WoT Discovery

Minutes

meeting starts with reviewing the minutes

<kaz> Nov-1

McCool: we should probably close the discussion over the XPath and JsonPath data models

McCool: maybe we should add a topic for fragment identifiers
… and a topic for XPath response models
… to the corresponding issues

since no comments or objections are presented about the minutes, they are approved

Issue 190

first issue is #190

<glomb> https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/190

McCool: andrea presented an alternative

but it not retrocompatible

since it requires adding fields to the TDs

McCool: ...I have presented an alternative that does not require more fields

everything happens on the id field

Andrea: the solution presented is not very RDF-friendly, it will work of course, the there still the issue of having different entities (Thing and ThingDescriptions) and the lack of entities in the data

McCool reviews the comments of the issue, summarizing them for the audience

Andrea: maybe we could use / instead of a query parameter for indicating the TD view

McCool is typing the comments of andrea and cristiano in the issue

<kaz> RFC 8141

McCool has summarised the discussion about how suitable the solutions proposed are, and also, about the compatiblity of URN with RDF as URIs

Issue 224

next issue is #224

<McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/224

McCool: if a TD is submitted into a TDD and it lacks of type as Thing

the directory should inject it

McCool adds the ideas been discussed to the issue.

McCool types the comments of the dicussion in the issue. He proposes 3 alternatives for dealing with this issue