Meeting minutes
Agenda
Sebastian: no guests today
… McCool already on vacation
… some news about rechartering, publication plans
… one resolution planned on use cases an requirements
… TD 1.1 2nd WD release
… will review feedback that was provided in the last couple of weeks
… depending on the discussion we will be able to do a resolution
… will spend most time on publication topic
housekeeping
<kaz> Dec-15
Sebastian: minutes of the last call
… (Sebastian walks through the minutes)
… W3C notes that also use assertion terms
Kaz: will check with PLH
Sebastian: in my experience there are many W3C documents who do that
Kaz: not many
Sebastian: DID?
Kaz: That's a registry note, it is different. Will talk with PLH
… W3M approved charter extension
… AC review also started
… please work with your AC rep, so we can continue the plan
Kaz: to be precise, it was not approved at that time (=last Wed), will be discussed today as our agenda item later
… co chair for CG group
Kaz: let's talk about the details later as today's agenda items
Sebastian: any comments? objections?
- none
Sebastian: please publish
updates
<kaz> sk: no
Editors call
Sebastian: no editor's call yesterday
Architecture call
<kaz> doodle for Architecture
<kaz> doodle for Profile
Sebastian: new time slots?
Lagally: if you and McCool can find a new slot for the chair's call, it would be possible to use the current Chairs' call slot
Sebastian: please be careful, to not double book participants to profile and architecture
Lagally: yes
Japanese CG
<kaz> Draft minutes from the kick-off event
Mizushima: 21 people discussed the CG and TF activities today
… next meeting is planned for Jan 28th next year
Sebastian: is there a list of participants
Kaz: the family names are listed there
Mizushima: in Japanese only
Sebastian: very cool
Lagally: congratulations, this is very useful
Sebastian: perhaps we should do this also in Germany, let's talk about this, Michael Lagally
Smart cities
Kaz: talking with Alan about the next steps plan
rechartering, charter extension
Sebastian: IG rechartering is in AC review
… we have a 3 months extension, this will get further extended when we have the AC review done
… please ping your AC rep to vote
… so we get all numbers for the rechartering
Kaz: so far we have 9 supports, we need 20
Sebastian: WG charter extension, not discussed yet in W3M
Kaz: we still have 1 month, expecting this will be discussed today
Sebastian: We need to think about a new charter after the current one
… there's issue 978 to collect topics, mainly WoT 2.0
<sebastian> 978 to collect topics
:-)
Asynchronous review process
<kaz> PR 1005
Sebastian: this should be discussed in the TFs
Kaz: needs more discussion
Sebastian: in TD we have a process (for editorial fixes)
Kaz: need more discussion in TFs
Publications
Sebastian: we have two documents up for publication
Use Cases
<kaz> Use Cases and Requirements document
Sebastian: the picture from my use case is only available behind a link, should be embedded
Lagally: I will fix as an editorial update, sorry for the oversight
Sebastian: what does the group think, is everyone ok to do a resolution to publish this document as a new version
Lagally: including some editorial fixes
Kaz: we mentioned to have another week of review, but if we can wrap it up today, that's also fine
Sebastian: taking the policy into account we should wait for another week
Lagally: that's fine, let's give members time to review during the Christmas break and decide in the first main call in January
Sebastian: Jan 12th will be the next one
Lagally: sounds good
new WD of TD 1.1
Sebastian: we published the last one in June
… proposal is to bring the version we see here to the public
… there were extensive review comments from Ben Francis
… he spent a lot of time on review and provided a lot of background
… many of them are just typo fixes, Ben as a native speaker was fixing a lot of spelling errors
… so we have a very good document that can be read quite well
… we have a lot of editorial issues, Daniel spent some time to fix them
… also fixes for mistakes and improvements, e.g. for the abstract
… we also explain what we mean by backwards compatibility, small textual improvements
… Michael Lagally had commented that there are some changes that have impact on assertions
… these are separated into individual PRs
… As an example in issue #1339 there's an explanation about backwards compatibility with 1.0 compliant implementations
… this has impact on old assertions, so we can also cover old implementations
… We had issue #1340 (manifest definition), which now points to a software implementation
… Ben mentioned that this manifest is a W3C document proposal
… proposal is that the manifest points to a application manifest
… this has an impact, because it makes the manifest normative, would change the assertion
… there was a last one about introduction of the scheme element in expected response
… this PR adds the scheme for the expected response
… discussion was that it is needed for the profile
… there are now also operation types that query actions, we also need to describe the query messages
We see 2 parts of PRs, one part is editorial, grammar fixes
… others have impact on some assertions
… mlagally mentioned that many are quite new and we need more time to review
… these PRs are providing fixes for some old issues
… we have different options: merge editorials and keep new assertions out
… give more time to the group for review and make the resolution similar to the use case document in the beginning of January
Ege: I think we should merge these editorial PRs even now and then others might be reviewed
… there was an agreement already - unless these PRs are against the agreements we should merge
… we have to publish it definitely before the February test fest
… it won't matter, since most people won't be working during Christmas time
Kaz: I tend to go for the second option and look into the updates in more details
… check the results during the next TD call
… You sent me an issue about the TD 1.1 context file, I would like to check the details of this one as well
<kaz> Issue 1343 - Dereference 1.1 context file via new TD 1.1 IRI|
Kaz: and decide if it should be included in the 2nd WD
Sebastian: The namespace is already here, this should have no impact
Kaz: if we want to update the context file for the next publication, we have to be careful
Kaz: if we can wait to install the context file and publish the WD separately it is fine, but I want to confirm our direction
… my preference is to install the file after some discussion and publish the document in January as the use cases document
cristiano: I still have a PR, this is minor, I fixed a context URL about the reference to the object schema
<mlagally> s/chritiano/cristiano/
dape: I suggest we merge the editorial fixes and people want to read the document, so I would like to merge them to have an improved document
… no strong opinion on the publication time
… we should set a deadline to provide feedback
Lagally: speaking for the architecture group, we have a couple of normative requirements, where we jointly agreed to carry over
Lagally: so would like double check the updates, and possibly there would be some normative changes as well
… therefore would have some more reviews till Jan 12
Sebastian: are your talking about the TD spec or the Architecture spec?
