12:02:01 RRSAgent has joined #wot-script 12:02:01 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/02/28-wot-script-irc 12:02:16 dape has joined #wot-script 12:04:49 meeting: WoT Scripting API 12:04:55 Mizushima has joined #wot-script 12:05:04 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Daniel_Peintner, Zoltan_Kis 12:06:57 cris has joined #wot-script 12:08:34 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 12:08:46 present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi 12:08:49 scribenick:zkis 12:09:00 Topic: previous minutes 12:09:10 -> https://www.w3.org/2022/02/21-wot-script-minutes.html 12:09:21 s/html/html Feb-21/ 12:09:36 no objections 12:09:39 minutes approved 12:10:00 Topic: quick updates 12:10:22 DP: on the main call it was asked when Scripting TF will update the spec 12:10:47 DP: it depends on the other publications; TD is stable, others maybe not 12:10:52 rrsagent, make log public 12:10:56 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:10:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/28-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 12:11:06 +1 12:11:07 DP: we could wait a few weeks that the dependent specs are updated 12:11:43 DP: currently the main dependency is Discovery 12:11:48 Topic: PRs 12:12:13 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/386 12:12:30 DP: there is a stalled PR (dependent on discovery) and the obsolete package lock (link above( 12:12:37 s/above(/above) 12:13:01 i/386/subtopic: PR 386/ 12:13:22 s/386/386 PR 386 - refactor: remove obsolete package-lock.json files in sub-directories/ 12:13:44 Topic: issues 12:13:57 SUBTOPIC: Check alignments with Architecture 12:14:05 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/376 12:14:12 i/issues/Subtopic: issue 376 12:14:58 s/SUBTOPIC: Check alignments with Architecture// 12:15:21 s/376/Issue 376 - Check alignments with Architecture/ 12:15:29 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:15:29 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/28-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 12:16:05 chair: Daniel 12:16:44 DP: the discussion converged on text aligned with the conformance classes 12:16:50 DP: any objections? 12:17:13 DP: will prepare the PR for Architecture 12:18:16 Subtopic: issue 384 12:18:19 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/384 12:18:47 DP: there is a related PR in Discovery 12:19:07 CA: establish minimal requirement for client in order to be able to discover 12:19:28 ... now it includes HTTP 12:20:37 s/HTTP/HTTPS 12:20:54 s/384/384 Issue 384 - Align discovery and scripting/ 12:22:34 DP: the work should continue beyond HTTP 12:22:49 ... in Scripting we'll have the same restriction 12:23:04 CA: yes, the discovery conformance class must implement HTTPS 12:23:46 ZK: it doesn't change the API shape, but it has to be clear in the spec, for implementations 12:23:58 DP: there was also a pagination that only worked in HTTP 12:24:13 ... was that the reason why HTTP is mandatory? 12:25:12 ZK: did they study the CoAP discovery, e.g. in OCF - that is a very clear mechanism 12:25:20 CA: yes, it was considered 12:25:56 DP: do we know when they plan to converge on this? 12:26:21 CA: the deadline is close, but is not known (it's being shifted) 12:28:03 ZK: this is not a strong dependency for Scripting, only for implementations (node-wot) 12:28:19 CA: there is the issue why Scripting allows using the Fetch API 12:28:48 ZK: Scripting discovery API may use also other architectural solutions for discovery than the one described in the Discovery spec 12:29:07 SUBTOPIC: Conformance section necessity 12:29:16 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/354 12:30:50 DP: the chairs need to send an email to the AC reps participating in the WG 12:30:53 -> https://www.w3.org/2022/02/23-wot-minutes.html#t05 12:31:10 ... since Notes are not covered by W3C patent policy, so it needs to be agree within the WG 12:32:00 KA: we need to think about how to deal with normative sections in Notes, but we might also put the Scripting API back to the REC track in the next charter 12:32:11 DP: one doesn't exclude the other in my opinion 12:33:04 ZK: the point was that ML didn't consider this side-agreement a clean solution 12:33:13 ... it would be cleaner to be regulated by the W3C process 12:33:25 KA: let's check with the chairs about the progress 12:33:48 DP: OK, so let's keep this open 12:34:20 SUBTOPIC: New op values (queryaction and cancelaction) 12:34:27 --> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/335 12:34:33 s/354/354 Issue 354 - Conformance section necessity/ 12:35:07 DP: in the TD spec the PR was merged which introduced the new op values 12:35:39 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1208/files 12:35:43 q? 12:35:48 q+ 12:36:38 DP: we might need to change the API, e.g. invokeAction() 12:37:14 s/335/335 Issue 335 - New op values (queryaction and cancelaction)/ 12:37:17 CA: we can query only one instance of an action 12:37:54 DP: my assumption was that we need to know the action instance in order to be able to later interact with it 12:38:30 ... so we cannot just add 2 new methods like queryAction() and cancelAction() 12:38:35 CA: so we need to change the return value 12:40:34 q+ 12:42:19 ZK: can we identify action instances on the wire (i.e. protocol binding dependent)? 12:43:11 DP: that was my assumption 12:43:52 q+ 12:43:55 ack cris 12:44:12 CA: it's quite difficult to specify an algorithm to handle action instances 12:44:31 ... if the TD doesn't define this well 12:44:55 DP: we need to check if it's not well defined 12:45:38 CA: in the last plugfest we experimented with this 12:46:17 CA: if an invokeAction() returns a JSON, how can we fake that as a control object? 12:46:21 ... it will be complex 12:48:30 ZK: we can define an action control object that has a callback (event) for completion, returning InteractionOutput, and one method for querying 12:49:02 CA: what if different things will return different results for the same action? 12:52:40 ZK: I still think we could do a control object that will work 12:53:29 ... I could draft a few alternatives in the issue, and when we have consensus, we can decide and make a PR 12:53:49 DP: yes, and as CA mentioned, we should check the TD spec completeness as well 12:54:07 q? 12:54:10 ack z 12:56:07 DP: we can also query (and cancel?) all actions 12:57:01 CA: the feature is in risk because no implementations yet 12:57:16 DP: sooner or later there will be implementations, even for Profiles 12:57:47 ... but if no one implements these, then it's out of the game 12:58:00 CA: the Things gateway implements this on protocol level 12:59:24 ZK: I think it would make even more sense to support cancel all actions, than query all actions 12:59:39 ... we need to wait until this is clarified, since it will change the API shape 12:59:46 rrsagent, draft minutes 12:59:46 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/28-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 13:00:36 DP: I will take a look at that 13:02:01 q+ to whisper we need to move to another call 13:02:09 DP: Ben had a use case for querying all actions 13:02:17 ZK: looks like network optimization, makes sense 13:02:25 DP: we need to adjourn 13:02:30 adjourned 13:02:34 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:02:34 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/28-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 13:02:37 q- 13:05:37 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Scripting_API_WebConf#28_February_2022 13:05:39 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:05:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/02/28-wot-script-minutes.html kaz 13:08:03 Mizushima has left #wot-script 15:06:49 Zakim has left #wot-script