15:02:21 RRSAgent has joined #wot-td 15:02:21 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-irc 15:03:23 meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF 15:03:51 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Cristiano_Aguzzi, Ege_Korkan, Jan_Romann, Klaus_Hartke, Thomas_Jaeckle 15:04:02 dape has joined #wot-td 15:04:45 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#Feb_16.2C_2022 15:05:48 present+ Daniel_Peintner, Sebastian_Kaebisch 15:05:55 rrsagent, make log public 15:05:59 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:05:59 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 15:06:55 chair: Sebastian 15:08:20 sk: next week we will have Joel Bender from ASHRAE 15:08:20 topic: Agenda 15:08:59 s/ASHRAE/ASHRAE for BACnet binding discussion/ 15:09:10 i/next/scribenick: Ege/ 15:09:19 topic: minutes 15:09:31 -> https://www.w3.org/2022/02/09-wot-td-minutes.html Feb-9 15:12:59 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 15:16:32 sk: any objections to the minutes of last week 15:19:12 sk: tag is very busy so it is good that we are starting 15:19:59 i/tag is/approved/ 15:19:59 sk: I would like to go over the issue mmccool has opened. Issue 1382 15:20:14 i/tag is/topic: publication plans/ 15:21:20 sk: about the explainer, we talked also in the main call. Let's simply take the explainer in the web page 15:21:32 q+ 15:21:38 i|about the|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1382 PR 1382 - Create Security and Privacy Questionnaire Answers for Ver 1.1 CR Process| 15:21:44 https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/258 15:22:15 q+ 15:22:18 ack e 15:23:52 ek: the issue linked above is from marketing. the explainer lacks the discovery and profile 15:25:58 ack k 15:28:10 kaz: there is a template for the explainer 15:28:37 sk: if there is one, we should follow it but I don't think that we have used one last time. The previous explainer looks like a markdown document 15:29:14 -> https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/715 TAG review form for TD 1.1 15:29:27 q+ 15:31:16 kaz: there is link that has further info 15:32:11 sk: let's look at an example 15:32:49 ek: this is more like guidelines 15:34:16 q+ 15:34:43 s/kaz: there is link that has further info/kaz: there is a specific form for the TAG review as above, and we need to generate an updated version of the TD Explainer for that form. probably we can look into several recent review forms and Explainers for the other specs as examples./ 15:35:58 q- 15:36:00 ack e 15:36:02 q+ 15:36:02 ek: do we write one document or one for each tf 15:37:41 sk: it would be better if each tf writes their own 15:37:59 ack k 15:38:47 q+ 15:39:01 kaz: I suggested somebody (probably McCool :) generate an initial document and each TF Editor generate their own document based on the initial one as a kind of template. 15:39:30 ... we should ask McCool about the progress 15:40:05 ek: I think it would be nicer to write a common intro and reuse 15:40:23 ca: what do we do about maintaining these explainers? 15:41:08 s/we should/and McCool mentioned his status during the main call, so we should/ 15:41:26 q+ 15:41:33 ack c 15:43:20 ack k 15:44:50 sk: security privacy is being handled by the security TF 15:48:05 weefwef 15:48:08 sk: (writes a comment in issue 1396, please check that in review) 15:48:36 s/weefwef// 15:50:10 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:50:10 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html JKRhb 15:52:00 sk: title and description has some security implications 15:53:08 q+ 15:53:33 q+ 15:53:36 ack d 15:54:05 q+ 15:54:28 ack dape 15:54:53 dp: so it is indeed correct that an implementation should take carethat no code execution happens 15:56:48 kaz: we should a SHOULD assertion that the producer should not put code in there 15:57:24 If implementers feel they must use HTML, or other markup languages capable of containing executable scripts, to address a specific use case, they are advised to analyze how an attacker would use the markup to mount injection attacks against a consumer of the markup and then deploy mitigations against the identified attacks. 15:57:44 -> https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model/ Verifiable Credentials Data Model 1.1 15:58:18 q+ 15:58:34 ack k 15:58:35 ack e 15:58:57 sk: we have already some sentences about this 15:59:37 ack c 15:59:52 i/If imp/[[/ 15:59:56 i/https/]]/ 16:00:05 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:00:05 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 16:00:29 s/put code/put executable content/ 16:00:57 ca: it is difficult to actually check if a string is code and we are saying that the title can be used for UI (without any checks) 16:01:16 s/we should/we should look into the other JSON-LD based specification like VC and DID, but I personally think we should have/ 16:02:08 topic: PR 1391 16:02:30 sk: this was redundant and old 16:02:38 sk: let's