<kaz> scribenick: McCool

Lagally: gave summary of purpose of call, reviewed architecture TF work items, including use cases and process
... presentation on process (insert link...)

<kaz> Use Cases - Next steps-200514.pdf Lagally's slides

Lagally: was suggestion to make use cases a separate document
... discussion in architecture call this morning
... had a resolution to hand over the content of the USE-CASE directory to the use-case TF, however that was only have the architecture group
... need to still meet in second call to finalize
... however did draft a use case document
... right now still discussing who should be editors

<mlagally> Pullrequest for the initial draft of the WoT Use Cases document

<mlagally> Statically rendered version HTML

Lagally: reviewing structure of new document; still an outline, several sections need to be filled in
... in fact, mostly empty sections, just an outline

McCool: I am willing to volunteer as an editor
... what issues can we move over to use-case repo?
... suggest we could make issues for additional use cases needed, scenarios for the plugfest, and prioritization of current use cases

Lagally: created a questionnaire to prioritize use cases

<kaz> draft questionnaire on priority

<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to mention Kaz can move the Issues to wot-usecases repo if needed based on

<kaz> Lagally: would be better to close the existing issues/pullrequests on the wot-architecture repo, and then start the new work on wot-usecases

<kaz> Kaz: will update the questionnaire based on the updated resources

McCool: even after we create doc, many of them still need some work
... regarding new use cases, I would like to see some simple use cases captured, for instance "Developer Documentation"
... but for now we can just create an issue for it
... and by "documentation" I mean "unified formal specification of the interface and semantics"

Lagally: creates issue https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/510

McCool: this is not what I meant, but I will edit the issue to say what I meant

<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to add labels corresponding to the level of priority after moving the resources to the wot-usecases repo and start to maintain the resource there

Kaz: would be good to add labels to use cases for priorities, etc.

Lagally: probably want to wait on that for a bit
... in addition, there was an interesting presentation in the main call
... from ITU-T, have a large number (about 30) of requirements documents
... including use cases

<kaz> ITU-T presentation

Lagally: need someone from ITU-T

McCool: need to be careful about IP, liaison agreement
... can't just extract text and insert it in our document

Lagally: we also need someone familiar with the documents

Kaz: need to establish a concrete liaison

McCool: I would suggest that we extract the actual document names and numbers and put them in the issue for more direct reference
... note this was ITU-T SG20

<kaz> kaz: +1 and we can mention our plan within an Issue as a placeholder

McCool: I suggest we also add an "accessibility review" for our use cases; can be future work

<kaz> placeholder issue 511

<kaz> accessibility review

Lagally: also concerned that we have some use cases where the champions have moved away
... we need some replacements

McCool: for automotive in particular, we can reach out to the W3C Automotive WG
... are there others lacking champions?
... I think edge computing use case makes sense...
... it is a "horizontal" use case, focused on a technology as opposed to a user
... but I suggest we do it anyway and then cross-reference with other use cases that use edge computing

<kaz> Kaz: can ask Access and Aptpod about there interest for Automotive use cases.

Sebastian: Kajimoto-san is now with a company that does automotive

Kaz: although they are not currently a W3C member

McCool: although we have a good argument for making Kajimoto-san an invited expert

Kaz: we can at least invite him once or twice as a guest, then I will talk to Alan Bird if we need Kajimoto-san's help regularly

Lagally: ok, let's do that; Sebastian, can you follow up?

F2F/plugfest

Lagally: today reviewed the F2F topics page, added Use Case prioritization

McCool: we should do as much prework as possible, for instance, maybe have the prioritization done first

<kaz> June online meeting topics

<mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/tree/master/REQUIREMENTS

McCool: maybe we should discussion requirements process
... perhaps "horizontal" use cases should be "requirements"

Lagally: geolocation requirements is a good example

McCool: for example, we might want to pull out "Vocabulary/Semantics" and "Schemas" as specific requirement topics
... note also there is an issue in the TD to add static location information
... and there is a spatial data group in the W3C
... we should ideally make these consistent

<kaz> kaz: and possible collaboration on schema (e.g., with OGC)

Lagally: another example is the digital twin
... this one is fairly horizontal

McCool: I think for horizontal use cases we should cross-reference other uses to which it applies

Sebastian: I have to go, want to mention I am working on a smart building use case
... still WIP

Lagally: do you want us to include it in the questionnaire?

Sebastian: it's ok to merge for this purpose...

Lagally: ok, we will review in this afternoon's architecture call
... aob?

<kaz> none

<kaz> [adjourned]