<McCool> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#16_Jan_2019
<kaz> scribenick: zolkis
<kaz> draft Call for Participation page
McCool: update about the workshop
Sebastian: gives the workshop details
... contributions are welcome: diagrams, slides
McCool: do we have a f2f session to discuss the CFP?
Sebastian: there is an initial draft
<kaz> current architecture draft
Lagally: we had a meeting
recently, discussing the architecture draft, improvements
needed
... Panasonic has proposals for requirements, Oracle has
proposals for new use cases
... deadline next week for further input
... this is for the first round of changes
... new proposals for smart cities and smart buildings
... target is mid-March for a new draft with aligned
input
... the terminology section will also be improved
Lagally: next merge is next week
Wednesday, so please make PR's until then
... making clear that in a new PR create a new section and put your name as comment
Koster: the one data model came
out from a meeting with Zigbee Alliance
... there are a lot of device types (battery operated,
etc)
... last meetup was last November, got a big attendance
... there was a prioritization discussion, common data model
was important
... OCF intentions are neutral
... the target is a common data model, normalization, etc,
similar to the early WoT discussions
... there is a questions about scope: cloud, device, gateway,
home, etc
... Google wants to prioritize device to device
communications
... there are many viewpoints
... candidates for model considerations include Zigbee, OCF,
BLE Mesh, Weave, HomeKit etc
... criteria include maturity, extensibility, existing
deployments, number of device types covered etc
... should explain to this group what WoT is doing
McCool: we should figure out whom to talk with and when
Koster: we should allow them figure out what should be their data model
McCool: right, we are
standardizing how to describe data models, not what data models
should be
... we need to discuss this during the F2F, let's create a slot
for this
Koster: we should summarize what
are the best qualities of the models, and figure out common
serializations
... Google wants something higher level and with more
abstractions
... others want simple things
... see also iot.schema.org
McCool: ITU sent material about smart cities; will reflect later
<kaz> ITU-T liaison letter (member-only)
McCool: next TPAC 16-20 September 2019, Fukuoka, Japan
<sebastian> f2f wiki
McCool: please do register even
if attending remotely
... Open Day schedule needs discussion
... probably Matthias cannot make the F2F
... maybe Sebastian could do the introduction
Sebastian: maybe Kajimoto-san
could do it?
... but could be as a backup
McCool: what's the fallback plan
for NIST
... (National Institute of Standards and Technology)
... breakout sessions: each group should explain recent changes
and schedule for completion
... will have implementation report after the test fest
... by next week WG meeting please update the sections
<kaz> latest TD draft
<kaz> diff from the published WD
Sebastian: TD is updated from the
issues
... move the defaults to the serialization part: finish this by
Friday
... there are small editorial stuff as well
... we consider adding two more editors: Michael McCool (security) and Victor Charpenay (model, ontology)
McCool: any objections?
no objections heard
McCool: the group accepts this; thanks for the appreciation
RESOLUTION: Michael McCool and Victor Charpenay added as editors to the Thing Description spec
Sebastian: please check the TD spec and report bugs
Ege: will update JSON schema part
MCCool: validation procedures and
tooling will be discussed in the next hour
... test plan will be discussed
Kaz: concerned about the big
changes in the current updated draft
... of the TD spec
... the change is quite big from implementation PoV
Sebastian: this comes from the
Lyon F2F, JSON-LD 1.1 compliance was not clarified
... we cannot really make the statement we'd be compatible with
JSON-LD 1.1, since there are open issues
... so we try to be close to JSON-LD 1.1, but we cannot say we
are compatible
... we make the JSON-LD transformation explained in section
6
Kaz: if the JSON-LD 1.1 becomes stable enough then we can refer to it; perhaps we should ask W3C management's advice
Sebastian: we could only say the
TD is close to JSON-LD 1.1
... Victor will take care of tracking this and updating the TD
spec
McCool: let's track this in an issue
Kaz: I think I myself can understand the situation, but would like feedback from implementors and advice from W3C management
McCool: any input on test fest?
Koster: will attend the meeting and will update
McCool: what are the gaps
... for instance security schemes etc
... just use as many features as we can and try to identify the
gaps
... expect node-wot fully documented
... other requirements? please edit the F2F page
<inserted> scribenick: kaz
Zoltan: something on scripting
... Daniel is not available, so won't put the proposal
today
<zolkis> issue #158: https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/158
Zoltan: but there is a discussion on
issue 158 as above
... the current spec is not good for browser-based
implementation
... during the scripting call, we had discussions
... still waiting for input
<zolkis> https://gist.github.com/zolkis/555441aebe1874392a00be50a8228f91
Zoltan: maybe we can have discussion
during the f2f as well
... would like to get advice from W3C management about API
design
... browser vs runtime
McCool: let's make this an agenda
item for the next meeting
... would prioritize this topic next week
<inserted> scribenick: zolkis
McCool: let's talk about this
next week
... and on the F2F
... we are over time, need to switch to next call
meeting adjourned