11:04:10 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-profile
11:04:10 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/03/23-wot-profile-irc
11:04:14 <kaz> meeting: WoT Profile
11:04:32 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Michael_McCool
11:04:37 <kaz> chair: Lagally
11:06:24 <Mizushima> Mizushima has joined #wot-profile
11:07:00 <McCool> McCool has joined #wot-profile
11:07:19 <kaz> present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
11:07:43 <kaz> topic: Agenda
11:08:03 <kaz> mm: we should talk about the Explainer for Profile
11:08:15 <kaz> ml: (generating an Issue for that purpose)
11:08:21 <kaz> present+ Ben_Francis
11:09:58 <kaz> ... (then goes through the agenda for today)
11:10:05 <McCool> ml: review agenda; testfest, event models, PR
11:10:22 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#WoT_Architecture_.28Profile.29_-_March_23nd.2C_2022 agenda for today
11:10:39 <kaz> i/review/scribenick: McCool/
11:10:47 <kaz> s/... (then goes through the agenda for today)//
11:10:57 <kaz> i/we should/scribenick: kaz/
11:11:02 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
11:11:10 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:11:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/23-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz
11:11:10 <McCool> topic: minutes
11:11:33 <McCool> ml: was two weeks ago, March 9
11:11:43 <McCool> ... no call last week due to plugfest
11:11:49 <kaz> i|was|-> https://www.w3.org/2022/03/09-wot-profile-minutes.html Mar-9|
11:12:36 <kaz> present+ Ryuichi_Matsukura
11:13:02 <McCool> ... discussed event model, 4 alternatives, proposals
11:13:21 <benfrancis> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/107#issuecomment-1062850204
11:13:42 <benfrancis> Follow-up comment: https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/107#issuecomment-1063073402
11:13:51 <McCool> bf: after call, based on discussion in call, gave followup
11:14:01 <mlagally> mlagally has joined #wot-profile
11:14:04 <mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/107#issuecomment-1062850204
11:15:16 <McCool> ml: please update the PDF link in the draft minutes to the above link
11:16:07 <McCool> ml: propose approving after link fix...
11:16:35 <McCool> ... just noticed though we have PDF link twice, but we didn't look at it, so should be fixed in both places
11:16:40 <McCool> kaz: URL fixed
11:17:37 <McCool> ml: ready to publish?
11:17:45 <McCool> ... no objections, approved
11:17:53 <McCool> topic: test fest
11:19:06 <mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pull/181
11:21:05 <kaz> s/https/-> https/
11:21:14 <kaz> s/181/181 PR 181 - WIP: Implementation Report/
11:21:16 <McCool> mm: so there were a number of fixes for assertion markup
11:21:21 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:21:21 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/23-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz
11:21:53 <McCool> mm: we need to find a good point to merge them, I will wait
11:26:06 <McCool> bf: I also made some changes recently to the ids
11:27:57 <McCool> mm: also plan to rename things, update the assertion list, etc
11:28:11 <McCool> ml: would also like to report about what we did in testfest
11:28:35 <McCool> ... talked in testfest about profile validation, testing, etc.
11:28:50 <McCool> ... started working on a JSON schema extension for profile testing
11:29:10 <McCool> ... based on the current profile spec
11:29:25 <McCool> ... just to better understand the process, a starting point
11:30:04 <McCool> ... have a tool right now, but the output is very verbose, includes copy of input TDs
11:30:58 <McCool> mm: whether or not the actual things you are testing make it into the final spec, working on the testing process is useful
11:31:37 <McCool> ml: ideally we can re-use the existing TD schema, then add additional constraints
11:32:00 <McCool> mm: will this JSON Schema be an appendix?
11:32:07 <McCool> ml: yes, we have a section for it
11:33:36 <McCool> mm: would suggest a validation section similar to that in the TD, defining "levels" of validation, etc.
11:34:53 <McCool> ml: Issue #187
11:35:04 <McCool> ... Create validation section...
11:35:45 <McCool> ml: there are also a number of profile test cases now, from Oracle and Ben; still working on event implementations
11:36:40 <McCool> bf: was trying to do some testing, curl was working, but not postman
11:36:58 <McCool> ... query action did not work for me, however; status not working...
