Agenda

Matthias: today we have two external presentations: one from Konca Minolta and another one related to the WoT ontology
... we need a press realise and a blog post etc. to show the WG started to work - there will be a meeting organized

Matthias: there exist 4 mailing lists at the moment. We need to reduce a number of emails by organizing the communication.

<McCool> anyhow, I was going to say we discussing creating an Editor's mailing list (actually, will have Editors and Chairs)

<McCool> specifically to cover organizational topics related to editing the drafts

Matthias: for instance we can publish first on the members-only WG list, and once we have an agreement or a proposal, then we can publish it on the public mailing list.

<McCool> generally better to use github issues for "sticky" topics

kajimoto: I would like to create a mailing list for the architecture deliverable.

Matthias: this is an old issue: mailing list vs. GitHub issue

Presentation from Konica Minolta

Presenter: Matej Dusik

Presenter II: Carlos A Velasco

project "Cognitive Hub" presented

jhund: very interesting presentation. What kind of protocols do you support? What kind of Things can be connected to?

Matej Dusik: we would like to support the W3C WoT

Matej Dusik: different Things can be connected over our semantic platform

Matej Dusik: we are currently driven by different use cases

Carlos: introducing himself, we are working on topics like semantics, WoT

Matthias: you are invited to give a short presentation on your work, activities etc.

<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to ask if Matej can send these slides to the group list

kaz: Matej, could you please send the presented slides?

Matej: yes.

Matthias: why did you choose Lora.

Matej: Low maintenance, low power

jhund: you are invited to participate in our Plug Fests to test the interoperability

<McCool> never mind, stupid network

The WoT Ontology

Matthias: Since Fernando is not present, we will skip the presentation

Jhund: we have a new repo. Zoltan will provide a strawman for the ED, we still no access yet. Email notification will be provided.

<kaz> Scripting minutes

jhund: IG space will be merged with the new repo and the current content will be freezed, and a visitor will be forwarded to the new repo.

Matthias: we should delete the old (current) content in order not to confuse visitors (it will not be deleted anyway, in case it is needed).

<McCool> McCool: beside moving "normative" details out, I think we also need to work on outlines for each document

kajimoto: I have updateed the architecture document (from the IG work) to be used in the WG

Matthias: we should ensure that the most recent template is used in docs

<kaz> wot architecture tentative area

<kaz> wot architecture final area

Matthias: in the work on the architecture we want to cover, apart from device to clould comm., also other scenarious, e.g., Thing to Thing interactions etc. Currently we don't have a separate call for the architecture work, email communication is crrently used.

Carlos: could we organize the work more clearly regarding where and how to contribute?

Matthias: the input has been inhereted from the IG. We now use the WG list.

<inserted> [ all the 4 deliverable documents (WoT Architecture, TD, Scripting, Binding Templates) are WG deliverables, so should be handle on the WG side. ]

Presenters: Maria and Fernando

Maria: we extracted requirements from the Current Practise document, and provided an OWL ontology and HTML documentation for the ontology
... the outcome is online and avilable for comments

mjkoster: how to link this ontology with other domain specific ontologies?

Maria: we will work on showing how to use the ontology w.r.t example use cases

sebastian: small modifications are needed to be align with the current TD model.
... shall we consider the work as a starting work for the model representation?
... Maria, you are invited to the TD discussion on the basic model.

<cvelasco_Fraunhofer> Sorry, I have to leave

<McCool> I don't think there is any particular reason to try to divorce things from RDF

<McCool> at least its basic "triples" methodology

Yongjing: if take this as a starting work on the basic model representation, then we should be aware that this representation is bound to RDF

<McCool> but not really to any specific serialization; that indeed should not matter, but I don't see evidence it does

<McCool> anyhow, I don't think we want to reinvent semantic technologies; we want to build on what's there already

<McCool> useful <-> what are the use cases?

<McCool> eg. validation, bridging, etc.