<kaz> scribe for today: Mizushima, Koster, Kaz

<inserted> scribenick: Mizushima

Web of Testings Test and Validation

McCool: agenda is context
... thing description validation
... security validation
... Out of scope

Kaz: we need check list of plugfest

Dave: rechartering oppotuniity

McCool: and Test Suite Rewuirements
... Review of Specification and test suit design

<kaz> Web Platform Testing framework

Koster: i think we need recomennd.

<kaz> (McCool captures the discussion on his slides)

Kaz: We should integrated W3C test tools
... frameworks

McCool: I start about to do
... We need list of test case under plugfest
... we should update from 2016

<inserted> <img alt="Plan from McCool's slides"/>

ECHONET Update

Kawaguchi: ECHONET update
... I take about collaboration with ECONET
... ECONET is mutivender home networking

McCool: is ECHONET Lite IP-based?

Matsuda: no. any kind of transfer is applicable if you want

McCool: Machketing?

Kawaguchi: 4 milions shiping

<mjkoster> Matsuda: Echonet lite can use non-IP networks

<inserted> scribenick: kaz

McCool: what is the data payload? binary or some specific format?

Kawaguchi: binary
... [What is ECHONET Device Object?]
... ECHONET spec itself doesn't specify the devices' behavior
... it specifies just the data format

Kawaguchi: [Support for Legacy Protocols]
... shows concrete data format and frame payload

Dave: wondering about the performance
... you can choose multiple interface

Kawaguchi: baed on the manufacturer's preference
... but there is some guideline

McCool: 2 problems
... automatically generate the TD?

Kawaguchi: for each device?
... partially automatic generation

Koster: what kind of format to be used?
... any kind of XML?

Kawaguchi: shows the object model
... some 0x80, 0x81 kind of data
... property on=0x30, off=0x31

McCool: anybody working on web implementation for ECHONET?

Sebastian: the property names are standardized by ECHONET
... how to extend?

Kajimoto: vendors can set unique name within the vendor-specific area

Kawaguchi: [Ongoing status]
... intended to be used on the cloud server
... talking with ECHONET guys about collaboration
... not open to the public yet

Matthias: it would be worth to define semantics from WoT viewpoint

Kawaguchi: q: when will the WoT specs be ready for practical use?

McCool: depends on the requirements
... commercial purposes?
... stable enough for engineering?

Matthias: starting with the next plugfest in Korea, we should apply changes for JSON-LD 1.1

Lagally: what about the simplified TD proposals?
... starting from when?

Matthias: asap
... new editor's draft should cover it
... end of April for the updated drafts?
... think after 3 more plugfests, spec and implementation would be stable
... question about normative reference
... maybe JSON-LD 1.0 as a normative reference for a while

Lagally: any other significant changes?

McCool: don't think so

Lagally: what about Mozilla's proposal?

Matthias: getting consensus

Kawaguchi: (go backs to the slides)
... interaction patters
... what would be the suitable use cases?
... property read/action
... property observe/event
... sending query parameter?

Matthias: discussion on terminology
... clear understanding on property/action/event?
... examples are helpful
... why property should be suitable to which case, etc.
... [Initial feedbacks (2/2)]
... TD DataSchema
... what data types are actually allowed?
... Sebastian has already answered

Kawaguchi: can expect the TD spec will be updated
... JSON Schema terms are re-mapped from time to time

Matthias: addressed by the simplified TD
... top-level property and form field
... and sub property
... would fit lwM2M and IPSO, etc.
... hierarchical structure
... JSON hyperschema also would fit

Kawaguchi: recommended method for discovery?
... any guideline?
... for unique ID/URL and versioning?

Matthias: some work by IRTF T2T
... on device identifier
... not sure about your own method, though

Kawaguchi: when will iotschema.org ready?

Koster: already ok for practical uses

Matthias: community-driven work
... if something missing, you should edit it

McCool: should define use cases for your "practical use"

Kajimoto: at a starting point with them
... but many manufacturers support ECHONET standard
... so might make sense to invite some key people to the next f2f

McCool: wondering about vendors from outside Japan

[break till 11:40; next topic on rechartering]

<scribe> scribenick: mjkoster

next f2f

<inserted> Matthias: have let the host know about hour preferred date and waiting for confirmation

recharter

Matthias: what are the building blocks?
... synchronization of servients
... life cycle - design phase, semantic composition
... simple JSON TD
... unified TD

McCool: proxy synchronization
... standardized directory

Dave: how to use the IG to grow the ecosystem

McCool: TD templates

Matthias: concept of templates has been around since the beginning and has been expected
... it's a TD without the instance information
... can be given the scripting API to create an exposed thing
... it's already in the charter

McCool: it's not in the charter
... TD types like templates
... with a unique identifier
... to argue about later
... new ontologies for things like name

Dave: maybe we could charter another group

McCool: new interaction types like screen
... hypermedia pattern when a thing returns a thing or a form or an action

Dave: can a thing be a data type?

