: propose to extend template by Taki to know what people would have available...

<mkovatsc> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/PlugFests_-_Template_for_PlugFest_description

Kaz: action by Taki "to generate a template of PlugFest description" is done?

MK: Yes... first draft

TK: there are 2 descriptions
... first we need collection unit description
... as part of this (picture, hardware, platform, WoT functions, ..)
... every participant describes the "Unit Description" part
... second we have scenario description
... think we had 3 scenarios... by linking to unit description
... that is a first proposal for the template

MK: Thanks!
... propose to de-couple unit from scenario description

TK: Agree

MK: Do you as participant miss anything? can you fill this out?

SK: looks good to me

JH: Yes, ok

MK: picture could be also logo
... change "Description of what the scripts does" to application logic ... without scripting

TK: good point...

MK: I am editing the page

DP: split Unit and Scenario description... two pages?

<kaz> ACTION: sebastian to take care of the scenario description [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/27-wot-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> 'sebastian' is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., sha, skbisch).

MK: propose individuals provide unit description... and one builds the scenario description

SK: can take care of Scenario description

Kaz: format or style... do we use wiki?

MK: seemed convenient... might work in future on a better visualization
... should start working on PlugFest templates soon..

PlugFest Test Case Reports

<mkovatsc> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/plugfest/2016-beijing/TestCaseCoverage.xlsx?raw=true

MK: please fill out PlugFest Test Case Reports soon
... send to mailing list or directly to me
... any remaining issues from Beijing?

DR: We should work on blog post

MK: DP started working on it

DR: timeline?

MK: planned for end of week
... Dave, would you be interested in supporting

DR: Yes, but will be busy next days

MK: Test wordpress draft or as fallback Google doc

IG Deliverables

<kaz> roadmap

MK: planned releases
... please have a look again..
... raise concerns/issues

<kaz> use cases and requirements

MK: assigned editors... use-cases and requirements (Johannes)

JH: last addition was month ago..
... don't think there are any additions
... any contributor?
... propose publishing

MK: Kaz can you check with Johannes about style and such

Kaz: yes

MK: new use-cases will lead updated versions... no final document

<kaz> tech landscape

MK: next document is tech-landscape from Soumya
... Soumya was hard to grasp recently
... anyone talked to him?


MK: Someone volunteering to finish up the document?

Kaz: will contact Soumya first

MK: Yes, will also reach out on mailing list for another editor...

<kaz> architecture

MK: architecture document is very active.. which is very good
... have one comment.. will send in PR

<kaz> current practices

MK: current practices can be frozen..

<mkovatsc> trying to fix audio

MK: Beijing release is frozen..
... it is a living document tough

Kaz: can publish IG notes every 3 months

MK: Okay.. will publish Beijing version and start working on Lisbon

Kaz: once draft documents are fixed, we will talk about publication again, right?

MK: will try to fix the document by next week

JH: should be able to do the same


MK: Will be a Demo room available on Wednesday?

Kaz: talked to planning team
... wondering about size of room
... bigger rooms are already booked

MK: Mhh, nots ure

Kaz: mid-size room in Beijing?

MK: even smaller is OK..

Kaz: 20 people room?

MK: sounds good to me

Kaz: difficult to get dedicated room for demo preparation for whole week

MK: Early the day or the day before might be also ok

Kaz: let's have more internal discussions before contacting TPAC team again

MK: PlugFest: task overview of the participants?

DP: think it was about "how" to introduce the demo

MK: When do participants plan to work on Plugfest?

Naka: started to work on explanation

DP: should we have a test-run before TPAC?

MK: Yes, if possible

group discussion: ask participants to share information/slides which are presented @ conferences, etc

MK: I added "getting started" on github
... can create "infomaterial" folder?
... who else has material?

DR: I have some and linked them from our page

DP: move everything to this folder?

DR: Page with links fine also

MK: Having a pool for figures... editable PPTs et cetera would be good instead of fixed PDFs

Kaz: shall we create wiki page for this purpose

MK: versioning might be good
... will create "material" folder on github
... everyone is asked to support and share


<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to remind all of the TPAC registration :)

<kaz> TPAC registration site

Kaz: I would like remind you to register for TPAC

DR: Can you send email?

Kaz: will do

<yingying_> flyer creation timeline

YY: one point about flyers
... very limited time

MK: Can you send draft top mailinglist

YY: Dave wanted to review it first?

DR: Suggest share pointer now,


YY: will send email also

MK: no real flyer yet

YY: Yes, just content for now
... Karen's feedback and layout next
... printing and shipping is costly

DP: printing in Europe might be another choice

MK: Was there a deadline?

YY: yes, 2 weeks

Next WebConf call

MK: state chart xml intro
... Scott Jenson

DP: resolution of publishing documents could be another topic

MK: Yes

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: sebastian to take care of the scenario description [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/07/27-wot-minutes.html#action01]

Summary of Resolutions

  1. IG believes current WG charter is ready for AC review
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.144 (CVS log)
$Date: 2016/07/27 13:40:50 $