<scribe> scribe: zkis

Accepting past minutes

<kaz> Feb-17 minutes

Past minutes accepted

PR 203

<kaz> PR 203

Zoltan presented the PR changes: added formIndex as a hint for implementation, and clarified the use of write handlers

Zoltan: the PR has been reviewed, approved and merged
... it fixed two issues, 199 and 202

Error handling

Daniel introduces the issue #200

Issue 200

Daniel: would say the table in Ege's comment should be informative

Zoltan: agree that it should be informative
... we can include this into the algorithms

McCool: we need to define what is the behavior if a non-mapped error happens

Daniel: some errors indicate if an unspecified error occured
... showing "UnknownError" as an example
... in the basic use cases we do need a clear mapping
... but there might be error that could be classified in many ways

Zoltan: what about the error data?

Daniel: we could use the error code, but no lengthy error messages or error data
... up to the implementation to harden that part

Zoltan: nevertheless, the spec should have some guidance on what data to include with errors

Daniel: is there an issue with privacy if we don't specify in the spec?

McCool: we should maybe have guidelines and good practices, but implementations can decide to follow them

Daniel: need to check node-wot in this respect (what data is exposed in errors)

Zoltan: we can make a note until we know exactly how to curate the error data

Daniel: let this issue be the single place to contribute to the error mapping
... or create a PR?

Zoltan: I can create a PR that can be left open, in order to experiment, but the primary place to discuss and contribute would be in the issue

Issue #201

https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/201

Daniel: we have an open PR in the TD spec that is related

<dape> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/869

Zoltan: we could still describe the current way of how things are supposed to work
... and use the information from the PR

Daniel: that is right; we should link the PR and the issue

Issue #193

https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/193

Daniel presents the issue

Zoltan: there was a question which Form would be used for reporting the written value

McCool: here as well it applies that implementations define the behavior and the TD should describe interactions correctly
... a safe assumption is to say writes never return a value, and you need to define an action if you want a value back

Daniel: seems there is no consensus on this

Zoltan: you can't figure out precision from the value (assumingly) reported by the write

McCool: that would need an action with a defined output schema

Zoltan: I agree

McCool: I agree with the current spec that returns Promise<void> because it handles all cases correctly

Daniel: looks like the discussion goes into the direction to keep the current way, because it gets tricky how to do the alternative correctly

McCool: we need to log a design decision and an editor's note, in order to avoid duplicating the discussion

Daniel: one possibility is to record the decision

McCool: we need a separate document to summarize the key design decisions

<scribe> ACTION: Zoltan make a PR with a note and explanation, and update the explainer

Issue #204

https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/204

McCool: I propose to discuss this in the Discovery TF
... and we would track Scripting related aspects in this issue

AOB?

AOB?

none

[adjourned]