12:03:25 RRSAgent has joined #wot-script 12:03:25 logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/01/25-wot-script-irc 12:03:34 Meeting: WoT Scripting API 12:03:49 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Cristiano_Aguzzi, Zoltan_Kis 12:03:54 Chair: Daniel 12:05:13 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Scripting_API_WebConf 12:06:01 Mizushima has joined #wot-script 12:06:41 scribe: cris 12:06:43 scribenick: cris_ 12:06:53 Previous minutes, see https://www.w3.org/2021/01/18-wot-script-minutes.html 12:07:01 topic: previous minutes 12:07:07 @@@URL here 12:07:17 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 12:07:48 daniel: we merge a PR from kaz and then discussed about the new term in architecture: PartialTD 12:07:52 ... it was a long discussion 12:07:58 ... and it is still open 12:08:19 ... we'll discuss today again. Cristiano made a PR about it 12:08:58 ... we discussed also about versioning. The issue is still open. We need more experience about the problem 12:09:25 ... any problem with the minutes? 12:09:28 cris: ok 12:09:34 zoltan: ok 12:09:44 daniel: ok, minutes published 12:09:50 topic: open PRs 12:09:59 --> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/291 12:10:24 daniel: minor issue 12:10:43 ... propertyReadHandler should return InteractionInput 12:10:57 ... previously it returned any 12:11:09 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Scripting_API_WebConf#25_January_2021 12:12:16 ... in the same PR I changed also any types in TS definition 12:12:50 zoltan: in web IDL we could use undefined and in TS use void 12:13:38 cris: I agree with Zoltan 12:14:13 daniel: I agree with you too, I'll change the PR accordingly. 12:18:04 ... ok issue resolved. 12:18:16 ... next PR is from Cristiano. It is about PartialTD 12:18:19 --> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/289 12:18:49 ... the changes are lager than I expected 12:20:45 cris: I changed the produce method and the ExposedThing constructor 12:21:15 daniel: zoltan commented that the PartialTD type could be renamed to init 12:21:41 ... from my side I'd a minor change. Basically, rename the argument and mention the details in the algorithm 12:22:01 zoltan: we can separate the type name from the validation algorithm. 12:22:29 ... I prefer a more web platform compliant term like ThingDescriptionInit 12:22:49 ... decupling this two would improve the undestanding 12:23:25 daniel: TD is used both as argument in construction for consumed and return type with the getThingDescription method 12:24:31 ... I'd like to reuse the returned object from getThingDescription as a produce argument 12:25:10 zoltan: it is part of the use case. We still could use thing Init with a better description 12:25:34 daniel: as I user I'd like to use the full TD returned by getThingDescription without any processing 12:25:47 ... quite similar to the algorithm defined in the PR 12:26:10 zoltan: my comment it's only about the name. I agree with the rest 12:26:36 daniel: ok. For sure we need the algorithm as presented in the PR 12:27:28 zoltan: my opinion is that the input is an object. We could use that type but the best practice is to name it differently to convey semantics. 12:28:54 zoltan: we should define also an algorithm to validate the output of the produce method 12:29:19 ... my point is that I don't like the name of the type. PartialTD is a bit confusioning 12:30:06 CA: introducing a new term might be confusing 12:30:20 ... partial TD term is used in the use cases 12:31:02 DP: partial TD is only used in Scripting 12:31:03 s/in the use cases/in our use cases/ 12:31:32 .. his proposing to remove the PartialTD from the architecture 12:31:43 zoltan: yeah it could be the right choice 12:32:22 ... we need a good name and we can move on. 12:33:32 cris: My last open point is weather if a partial TD will not ever used somewhere else 12:33:42 daniel: maybe it is closer to the ThingModel 12:34:29 zoltan: we could define a ThingDescription and add a new object called "input" 12:34:48 ... there we could even also accept a ThingModel 12:35:41 cris: let's start with ThingInit 12:35:51 zoltan: it is better ExposeThingInit 12:36:14 cris: right 12:37:16 daniel: so we need just to rename PartialTD to ExposeThingInit and then discuss the algorithms 12:37:44 cris: the algorithms need some more work 12:37:58 zoltan: the alorithms are fine IMO 12:38:22 cris: there are some TODOs 12:38:36 daniel: yes we could discuss that next time 12:39:27 cris: we could use JSON schema patch feature 12:39:52 daniel: yes it was proposed by adrew 12:40:01 q+ 12:40:33 ... it would be much easier to have a external algorithm 12:41:20 kaz: adding this kind of algorithms is good. I think we should clarify the reasons why we are adding this capabilities, as I mentioned in other calls 12:42:18 daniel: the intent now is to remove partial TD from architecture, because we are the only one to use it 12:42:46 kaz: it may be best to discuss about this in the next architecture call. 12:43:15 ... we are on the same page. 12:43:21 s/about this/this/ 12:44:09 zoltan: we need this concept also in other places. So it may be probably better to define it in the architecture 12:44:16 s/adrew/Andrew/ 12:44:21 ack k 12:45:04 zoltan: for example in the node-red runtime they are probably using a similar concept 12:45:21 daniel: sure but it is up to them how to initialize an exposed thing 12:45:42 zoltan: but they should follow a common algorithm 12:46:35 CA: maybe not every client would accept the same algorithm for Thing init 12:46:42 s/it may be best to discuss/we're talking about partial TD, TD fragment and Thing Model during the Architecture call and the TD call. So in any case, we need to continue the discussion on/ 12:46:43 cris: probably other implementations would not follow a common algorithm 12:47:05 zoltan: it is not like they can do whatever they want 12:47:42 q? 12:47:45 q+ 12:47:48 daniel: how internally set up the whole exposed thing is not strictly specify. It is critical to provide the some outcome 12:47:58 cris: I agree 12:48:26 zoltan: so Why are we defining the algorithm in our spec? 12:48:51 daniel: it is difference it is for scripting consistency. 12:49:11 q? 12:50:35 daniel: there're a bunch of details that would need to be specified in the exposing process 12:51:27 kaz: scripting api task force can define its terms. We should clarify why we end up with this decision. Examples could help a lot. Also how to use this partial TDs in applications 12:51:50 Summarizing, the TD spec specifies the expected outcome (TD), not how it is achieved when creating ExposedThing 12:52:38 In Scripting spec, we need to specify the interop expectations in the algorithms, for instance how to handle input for ExposedThing init 12:53:58 zoltan: we need to ask to the TD task force if they are interested on the PartialTD definition 12:54:07 ... later we can move the discussion to the architecture 12:55:32 s/TD task force if/Architecture TF if 12:58:13 https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/577 12:58:56 cris: please add a comment about today dissussion in the PR above. 12:59:15 daniel: I'll try to report our point in there. 13:00:29 cris: I'll finish the PR, please check the alogorithms 13:00:51 daniel: Ok, there are some issues left 13:01:00 ... but we are overtime 13:01:14 zoltan: I could stay more 13:01:53 ... about implementation feedback you could raise an issue 13:02:20 daniel: I just felt that the new changes add a lot of complexity 13:02:40 zoltan: streams are widely used for handling generic data format 13:02:47 ... web platform is using it 13:03:45 rrsagent, make log public 13:03:49 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:03:49 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/25-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 13:04:51 kaz: out of time :) 13:04:59 [adjourned] 13:05:01 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:05:01 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/01/25-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 13:22:57 zkis has joined #wot-script 13:49:57 zkis has joined #wot-script 15:07:20 Zakim has left #wot-script