Koster: communication patterns like webhooks and pubsub (protocol bindings and sub-protocols)

Matthias: to explain better, for examplee ws is only a transport; how do we use these for interactions?
... there is CoAP over WS, etc.
... Mozilla also working on sub-protocols over web sockets

Dave: do we want to try to converge on a default binding?

McCool: also multipart chunked SSE

Matthias: we have weblinking in the TD which can pull in external resources
... management things

McCool: security metadata and bindings, e.g. roles
... test modes

Matthias: system thing to represent the local runtime
... and things in the runtime to potentially expose
... has some internal URI scheme that can use I2C and other local interfaces, like GPIO on a raspberry pi
... there is a local discovery mode

McCool: security configuration data

Matthias: can provision a new runtime

McCool: maybe it's 2 different things for system e.g. runtime provisioning and local things in the runtime context

Matthias: could have a servient management thing for provisioning and installing scripts
... thing management vs. management things

McCool: gateways?

Dave: website using iotschema annotation with UI controls
... also discovery
... make it easy for ppl to discover and install services using web browsers

McCool: service things
... payments
... large can of worms

Matthias: this is exactly thing management

Dave: also make these things discoverable

McCool: basically a TD that describes the services

Matthias: there is a capability for a thing already defines

Dave: how do we orchestrate it end to end?

Matthias: script on the website can call or invoke interactions of the management thing
... which operates on the runtime

Dave: browser vendors may need to do special things

Matthias: if they implement the scripting API it can be done without special integration

Dave: security and privacy are important

Lagally: we don't have a way to describe how an API works like interdependencies between interactions

McCool: we can use ontologies to apply constraints

Dave: sequences of API calls

Koster: there is a schema.org activity on describing web service APIs

McCool: prioritize now

Matthias: bubble sort by walking through the list
... what can we identify that we already know we need

Dave: sort by WG vs. IG

Matthias: also some out of scope or later
... system thing exploration can be done in the IG on the management thing
... there is vocabulary, flow, and how to expose

McCool: suggestions for sorting items by venue IG vs. WG

Kaz: risk of doing some important standardization work within the IG side

Matthias: should team up with IETF on protocols and sub-protocols

Dave: is there any other work we want to collaborate with IETF on?

Matthias: mapping to web of things protocols, e.g. defining URI schemes
... people need to participate in the plugfests to incubate some of these ideas

McCool: well, actually

Dave: need to involve ppl not in the room, do more outreach
... rechartering means re-joining and creating opportunities for other companies to join

McCool: we could make it more attractive to browser vendors

Matthias: we need to be realistic about creating something worth marketing and something people can use

discussion about whether to use the charter to create interest and attract new members vs. using the charter to commit to delivering something useful

discussion about outreach

Dave: are there any thongs we should look at for outreach, e.g. cloud services, to get participation rather than competition

<inserted> scribenick: mjkoster_

Matthias: tool development and playground
... will clarify some things and make a strawman proposal for items for the new charter
... (walking through the list and making notes)

McCool: discussing class vs. template

Lagally: a place where we distinguish templates from instances

Matthias: there was a discussion IRTF about hard typing vs. flexibility in description

McCool: manufacturer has a template for a type of product

Matthias: hypermedia patterns; constructed action, events for alerts, entity description
... a running action is not a thing but needs a description in the TD
... management thing is low hanging fruit
... how do I manage a remote runtime or proxy
... WoT vocabularies are normative

McCool: security metadata also

Matthias: communication patterns go in IG
... but the created action can be developed in WG, it is already incubated
... who would build and specify a new sub-protocol over WS?

(dsr, mm, and expected to be Mozilla)

Matthias: this should be IG incubation

Dave: want to build a peer to peer protocol

Matthias: also the Panasonic WS sub-protocol
... system thing is a candidate for IG incubation
... is there anything someone can't live with?

McCool: split developer outreach into two categories
... liaisons and online events

Matthias: combine with plugfests

Sebastian: what about the WoT landing page?

Matthias: lunch, return in 25 minutes

<kaz> [lunch till 1:30pm]

<kaz> scribenick: kaz

Next plans for WoT Task Forces

Scripting:

Zoltan: publication prep ongoing
... new api style for simplified TD
... feasible we agreed
... @context
... action point for Daniel to check with WebIDL people about how to handle the changes
... PRs for simplified TD

Matthias: need to accelarate the work
... how the JSON-LD 1.1 version would look like
... WebIDL only includes normal stuff
... Daniel to follow up

Zoltan: we can modify later if needed

Matthias: can you do it now?

Zoltan: not now

Matthias: maybe you can ignore the semantic part for the moment
... and Daniel can handle it separately

Zoltan: we can add an Editor's note

Matthias: paper review next week
... can give you the 2nd week
... e.g., 13th
... scripting call on 15?

