23 Jun 2017

See also: IRC log


Kaz_Ashimura, Dave_Raggett, Maria_Poveda, Michael_Koster, Michael_McCool, Taki_Kamiya, Aparna, Danh_Le_Phuoc, Victor_Charpenay, DarkoAnicic


<kaz> scribenick: mjkoster

F2F prep and three technical topics

darko: who on the call is working on vocabularies?

maria: looking at mappings between SAREF and oneM2M
... seems like there are few classes in these models

mccool: working on OCF E-R diagram

dsr: looking at OCF, SAREF and how to create a bridging ontology
... has done the interaction model and ready for the next step

<MariaPoveda> The mappings between SAREF and oneM2M are here https://goo.gl/aVG1q2 but there should be an updated version soon

darko: we could start contributing these results
... folders with examples in the link
... this is the place to contribute

<DanhLePhuoc> https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/linked-data

<DarkoAnicic> Vocabularies: https://github.com/wot/blob/master/linked-data/linked-data-vocabularies.md

(discussion on who can accept and how to accept pull requests)

<kaz> kaz: have checked with the WoT Chairs and got OK to create a GitHub Team for the WoT IG Editors including Darko. So will create that Team on GitHub.

victor: updated current practices document
... working on exposing SSN information as wot things

darko: what do we want to demonstrate at the plugfest?

danh: do we want to do semantic alignment and mapping?

darko: we are just at the beginning and should start with something simple
... work toward a common set of terms
... so everyone can discover and integrate using common terms

dsr: even for simple scenarios there is a need for context, at least location to start with

darko: shall we define some scenarios and specific need for additional common vocabulary?

dsr: yes, that's the general idea
... but be careful what we are trying to standardize vs. what we need to define for plugfest

danh: work from concrete scenarios and what is available

victor: has an outstanding PR with some of these concepts

danh: start with scenarios, then build recipes etc on top of that

victor: share screen with the PR material

<kaz> Pull Request 331 by Victor

victor: same table as shown in TD meeting, PR #331
... integrates many vocabularies including geospatial, etc.

darko: need scenarios to be described, how to motivate people to implement the annotation

victor: the intention is that participants will annotate their TDs

kaz: how can we collaborate with TD and consolidate the discussion, can we have a joint call before the F2F?

mjkoster: need a follow-on discussion on the semantic annotation

Semantic processing

danh: bring up PR on screen
... enable discovery using terms from different vocabularies
... based on a semantic bridge
... ontology to consolidate other ontologies

dsr: decoupled ontology development is more scalable, and can be harmonized using intermediary concepts in a bridging ontology

danh: like an integration context?

dsr: provide common concepts across ontologies
... can't always map directly

danh: there are some different techniques for bridging

dsr: looking at existing work e.g. inter-iot (reference?)

danh: maybe going different directions but targeting the same result
... using sub-class mapping rules developed for domain-specific models

dsr: a bridging ontology can be used for discovery, for adaptation there may be more logic involved e.g. translation
... use concrete concepts like temperature, etc.

<dsr> mapping may depend on the context, e.g. the data and metadata

danh: use common scenarios

<dsr> Inter-IoT http://www.inter-iot-project.eu/ have done a lot of work on mapping between IoT ontologies

<dsr> They say: INTER-IoT aim is to design, implement and test a framework that will allow

<dsr> interoperability among different Internet of Things (IoT) platforms.

victor: tools question?

<victor> I was asking about using the HyLAR JS reasoner (https://www.npmjs.com/package/hylar)

kaz: do we want to work with automatic ontology conversion?

danh: they don't try to convert ontologies but use rules for mapping

kaz: similar to the topic of binding template

danh: should use logic and reasoner to do the job at scale

kaz: matthias is proposing a separate protocol binding template topic, because "protocol binding template" is related to all the other topics including this LD discussion.
... and we can discuss the relationship between one and another during the next Wednesday call

danh: can demonstrate step by step process that makes it easier to understand

Thing Description Recipes

darko: third topic, recipes
... example of a recipe to turn on a light when motion is detected in a room

<DarkoAnicic> Recipe: https://github.com/wot/blob/master/linked-data/thing-description-recipes.md

darko: json-ld example

<DarkoAnicic> https://github.com/wot/tree/master/linked-data/contributions/thing-description-recipes

darko: please review and comment
... defines the recipe for orchestrating the interaction capabilities of multiple devices

using iot.schema.org capabilities

maria: are the semantics included in the recipe or imported?

darko: the semantic annotation is included in the recipe, and is used to discover and configure
... comments?

dsr: this brings up the question of semantic composition vs. syntactic composition of interfaces?

darko: please contribute to these activities and review/comment

danh: will we still try to converge by the plugfest?

darko: yes, we hope to start the process of convergence
... we need to drive toward involving all the participants
... time is short but we can make some demonstrations and a simple scenario with the motion sensor + light, temperature sensor + air conditioner
... follow up over email, no more telcos until F2F
... adjourn and thanks

<kaz> [ adjourned ]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2017/06/23 15:17:43 $