Meeting minutes
Agenda bashing
Lagally: reviews agenda
… notes UC TF description added to new web page draft
… and we should also do some wiki page cleanup
<kaz> Use Cases TF description on the WoT Welcome site
Lagally: also master->main change on github needed, but still working through this change on wot-testing
minutes review
<kaz> Jan-26
Lagally: discussed ITU-T use case summary
… plan was to invite them to this call, but did not get organized, so need to try again
… also talked about OPC-UA and liaison plans
… see PR90
<mlagally> PR 90 - Joint activity for a standardized OPC UA Binding
Lagally: no objections, minutes approved
so, want to look at LBD, but no one in attendance to discuss, so we'll look at other topics
PR 89
Lagally: let's review PRs
… PR89, HTML version of template
<kaz> PR 89 - add HTML template for use cases
McCool: suggest we also update the README to give appropriate instructions, i.e. either MD or HTML template
Lagally: will take update the README offline
<kaz> i/let's view PRs/topic: PR 89/
PR 86
<kaz> PR 86 - Update Smartcity Dashboard UC
<kaz> 4.4.2 Smart City Dashboard
Lagally: let's keep the PR/MR open so Philip Tran can review, then will discuss in two weeks
McCool: there are other pending activities around geolocation more generally...
Lagally: but that can wait, let's do the dashboard UC first
PR 94
<kaz> PR 94 - Focus AR/VR Guide use case on AR
<kaz> 4.17.1 VR/AR Virtual Guide
Action: kaz to contact Rob Smith about PR 94
<mlagally> https://
OPC-UA
<kaz> PR 90 - Joint activity for a standardized OPC UA Binding
Sebastian: been working on joint charter
Kaz: not really a uc description but a liaison proposal
… should be put under related standards in another relevant use case...
McCool: such as factory automation
Sebastian: see PR 90
Lagally: we should additionally clarify what an OPC-UA binding provides as benefits to other use cases
McCool: so maybe this should be in a new section, i.e. "Related Standards"
McCool: not sure whether the ITU-T stuff should go in as well...
Lagally: don't think we should do that, but can look at specific content
Lagally: anyway, proposal is to add a section for "Related Standards" and subsections for OPC-UA and ITU-T
… and suggest that we do another iteration on the OPC-UA to include additional
Kaz: technically, we could reuse "dependencies" section but adding a new section for "related standards" would make sense
Lagally: (created an issue on that point)
Issue 96 - New Annex to describe Liaisons
(McCool leaves)
Issue 50
Issue 50 - Complete privacy section for Medical use case
Lagally: this is one example on privacy required use cases
(need McCool for this topic)
Issue 75
Issue 75 - Requirements document for time stamps/ time series
Sebastian: we're not sure how to handle time stamps / time series withing TD
… related to topic about runtime data
… detailed description of the runtime data is needed
Lagally: do we have any ontology to handle time stamps / time series?
Sebastian: think it's a question of the data model
… JSON Schema already provide some
… but you can provide something additional
… but we don't have any concrete recommendation
Kaz: 2 comments here
… first, do we really have clear enough descriptions within our use cases about how to deal with time series of data?
… probably we should add some more clarifications based on some of the related use cases like media use cases and geolocation use cases
… second, as I suggested during the main call the other day, we should talk with related SDOs which handle ontologies, e.g., IEC
Koster: agree with Kaz
… joint discussion with OneDM on time information handling could be helpful
… examples include time series of temperature
David: time is on the same level of location
… need to identify when/where and what
Koster: right
… relevant to TD processing
Lagally: should have some use case on the combination of time and geolocation
… let's continue the discussion
… aob?
Mizushima: there is still a use case proposal on edge computing
… but that is written in MD
… we should convert it into HTML, shouldn't we?
Lagally: yes, please do so
[adjourned]