WoT Use Cases

Minutes

Aug-3

Lagally: (goes through the minutes)
… will follow up Conexxus

McCool: btw, there was some information on industry cases of WoT during the Marketing call

Lagally: minutes approved

Aug-31

McCool: (gives summary)

Lagally: this use case itself is quite simple on smart homes

Kaz: right
… we should handle geofencing, etc., separately from this use case
… and can generate another separate use case about that as a horizontal use case

Lagally: ok
… btw, what's the status on the liaison with OGC?

McCool: talking with Christine
… it seems there is an IEEE WG on geospatial data as well

Kaz: we should have a joint session with them during TPAC

McCool: yeah
… another question is how to manage the geolocation data
… along with time-series data

Kaz: we can start with some basic discussion based on use cases

McCool: yeah

Lagally: for concrete extensions, we should be careful about our Charter
… current Charter or the next one
… e.g., clustering things

McCool: thinking about orchestration
… are we just concern about grouping the status?
… or what do we want to achieve?

Lagally: seems various topics there
… including permission management

McCool: we have things like OAuth now
… but no standard to manage orchestration
… e.g., a visitor visiting my home would like to get connected with the network at my home

Kaz: let's approve the minutes first :)

McCool: yes, the minutes are fine :)
… regarding the next steps, we have several advanced use cases in the pipe

Lagally: so we added "gaps" to the use case template to clarify the gaps
… what was the conclusion about ECHONET use case description itself?

<sebastian> sorry I have to go

Kaz: was quickly skimming it again today with Michael Lagally ;)

Lagally: ok. the minutes themselves are approved

ECHONET use case

ECHONET use case

(discussion on the "Gaps" section specifically)

[[

controlling multiple devices in an orchestrated manner is dependent on the implementation of a client application in the current WoT specification

]]

McCool: so there is a gap for multi-vendor orchestration

Lagally: what level of orchestration is expected?
… how the ECHONET spec handles orchestration?

Matsuda: ECHONET Lite Web API spec itself doesn't have orchestration capability

Kaz: ECHONET doesn't have multi-vendor/multi-standard orchestration capability, and so they would like to use WoT for that purpose

Matsuda: right. we just wanted to show you that there is a use case which can't be implemented with existing standards

Lagally: what kind of "orchestration" is expected here?

Matsuda: multiple devices which use multiple data models

McCool: "orchestration" here is not just operation
… but also include data
… so need to maintain the data somewhere
… btw, ECHONET Lite Web API spec has the device spec and the device description
… more than one access point may be involved

Kaz: I'm OK with accepting this use case description itself, but we should clarify our expectation for "orchestration"
… based on some concrete scenario, e.g., the conductor work with the pianist, violinist, drummer, etc. :)

McCool: right. and "orchestration" should include "configuration management"

Matsuda: for the moment, we can avoid using the term of "orchestration" within our use case

Kaz: ECHONET is planning to join the Plugfest during TPAC
… so we can think about actual "orchestration" during the Plugfest and its planning
… note that their spec document is written in Japanese
… but the most important definition is done by tables which include English as well as Japanese
… so we can refer to part of their spec document

McCool: right

Lagally: ok
… Matsuda-san, what kind of features for "orchestration" or "grouping" do you want in addition to your own grouping capability?

Matsuda: things like where to store data, how to handle different data from various vendors, etc.

McCool: we could put them on the document

Lagally: can we have some more detailed description about the gaps?
… grouping and sequence of actions?

McCool: note that it would take a few more weeks for them to add requirements description
… since they need to discuss the changes internally

Lagally: ok

McCool: wondering about the schedule

Lagally: let's go for weekly meeting

McCool: will send an updated invite

Kaz: can we move ahead with the ECHONET use case itself?
… can we ask Matsuda-san to generate the HTML description for the use case document?

<mlagally> Proposal: Include ECHONET use case into use cases document

Resolution: Include ECHONET use case into use cases document

AOB

Lagally: wondering about outreach

McCool: could have joint meetings during TPAC

https://built.itmedia.co.jp/bt/articles/2108/31/news030.html

Kaz: fyi, as I mentioned during the Marketing call today, big companies like Takenaka from Japan have started to use WoT as the basis for their IoT systems :)

Lagally: great!

[adjoured]