Meeting minutes
<benfrancis> .
Discovery
McCool: I'm working on a proposal how the discovery should run for consumer
wot-discovery issue 272 - Consumer Process for Discovery
Lagally: Looks quite complicated
McCool: I will simplify the version and ask you for feedback
<MM needs to go>
Lagally: we will revisit next week
Minutes check
any objections?
no
Profile Requirements
Lagally: we worked on this
in the last calls
… I compiled them to a MD file
<mlagally> Profile Requirements
Lagally: I also created issues with all requirements
https://
… there is also the names of supporters
provided
… we should priories the issues based on the number
of supporters
Issue 170
Ege: we cannot validate core profile yet.
wot-profile issue 170 - Validatible TDs
Ege: since behaviour cannot be validated in the TD
Lagally: A TD follow the Profile it should guaranteed that is really working. Should be true when I buy a IoT device that promise to follow the profile.
<kaz> kaz: It depend on what we mean by "validation". Our expectation on "validation" should be clearly defined, and I think we could do that based on what we've been doing for our Testing (=assertion check vs manual test).
Lagally: we should minimize
the implementation effort for adopters.
… I will prioritize this issue with prio
1
Multiple profiles (mechanism)
wot-profile issue 169 - Multiple profiles (mechanism)
important should be prio 1
Sebastian: the current Charter says we'll have one profile, doesn't it?
Lagally:: the goal is to define the HTTP-based profile.
Sebastian: if there another profile defined (e.g., Constrained Profile, OPC UA PRofile), the profile should be independent of existing profiles
Kaz: I'm a bit confused. What do you mean by saying "Multiple profiles mechanism is a requirement for WoT Profile"? Maybe support for multiple protocol?
Kaz: please note that the current WG Charter itself doesn't say we're limited to only one Profile. It's rather our own decision based on the progress so far. So we can clarify our expectation for having multiple Profiles first, and then think about what we can do next.
(some more discussion about our expectation for having multiple profiles)
Finite set of features and capabilities to implement by the consumer
https://
prio 1
Developer guidance
https://
Prio 1
Limit and reduce complexity
https://
Prio 1
<mlagally> proposal:
Select all P1 requirements in scope of the Profile 1.0 spec. These
are identified by
https://
<mlagally> proposal:
Select all P1 requirements in scope of the Profile 1.0 spec. They
must be satisfied by the Profile 1.0 specification.. These are
identified by
https://
<mlagally> proposal:
Select all P1 requirements in scope of the Profile 1.0 spec. They
must be satisfied by the Profile 1.0 specification. These are
identified by
https://
Kaz: you've added the "P1" label based on the number of the supporters. right?
Lagally: yes
Resolution: Select
all P1 requirements in scope of the Profile 1.0 spec. They must be
satisfied by the Profile 1.0 specification. These are identified by
https://
<kaz> [adjourned]