McCool: ml was not available, so we merged mostly editorial PRs, then created a pre-restructure branch so more radical PRs would still have a convenient rollback point
McCool: btw, it seems some people are assuming directories will follow the profile but I had not previously considered this to be a requirement. But it MAY may sense... we will have to explicitly discuss in the next call
Lagally: any objections to publishing the minutes?
Lagally: hearing no objections, minutes are approved
Discovery PR #588
<kaz> wot-architecture PR 588 - Add Discovery refs, dfn, and section
McCool: basically just added a couple of paragraphs that describe the purpose and basic architecture of the Discovery service
McCool: notice the strong emphasis on security and privacy
Lagally: we should be explicit about what is normative
McCool: in particular, it is not required that discovery be done using WoT Discovery, that there is a WoT TDD, or that peer-to-peer is supported
… so I would suggest merging this but I can add another paragraph in a new PR to make these points explicit
… probably a "MAY NOT" assertion? Not sure
McCool: we probably do want to *encourage* use of WoT discovery, but not require it
carry over requirements to use cases #72
Lagally: housekeeping, just merge; carried over to use case repo
… is in the repo, not the document
<mlagally> wot-profile PR 72 - carry over requirements to use cases TF
McCool: should we reschedule the arch call?
Lagally: let's try contacting Ben first to see if he has an ongoing problem
Lagally: Summary of action items
... Mccool to check the pagination response codes in the discovery spec
... Ben to double check the list of error codes in WebThings Lagally: check error codes of Oracle's digital twin implementation
... Daniel to double check node-wot's error codes, are there error response payloads?