<scribe> scribenick: kaz
<mlagally> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf
<mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/448
Lagally: (goes through the agenda for today)
Lagally: would like to start discussion on possible building blocks based on the use case discussion
Lagally: any problems?
(none)
Lagally: approved
Lagally: this time slot (9am CET)
doesn't work
... would think we should keep the current slot in the
end
... because Sebastian and McCool can make the Call 2
... so let's keep the current time
RESOLUTION: keep the current time for Call 1
Toumura: currently, this Doodle poll
is based on UTC
... but the calls are allocated based on US time
Kaz: yeah, so the original time is 7am CET and 3pm Japan now (till March 28)
<mlagally> Time on March 19th
<mlagally> Time on March 26th:
<mlagally> April 2nd:
Lagally: would ask people about if they have any problems with the current time again
Kaz: ok
Lagally: no new issues
Lagally: thanks, Toumura-san
... let's merge it!
... (merged)
<mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/448/files
Lagally: Jennifer has created
this
... (goes through the changes)
... primarily about mobile devices
... reusable localization module is needed
... there are a couple of interesting things
... e.g., latitude/longitude/altitude
Kaz: there is geolocation api and
generic sensor api which handle geolocation information, e.g.,
latitude/altitude
... maybe we should survey those existing specs
Toumura: there is another group named Spatial Data IG
Kaz: we can look into that group's work as well
Lagally: shows the Charter of the IG
Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices
Kaz: looking into related work including this would make sense
Lagally: main requirement is need for
describing location information
... various styles in various countries
Zoltan: there is MIME type for that purpose
<zkis> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_Exchange_Format
<mlagally> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_navigation
Zoltan: application/gpx+xml and
application/octet-stream
... we should be able to use it
Lagally: we should ask the Govtech guys for ideas too
Zoltan: data serialization
should/could be application-specific
... but some normalization for the data is important
Lagally: potential property
names
... we had some strawman discussion for wot-profile
<mlagally> https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#mandatory-fields-0
Lagally: simple proposal of
streamline
... possible issue with altitude with bridges, etc.
<mlagally> https://www.iso.org/standard/39242.html
Lagally: another resource from ISO
Zoltan: 2 levels of approach
here
... convey the data and context
... the other is going into deep
... incorporating with our vocabulary
... architecture-wise, how to represent the data is to be
discussed
... deeper discussion would become too complicated
Lagally: agree
... would see the clear description on the use cases and the
requirements for the Architecture discussion
... possible extension for node-wot from implementation
viewpoint
... let's go through the rest of the use case description
... very nice and useful use case
Zoltan: I like those examples since
they're related to actual life
... let's keep on the right approach
Lagally: would like to merge this
(no objections)
Lagally: merged
Lagally: need to look at the diff
Kaz: we can skip the title and
the status section
... can updated the reference URLs as well
... the publication date for TD should be the same day as the
Architecture itself (as a REC :)
Lagally: wondering about how to describe the changes
Kaz: no normative changes
... just editorial fixes
... also was wondering about fig 18
<mlagally> Proposal: Change log to be extended with: "No normative changes, minor editorial fixes and stable external references.
Kaz: do we want to use the updated diagram which we generated for the press release?
Lagally: no, don't think we should update the figure
RESOLUTION: Change log to be extended with: "No normative changes, minor editorial fixes and stable external references.
Lagally: Kaz, please generate an updated HTML based on the discussion today
Kaz: ok
<scribe> ACTION: kaz to update the static HTML for REC publication
Lagally: any other business for this call?
(none)
Lagally: let's talk with some of you during the Call 2
[Call 1 adjourned]
Lagally: (goes through the
agenda)
... (also the discussion during the first call)
Lagally: any objections to accept the minutes?
(no objections)
Lagally: approved
Lagally: (goes through the diff
above)
... minor editorial changes
... and references to be updated
... will create a pullrequest for the changes section
... part of minor editorial changes
Kaz: maybe we should not use "REC" specStatus for respec
Lagally: ok
... (adds a comment to the pullrequest)
... close this pullrequest without merging
... note that the change description itself is already
reflected
Kaz: that's fine :)
... will regenerate the static HTML version then
Lagally: would suggest we look into the detail next week
Lagally: just quick sanity check
Lagally: media-related use cases
Lagally: (goes through the use case
descriptions)
... want to have overviews
Lagally: we don't have semantic
annotation requirements yet
... e.g., for the compatibility with iotschema.org
Koster: right
... we should work on that
... go ahead and make an action
Lagally: ok
... (creates a new Issue for that)
<mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/452
Koster: W3C Thing Description being a backplane for semantic information
Lagally: should I assign this issue to you?
Koster: yes :)
[Call 2 adjourned]