14:58:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-arch
14:58:23 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/02/25-wot-arch-irc
14:59:43 <mlagally> mlagally has joined #wot-arch
15:00:00 <kaz> Meeting: WoT Architecture
15:01:07 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally
15:04:15 <citrullin> citrullin has joined #wot-arch
15:06:21 <kaz> kaz has joined #wot-arch
15:06:57 <sebastian> sebastian has joined #wot-arch
15:07:45 <Mizushima> Mizushima has joined #wot-arch
15:08:26 <kaz> present+ Philipp_Blum, Michael_McCool, Michael_Koster
15:08:26 <mjk> mjk has joined #wot-arch
15:10:08 <mjk> topic: agenda bashing
15:10:35 <McCool> McCool has joined #wot-arch
15:10:40 <mjk> mm: want to dedicate most time to the profile discussion
15:10:49 <mjk> s/mm/ml
15:11:06 <mjk> ml: any other agenda items?
15:11:17 <kaz> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#Feb._25th.2C_2021
15:11:26 <mjk> ml: looking at the comments from Ben Francis
15:11:30 <kaz> present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
15:11:53 <mjk> topic: review previous minutes
15:11:59 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2021/02/18-wot-arch-minutes.html Feb-18
15:13:37 <mjk> ml: reviewing the discussion of memory size and use cases
15:14:27 <mjk> ... any objections to approve?
15:14:35 <mjk> (no objections)
15:14:44 <mjk> topic: vf2f
15:15:01 <mlagally> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf
15:15:12 <mlagally> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_March_2021#Timetable_for_WoT_PlugFest_and_vF2F_in_March.2C_2021
15:15:21 <mjk> mm: ASDF hackathon running concurrently with the VF2F
15:16:34 <kaz> present+ Sebastian_Kaebisch
15:18:52 <mjk> ml: reviewing time slots for VF2F
15:19:34 <mjk> s/VF2F/Plugfest
15:19:48 <mjk> s/Plugfest/VF2F
15:20:03 <mjk> s/the VF2F/the Plugfest
15:20:57 <mjk> mm: prefer to have enough time for good depth on each topic, focus on report out and do the work offline
15:22:12 <mjk> ... what is the priority of the different meetings?
15:23:10 <mjk> ml: we could schedule some of these joint meetings to a use case call
15:23:32 <mjk> s/prefer/for joint meetings prefer
15:25:30 <mjk> topic: next weeks progress on profiles
15:25:48 <mjk> mm: we need to talk about use cases and reconcile the different interpretations
15:26:47 <mjk> mm: we need to discuss optionality or multiple profiles for different use cases
15:27:23 <mjk> mm: is it one profile for everything or is there enough specialization in use cases?
15:27:43 <mjk> ml: initial focus was interoperability for embedded
15:28:18 <mjk> mm: embedded is too broad, factory automation has other requirements
15:28:28 <mjk> sk: agree, embedded is too broad
15:28:50 <mjk> mm: for industrial applications we may need larger TDs, for example
15:29:30 <mjk> ml: we should discuss this before the VF2F
15:30:38 <mjk> ml: profiles have priority over architecture
15:32:00 <mjk> mm: go through the issue tracker and find topics that are important to the group
15:33:36 <mjk> ml: what about (APA)?
15:34:08 <mjk> ml: there are many issues on terminology
15:35:13 <mjk> mm: people thought hubs are not part of the WoT architecture, we should clarify
15:35:56 <mjk> ml: terminology needs alignment with ITU-T architecture
15:36:32 <mjk> mm: edge gateway could include hub use cases
15:37:33 <mjk> mm: the hub is not necessarily a gateway
15:38:01 <mjk> ... but it is often a proxy
15:38:18 <mjk> mk: there could be separate control point vs. proxy
15:39:09 <mjk> mm: we need to think in terms of function integration per ITU-T
15:39:39 <mjk> sk: edge terminology replaces gateway in common use
15:40:45 <mjk> philip: gateway is used for some specific network routing functions
15:41:04 <mjk> mk: agree, gateway is not specific enough
15:41:17 <mjk> mm: gateway hub, edge hub?
15:41:38 <mjk> ... use gateway as an adjective
15:43:22 <kaz> q+
15:44:00 <mjk> mm: use gateway when we are talking about network functions
15:44:11 <mjk> ... hub does orchestration
15:44:39 <mjk> ... edge computer does more heavy lifting beyond hub
15:44:48 <mjk> ... hub can be a generic term
15:45:09 <mlagally> mlagally has joined #wot-arch
15:45:23 <mjk> kaz: agree in general with mm categories, we also need to define "intermediary"
15:45:52 <mjk> mm: talk about functions vs. hardware
15:46:06 <mjk> ... hubs can run directory services and intermediaries
15:47:04 <kaz> ack k
15:48:18 <mjk> ml: OSGi is a functional gateway architecture
15:50:19 <mjk> mk: agree with use of gateway for network oriented functions and to describe existing use e.g. OSGi
15:50:36 <mjk> mm: hub defined as centralization of local services
15:51:04 <mjk> ... intermediaries, shadows
15:53:23 <mjk> mk: a shadow reflects state of a device
15:53:40 <mjk> ml: let's finish the hub definition
15:54:04 <mjk> mm: enumerates service types for the issue tracker notes
15:54:53 <mjk> mm: will create a PR for hub terminology
15:55:43 <mjk> mk: shadow is an intermediary between the devices and the digital twin models
15:56:21 <mjk> ml: life cycle notes
15:56:32 <mjk> ml: other issues?
