09:56:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-arch
09:56:08 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-irc
09:56:16 <kaz> meeting: WoT Architecture
10:00:44 <cris> cris has joined #wot-arch
10:02:02 <mlagally____> mlagally____ has joined #wot-arch
10:03:13 <Ege> Ege has joined #wot-arch
10:03:59 <Ege> I will join the second hour today due to a conflict
10:06:04 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally
10:06:34 <kaz> present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi
10:06:40 <ktoumura> ktoumura has joined #wot-arch
10:07:32 <kaz> present+ Kunihiko_Toumura, Ben_Francis
10:09:15 <kaz> scribenick: cris
10:09:35 <cris> topic: agenda
10:10:01 <cris> ml: first architecture with housekeeping
10:10:15 <kaz> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#Dec_9th.2C_2021
10:10:21 <cris> ... then profile we should discuss scope and goals
10:10:29 <cris> ... also validation is an open issue
10:10:56 <cris> ... any other things that we should cover today?
10:10:57 <ryuichi> ryuichi has joined #wot-arch
10:11:00 <cris> ... ok
10:11:11 <cris> topic: house keeping
10:11:43 <kaz> subtopic: minutes
10:11:47 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2021/12/02-wot-arch-minutes.html Dec-2
10:11:52 <cris> ml: I reviewed the minutes they are fine
10:12:46 <cris> ... side note: yesterday we discussed an issue in the TD task force. We should have a second look to it
10:13:02 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
10:13:06 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:13:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:13:17 <Mizushima> Mizushima has joined #wot-arch
10:13:34 <kaz> chair: Lagally
10:13:45 <cris> ... gave a background about how the Profile spec was created
10:14:09 <cris> ... we created issue 152 where we can discuss how to proceed
10:14:20 <cris> ... are mintues ok?
10:14:32 <cris> ... minutes approved
10:14:43 <kaz> s/I will join the second hour today due to a conflict//
10:14:44 <cris> topic: new timeslots
10:14:46 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:14:46 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:15:39 <cris> ml: we have doodle pools for the new timeslots please answer asap
10:15:41 <kaz> -> https://doodle.com/poll/ht5q6rbzs7xcbtna Doodle for Architecture
10:16:01 <kaz> i|we have|-> https://doodle.com/poll/ht5q6rbzs7xcbtna Doodle for Profile|
10:17:09 <cris> topic: contributions
10:17:22 <cris> ml: two PRs ready to go
10:17:36 <cris> ... one from mcool is still wip
10:17:54 <cris> subtopic: PR 650
10:18:09 <cris> ml: the PR removes a section
10:18:22 <cris> ... about protocol methods
10:18:32 <cris> ... looks good.
10:18:50 <mlagally____> Proposal: Merge https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/650
10:19:03 <kaz> s/mcool/McCool/
10:19:11 <mlagally____> Resolution: Merge https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/650
10:19:13 <kaz> present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
10:19:31 <cris> subtopic: PR 651
10:19:58 <cris> ml: as previous PR it removes an assertion about consumer configuration
10:20:08 <cris> ... it is more related to discovery
10:20:18 <cris> ... but it has no reviews
10:20:22 <cris> ... I did
10:20:34 <mlagally____> Proposal: Merge https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/651
10:20:44 <McCool> McCool has joined #wot-arch
10:20:54 <mlagally____> Resolution: Merge https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/651
10:21:16 <McCool> all, I'm trying to call into the arch meeting but the webex is not opening for me.  Did I miss a change of webex?
10:21:25 <kaz> i|the PR removes a|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/651 PR 651 - Remove arch-consumer-configuration|
10:21:31 <cris> topic: spec alignment adn pubblication blockers
10:21:42 <benfrancis> McCool: The webex on the calendar is wrong, the link on the mailing list works
10:21:51 <McCool> argh
10:22:06 <benfrancis> McCool: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-wg/2020Aug/0003.html
10:22:09 <mlagally____> please use the old webex
10:23:05 <cris> ml: we have just one publication blocker
10:23:17 <kaz> present+ Michael_McCool
10:23:40 <cris> ... it is a TD assertion it should be moved there or removed
10:24:20 <kaz> i|the PR removes a|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/650 PR 650 - remove arch-methods assertion and section|
10:24:46 <kaz> i|as previous PR it|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/651 PR 651 - Remove arch-consumer-configuration|
10:25:11 <cris> ... we have more but most of them are assertions
10:25:19 <cris> ... please spend sometime working on them
10:25:23 <kaz> s/adn pubb/and pub/
10:25:31 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:25:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:25:53 <mlagally____> Please all owners of publication blockers dedicate a bit of time to resolve their issues and create PRs.
