Agenda

McCool: sent an email to you about the potential agenda

1. Time for the call. It would be good to find a call Taki can join, and also Oliver Pfaff from Siemens. One option: use the time on Thursday I allocated for working on the Charter. I think this is late enough so it's not a problem for Taki but may be too late for Oliver and Elena...

2. Purpose. We need to have something specific to work on. Do we keep refining the guidelines or work on something new, like Privacy mitigations?

3. People have limited bandwidth for meetings. Should we put the security call on standby while working on something else (eg Discovery) then reactivate it later?

McCool: we've been working on guidelines
... we definitely need some more work
... privacy mitigation, etc.
... but we need to work on management APIs, etc., before that considerations

Better slot?

McCool: also need to see better slot for new participants
... so we should discuss moving the time
... also wondering if we should stop our security work and work on discovery, etc., first

Elena: need another doodle to pick a better slot for new participants?

McCool: later slot would be better for Taki
... 2 questions: another day? or late evening?

Elena: later slot would be OK but maybe problematic for Japanese guys

McCool: for me that would be OK, e.g., 11pm on Thursday

Elena: let's extend the candidate slots

McCool: we have several constraints
... e.g., earlier slot than 5am PDT would not be good for Taki
... wondering about Elena's availability on Monday

Elena: have to leave 3pm EEST

McCool: we had to wait for the marketing call settled
... but it's fixed now

Kaz: Thursday, 10pm JST, 9am EDT, 4pm EEST

McCool: let's set up another doodle for security

Elena: can do any time Friday

McCool: what about late evening on Thursday?

Elena: overlapping meeting

McCool: 8pm-midnight including Friday

<scribe> ACTION: kaz to create a new doodle for security

Purpose

McCool: having a call slot for discovery/security
... so security+privacy+discovery would be the theme
... or having a separate call?

Elena: we can improve the current security/privacy document, but what would be the time span?

McCool: there are people interested in discovery topic
... maybe partial overlap with security/privacy
... we need separate calls if we have different people
... possibly could have both calls alternatively, security->discovery->security...
... what do you think, Kaz?

Kaz: would hear from the potential participants

McCool: right
... note that initially we might need dedicated discussion for the discovery topic

Privacy considerations

McCool: we're at the middle of our transition
... changes for id from TD
... cryptgraphically unique might be OK, though
... (explains the summary of the discussion with PING)
... the question was not having concrete mechanism for mitigation of privacy risks

<McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/proposals/privacy.md

McCool: the conclusion was making "id" optional and also remove "unique" from it's description
... my remaining concern (for the future) is the distribution mechanism for TDs

Elena: what is the purpose of "title"?
... arbitrary string?

McCool: yes
... but people might put information about location, name, etc.
... "title" is the only mandatory field if we make "id" optional
... so personally think would be better to make "title" as well optional
... the other point is about Data Schemas
... not really clear
... same problem with URI Templates
... these are my first thoughts
... some suggestions for privacy mitigations

Elena: will take a look
... would be better to have a concrete reference implementation for that purpose?

Prev minutes

Sep-9 minutes

McCool: we should take a look at the current updated definition within the Architecture document
... (skims the minutes themselves)
... any comments?
... objections to accept them?

(none)

McCool: so accepted

[adjourned]