Meeting minutes
Minutes
Daniel: let's discuss the topic on the Use Cases section later again
… don't see any issues with the minutes themselves
(no objections; minutes approved)
Decision process
wot PR 1005 - Asynchronous Review Process for Specification Changes
Cristiano: maybe we can introduce some specific labels to clarify the importance of each issue/PR
Daniel: yeah, would make sense
Kaz: if we REALLY want and need, we can go for this asynchronous decision making direction
… however, as I mentioned last week already, we should be very careful about this issue
… because our basic policy for this Charter period has been having discussion on GitHub, then during TF calls and during the main call in the end for important topics like publication decision
… so we should clarify what kind of issues/PRs can be handled by which method
Daniel: right
… we should continue to discuss how to deal with it
Meeting cancellations
Daniel: McCool suggest we cancel all the WoT calls after Dec 19 except the main calls (and all meetings canceled after 26th)
Cancellation plan on the main wiki
Daniel: I'm OK with that plan
Cristiano: I'm also OK
PRs
PR 353
PR 353 - refactor: move section "Terminology and conventions" right after "Conformance"
Daniel: moving the Terminology section
… also removing references
Cristiano: reference for ECMAScript has some issue
Daniel: can create another issue to address that point
… note there is some ReSpec error about [[value]]
… objection to merge this PR 353?
(no objections)
merged
PR 356
Allow only one subscription per affordance
Cristiano: will clean up the PR
Daniel: if you can fix the issue with ECMAScript, that's great
Issues
Issue 342
Issue 342 - Reference terminology section of the architecture specification
Daniel: think this issue is already resolved
Cristiano: what about the "Use cases" section?
Daniel: there is a comment from Mizushima-san for another issue about that point
… (adds comments)
Issue 355
Issue 355 - Rename Use Cases section ?
Daniel: Mizushima-san suggests we change the section title from "Use Cases" to "Features"
Cristiano: features are about more products
Kaz: the most important thing here is all the WoT Editors/Contributors having the same understanding for the terminologies for WoT specs including "Use cases", "Functionalities" and "Features" so that we can use those terms consistently for all the WoT spec documents
Daniel: I'm OK with "Functionalities"
Cristiano: I'm OK too
Mizushima: would still prefer "Features"
Kaz: I'm OK with either way, "Functionalities" or "Features"
… but "Use cases" is confusing to be used to show functionalities withing WoT spec documents
[adjourned]