<kaz> scribenick: mlagally

TPAC

McCool: Panasonic needs higer resolution logo for TPAC demo table title plate, ideally SVG file

Daniel: I will try to dig up and send to McCool

Kaz: I can also try to help

McCool: walks through agenda

IG charter draft

McCool: There are 3 PRs, got some feedback from TAG and PING
... these changes are adding references to i18n group and others
... another PR for accessibility
... I implemented the things requested by APA
... walks through the changes>
... suggest to merge these PRs
... we could do a resolution today to submit to W3M
... any objection to merge PR # 854
... none, merged
... no objection to merge #855, merged

<McCool> https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/master/charters/wot-ig-2019.html

McCool: This is the rendered version, we add explicitly APA, PNG and other groups

Lagally: do we need the strikethrough in the "Rechartered" section?

McCool: we can make it two rows, we can approve today and Kaz can make this minor change

<McCool> proposal: submit the IG proposed charter at https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/master/charters/wot-ig-2019.html, after some minor edits by Ashimura to clean up the changes table, to W3M

RESOLUTION: submit the IG proposed charter at https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/master/charters/wot-ig-2019.html, after some minor edits by Ashimura to clean up the changes table, to W3M

WG charter draft

McCool: We had a meeting last weeks with chairs and editors
... I spent a few hours to create a draft
... no change history yet, also some dates not yet available
... I added an extended scope section
... ... there's several constructive comments by lagally

<inserted> PR 856

Lagally: let me comment on profiles: we should not constrain to "smart home profile"

McCool: industrial profile may be more difficult to define, smart home is a low hanging fruit
... I will uplevel the profile to a more general form

Lagally: these are only initial comments, did not have much time for review

McCool: <walks through document and deliverables>

<kaz> rendered version

McCool: we want to have a document defining a profile, could be single document or a document per profile
... discovery - we had directories and P2P in our Powerpoint deck, not sure what we will do
... we have other deliverables for security and privacy guidelines and protocol bindings

Daniel: we need first a mechanism to define a profile, not sure if we actually need to define one

McCool: we have identified interop requirements from a class of users, e.g. Mozilla
... we need to have a profile at least in one domain, e.g. a smart home
... defining a profile would be a separate normative document

Profiles

<kaz> scribenick: kaz

Lagally: (shares his screen)
... resource on Lgally's repo

<mlagally> https://cdn.statically.io/gh/mlagally/wot-profile/master/index.html?env=dev

Lagally: rendered version above
... details to be discussed tomorrow (during the WG Charter call)
... would make sense to have a dedicated call for details
... [1. Introduction]
... interoperability concerns
... [1.1 Deployment Scenarios]
... [1.2 Why a Core Profile?]
... subset of TD spec and binding
... (using Fig 1: WoT Core Profile)
... goals
... guarantee interoperability among all implementations of the profile
... imit the implementation complexity for resource constrained devices
... ensure a TD is also useful for a human reader
... good document on behavior
... don't have time to dive into the details today but...
... (goes through the following sections)
... [2. Terminology]
... keywords and fields
... [3. Profile Mechanism]
... put constraints on vocabulary to make specific terms mandatory and remove others
... limited cardinality, e.g., only one form per operation per interaction affordance
... limit the length of characters per string
... other constraints are also described in the table
... no arbitrary nested objects or arrays of arrays
... limited protocols and protocol features
... two areas where constraints are applicable
... data model and protocol binding
... those are orthogonal
... if somebody want to extend the core profile...
... profiles can be built on the top of each other or overlap
... example of profile stack
... (Figure 2: WoT Core Profile)
... WoT Core Profile, WoT Enhanced Profile, WoT Template Profile, WoT Digital Twin Profile
... additional things here are not described yet
... [4. WoT COre Profile]
... general constraints
... and then another chapter on [4.2 Protocol Binding]
... first we should look into the core data model part
... [4.1.1 General]
... (quickly skim the sections)
... [4.1.2.1 Mandatory fields]
... [4.1.2.2 Recommended practice]
... recommended to use "undefined" for strings
... [4.1.3 Data Schemas]
... [Data Schema Constraints]
... [4.1.4 Property Affordance]

McCool: we should discuss the procedure about how to proceed
... where is the best place to handle the issues?
... your repo? or the public one?

Lagally: possibly a separate wot-profile repo?

McCool: can we create a new repo?

Kaz: yes
... and we should use "index.html" as the file name so that we can use the pr-preview capability

McCool: agree
... please create a repo for that purpose

Kaz: will do

<scribe> ACTION: kaz to create a new repo for profile discussion, wot-profile

<trackbot> Created ACTION-179 - Create a new repo for profile discussion, wot-profile [on Kazuyuki Ashimura - due 2019-09-04].

Lagally: we can continue the discussion during the architecture call tomorrow

McCool: architecture call at 15-17 JST; Charter call at 20 JST
... f2f logistics to be discussed next week
... anything urgent about TF report?

(nothing)

McCool: just wanted to mention the security call's time change
... please respond to the doodle if you're interested

Lagally: should respond to comments on security on GitHub too

McCool: will look at them

PlugFest call

<mlagally> let'S stay on this webex

<mlagally> use wot-pf IRC channel

[adjourned]