Meeting minutes
minutes
<kaz> May-4
Lagally: reviews May 4 minutes
David: hubs in retail focus on localization and portability
McCool: edgex just an example, need to look at how to capture uc and requirements
Lagally: anyway, any objections to the minutes?
… hearing none, published
Kaz: we also need to look at May 11 minutes
<mlagally> https://
<kaz> May-11
Lagally: review May 11 minutes
… right, that was when Soumya presented
… also the ITU-T liaison; I guess we are still waiting for their response
… and Soumya presented several use cases that touched on AR/VR and edge cases
… planned to come back with a UC contribution
McCool: now I'm wondering if Soumya knows about the meeting schedule; has the wiki page been updated?
Lagally: let me check...
Lagally: any objection to publishing the minutes?
… hearing none, to be published
issue review
Lagally: as a general comment, there are a lot of things commented out in the index.html that need to be filled in
… have created issues for many of these
… and also, added several hidden citations so references show up but document does not cite them in visible content
… also, it would be better to use re-spec references as opposed to local ones
… mizushima-san, do you think you can look into this?
Mizushima: I am willing to check the links, but in some cases there are no data
… for example, MMI-2.1, etc. what are these?
Lagally: those are a bit special
McCool: btw, MMI stands for "multimodal interface" and may or may not be in respec (was a CG note, I think)
Lagally: some things we need local refs, but if is it an RFC, etc. there should be an official ref for that
Kaz: we need to look at refs; but I did make a PR to update the publication, and some of those changes were reference fixes
… but, respec has a bug that is introducing white space and breaking some things, so...
Lagally: why don't you work with mizushima-san and see if you can sort out the references?
Action: kaz to work with mizushima-san on specref database
PRs
<mlagally> https://
Kaz: this updates various things for publication
… fairly large, but we need to merge it as a basis for discussion
Lagally: it's all editorial cleanup?
Kaz: yes, and there is a summary
<kaz> summary of the changes
Kaz: fixing broken links, mention of "master" converted to "main", duplicate ids, etc. etc.
Lagally: other PRs
… cultural spaces
<mlagally> https://
Lagally: is intro contributions, as an HTML file
Kaz: unfortunately he modified the template directly, so we need to fix the PR
McCool: and we can ignore the markup and formatting for now, will fix when we roll up into index.html
… I think the environmental control requirements are new here
… it's true that art museums etc. have special requirements
Lagally: knowledge representation of locations...
McCool: so, geolocation?
Lagally: related to energy consumption as well
… also person tracking
Lagally: so let's add some comments
McCool: needs citation for definition of "trustworthy" and "trust degree" since actually uses a numerical value
Lagally: (add comments)
McCool: a discussion of accessibility
… would also be useful, not sure if is already in there
McCool: regarding the template issue, we can fix, but will require some cutting and pasting
Lagally: also some discussion of welcome messages, environmental and lighting controls, etc.
McCool: interesting discussion here, because you might not want heating/humidity to vary too much, but temporarily brightening lighting might be ok
Lagally: perhaps they missed location?
McCool: person might be given a guide that has a tracker
… also, some museums have "linear" exhibits, some are branching
… for location, need something more specialized to indoor
McCool: does he mean some visitors have more rights than others, e.g. rights to take photographs?
McCool: would imagine tracking artifacts is something you'd want to do in a museum
… and correlate that with visitors, environmental controls, etc.
Lagally: so summary, we accept it, once they mix the name conflict, we can revisit in next call
Connexxus User Stories
David: IoT group in connexxus had made progress on user stories
… outdoor and indoor
… are 11 in the outdoor, about 15 for indoor
… wondering if we can make use of some of these here
… have identified stakeholders
… end users, why do they care (what do they want to know...)
… relates to security and discovery
McCool: sounds like it has a lot of useful material
Lagally: is there a presentation or summary?
David: is a word document
… one thing they are trying to reason about is abstracting these into a set of thing descriptions
… is it possible to abstract three of these as TDs?
Lagally: no use case meeting next week... in two weeks
McCool: can we get access to the document?
Lagally: more productive to have a presentation...
… we can aim for four weeks out
David: can't make the next meeting
McCool: could we switch around parts of architecture and use case calls?
David: that might work, I will talk to jack d about it
Lagally: any other business?
… no, let's adjourn; thanks, all. Note: no UC or Arch call next week.