Meeting minutes
Minutes
Lagally: any objections?
(no objections; approved)
Publication timeline
wot repo PR 1010 - proposed updates to WG extension schedule
point 2 - wide review
McCool: Start to get wide review including TAG, Accessibilty, Privacy, Security, and Internationalization to review TD 1.1 draft by Jan 25, 2022 (note: might take 6 months)
McCool: instanciation to be clarified
point 0 - document consistency
Kaz: what about point 0?
0. Clarify which normative sections should be included or should be improved in TD 1.1, Profile, Arch 1.1, and Discovery by end-Nov 2021
Kaz: need to wrap up the check results
Lagally: let's discus it later based on Toumura-san's index
McCool: ok with changing the deadline until end-Jan 2022
Lagally: (adds comment for that within the PR 1010)
… all the Editors of the REC trac docs should confirm their documents' structure/normative sections have been properly reviewed.
… maybe by Feb-4?
McCool: Friday is good for deadline
point 4 - normative feature freeze for TD and Arch
Lagally: (adds a comment on the deadline of point 4)
… suggest Friday, Feb-4 to have 2 meetings before we step forward
point 5 - normative feature freeze for Discovery
(discussion on point 5. Discovery by Jan 31)
McCool: one Thing with one TD
… should figure out intermediate use cases as well
Lagally: Profile needs a simple self description mechanism
… without huge implementation demands
point 6 - Testfest
(discussion on point 6. Testfest)
Lagally: focus on telemetry use cases
McCool: long polling and webhooks
… also websockets
… webhooks handles data on the cloud
… websockets might be for the future version
… need to be sure URLs are locked down
Lagally: most of our plugfests have been assuming local networks
McCool: yeah
… in reality, there is no actual security within home networks
… technically, we can distribute keys
… but we don't have the mechanism for onboarding
Lagally: scenarios for networks beyond trusted ones
Lagally: how to handle the expected use cases?
McCool: login based on HTTPS and use the network established is fine
Lagally: suggested scenarios
… 1. telemetry: TD for a could service, TD for an event listener Thing (Consumer)
… 2. digital twins
… 3. beyond the trusted local network
… 4. industrial scenarios
… 5. battery powered device (not connected to network always)
… btw, security considerations for discovery?
McCool: mutual authentication?
Lagally: normative feature freeze for TD and Architecture by Feb.4?
McCool: still need to work on that
Lagally: (creates a new Issue for wot-discovery on Profile)
… Profile needs a simple self-descriptive mechanism without huge implementation demands
… does a simple Thing have to implement a directory service / implement a discovery API?
Lagally: would add another note on Testfest
… Profile validation?
McCool: not a big deal one implementation misses some of the Profile features
Lagally: (adds a question)
… partial Profile implementations (for Testfest mid-March)
Sebastian: Testfest should concentrate on the new features
… all the new features should be implemented by more than one implementation for all the normative specs
… checking the use cases itself is not for the "Testfest"
Lagally: agree we should not create new things
… it's that we should consideration these scenarios as the basis of the Testfest setting
McCool: would say we need to look into the detail
… what to observe
… it's not good timing to add features
… we should be very careful
Kaz: my understanding is these suggestions are basis for the expected "Test scenarios"
… for manual tests, we need concrete Test scenarios
Lagally: (shows the section 6. System Topologies (Horizontals))
WoT Architecture - 6. System Topologies (Horizontals)
Lagally: we've been assuming local networks basically
Sebastian: remember Panasonic provided remote network as well
… but WoT standardization doesn't need to handle network setting itself
(discussion on the expectation for the Testing for Architecture)
Lagally: would like to revisit use cases and see the gaps
Kaz: would suggest a few things for this discussion on PR 1010
… 1. scope and scenarios of the Testfest to be defined before the actual Testfest during the preparation, and concrete scenario for manual tests also should be defined beforehand
… 2. so should move the "Suggest to consider the following scenarios" comments from "6. Testfest" itself to the preparation phase (=earlier than point 6). I think some of the use cases described within "6. System Topologies (Horizontals)" of the WoT Architecture spec can be considered when we generate the Test scenarios
… 3. the detail of the Test scenarios should be disussed during not this Architecture call but the Testing call
(some more discussion on expectations for Plugfest and Testfest)
(Plugfest's purpose is gathering implementations and see the connectivity, while Testfest's purpose is checking the implementability of each feature by more than one implementation)
document consistency
Lagally: would like to confirm the document consistency based on Toumura-san's issue 646
Issue 646 - [Index] Section structure, assertions, and issues
McCool: should send around an email to encourage people to review the issue
[adjourned]