27 Feb 2019


Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Daniel_Peintner, Kunihiko_Toumura, Taki_Kamiya, Zoltan_Kis, Toru_Kawaguchi, Yosuke_Nakamura, Michael_Koster, Michael_Lagally, Ege_Korkan, Ryuichi_Matsukura, Sebastian_Kaebisch


<McCool> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#27_Feb_2019

<kaz> scribenick: mlagally

Quick updates

<kaz> scribenick: kaz

Lagally: had a call today on workshop
... we split the "how to participate" information from the main CfP
... Kaz is adding information on EasyChair submission

Kaz: will check the options to handle mutiple paper types (position paper/statement)

Lagally: pc members to be fixed by the end of this week

Kaz: if it takes longer to get confirmation, we can add them (additional pc members) later

Lagally: we'll get back to all next week

<scribe> scribenick: mlagally

Daylight Saving times

mmc to avoid confusion enter the calls in your calendar based on US Eastern Time

McCool: next week the main call will be at the same time, the week after one hour earlier
... I can send around calendar entries to the members list, which includes the call information

WG onboarding information

<kaz> Kaz's message on the WG onboarding info (Member-only)

(Lagally has problem with WebEx connection and rejoins)

<inserted> kaz: explains the onboarding information site

McCool: is there a list for publication schefule

Kaz: we can add that kind of information and want that kind of feedback
... please respond to my email on the WoT WG Members list (URL above)

McCool: btw, there's our home page and a landing page but the landing page has old information

<kaz-win> WoT landing page

Lagally: we should fix this asap - It mentions "W3C started standardising ..."

McCool: we can rewrite the first paragraph
... I will draft some introduction section - we should discuss in next call and replace the content afterwards


TAG review - Push to Friday next week before sending it to TAG

McCool: this would be worst case
... Chairs (Matthias and me) need to prepare transition documents. Editors need to draft an explainer about the documents. (Architecture and Thing Description)

Lagally: What about the other documents (Binding and Scripting)?

Kaz: Only normative documents require wide reviews.

Lagally: Architecture document references Binding and Scripting spec.
... are they also to be reviewed?

Kaz: We can reference stable documents

McCool: if documents have not been published, this may be a concern

Kaz: This will be checked, when we do the review

McCool: we need to make sure that we push out up to date documents
... in the CR review we need to have up to date document for all informative documents

Lagally: do we have a template for the explainer document?

<kaz> example of TAG review request

<kaz> example of explainer document

McCool: yes, see the TAG review issue above.
... ideally we have editors drafts by Wednesday, March 6th - chairs will submit to TAG by Friday March 8th.

Lagally: We only have a architecture call on Thursday, would prefer to review in Architecture call on Thursday
... we can have a draft by Tuesday and consolidate until Thursday.

Kaz: concrete date when the TAG review for our specs will start is not yet decided.
... If have our expected dates in our mind, we can negotiate the deadline with them

McCool: Other groups need to review that as well.

Kaz: I think we also need reviews by i18n, Accessibility, JSON-LD, etc.
... documents don't have to be final.

McCool: CR deadlines are optimistic. Sebastian, are you also ok?

Sebastian: we still have many issues - realistically the open issues won't be covered by next week
... do we freeze a version or can we do changes during review

McCool: you can make changes, but ideally only minor changes
... JSON-LD question should be addressed before TAG review
... minor things can still change

Kaz: Sebastian (TD) and Lagally (Architecture) should start explainer, I've already talked with the TAG Contact and raised a heads-up but will talk with him again when we're ready

McCool: Explainer can be high level enough to still permit structural change

Kaz: and regarding what and when to get wide reviews (including the TAG review), I'd talk with Philippe and Yves again

TF updates

* Architecture

Lagally: architecture has moved to Thursday time slot
... we did not have a call since last week. We had text updates from Matthias since then, some updated figures. I created a PR yesterday, will have another one today

* TD

Sebastian: we still have to clarify the situation around JSON-LD, this will be a topic in the call on Friday

Kaz: I talked with Ivan Herman, the Team Contact for the JSON-LD WG. We need to ask them for a wide review. Perhaps they can join a TD call or our email discussion

* Binding

Koster: no specific update on binding - plan to have an extended explainer, hope to have the update soon

McCool: need an up to date document when we go to review

Koster: yes, it is important, will work on it in the next two weeks

* Scripting

Zoltan: we discussed various options on the next API version - fetch platform vs. convenience APIs, constructors vs. factory methods. I made a terminlogy PR update

<zolkis> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1HN15VhjCcZEjrSllFSUVxUWiYhxFdslx80EtyJObNeo/edit#slide=id.g506a6ce621_0_0

<zolkis> check slides 24-27

McCool: What about note publication prior to the TAG review?

Zoltan: Depends on how the discussion goes, we should allocate a day, since the 1 hour call is note enough

McCool: I created a PR and updated best practices - wot best practices and testing document has not been pushed out as a note.
... let's discuss the testing conversation in the next hour
... if you are interested, please join the plugfest call


Kaz: wrt TAG review - I'm not sure we need to have referred documents completely stable

McCool: "reasonably stable" would be desirable
... editors version should be consistent, there should not be major empty sections

Kaz: note that the latest published version of binding templates is very old

McCool: we should update the editors drafts before the TAG review
... we should publish them as notes prior to CR transition

<sebastian> I have to go

<kaz> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/343

Lagally: what is the TAG review checking?

Kaz: document structure, basic architecture, design policy, etc.

<kaz> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2019/03/02 23:45:51 $