Meeting minutes
Minutes
approved
Quick Updates
Editors call - some alignments in scripting, Event handling in the TD, discovery is mostly frozen
Mizushima: WoT Japanese CG: 22 people participated in meeting last Friday. Questions about how to implement it easily, how to handle events
McCool: is there a list of attendees?
Kaz: there are minutes on github, but CG does not care about affiliations, records just names
Sebastian: 2 issues in last TD call - Plans to set up a Bacnet binding. We should also ask Takenaka if he is interested to work on this.
Kaz: have already talked with Kasuya-san, and will report in TD call
McCool: As a general idea Use Case descriptions should be created using the use case document for further inclusion into the use cases document
… any plans for a future CG meeting?
Mizushima: Echonet lite event is planned for March
Daniel: scripting API is a WoT Note, notes should not have conformance statements, there's also a "Note" track that has conformance statements.
<dape> Daniel's message
Daniel: we plan to move to this "note track"
<kaz> Scripting Issue 354
Kaz: I put that topic into TF reports, when do we want to make a group resolution?
Daniel: want to give people a 1 week review, next week?
Kaz: W3C process document has been significantly updated - group notes can contain normative statements, but these documents are not endorsed by the W3C as a whole or covered by W3C patent policy
McCool: This may apply to other documents as well, such as security guidelines
Lagally: what's the difference between a "note" and a "note track"?
Kaz: document is not endorsed by the W3C as a whole, it is not a rec
… the status of the document will be significantly changed, boiler plate
… respec may make this change already automatically
IG rechartering and WG extension
IG charter: request for approval was sent to W3M, and should be discussed right now in parallel
WG charter extension: not approved - this may happen today
… at the moment we formally don't have a WG, cannot publish documents
Lagally: can we make it explicit, that the dates in the WG extension plan are tentative
McCool: only the last date is fixed
Kaz: we should decouple the schedule discussion and extension procedure
… regarding the extension procedure, we need horizontal reviews again and it would take one month. Then need to get the AC review and it would also take one month or so. So I'm asking W3M for 4-mo extension to finalize the procedure. However, we can think about the updated publication schedule based on the assumption of extending our WG Charter by 12-mo., ...
… we can get 1 year extension to Jan next year, should think about schedule separately
WG rechartering
We should take into account the use cases for the next charter period and should start use case and requrement analysis before we finalize the new charter.
… will add this to the schedule
Lagally: let's discuss in the next UC call
publications
Kaz: I'm working on the process to publish Use Cases document and TD, will work later this week.
Lagally: Architecture review of normative parts showed some inconsistencies - will talk about details in tomorrow's arch call
McCool: security TF could manage security review of all WoT specifications
… questionnaire is very browser centric
Lagally: we should do that, will reduce number of parallel communication trails with security experts
CG chair
McCool: CGs are pretty ad-hoc, typically only one chair, chair can select co-chairs
… mmc explains details about the chair selection process
… CG decides how this is handled
… we should have a resolution about which procedure to use
… Dave Raggett should decide on the process
<McCool_> https://
<McCool_> proposal: recommend that the "Simple" algorithm be used to select the new WoT CG chair
<McCool_> proposal: recommend that the "Simple" algorithm be used to select the new WoT CG chair, and that we ask Dave Raggett to announce to the group
<McCool_> proposal: recommend that the "Simple" algorithm be used to select the new WoT CG chair, and that we ask Dave Raggett to announce to the CG
<cris_> https://
Cristiano: I'm fine with the simple algorithm, need to understand modalities how to self-nominate
… website says that only W3C staff can nominate chairs
McCool: Let's ask Dave to do the necessary procedures, announce nominations afterwards
<McCool_> proposal: recommend that the "Simple" algorithm be used to select the new WoT CG chair, and that we ask Dave Raggett to announce to the CG, and also enable nominations in the system by removing himself as chair
Lagally: a chair needs to separate between the role of a chair and representing his company. He should make it explicit when he speaks for his company and needs to have a balanced view that represents the interests of all WoT members.
<McCool_> proposal: We ask Dave Raggett to recommend that the "Simple" algorithm be used to select the new WoT CG chair, and that we ask Dave Raggett to announce to the CG, and also enable nominations in the system by removing himself as chair
Lagally: I'm sure we have enough good candidates for that, will not run for chair.
Kaz: Everybody should join the CG first and understand the proposal of how the nomination should be done.
McCool: There are 224 members but not much activity.
Kaz: We don't have to make resolution in this call, but on the CG mailing list. Everybody who is interested in CG discussion should join.
… we can make a proposal for ourselves, though
McCool: We can make a proposal for the CG, the CG can make a resolution
Lagally: I encourage we get regular updates from the CG chair(s) in this call
McCool: We should have a charter
<kaz> Kaz mentions there is a template for CG Charters as well
testing
McCool: We need to decide when to have the testfest, I agree that we have 2 test fests in the schedule.
… We need to decide right away so we can get organised.
… current dates don't hold
… plan of having the testfest / plugfest in the same week.
Lagally: I encourage and support that.
<McCool> proposal: hold TestFest/Plugfest the week of 14-18 March, with a daily Testfest sync call at 8am ET and a Plugfest call at 9am ET
Lagally: this narrow time slot works for all members around the globe
RESOLUTION: hold TestFest/Plugfest the week of 14-18 March, with a daily Testfest sync call at 8am ET and a Plugfest call at 9am ET
liasons
McCool: tomorrow there's a call for a Webinar, myself, Kaz and Sebastian are speaking
… currently updating the slides
<kaz> ITU-T Webinar site
<kaz> McCool's slides
<kaz> Sebastian's slides
<kaz> Kaz's slides
McCool: I'm meeting offline with Christine Perey, we work on reviewing geolocation use cases. I also review the geopose standard, there are some gaps of how we can embed location into TDs
Kaz: For Echonet there's a plan in the CG
… next steps for smart home is the actual binding
McCool: historical data, Christine is involved in that, there are some use cases for digital twins
TF reports
Daniel: scripting: we are aligning with discovery TF, I already mentioned the "Note track"
McCool: we should talk about exposing an interface
Daniel: right, this is not part of the current APIs
McCool: Security: several PRs in the pipeline, not merged yet. In the PR for architecture I added an section.
… Discovery: We had a discussion earlier today (in Profiles), hope the proposal resolves the issue
Sebastian: will discuss events in today's TF, apart from we are kind of stable, some smaller changes
McCool: purpose of a feature freeze is to get testing possible, target a mostly frozen document
<sebastian> sorry, I need to move to a next call
Lagally: unfortunately cannot participate in today's TD call, please create an issue with remaining questions for the event proposal, so we can address it in tomorrow's architecture call
<kaz> [adjourned]