Meeting minutes
Discussion about new eventing approach (Michael Lagally)
McCool: note we should be careful about what to do for this version
Lagally: (starting with Use Cases)
Lagally: many use cases there
wot-thing-description issue 1323 - Missing event/notification affordance or operation
WoT Architecture - 8.1.1 Things and Consumers
Lagally: (describes the components, Things and Consumers)
McCool: Consumer is an entity consumes TD
… but there is confusion about the roles
… around clients
… generally try to avoid client vs server
Ege: don't think there is confusion
… in MQTT, consumers are clients
… in this abstract level described by Architecture, the model is covered by TD
… also intermediary doesn't "consume" the TD
… one entity could handle both the roles, though
<cris> +1; this is my understanding too
McCool: we still have issues pointed out by Lagally with HTTP, etc.
Lagally: both Thing and Consumer are Servients
Sebastian: misunderstanding here
… Consumer is an entity consuming the TD
… Servient is defined as a software stack which can be used for both Consumer and Thing
Kaz: agree with Sebastian
… section "8.8 WoT System Components and their Interconnectivity" describes that
… so probably that section should come earlier (than 8.1)
Lagally: right
McCool: let's think about webhook
… web services expose webhooks
… do we need to standardize the mechanism?
<Ege> +1 to mmccool
McCool: the prescription should go to the Protocol Bindings and/or Profile
Lagally: what if there are 10 different mechanisms?
McCool: we can put that into Profile
Cristiano: 2 points
… connecting this to practical points
… agree with McCool
… describe protocols exposing the interaction
… within the diagram in issue 1323
… this is basically a subprotocol
… if you're using a subprotocol for webhook
… we can already describe that
(Lagally needs to leave)
Sebastian: should continue the discussion next time
Review PRs based on the feedbacks for the 2nd WD release
editorial changes
Sebastian: would start with editorial ones
… maybe some of the PRs may need further reviews
PR 1332 - fix: some HTML markup issues
Sebastian: (goes through the diff)
McCool: some typo there
Sebastian: any other comments?
(none)
merged
Sebastian: (goes through the diff)
McCool: missing the subject of the sentence
Sebastian: (goes through the remaining part)
McCool: we should be careful
… the original text might be better around "terms from the information model"
Sebastian: (add edits)
Kaz: just to make sure, the PR adds changes for the namespace in section 5.3 as well. right?
Sebastian: yes, strangely that has not been fixed yet
… OK to merge this?
(no objections)
merged
McCool: maybe need to add another sentence
… should remove the sentence now and create an issue for that
Sebastian: (removes local/global before "schema")
… (looks into the td-validatio.ttl too)
… (confirms the namespace change for 1.1)
… (then goes through the remaining changes)
… would propose to merge this PR
McCool: ok
… let's create another issue as well
(McCool needs to leave)
merged
PR 1335 - fix: typos and grammatical errors
Sebastian: (goes through the diff)
Daniel: some conflicts there
Sebastian: (looks into the conflicts)
… (and adds edits)
… (for index.html and index.template.html)
Sebastian: any objections for merging this?
(none)
merged
PR 1336 - fix: some internal links
Sebastian: (goes through the diff)
… (then resolve the conflicts)
<mlagally_> I'm unfortunately pulled into another meeting and cannot rejoin
Sebastian: any objections?
(none)
merged
PR 1337 - fix: minor singular vs plural issue
Sebastian: (looks into the conflicts)
merged
PR 1344 - fix: object definition ref in ObjectSchema
Sebastian: (looks into the diff)
merged
3 PRs for 2nd WD
PR 1283 - update webhooks example
Sebastian: need Lagally's input
PR 1339 - update assertion td-context-ns-thing-mandatory
Sebastian: (goes through the diff)
Kaz: wondering about the gray background under the table within section 5.3.1.1
Sebastian: caused by ReSpec maybe?
… it describes assertions
Kaz: ok
… maybe caused by the assertion tool by McCool then
Cristiano: title to be extracted from the first object?
Sebastian: would not see any problem about that
… can be merged then?
Kaz: btw, from the readability viewpoint, it might be better to use bullet points to describe each definition
Sebastian: right
… would suggest we improve the style for the next publication
Kaz: that's fine
Sebastian: (creates a new issue to improve the style)
Issue 1353 - structure assertations
PR 1339 - update assertion td-context-ns-thing-mandatory
Sebastian: split an old bigger PR into small ones
… some conflicts there
… (look into the conflicts)
… any objections to merge it?
(none)
merged
Sebastian: (looks into the diff)
Cristiano: looks reasonable
Daniel: my concern is (like Ben) introducing changes not directly related to manifest
Sebastian: right
… (adds comments on that issue)
… new PR will be provided with the changes on manifest
… so won't merge this PR itself
PR 1341 - schema term in expected response
Sebastian: (looks into the diff)
Ege: agree with use cases but making this would make TD complicated
Cristiano: complicated to understand what would be output
… also difficult to validate the data
… so tend to agree with Ege
Koster: more work needed, but seems this is what we want
Sebastian: would be OK not to merge this for now?
… need more background before merging this
Kaz: yes, we can wait
<cris> +1
PR 1283 (revisited) - update webhooks example
Sebastian: Lagally is not here but would skim the changes
… (go through the diff)
… Editor's Note is also added
… would be happier to have Lagally here
… but what do you think about this PR?
Cristiano: your changes are mainly for examples
Sebastian: yes
… to make it clear
Cristiano: improving the examples is OK
… but we can split the example part and the other part
… anyway, having Lagally would be better
Sebastian: this PR is about the examples within the Appendix
… (adds comments)
… OK with merging
… but should improved the example or add another example to show another option about webhook-bsed approach
… see also issue 1323
Sebastian: (resolve conflicts)
merged
Sebastian: then let's continue the discussion on webhooks
… would like to get resolution next Wednesday
… will continue the discussion on new event proposal from Lagally too
[adjourned]