10:25:55 <mlagally____> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22blocks+publication%22
10:26:19 <cris> ml: the label is blocks pubblication, use the URL above to see the list
10:26:37 <cris> subtopic: spec alignment
10:26:52 <cris> ml: is terminology section moved from discovery?
10:26:57 <cris> mc: pretty much
10:27:10 <cris> ml: ok closing the issue
10:27:32 <cris> ... is moving terminology from TD pending?
10:27:45 <cris> mc: yeah
10:28:06 <cris> ml: about binding templates? I think is solved
10:28:15 <cris> s/is/it is/
10:29:10 <cris> ... there also another issue about binding templates terminology, they are requesting definition of content type and MIME type
10:29:27 <cris> ... looking at the current document we don't have those term defined
10:29:31 <cris> ... leaving open
10:29:53 <cris> ... for issue 617 we need @Ege
10:29:54 <kaz> s/ blocks publication / "blocks publication" /
10:30:33 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:30:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:31:26 <kaz> s/ blocks pubblication / "blocks publication" /
10:31:28 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:31:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:32:13 <cris> ml: I think we have everything covered in the architecture?
10:32:16 <cris> ... aob?
10:32:29 <cris> topic: WoT Profile
10:32:50 <cris> ml: there's a lot of conversation going on in different issues/prs
10:33:01 <kaz> i|is terminology section moved|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22spec+alignment%22 Spec alignment issues|
10:33:14 <cris> ... a good starting point is the list of PR
10:33:32 <cris> ... some of them are labeled as needs discussion
10:33:42 <kaz> s/topic: contribution/topic: Architecture/
10:34:10 <kaz> s/topic: spec alignment and publication blockers/subtopic: spec alignment and publication blockers/
10:34:26 <cris> ... there are two PR marked as close
10:34:41 <kaz> s/subtopic: spec alignment and publication blockers/subtopic: publication blockers/
10:34:41 <cris> ... I'm wondering why are those labeled as that
10:34:49 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:34:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:35:15 <kaz> present+ Ryuichi_Matsukura
10:35:16 <cris> ben: I created an alternative PR that should cover the same changes
10:35:46 <cris> ... if that PR would be merged PR 87 should be close
10:36:05 <cris> ... but feel free to remove the close label if you find it missleading
10:36:27 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:36:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:36:50 <cris> mc: maybe a different label can help, like potential conflict?
10:37:06 <cris> ml: not sure it will help since we have many conflicting PRs right now
10:37:48 <cris> ... the next one with close label is from @Ege it creates an echonet example
10:38:01 <cris> ... why is labeled as close?
10:38:08 <cris> ben: Ege suggested so
10:38:33 <cris> ml: I think we should merge it
10:39:01 <cris> ben: Ege suggested closing it
10:39:20 <kaz> i|there is a lot of|subtopic: open PRs|
10:39:22 <cris> ml: ok, we can.
10:39:30 <kaz> i|there is a lot of|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pulls Open PRs|
10:39:35 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:39:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:39:52 <mlagally____> Resolution: close without merging, as suggested by the author: https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pull/85
10:40:03 <kaz> i|there's a lot of|subtopic: open PRs|
10:40:11 <kaz> i|there's a lot of|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pulls Open PRs|
10:40:13 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:40:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:40:48 <cris> ml: I have a couple of slides to support the discussion about goals and purposes of this document
10:40:56 <cris> ... I'd to have a open table
10:41:11 <cris> ... reaching a consensus
10:41:17 <kaz> i/have a couple/subtopic: Profile cope/
10:41:20 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:41:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:42:11 <McCool> q+
10:42:21 <cris> ... I'd ask to be really open about personal/company agendas
10:42:23 <kaz> q+
10:42:58 <cris> ... different opinions are symptoms of the current IoT status (fragmentation)
10:43:34 <cris> ... as task force chair I'll try to be objective and separate company goals
10:43:48 <kaz> ack mc
10:44:06 <cris> mc: IoT and Interoperability are huge topics
10:44:13 <cris> ... we need to be practical
10:44:28 <kaz> s/Profile cope/Profile scope/
10:44:32 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:44:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:44:48 <cris> ... we should limit ourselves to address interoperability problems of the current spec
10:45:56 <benfrancis> q+
10:46:03 <cris> ... about webhooks, I think they are important but we don't have experience with those protocols.
