<kaz> scribenick: McCool

<mkovatsc> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Agenda

Daniel: online plugfest, add to the agenda, discussed in TD call

Quick updates

redo on the testing doodle

<mkovatsc> https://doodle.com/poll/pdfikpihu4pvqpu8

those who filled it in early, please check again

dave, matthias, and ege

TPAC report

<mkovatsc> https://www.w3.org/2018/10/25-26-wot-minutes.html

kaz compiled draft minutes, above

please look at them, in a week we should finalize

in next main call

PlugFest results

<mkovatsc> https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/plugfest/2018-lyon

results from hitachi, panasonic, oracle

please add yours

do change the intended layout a little

looks like oracle is not using the table

McCool: let's try to coordinate this with our work on drafting the implementation report

Matthias: linear report, table is better
... have some test cases where there are missing assertions, and vice-versa
... there are a large number of assertions missing still
... postpone looking at details until testing/plugfest call

Online plugfest

<dape> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf

Daniel: see link, agenda from the 9th
... possible candidate dates for plugfest
... freeze of TD doc end of Dec, xmas/new years impl, then plugfest in 3rd week of jan
... this is current proposal, felt that some time was needed to finalize td before plugfest

<kaz> Nov-9 TD call minutes (Member-only)

Matthias: very concerned about timeline
... no time to fix findings before next F2f
... results are currently very far from what we need
... not about passing all the tests, but about getting testing plan organized
... another indicator is that our results template is lengthy, does not have all assertions
... I do have some tooling that should work here

Kaz: from w3c procedure viewpoint, plugfest is not really necessary; useful, but not required
... CR/PR transition just requires testing a couple of implementations separately
... maybe should thing of interop testing and assertion testing separately

McCool: but... do people self-report, or use validation tools; what counts as an implementation?

Matthias: plugfest is a time that implementors can sit together to test things

<kaz> https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-mmi-interop-20120124/

Matthias: for example, people who only have clients need servers to test against
... and we need concrete dates

Kaz: here is another example, see link above. we should concentrate on the testing for CR/PR transition. and later we can publish an interoperability testing document based on PlugFest results as a WG Note if we want.

McCool: I think we should focus on what is technically needed, other things are gravy
... we can put report on interop testing, etc in an appendix of the implementation report

Lagally: feel a little uncomfortable squeezing in things so late in the year
... would rather not squeeze things into a short time

Matthias: I don't know if it helps to just call it a special call on the test suite
... but there an issue with collecting the information from the implementors

<kaz> McCool: shows his generated draft implementation report
... details to be discussed during the testing call later

<kaz> Michael's draft implementation report

<McCool> I know I personally have delayed filling out the report as I'm a concerned format is not correct
... deliverables to be filled in
... most new content
... for example, agreed on simplified api requirements
... basic idea though is to explore new topics, liasons, interop testing
... also growing ecosystem of implementations
... what is the deadline?

<inserted> [We had some more discussion on testing, and a separate assertion review call proposed during the 2nd week of December.]

IG Re-Charter

<mkovatsc> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/charters/wot-ig-2019.html

Matthias: probably end of nov

Kaz: better to have a draft by end of nov
... already started discussion with w3m for wg extension but
... would be good to have both at once

McCool: I would feel uncomfortable waiting until dec
... let's get all the issues for the ig recharter lined up for discussion and ideally PRs by next main call

Kaz: note that w3m meeting also occurs on wednesday

McCool: we should at least give them a heads up that it will be on the agenda then

Possible support?

Matthias: visitors about testing during TPAC
... working on web, but interested in what we were doing in iot
... some of them are willing to help us a bit, but asked for funding
... is a bit difficult since we still have to figure it out
... new territory for them, too
... have some concerns about who is helping who
... probably benefits on both sides

McCool: I think we need to clarify what we are testing first

Matthias: ok, so let's keep them in the loop, may be useful later

Dave: concur with mccool, not quite ready yet; contracts etc would be premature
... but if some members want to sponsor them, that would be fine, however...
... up to that member

Kaz: extracting assertions and handling tests ourselves should be the first step

Matthias: ok, will get back to them; not a "no", but a deferral; "maybe later"

Task Force reports

McCool: a bunch of security updates to the TD
... definitions, considerations, mandatory at thing level...
... don't trust the class diagram though, not updated yet
... victor is working on a way to autogenerate

<kaz> [adjourned]