15:58:20 <mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22spec+contribution%22
15:58:28 <mjk> ml: outreach on help wanted items before the F2F?
15:58:46 <mjk> mk: will sign up for introductory paragraphs
15:59:24 <mjk> ml: anything from discovery?
16:00:37 <mjk> mm: issues #530, #524
16:01:06 <mjk> ml: there is a label for discovery
16:03:06 <mjk> ml: security considerations section
16:03:12 <mjk> s/ml/mm
16:04:20 <mjk> seb: TD section should describe partial TDs (TM, discovery templates, scripting interactions)
16:06:07 <mjk> ml: protocol binding should be included as a topic also
16:07:08 <mjk> mk: clarify that the preceding discussion was in the context of contributions from other groups to the Architecture document
16:08:50 <mjk> ml: what about profiles: canonical TD, reference devices, use cases
16:09:43 <mjk> ml: this is the priority material to discuss in the VF2F
16:10:20 <mjk> topic: review the proposed specification text on profiles
16:10:30 <mjk> ml: there are 3 PRs
16:10:53 <mjk> ... PR #70 on categories
16:11:19 <mjk> mm: categories can be kept separate from the TD limitation discussion
16:11:58 <mjk> ml: devices range from small embedded to larger resourced devices like hubs
16:12:36 <mjk> ... identify features and use cases for the categories
16:12:54 <mjk> mm: I think about small nodes and bigger nodes
16:12:55 <kaz> i|can be kept|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pull/70 PR 70 - device categories - initial draft|
16:13:02 <mjk> ... edge and cloud overlap
16:13:42 <mjk> ml: do we need another category for different bigger devices?
16:13:59 <sebastian> q+
16:15:15 <mjk> sk: not sure if "node" is useful, since edge and cloud can have nodes also
16:15:35 <mjk> sk: categories are not clear
16:15:48 <mjk> philip: how about "constrained devices"?
16:18:13 <mjk> (discussion on Node vs. Endpoint terminology)
16:18:15 <kaz> -> https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/wot-profile/70/594c374...96ae4f0.html#device-categoriesdevices Proposed Section 5. Device Categories
16:20:31 <mjk> discussion of roles vs. device categories
16:20:32 <kaz> q+
16:21:48 <mjk> sk: where does a controller belong?
16:21:54 <McCool> q+
16:23:02 <mjk> ml: the term class is probably a good identifier
16:23:17 <McCool> ack seb
16:23:27 <mjk> ... the IETF terminology is useful
16:23:47 <citrullin> https://customer.honeywell.com/resources/techlit/TechLitDocuments/31-00000s/31-00100.pdf
16:23:58 <citrullin> CPUEach controller uses a 32 bit ATMEL ARM 7 microprocessor.Memory CapacityFlash Memory: 512 kilobytes. The controller is able to retain Flash memory settings for up to ten (10) years.RAM: 128 kilobytes
16:25:51 <kaz> -> https://www.w3schools.com/bootstrap/bootstrap_grid_small.asp there is some definition for device classification based on the screen size (but I personally think we should rather use more neutral term like "class")
16:26:42 <mjk> kaz: memory size is what determines the class
16:27:31 <mjk> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7228
16:28:49 <kaz> s/class/class, but I also would go for neutral class name like "class 1, 2 or 3" instead of "small, medium or large"/
16:29:03 <mjk> ml: don't want to spend time drafting new documentation
16:29:50 <mjk> mm: start with classes then extrapolate as needed for profiles
16:30:09 <kaz> q?
16:30:11 <kaz> ack k
16:30:11 <mjk> q?
16:30:13 <McCool> ack k
16:30:16 <McCool> ack m
16:32:19 <mjk> sk: what are the scenarios that go with the classes and use cases?
16:32:55 <mjk> ... the scenarios can inform the TD
16:33:20 <mjk> sk: there is only the switch and lamp scenario, which is not realistic enough
16:33:34 <mjk> ml: they are in the minutes
16:33:49 <mjk> sk: Can we summarize somewhere?
16:33:59 <mjk> ml: we summarized 2 or 3 weeks ago
16:34:28 <mjk> ml: there will be an arch call next week if people are available
16:34:33 <mjk> ml: AOB?
16:34:41 <mjk> ... none; adjourn
16:35:03 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
16:35:08 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:35:08 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/02/25-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
16:35:11 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:35:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/02/25-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
16:35:12 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:35:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/02/25-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
16:47:12 <kaz> Chair: Lagally
16:47:13 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:47:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/02/25-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
18:31:29 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-arch