10:46:29 <cris> ... on the other hand we have experience with SSE and longpoll.
10:47:52 <cris> ... action and event models feel to big topics to be added inside Profile
10:48:30 <cris> kaz: are you ok with starting discussion on each slide?
10:48:39 <cris> ml: yes that is my intention
10:48:51 <cris> q?
10:49:30 <cris> kaz: scope and goals might be discussed together
10:49:37 <cris> ml: ok
10:49:41 <kaz> ack k
10:50:01 <cris> ben: +1 for mccool points
10:50:51 <cris> ml: you can see wot profile use cases on the use case document
10:51:06 <kaz> s/Profile scope/Expectations for the WoT Profile spec/
10:52:18 <benfrancis> q+
10:52:21 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:52:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
10:52:25 <kaz> q?
10:52:39 <cris> q+
10:52:54 <kaz> q+
10:53:08 <cris> ben: we can solve the first use case out-of-box interop with profile
10:53:22 <cris> ... the last use case I don't think we can solve using profile alone
10:53:49 <cris> ... you need a software that those the translation between protocols
10:54:08 <cris> ... basically you can't guarantee interoperability between profiles
10:55:39 <McCool> q+
10:55:40 <cris> ml: when we have the separation between the Thing and Protocol Binding
10:55:45 <kaz> ack b
10:55:55 <benfrancis> q+
10:56:22 <cris> ... it should be easier to threat different profiles as abstracts objects and let them interoperate
10:57:21 <kaz> i/IoT and Inter/[Scope]/
10:57:43 <McCool> q?
10:58:41 <kaz> s/are you ok with/before starting the discussion, we should clarify the procedure for the discussion today. for example, are you ok with/
10:59:44 <kaz> ack cris
11:00:08 <cris> cris: we had experience with Modbus, MQTT and OPC-UA
11:00:41 <cris> kaz: about the main scope and goal we should clarify
11:00:58 <cris> ... how to deal with the discussion
11:01:09 <kaz> ack k
11:01:14 <cris> ... maybe we can ask each member
11:01:32 <cris> mc: it is good to have use cases analysis
11:02:33 <kaz> s/maybe we can ask each member/given the current situation, I think we should ask each member about their opinion if any/
11:03:06 <cris> ... maybe it is beneficial to identify the target actors for profile (which are the target consumer/exposers ? )
11:03:11 <kaz> q?
11:03:14 <kaz> ack m
11:03:23 <cris> s/exposers/producers/
11:04:52 <cris> q+
11:05:19 <kaz> q+
11:05:29 <ryuichi_> ryuichi_ has joined #wot-arch
11:05:33 <sebastia_> hi, Im not able to join webex.
11:05:48 <sebastia_> is there a new link?
11:05:52 <cris> ml: profiles might have just a role in the digital tween use case
11:07:11 <McCool> q?
11:07:17 <McCool> q+
11:07:29 <cris> ... it is beneficial to refer arch definitions to help the discussion
11:08:04 <McCool> (servients: note that we have Thing Descriptions, not "Servient Descriptions".  I.e. we currently describe just the *server* affordances...)
11:08:33 <cris> ... the arch is more than client - server model
11:09:17 <kaz> q?
