WoT Discovery – 04 April 2022

Meeting minutes

Minutes

Mar-28

<acimmino> meeting starts reviewing the minutes

<acimmino> mccool: today we should discuss the implementation reports (discussed also last week)

<acimmino> mcool: kaz please edit the issue 291 for changing not* to note*

<acimmino> mcool: add to issue 271 still under discussion

PRs

McCool: 2 PRs there

PR 295

PR 295 - Make Security and Privacy Considerations Normative

McCool: discussed this during the security call
… appropriate to give one more week for review
… would be good if you all could review it too

diff - 8.1 Denial of Service

Kaz: should the "should" within section 8.1 also be an assertion?

McCool: there is a comment, and we're removing it
… need more work on this

McCool's comment 2-h ago

McCool: (then goes through the other sections)
… 8.2, 8.3, ...
… 9. Privacy Considerations
… 9.1 Location Tracking
… section "10. Performance Considerations" is non-normative

Farshid: easily testable

McCool: similar issue with TD
… section "11. Directory Service API Specification (Thing Model)"

Farshid: can move it

McCool: putting it to the Appendix may make sense
… we have another section for "Directory Service API"

Farshid: maybe we should shorten it a bit?

McCool: probably we should have a section on Thing Model here (around Directory Service API)
… but should not repeat it

McCool: agreed to move the section up
… putting it as a subsection under the "Directory Service API" section
… Farshid, do you want to work on a PR?

Farshid: yes

McCool: investigate wether we can make it collapsable

Kaz: do you mean some of the example (ex. 4, etc.) within the TD spec?

McCool: yeah
… two versions: a hyperlink and inline text for the TM with a checkbox saying "show TM inline)
… don't hae to worry about that right now

McCool's comment on that

Use Case Review

Use Case coverage

McCool: the trouble is that it's a bit unclear how to describe it
… need to see the gaps between the requirements from the use cases and the current specs
… would be useful as the input for the next Charter period
… another question is that there are two kinds of use cases
… industry-specific ones and more vague/generic ones

Kaz: some discussion during the Scripting call as well
… suggested we have some more discussion with Lagally about what/how to do about this
… e.g., during the Editors call and the Use Cases call

McCool: right
… was there a GitHub issue about this yet?

Cristiano: there is an issue for Scripting

<cris_> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/392

McCool: we can create another issue for Discovery

wot-usecases issue 189 - Clarify Expectations for Coverage Table

McCool: would be better to have a table of requirements rather than a table of use cases
… (adds comments to the issue 189)

McCool's comments

McCool: (shows an example of table of requirements)

example of "Edge Computing Use Case and Requirements analysis"

another example of "Natural Language Interface Accessibility User Requirements"