11:37:09 <McCool> ml: let's discuss offline, and work on implementations
11:37:29 <McCool> bf: on my side, profile implementation, have report on github
11:37:32 <kaz> i|ssue #187|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues
11:38:10 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues|https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/187 Issue 187 - Create validation section|
11:38:11 <McCool> topic: event model
11:38:17 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:38:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/23-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz
11:38:34 <benfrancis> WebThings compliance report https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NmoZ61iVEfIw6rhRwsCwTrq__eN137ROHzJjobWNPZo/edit?usp=sharing
11:38:40 <McCool> ml: prepared a slide deck
11:38:57 <McCool> ... PR #185
11:39:26 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pull/185 PR 185 - Slides for event model discussions (just merged)
11:39:56 <McCool> ml: some baselines that we seem to agree on
11:40:03 <McCool> ... general principles
11:40:25 <McCool> ... may be hard to *require* that a device is BOTH a client and server
11:40:53 <McCool> ... should ideally only have a single protocol binding for each op
11:42:18 <McCool> ... so avoid having mixed protocols in a single profile
11:42:43 <McCool> bf: and specifically within a single protocol, i.e. for events
11:43:39 <McCool> mm: which means if we don't require both client and server, webhooks won't fly
11:43:51 <McCool> bf: ml will get to that...
11:44:00 <ryuichi_> ryuichi_ has joined #wot-profile
11:44:20 <McCool> ... an individual profile may not require BOTH client or server, but it needs at least one
11:45:14 <McCool> ml: does single binding per op also mean a single form per interaction
11:45:29 <McCool> bf: yes, some nuance to that, but fundamentally yes
11:46:06 <McCool> ml: was some concern from Siemens about that, will have to follow up
11:46:48 <McCool> ... so right now, it looks like we agree on most things except events (and observe)
11:47:00 <McCool> ... so we can call that the baseline HTTP protocol
11:47:32 <McCool> ml: currently in the spec we have SSE for events, but not for observable
11:47:48 <McCool> ... but is a PR for observables
11:48:25 <McCool> ... in similar way we could have a websocket binding for notifications, as a separate standalone thing
11:48:56 <McCool> ... so we could do a baseline HTTP, then add extensions for different event mechanisms
11:49:40 <McCool> ml: we would then put event bindings in extensions
11:50:24 <McCool> ... have dedicated sections
11:50:43 <McCool> mm: would then have a baseline http profile, then an event profile you would add?
11:50:56 <McCool> bf: not convinced this is a good idea, will cause fragmentation
11:51:42 <McCool> ... we already have an SSE binding, the only use case is when the device is a client; a different deployment scenario
11:51:56 <McCool> ... giving up on events in the core for that one use case seems extreme
11:52:08 <McCool> ... my suggest is to have two profiles
11:52:22 <McCool> ... similar to this, will share common baseline
11:52:36 <McCool> q+
11:53:11 <McCool> ml: won't have no interop in baseline, for devices without events
11:53:26 <McCool> ... and SSE just is not scalable
11:55:06 <McCool> mm: one profile or a profile plus an extension are technically similar
11:55:26 <McCool> ... what we want for interop is to clarify the use cases for each profile
11:55:42 <McCool> bf: have servient and client-server profiles
11:56:00 <McCool> ... if we have baseline, plus extension
11:56:25 <McCool> ml; if stick to the baseline itself, then interop is acheived
11:56:42 <McCool> ... so three profiles, really: baseline, servient, and client-server
11:56:58 <McCool> ... many scenarios are possible without events
11:57:18 <McCool> q+
11:57:58 <kaz> s/ml; /ml: /
11:58:13 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:58:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/23-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz
11:58:54 <McCool> bf: do you have an example implementation of the use case you are talking about?  It would be very useful to see what bits are the same and which are different?
11:59:50 <sebastiankaebisch> sebastiankaebisch has joined #wot-profile
12:00:08 <kaz> q+ to remind you all that we need to switch to the main call
12:00:09 <McCool> ... we have implementations of the others, but not webhooks...
12:00:20 <McCool> ml: agree, that would be useful, working on it
12:00:43 <kaz> ack mc
12:00:51 <kaz> ack k
12:00:51 <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to remind you all that we need to switch to the main call
12:00:52 <McCool> mm: some IoT devices, I know of do use webhooks, e.g. Shelly, but profiles are for greenfield, so...
12:01:06 <kaz> [adjourned]
12:01:10 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
12:01:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/03/23-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz
12:05:48 <Mizushima> Mizushima has left #wot-profile
12:05:58 <sebastia_> sebastia_ has joined #wot-profile
13:19:03 <sebastiankaebisch> sebastiankaebisch has joined #wot-profile
13:19:25 <sebastiankaebisch> sebastiankaebisch has joined #wot-profile
14:06:48 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-profile
14:30:52 <sebastiankaebisch> sebastiankaebisch has joined #wot-profile
14:31:25 <sebastiankaebisch> sebastiankaebisch has joined #wot-profile
15:02:31 <sebastiankaebisch> sebastiankaebisch has joined #wot-profile
15:02:54 <sebastiankaebisch> sebastiankaebisch has joined #wot-profile