merge 16:03:31 topic: PR 1331 16:03:36 i|this was|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1391 PR 1391 - delete ext-td-json-schema-validation.json| 16:03:39 q? 16:03:47 q+ JKRhb 16:03:48 ack j 16:04:28 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1331 PR 1331 - fix: move CBOR content types their own table row in section 5.3.2 16:04:34 jr: json and cbor has different encodings so they should be separated 16:04:36 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:04:36 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 16:05:15 sk: I have a past with these binary xml representations 16:05:17 i/I suggested/scribenick: kaz/ 16:05:23 jr: this is a good compromise 16:05:32 i/I think it would be nicer/scribenick: Ege/ 16:05:39 dp: yes I think so too 16:05:45 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:05:45 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 16:06:06 sk: so you want to have JSON/Cbor and XML/EXI? 16:06:16 jr: yes I will update the pr 16:07:41 i|title and de|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1396 Issue 1396 - Complete TAG/Security Wide Review Request| 16:07:46 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:07:46 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 16:08:34 topic: PR 1341 16:09:17 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1341 PR 1341 - schema term in expected response 16:11:02 q+ 16:12:35 sk: should be discussed for TD 2.0 16:12:43 topic: PR 1342 16:13:02 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1342 PR 1342 - reorganize how to use uri schemes 16:14:50 ek: benfrancis did not like full flexibility of the uri scheme. michael lagally and benfrancis did not like referencing to the binding templates 16:16:22 q+ 16:17:09 -> https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/1342/21ce84a...acf4828.html#protocol-bindings diff - 8.3 Protocol Bindings 16:17:42 sk: node-wot has more protocol than what is allowed here. we should be flexible 16:17:53 ack c 16:19:52 q+ 16:20:15 kaz: we can use the registry document track or modify the binding document to specify this 16:22:13 kaz: we can also make some parts of the document a registry format 16:24:43 ca: I think the long term solution would be registry 16:30:52 ek: I think we should close the PR, continue discussion in the issue so that we can link to the binding spec 16:31:00 ... we need to decide what to do with the binding templates 16:31:53 topic: PR 1331 16:31:59 sk: you can do the edit and merge 16:32:47 topic: Issue 1394 16:34:00 q+ 16:34:11 ack c 16:34:23 ack k 16:34:55 ack dape 16:34:58 q+ to mention a better example of registry spec: https://www.w3.org/TR/2022/DNOTE-webcodecs-flac-codec-registration-20220209/ 16:34:59 q+ 16:35:07 dp: we should be careful removing stuff due to backwards compatibility issues 16:35:10 q- 16:35:46 i|you can do the|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1331 PR 1331 - fix: move CBOR content types their own table row in section 5.3.2| 16:36:55 i|we should be care|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1394 Issue 1394 - name and in fields for BasicSecurityScheme and DigestSecurityScheme needed?| 16:37:01 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:37:01 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 16:39:09 ack k 16:39:09 kaz, you wanted to mention a better example of registry spec: https://www.w3.org/TR/2022/DNOTE-webcodecs-flac-codec-registration-20220209/ 16:40:42 i/you wanted/topic: Registry Note (revisited) 16:41:19 topic: Issue 1399 16:41:32 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1399 Issue 1399 - ThingModel Placeholder limited to simple types 16:41:36 q+ 16:42:40 sk: thomas is not here though 16:42:54 ca: I think it is clear though 16:42:58 ack c 16:44:13 ca: for him it was not clear that the value can be objects since the example does not contain 16:44:19 q+ 16:44:51 ack dape 16:45:48 @JKRhb here is an example 16:46:13 ca: To me it was clear but for him it is not for him I think 16:46:30 sk: there is this npm tool but we cannot reference to a tool from the spec 16:47:53 ack dape 16:49:19 sk: (the comment he is writing summarizes the discussion) 16:51:02 Topic: Issue 1390 16:54:18 q+ 16:54:56 ack j 16:54:59 q+ 16:55:17 rrsagent, draft minutes 16:55:17 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 16:56:47 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1390 Issue 1390 - PropertyAffordance section is missing type specific in "vocabulary terms" table 16:57:38 ek: so property aff inherits data schema and number schema inherits data schema but there is no relationship between number schema and property affordance 16:57:51 q+ 16:58:01 q- 16:59:13 ack c 17:01:29 q? 17:01:35 adjourned 17:01:47 rrsagent, draft minutes 17:01:47 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/16-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 17:42:38 sebastian has joined #wot-td 19:56:17 Zakim has left #wot-td