See also: IRC log
<mkovatsc> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Agenda
<kaz> scribenick: McCool
<kaz> scribe: Michael_McCool
no BigIoT call today; will be at Dusseldorf F2F; Bosch will therefore be at OpenDay
add quick update about "marketing" to the agenda
also policy about observers to F2F logistics
also outreach
<mkovatsc> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#14_June_2017
(all above items under review of chair's meeting)
cross-task-force collaboration
to discuss collab of Security, Scripting, and Architecture
will be T2T update in Prague
<mkovatsc> https://github.com/t2trg/2017-07-wishi/blob/master/AGENDA.md
Tim Carey, with Nokia
<yongjing_> hi my browser collapsed again.
<yongjing_> will connect the audio soon and provide some info regarding the oneM2M representative in T2TRG Workshop
T2T will have talks from many "unions" or groups: OMA, IPSO, oneM2M, OCF, iot.schema.org, Haystack, Fairhair, etc
a reequest template was sent around with list of specific questions to answer/discuss
one or two pages in oneM2M will discuss WoT semantic interop, home appliance information models
will be similar to what Yongjing has presented in WoT F2F previously
Matthias to see if can get aligned with them
Fairhair: metaspecification for BAC: BACnet, KNX, Zigbee; also interested in meta and binary representations of same
Haystack: taxonomy vs. ontologies
Sunday schedule not yet set... but will present on TD
another topic for discussion: hypermedia, perhaps a more straightforward approach than Hydra (who will not be presenting...)
name of the workshop includes this idea
Michael Koster: annotating hypermedia controls was previously discussed
Matthias: no registration fee needed, don't need IETF pass
but do need to register, deadline is 23 June
look at above link
<mkovatsc> https://github.com/t2trg/2017-07-wishi/
<inserted> scribenick: kaz
McCool: discussion during the f2f and
the Chairs call
... have not got feedback yet
... audience includes both the W3C Members and
non-Members
... Kaz and Dave talking with the Comm/BusDev Team
... impact of W3C's WoT
... how to improve materials?
... ask you for a paragraph, etc.
... discussion for a few minutes here?
... if there are no specific opinions now, we can continue the
discussion on the group list
Matthias: sounds good
McCool: would put a more coherent plan with the W3C MarComm team
Matthias: hard to get opinions during
the call directly
... materials from Osaka?
McCool: would do that within a few
weeks
... presented slides during the f2f
<McCool> Matthias and Daniel also to be working on a proposal for an improved web presence
McCool: maybe could update them next
week
... maybe should create a pull request?
Matthias: a flier on GitHub?
McCool: we can issues, etc., too
<inserted> scribenick: McCool
McCool: to create a pull request for vision discussion
kaz to create a marketing directory and/or repo
might be best to not include this discussion in the public eye...
for instance, AWS IoT/Greengrass; McCool looking into this
might be hard to get for Dusseldorf, but plan B would be to aim for TPAC
unless someone has a contact please talk to Michael
<mkovatsc> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/tech-landscape/landscape.html
Matthias: would be good to update the technology landscape: needs both OpenFog and AWS GG
for those that joined recently, if you could take a look and suggest changes?
Michael to create a pull request, add AWS GG and OpenFog
correction: will just edit directly for AWS GG and OpenFog, but if others want to add something can also do so, via an issue if necessary
<kaz> f2f registration results
last monday was the deadline to register...
kaz: 35 answers, 33 present, 2 remote
but, hotel information was distributed late; will re-open site so people can add hotel information and affiliation
also, several requests for observers; open day no problem, but also requests to observe plenary and breakout sessions
many are universities (eg PhD students) but also industrial, eg BMW
ok to attend, but we need to remind people of patent policy, etc.
kaz to make a presentation at the beginning of the meeting on W3C IP policy
Koster wants to invite someone from Google for iot.schema.org collab
if just presenting work already public, no problem; but technical contributions
kaz: we need to clearly mark which are IG and which are WG sessions
I think just putting IG and WG on each Agenda item would be a good start
also, agenda needs to be filled out
each TF needs to propose some set of breakouts, at least
there is now an "Input" section, we will schedule it later
<mkovatsc> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_9-13_July_2017,_D%C3%BCsseldorf,_Germany#Input
what we have so far...
BIGIoT project... specifically on marketplaces
iot.schema.org
Others? Matthias to reach out to Evrythng
ICN?
Matthias to try and find a speaker on this topic...
one demo: wrap the following with a WoT interface: https://github.com/01org/SmartHome-Demo
Koster has a specific proposal for how to do protocol bindings that this should also test
want to conclude the current work on Friday, freeze it, then update current practices for plugfest
<mkovatsc> https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/
<McCool_> scribe: McCool_
(sorry, got dropped, had to rejoin)
<inserted> scribenick: McCool_
regarding TD spec: a lot of work still needed at current practice document still depends heavily on examples, needs a clearer definition of type system, etc
kaz: material for plugfest version?
Matthias: create osaka folder, capture previous test material
joint call with security TF on monday
discussion of how to separate security contexts
what assumptions can script writers make? See issue 30
<jhund> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/30
issue with small device with only one context, vs cloud with multiple tenants, vs gateway that might add drivers
there are several different scenarios that affect how security is handled; we have to decide what we can safely ignore
also discussed protocol binding as a natural boundary
zoltan: protocol bindings fairly complex; need more experience
before we can draft what separation level is necessary
what do we want to abstract?
two other things brought up: firmware vs. dynamically loadable scripts
second issue was what metadata is needed, what prior work, web manifests, etc.
need to do threat analysis for various use cases
we discussed smart home use case; list of relevant threats
next step would be a security architecture
Elena is expecting some additional input on appropriate use cases (and contexts, eg gateway, endpoint, cloud service, etc)
please do take the time to look at the threat analysis document and provide input
Koster presented his protocol binding proposal
will eventually make its way into a pull request to the TD
then presented Smart Home demo... still working on getting it working on actual hardware
then we have to actually implement a protocol binding... McCool to work on this, but probably won't be able to OSS it in time for F2F
but should at least be able to demonstrate it.
Matthias: anything else?
kaz: how to make the collab between various TFs work better?
maybe allocate some time for feedback during main call?
Matthias: when TF has something that needs to be shared, then it is in the main call
that is the whole idea of the updates, which should be focused on conclusions, not just we did this and did that
McCool: other option is just to schedule a joint meeting
kaz: will ask Kajimoto-san about his opinion
Matthias: adjourn!