Zoltan: ok
... and make a PR
... start the work on the scripting spec for new version
... next plugfest will be end of June
... aim May for the iteration
... start algorithm discussion
... security consideration as well
... freezing date may be June 1

Matthias: in May iteration

Zoltan: main steps of the algorithm
... will discuss how to do during the next script call in 2 weeks
... April 9th
... that's it
... btw, thanks for the good meeting!

(zoltan leaves)

TD:

Sebastian: restart our telco on April 6
... next f2f end of June
... around 13 weeks
... need stable version for plugfest
... by 10 weeks
... compile simplefied TD approach
... new vocabularies into TD deliverable
... ask for volunteers

McCool: will create PRs for security metadata for TD
... aiming PR by end of May

Matthias: special build procedure for TD spec

Sebastian: not very complicated

McCool: also need ontology work
... 4 weeks to do that

Sebastian: rocedure on the README.md
... ok to merge section 5 and 6?
... initial idea was only core model somewhere
... make sense to merge "5. vocabulary" and "6. JSON-LD Serialization"?

Lagally: not a good idea
... pure model should be kept separately

Matthias: simplified TD doesn't have to be a second one

McCool: clean separation would be good

Sebastian: maybe possibly provided as a separate note?

Dave: self-contain style would be good
... other serializations could be documented separately

Matthias: this will be fine
... media type can be registered
... maybe good to have a separate work with figures
... CBOR, etc., could be interesting
... depending on how much figures needed, though
... maybe would make sense to move out
... there is redundancy

Lagally: would like to keep it asis

Matthias: maybe clean-up is still needed

Lagally: right

Sebastian: done

Binding:

Koster: still some work for publication
... next item is actual action pattern
... more functionality
... target wold be May for stable one
... major refactoring base on simplified TD

Matthias: not much adaptation

Koster: simplified version of form, etc.

Matthias: one point is
... action item Barry picked up
... guideline for WoT Binding, e.g., MQTT

Koster: happy to prepare for it
... stable version by May
... publish for plugfest
... binding mechanism

Matthias: similar issue to be documented for security part

McCool: lifecycle issue
... create instance, etc.

Koster: that's it

Matthias: when to publish the first draft?
... maybe end of April?

Kaz: provides the clarification that the originally expected publication date was last week and would suggest we publish it next week asap

Bindig:

Matthias: asap

TD:

Matthias: asap

Security:

McCool: end of April
... security metadata for TD
... more imporatant thing is security review for scripting api
... lifecycle and expansion for security
... more abstract ersion of lifecycle
... timeline
... 6 weeks from now
... NDSS paper also to be finished
... for the security note
... industry use cases
... try to update by the next plugfest
... another point
... testing validation
... every tf also should look into it
... accessibility
... work with Graeme
... OCF liaison
... Koster has views?
... WoT bridging project
... involving OCF Members
... OCF metadata-WoT metadata bridging

Matthias: they might think OCF as a possible competiter to OCF
... but that's not true
... bridging vocabulary with OIC one, etc.
... should not feel WoT is a competeter

McCool: technical reviews for feasibility
... so would ask Koster's opinion as well
... with reference to more stable version specs
... we'll have more discussion on that

Matthias: some binding for WoT-OCF
... something does that UPnP
... knowledge about UPnP

McCool: ecosystem-ecosystem bridge
... bidirectional bridge

Matthias: WoT for bridging
... you don't have automatic mechanism
... but more formal way using WoT
... get less bridging issues

McCool: thinking about OCF bridging
... let's talk about that offline

wrap up

Matthias: thank you everyone for coming!
... quite good meeting
... simplified TD, etc.
... solves various issues
... fits better to existing ecosystems
... very good result from this meeting

McCool: rechartering timeline?
... 3 months extension enough?
... maybe actually 6 months

Kaz: will talk with PLH
... based on the results from this meeting

<scribe> ACTION: kaz to talk with PLH about rechartering

<trackbot> Created ACTION-130 - Talk with plh about rechartering [on Kazuyuki Ashimura - due 2018-04-05].

Matthias: 3 months for wrapping up the current work
... and 3 months for generating new Charter

Kaz: repeats the basic plan on the flipchart

Dave: what to be done within the upcoming a few months?

Matthias: publication/plugfest by the next f2f
... will summarize it by email

Kawaguchi: still not sure about the relationship

Matthias: explains

Kaz: this is similar case to HTML5 which depended on WebIDL

Matthias: will summarize the story and send it to the Membership

<scribe> ACTION: kaz to talk with PLH if TD can refer to JSON-LD 1.1 if it's a WD

<trackbot> Created ACTION-131 - Talk with plh if td can refer to json-ld 1.1 if it's a wd [on Kazuyuki Ashimura - due 2018-04-05].

Lagally: first and good meeting

Matthias: thank you, all!

[f2f meeting adjourned]