<McCool> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#21_Aug_2019
<scribe> scribenick: kaz
McCool: pretty full agenda
McCool: online plugfest
... decided to hold it on Aug 29 but some of us wont' be
available
<McCool> https://doodle.com/poll/nadmz7deszgvsk73
McCool: so we're holding doodle
... but we need to pick a concrete date/time as well
... please respond to the doodle first
Kaz: (explains the demo schedule on
Wed)
... we can use the "demos" slot (15:30-16:30)
... the first question is which to choose, before or after that for
our own plugfest slot (in addition to the common "demos" slot at 15:30-16:30)
McCool: maybe before that?
(no objection)
Kaz: can create an entry for the
session proposal wiki for that slot
... the second question is demo table by Panasonic
... Panasonic is a gold sponsor and has a demo table
... and ok with sharing it with the whole WoT group
McCool: great
... let's have detailed discussion with Lagally
Kaz: we can use preview option by
adding a setting file to the GH repos
... can get rendered HTML without statically
McCool: ok to install them?
(no objections)
Kaz: will do
McCool: got comments from W3M on
Accessibility and I18N
... and created GH issues for them
McCool: would apply those comments to
the draft IG Charter
... relatively simple PRs
... if you have any comments, please put them on GH
Kaz: we need to create PRs
... I'll get back to the W3M
... and the Charter will be sent to the AC review after their
approval
McCool: got update from David Baron
McCool: (goes through the
comment)
... regarding JSON vs JSON-LD impact on interoperability
... we should have somebody from the JSON-LD group to get
knowledge
Kaz: Sebastian and Victor were
planning to contact the JSON-LD guys for the joint session during TPAC
... but not sure about the progress, though
... can talk with Ivan Herman and Benjamin Young if needed
McCool: it seems Sebastian is on vacation but what about Victor?
Daniel: not sure
McCool: so Kaz can contact JSON-LD guys CCing them
Kaz: ok
McCool: regarding our own
action
... improve our explainer and describe use cases
... need to think about actual users
... will look through the architecture document, etc.
... to get user-oriented use cases
Kaz: plugfest scenario could be also a possible use case input :)
McCool: yeah
... anyway we need some high-level use case description
... if you have any ideas please put them on this GH issue
Kaz: any resources?
Koster: I have some
McCool: please send the link later
Koster: ok
<mjkoster> pointer to OneDM SDF slides: https://github.com/mjkoster/ODM-Examples/blob/master/sdf/onedm-wot-20190821.pdf
<mjkoster> also ppt: https://github.com/mjkoster/ODM-Examples/blob/master/sdf/onedm-wot-20190821.pptx
Koster: [One Data Model]
... recap
... one data model is not a new organization but liaison of
existing SDOs
... Zigbee, OCF, OMA, Google, Comcast, Amazon, ...
... the tool work and language work done publicly
... drive to a common set of data models for device
definitions
... across all the vendors and SDOs
... discussion on what the big problems are
... weekly meetings
... since February
... and 3 f2f meetings
... [One Data Model - high level process]
... try to define a model and test the language
... working on non controversial device models
... taken from most likely SDOs
... converge on a single model
... [One Data Model - Status]
... JSON language
... Simple Definition Format - SDF
... Markdown doc and JSON Schema
... working in the middle
... go public with the calendar year
... [SDF Language]
... on the language
... how it relates to TD
... SDF is plain JSON with JSON Schema (v7)
... creating portable definitions of devices
... property/action/event
... like iotschema but high detail features like
bitfields
... going opposite from iotschema
... but still mainly a data model
... define actual devices without defining instance
... [Composition]
... we have grouping
... odmObject has iotschema capability
... contains a set of properties, actions events
... odmTHing to group a related set of Objects that work
together
... a couple layers
... odmView as well for specific compositions
... [Data Typing]
... we have odmData class for data type definitions
... fully compatible to JSON Schema
... and subType for uint8, etc.
... these are additional constraints
... put into existing mechanism
McCool: CBOR type payload form OCF?
Koster: we're defining data constraint
McCool: not defining any information on payload
Koster: a lot from One Data Model
want to put data constraint
... this is number, boolian, etc.
... some of them think about common binding
... we consider payload handling is part of binding
... we might say what the preferred type is
... you could say RGB color is a type
... but protocol binding would do further thing
... you can define data type semantically
... you can say temperatureData as floating number
... same tradeoff as iotschema
... [References]
... JSON Pointer is used to refer to elements in a
document
... definition would be ocf:https://example.com/ocf#
... [Example]
... info section
... title, version, copyright, license
... namespace
... definition
... [Definitions]
... SDF keywords and Definitions in the Default Namespace
... almost same as iotschema
... "Switch", "Value", "on", "off" come from the Definitions in
the Default Namespace
... just like the definition from iotschema
... [Definitions (cont)]
... "enum" is useful for constraints
... [SDF Documents]
... links
... SDF format description document
... JSON Schema for validation
... etc.
... [OneDM SDF FAQ]
... doesn't compete with TD
... [OneDM SDF FAQ (cont)]
McCool: will be available at IETF 106 in
Singapore in November?
... we're planning to join the IETF hackathon
Koster: won't be able to go to Singapore
... framing and shapes
McCool: not sure if we should
directly speak with the IETF guys
... should try to align with One Data Model
Koster: people can ue this for WoT
native devices
... same terms for annotation
... you can convert the semantic information
... application can use high-level concept
McCool: is Mozilla a member?
Koster: sent them a pointer
... they're interested in semantic definition
... would like to make more examples of TDs
... JSON and CBOR payloads as well
... security, protocol binding and payload
... maybe TD template still has payload
McCool: Conexxus couldn't attend
today but we should talk with them as well
... they're more user organization and looking for use
cases
<McCool> https://www.conexxus.org/
Koster: interesting
... we're also working with SunSpec
<McCool> https://sunspec.org/
Koster: they have data model
McCool: maybe Vancouver would be a better place for further collaboration
Koster: yeah
... limited travel availability
Kawa: could you share your slides?
Koster: will do
McCool: Taki wrote up a message here
McCool: issue 55 on XML
... should wait for detailed discussion
Ege: working on examples
... kind of long-term issue
Kaz: Lagally is not available, so should skip the call today?
McCool: that's my suggestion as
well
... please respond to the doodle poll on the online
plugfest
... any other points?
Kawa: as Kaz mentioned, Panasonic
is willing to provide a demo table
... but we need to respond to the W3C meeting planner Team
about the setting
... like the logo panel
McCool: would be happy if you could
mention "WoT" on that
... but would leave it to you
Kawa: we don't have any specific
opinion
... our question is whether we (=WoT WG/IG as a whole) would
like to join it or not
McCool: would take the table
... we could say "WoT powered by Panasonic", etc.
Kawa: ok
... would like to talk about the detail with Kaz and the
meeting planner Team
... and then get back to the group
McCool: any possibility of banner poster, etc.?
Kawa: need to check with the
meeting planner Team
... Kaz, please talk with them
Kaz: yes, sir!
Kaz: think we should have a call tomorrow
McCool: please send an invite
Kaz: will do
[adjourned]