11:09:56 <kaz> qq+
11:10:13 <cris> ... we different interaction patterns: client-server, client-servient, servient server, servient-servient
11:10:23 <kaz> q- kaz
11:11:20 <cris> ml: going back to the scopes
11:11:33 <kaz> i/(servients/(some supplementary discussion on terminology)/
11:11:57 <cris> ben: earlier point: interop between protocols. I think this is a goal of the Thing Description
11:12:48 <kaz> present+ Ege_Korkan, Sebastian_Kaebisch
11:12:59 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:12:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
11:13:16 <cris> ... I recall that we settled for a scope in a previous call but it wasn't tracked
11:13:26 <McCool> q?
11:13:31 <McCool> ack ben
11:13:48 <kaz> i/(some supple/[Terminology]/
11:14:38 <kaz> i/going back/[Scope] revisited/
11:14:44 <kaz> ack cris
11:16:58 <kaz> kaz: would suggest we ask the other participants about their opinions as well
11:17:06 <kaz> i/would/scribenick: kaz/
11:17:23 <kaz> ml: Toumura-san, Matsukura-san and Mizushima-san, what about you?
11:17:42 <kaz> s/well/well. if they have same opinion with somebody, that's fine./
11:17:58 <kaz> ... what do you need for Profile?
11:18:11 <kaz> toumura: I'm a Consumer implementer
11:18:22 <kaz> ... so narrowing down the scope would be helpful
11:18:40 <kaz> ... we don't have enough information for consumer implementations
11:19:08 <kaz> ml: tx, that's a good point
11:19:15 <kaz> ... would support that viewpoint too
11:19:37 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:19:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
11:20:00 <kaz> ...for Oracle, it's essential to have limits and constraints
11:20:17 <kaz> ... that fit into database-based server implementations
11:20:18 <kaz> q?
11:20:20 <kaz> ack
11:20:22 <benfrancis> q+
11:20:24 <kaz> ack k
11:21:01 <kaz> ... for example, generic UI is very important for us
11:21:03 <kaz> q?
11:21:17 <ryuichi_> q+
11:21:25 <sebastia_> q+
11:21:40 <kaz> mm: support idea to make resolution on the scope
11:21:47 <kaz> ... looking at the issue we started about the outline
11:22:16 <kaz> ... we define entities precisely, etc., would make sense
11:22:23 <Ege> q+
11:22:28 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/152 Issue 152 - Propose an outline for a new profile document
11:22:31 <kaz> ack mc
11:22:33 <kaz> ls
11:22:40 <kaz> s/ls/
11:22:50 <kaz> q?
11:23:04 <kaz> ack b
11:23:12 <kaz> ben: great to have different voices
11:23:25 <kaz> ... Lagally, you mention human readability
11:23:40 <kaz> ... more contentious
11:23:49 <kaz> ... my concern is what it means in practice
11:24:04 <kaz> ... that's important but should be solved by the TD rather than the Profile
11:24:47 <kaz> ... human readability should be defined by TD rather than as a constraint within Profile
11:24:54 <kaz> q?
11:25:08 <kaz> qq+
11:25:18 <kaz> ml: ok
11:25:29 <kaz> ... but let's focus on the discussion on OOTBI today
11:26:05 <kaz> q-
11:26:21 <kaz> kaz: I think today's discussion is kind of brainst ..
11:26:31 <kaz> matsukura: can understand everybody's opinion
11:26:38 <kaz> ... about interoperability
11:26:41 <kaz> ... for easier deployment
11:26:50 <kaz> ... Fujitsu has a product for WoT
11:27:05 <kaz> ... so we focus on how to maintain devices everywhere
11:27:20 <kaz> ... it's difficult because TD has a logical ID
11:27:32 <kaz> ... but the information is not really connected to actual devices
11:27:49 <kaz> ... we have to describe TD when we install it in the field
11:28:01 <kaz> ... the location information, etc.
11:28:09 <kaz> ... human readability is important but
11:28:22 <kaz> ... we need to specify useful information
11:28:29 <kaz> ... TD is abstract data model
11:28:46 <kaz> ... why such information is needed for actual fields?
11:29:02 <kaz> ... Profile document should focus on practical usages
11:29:26 <kaz> ... one possibility is describing limitation, e.g., nesting levels
11:29:45 <kaz> ... we provide gateways assuming a Thing
11:30:01 <kaz> ... that kind of intention is expected
11:30:23 <kaz> ... limitation of the length of TD may be specified by Profile
11:30:25 <Ege> q?
