<kaz> scribenick: ege

latest online report (to be updated)

McCool: (shows the latest report.html on his local PC)
... as I said in the main call, I couldn't update the test results for a while
... some missing results here and there

<kaz> (big chunk of features starting with td-context till td-context-ns-thing-prefix)

<inserted> (also td-date-schema-objects)

<inserted> scribenick: kaz

Ege: that one has some bug...
... can be array or object

McCool: let's create an issue then

Ege: will do

<ege> issue: https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/364

Kaz: you mean the block of 3 lines starting with "td-data-schema-objects". right?

McCool: yes

<inserted> scribenick: ege

McCool: maybe a third category?
... a lot of them have to do with the security schemes
... event names, someone needs an example
... many things that need one more example

Ege: I will note that

McCool: readonly and write only might go away

Ege: no not really

Kaz: so McCool, you mean that we can remove these two assertions, possibly?

McCool: yes, there is a good chance that they will be removed
... @context is not done
... but we need to check again

Ege: this is in dataschema level, very new

McCool: what is bothering me are the different security schemes
... as we discussed in the td call, I will make a PR to clarify to how we use security extensions
... what might be worrisome, is like in bearer we don't use all the options

Kaz: McCool I thought that you had identified several features as "at risk" within the TD explainer document. is there a possibility the features at risk would change?

<inserted> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/master/explainer/Explainer.md

McCool: don't think so
... there is this names key
... it should be multiple language

Ege: this just appeared out of nowhere

McCool: the description seems like a multi language
... new default values in op
... you can see that an entire section can be at risk
... there is no example for all these
... psk may go through but no one other than node-wot uses this
... with json ld 1.1 this might go away

Ege: plugfest before or after workshop?

McCool: we are waiting for a venue

Kaz: my understanding is that there will be not a usual "PlugFest" but demos like the ones we did on the Dev Day during TPAC

McCool: we will be too busy for spec work to organize an actual plugfest
... more discussion rather than implementations
... maybe in the second charter we can have a plugfest

<inserted> kaz: plugfest is poc for new spec work, while testfest is testing implementability of the current specs

McCool: we will have maybe more commercial cases

Ege: should I create new assertions?

McCool: you can add it to the extra assertions
... maybe work on the big block

<kaz> [adjourned]