… TD spec itself was already fixed for the publication 2 weeks ago basically
Lagally: we have to make sure those two specs are consistent with each other
Sebastian: that's true
… but the proposed updated WD was fixed 2 weeks ago (except the recently proposed editorial changes)
Lagally: ok
… but there are many PRs recently made
Sebastian: right
… but those new PRs are based on the review results
Lagally: maybe it would be better to clarify those PRs marked as "2nd WD"
Sebastian: those PRs are based on the review results
Lagally: are you planning to merge those PRs before the publication of the updated WD?
Sebastian: yeah
… note there are some more PRs on event consumer but have not been reviewed yet
Lagally: speaking for Oracle, that topic is critical
… so would not go for making resolution for publication today
Sebastian: note that the possible resolution for publishing an updated WD is about the draft fixed 2 weeks ago itself
Lagally: don't think the draft is stable enough...
Sebastian: what do you mean? due to the editorial changes?
… would it be OK to ask people for some more review and finalize the draft in Jan?
Lagally: make sense to review all the PRs listed here
Sebastian: ok
… let's postpone the discussion till the next TD call on Jan 12
… a possible option is simply publish the updated WD as is without merging the recent PRs
Lagally: that would not be a good idea
Daniel: there are a lot PRs
… but some of them, e.g., my one is quite minor
… would say if two people can agree to merge, editorial PRs could be merged
<cris> +1
Daniel: putting all the PRs into the same bucket would not be a good approach
Lagally: basically, that's correct but some of the PRs created very late
… I've not reviewed them yet
Sebastian: btw, regarding the event handling proposal, it came very late
Lagally: the proposal was made last week
… I explained the issues during the TD call
… and generated concrete proposal based on the discussion
Sebastian: my question is if we need to include this proposal for the 2nd WD
Lagally: we need to include this proposal at least before the next Plugfest
Sebastian: in that case, we can handle it separately from the 2nd WD itself
Kaz: my suggestion is (1) discuss all the recent PRs for TD listed here during the next TD call on Jan. 12, (2) see which PRs to be included in the 2nd WD, (3) how to run the next Plugfest (based on which draft) and (4) update our publication schedule and the testing schedule based on that.
Ege: there's some confusion about the test fest - we test out existing features, not new features
… this is not the goal of what we want to do in february
… this is not against the proposal, no content related content
… why does it come after a feature freeze
Lagally: we discussed the issue in the TD call before the feature freeze
Ege: you can try out in a plug fest
Lagally: suggest to do a combined test fest / plug fest
Ege: we have a certain amount of time during the plug fest
… we would go into bigger trouble, it might be a good idea to have plug fest before the test fest
Lagally: I think that is a good idea
Sebastian: We just talk about doing a WD publication
… we can cover additional topics, if they are implementable, in the CR
Kaz: I object to that direction, and even though they are only editorial, we have to compare Ben Francis' comments with the PRs.
… we should have the event discussion after the publication and need to review the event proposal
… it would not be fair to the people who are already on vacation to accept MRs without giving them time for review
Sebastian: I don't understand why we have these concerns on the WD
Kaz: we are already 30 mins overtime
Sebastian: there are several editorial ones, can we come over them
Kaz: as I mentioned on the chairs call, I asked you to skim through these in the call
… we already failed doing a resolution here, let's wait for the next TD call
Sebastian: I'm ok with this, let's continue the discussion in the next TD call, please let'S know of you completely disagree with PRs
… we have not discussed if this document is the basis of the test fest
… there are other issues in github that need further work
Kaz: please add a lable. We may need to update the schedule of the publication, need to update it every week and keep the progress
<kaz> current plan for publications
Sebastian: is everyone happy with that?
<kaz> (no complaints)
Sebastian: seems we have an agreement
… it is good to have discussions on different aspects, hope we have a better understanding of issues and PRs
… we have a big overtime, sorry for this
… Merry Christmas and a happy new year, we will see us in January
<cris> merry xmas and happy new year to everybody!! :)
<kaz> [adjourned]