11:30:29 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:30:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
11:30:32 <kaz> ack r
11:31:21 <Mizushima> q+
11:32:24 <kaz> seb: what would be useful is considering specific protocol like HTTP to define Profile
11:32:27 <kaz> ... would be helpful
11:32:32 <kaz> ... very clear
11:32:43 <kaz> ... how to interpret it
11:32:56 <kaz> ... interoperability for commercial products is another point
11:33:04 <kaz> ... how the data model to be used
11:33:20 <kaz> ... there is strict representation to be fulfilled
11:33:30 <kaz> ... to adapt to any kind of customer expectations
11:33:48 <kaz> ... my experience is it's not possible to limit it
11:34:17 <kaz> ... specific application areas require existing deployed mechanisms
11:34:30 <kaz> ... something fit with all the needs
11:34:47 <kaz> ... I'm ok with clear guideline on how to deal with HTTP connection
11:34:56 <kaz> ... but could be as flexible as possible
11:35:06 <kaz> ... to provide information for customers
11:35:27 <kaz> ... if the customers want something more compact, should fit with that
11:35:47 <kaz> ml: Profile is for greenfield deployment, right?
11:36:01 <kaz> ... meaning new stuff
11:36:09 <kaz> ... different scenario
11:36:28 <kaz> seb: yeah, but greenfield mainly addresses protocols. right?
11:36:57 <kaz> ... typical established protocols for industries already
11:37:02 <kaz> ... data model as well
11:37:13 <kaz> ... e.g., OPC-UA and ECLASS
11:37:22 <kaz> ... they exist and won't disappear
11:37:59 <kaz> ... so the scope of Profile is not just defining new stuff
11:38:34 <kaz> ... would ask about something
11:38:52 <kaz> ... what would be the strategy when TD has more stuff which can be consumed?
11:39:02 <kaz> ... what kind of files to be used?
11:39:17 <kaz> ... maybe can't be handled caused by some limitation
11:39:24 <kaz> ... should clarify that kind of points
11:39:47 <kaz> ml: we're not only thinking about implementing large cloud apps
11:40:03 <kaz> ... every platform has some constraints
11:40:14 <kaz> ... we should probably define some common constraints
11:40:26 <kaz> ... e.g., max length for TD
11:40:46 <kaz> seb: we have to ask people about their limitations
11:40:55 <kaz> ... maybe some of them are secrete, though
11:41:16 <kaz> ... never thought the goal of Profile because it should be flexible
11:41:26 <kaz> s/thought/thought about/
11:41:49 <kaz> ml: the question is flexibility itself wouldn't help interoperability
11:41:59 <benfrancis> q?
11:42:08 <kaz> ... interoperability needs some common constraints, I think
11:42:10 <kaz> ack se
11:42:13 <kaz> ack e
11:42:17 <kaz> ege: 2 points
11:42:24 <kaz> ... 1. definition of "interoperability"
11:42:31 <kaz> ... maybe controversial
11:42:58 <kaz> ... some systems might be interoperable but in some case don't work with each other
11:43:32 <kaz> ... how to handle interoperability by Profile?
11:43:37 <kaz> ... 2. question for Toumura-san
11:43:52 <kaz> ... e.g., UI generation
11:44:10 <benfrancis> q+
11:44:29 <sebastia_> q+
11:44:56 <kaz> ... f you always know there is a description, a "not identified" fallback could be used
11:45:10 <McCool> (title/descriptions need to consider internationalization, however: see my comments here https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/152#issuecomment-989766249
11:46:05 <kaz> ege: if we assume that kind of conditions, we could reduce implementation effort
11:46:30 <kaz> ... OOTBI can be achieved by small set of devices within IoT landscape
11:46:42 <kaz> ml: but that is not the goal for WoT Profile
11:48:01 <kaz> ege: Profile would make it easier to tackle the IoT silo issue
11:48:14 <McCool> (re implementation effort: I agree implementation should be *finite*, i.e. finite set of protocols, etc.  But I think we also previously agreed not to worry too much about *small* devices as consumers in this pass (can address constrained devices in a future profile))
11:48:31 <kaz> q+
11:48:43 <kaz> qq+
11:49:28 <McCool> (also: 1. we should have a resolution on scope as ben noted, to confirm OOTBI 2. we should discuss issue https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/152
11:50:05 <kaz> kaz: @@@
11:50:24 <kaz> ege: so my point is Profile would reduce implementation effort
11:50:41 <kaz> mizu: would like to talk about the WoT-JP CG's work
11:50:59 <kaz> ... they can't understand TD because the spec is complicated
11:51:16 <kaz> ... can't understand how to use TD
11:51:33 <kaz> ... it's important to create a guideline about how to use TD
11:51:41 <kaz> ... and the structure for their own devices
11:51:52 <kaz> ... how to create TD file would be beneficial
11:51:55 <kaz> q?
