Meeting minutes
<mlagally> np
minutes
<kaz> Mar-31
Lagally: no objs, approved
schedule
Lagally: let's just review where we are
… norm freeze may 6th
… feb 4 was normative sections
McCool: one thing to mention is if S&P become normative, technically adds new assertions
… but this would be consistent with other specs
… I would expect the security TF to get through that in the next two weeks
<kaz> 10. Security Considerations
Lagally: what does it mean if they violate one of the S&P assertions?
McCool: see also 726, which is review
<kaz> Issue 726 - Review and Update Security and Privacy Considerations
Lagally: let's do a PR that just makes it normative, and then ask for review
… also delete the ednote about refactoring, already done
McCool: also we need to add discovery, of course
spec structure
Lagally: for the May 6 deadline, need to see if there are any other places where there would be assertions
… is label called "normative sections", but these are reorg
… see also issue 646
<kaz> Issue 646 - [Index] Section structure, assertions, and issues
McCool: also want to check S&P are in the right place
Lagally: is issue 646 still open?
… can we close this, or is it still open?
Toumura: if structure is settled, we can close this issue
Lagally: ok, I think we are settled, let's close
Spec alignment
<kaz> spec alignment issues
Lagally: spec alignment
… binding template, ege has looked into
… mccool still has some open issues on discovery
<mlagally> https://
PR 731
Lagally: see PR 731 PR 731 - fixing issue 616, addressing issue 616
… also did some cleanup to get rid of an informative note
… just an outdated reference to use case process
Lagally: propose merging and closing related issue
McCool: ok
Lagally: done
Issue 674
<kaz> Issue 674 - Review use cases document / align terminology / identify gaps
Lagally: next is issue 674, aligning terminology
… is still a problem with a few things, like "virtual thing", which is used inconsistently
McCool: real issue is normative docs, things like use case doc we can clean up later
… but if discovery and arch are inconsistent, that is a problem for our schedule
Lagally: propose closing. 674, then work on other issues that are aiming to make each normative doc consistent with architecture
McCool: regarding discovery, one issue I am aware of is use of "producer", etc.
testing
<mlagally> https://
Lagally: created small issues, e.g. update readme
<kaz> rendered version of the draft implementation report for WoT Architecture 1.1
McCool: some other minor things in the report to fix, will do another bugfix pass soon; impl sections, automated testing, etc
… also ignore the staticly links, they are out of date now
… need to delete some extra files that are not needed anymore, eg. test specs
contributions
PR 730
<kaz> PR 730 - fix respec error on producer
Lagally: pr 730, fixes a respec error; merging
Lagally: also producer is not referenced, but can be linked from S&P
McCool: I can fix that then when I make my PR for that section
PR 728
<kaz> PR 728 - Draft telemetry section
Lagally: PR 728, some review comments
… is a comment about "industrial controllers", but that is beyond telemetry
… ege also commented that term "bearer" should be changed to "communication channels"
McCool: small typo noted (wont't), but ok with merging
Lagally: ok, will merge
Lagally: aob?
<kaz> none
<kaz> [adjourned]