11:51:57 <kaz> ack k
11:51:59 <kaz> ack mi
11:52:02 <kaz> ack k
11:52:02 <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to react to Ege
11:52:17 <kaz> ben: generating generic UI
11:52:28 <kaz> ... Web Things have Web Components
11:52:46 <kaz> ... when we have semantic annotation, can generate generic UI
11:53:03 <kaz> ml: so what is your expectation?
11:53:31 <kaz> ben: so my expectation is that Profile doesn't need further definition on data model
11:53:40 <kaz> ml: in positive way, what?
11:53:41 <benfrancis> Proposal: Definition of out-of-the-box interoperability "Any Consumer which conforms with a given profile can interact with any Thing which conforms with the same profile, without additional customization."
11:53:50 <kaz> ben: clarification on OOTBI
11:54:12 <kaz> ... any Thing conforms with some specific Profile can work with each other
11:54:37 <kaz> ... implementations by different manufactures can communicate with each other
11:54:38 <kaz> q?
11:54:40 <kaz> ack b
11:54:41 <kaz> ack s
11:54:51 <kaz> seb: my expectation is finding building blocks
11:55:02 <kaz> ... interaction affordance
11:55:06 <kaz> ... discovery
11:55:24 <kaz> ... Profile is something kind of nice guideline
11:55:39 <kaz> ... e.g., when I want to use HTTP-based Things
11:55:53 <kaz> ... nice guideline without any big requirements
11:56:12 <kaz> ... could get nice guidelines based on the Profile spec for WoT
11:56:17 <kaz> ml: ok
11:56:27 <kaz> ... we've captured everybody's opinions today
11:56:39 <kaz> ... (goes through the lists of opinions)
11:56:47 <kaz> ... agreed on OOTBI
11:57:08 <kaz> ... reasonable to go for that direction?
11:57:16 <kaz> ben: could you show the actual definition?
11:57:29 <kaz> ml: thought some definition on Architecture?
11:57:34 <kaz> ben: not Profile itself?
11:58:04 <kaz> ml: some definition within the use case description from the Use Cases and Requirements doc
11:58:13 <kaz> ... section 3.2
11:58:25 <kaz> ben: then we actually miss clear definition
11:58:42 <kaz> (kaz: right. so I also mentioned we should clarify that :)
11:59:00 <kaz> ml: ok
11:59:17 <kaz> q+
11:59:27 <kaz> ... I'll write up a summary
11:59:47 <kaz> ... and let's try to get common understanding next
12:01:13 <kaz> kaz: supplementary explanation
12:02:03 <kaz> ... so the next step should be (as Lagally mentioned) summarizing the discussion today, and get consensus on our expectation for Profile including a clear definition for "OOTBI"
12:02:11 <kaz> ml: yes, let's do so
12:02:14 <mlagally____> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/155
12:02:31 <kaz> ml: (generates issue 155 for that direction)
12:02:39 <kaz> ... is that OK?
12:02:45 <kaz> (no objections)
12:02:51 <kaz> [adjourned]
12:02:55 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
12:02:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/12/09-wot-arch-minutes.html kaz
12:46:52 <sebastian> sebastian has joined #wot-arch
12:51:34 <sebastian> sebastian has joined #wot-arch
14:03:18 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-arch
14:52:34 <zkis> zkis has joined #wot-arch
16:06:17 <sebastian> sebastian has joined #wot-arch
17:02:54 <sebastian> sebastian has joined #wot-arch