W3C

– DRAFT –
WoT Testfest - Day 5

10 June 2022

Attendees

Present
David_Ezell, Ege_Korkan, Elodie_Thieblin, Fady_Salama, Jan_Romann, Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_McCool, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
-
Chair
McCool
Scribe
Fady, kaz

Meeting minutes

PRs

PR 317

PR 317 - Add manual.csv files for dart_wot

<kaz> PR 317 - Add manual.csv files for dart_wot

McCool: We will merge this

<kaz> (merged)

PR 344

<kaz> PR 344 - editdor addional feature tests

McCool: need Sebastian

Latest status

(McCool gets the latest resources from the wot-testing repo)

(and then checks the results for dart-wot implementation)

(and then regenerates the TD implementation report11.html)

McCool: I updated my script to pass anything that has 2 or more implementations
… I also updated it to highlight any thing at risk as yellow
… It seems that testing problems have been fixed
… you can also see that optional assertions are now at risk even if one implementation is available

Kaz: even optional features need 2 implementations

Ege: It is weird that vocab assertions are optional

McCool: The vocab itself is mandatory, but using them is optional

ACTION: McCool to check the vocabulary assertions

PRs (revisited)

PR 344 (revisited)

<kaz> PR 344 - editdor addional feature tests

<kaz> (related to the ediTDor implementation)

McCool: That PR is blocked because it fails the tests

Ege: I did some fixing for the tm:extend assertion and maybe running the action again will fix it

McCool: which files had problems?

Ege: will check the detail later

Regenerate the TD implementation report again

McCool: I've generated a file that includes all the files at risk
… and now I would like to look at them and record who will close which gaps

Automated Validation Results

td-action-names

Sebastian: 1.0 feature to be covered already

McCool: will doublecheck

Kaz: we need to look into the 1.0 results in general. right?

McCool: yeah
… right now only Intel, Huawei, Panasonic and SmartThings there
… missing input from Siemens
… wondering if any other old results to be considered

(in addition to Siemens)

ACTION: McCool (and somebody) to check old 1.0 results

McCool: Sebastian, do you want to look into that?
… myself will look into it but would be better to have one more reviewer
… probably overlooked something
… one issue is that Siemens' result was based on node-wot and overlapped with it

Kaz: maybe we need to have an additional flag to identify the code base *after* merging the results

McCool: We need to think about how to count in older examples and implementations

ACTION: group to consider how to deal with results from multiple implementations which are based on one specific code base and multiple implementations from one organization (including the results from Ver. 1.0 implementation results)

Ege: need to fix playground as well

Kaz: let's think about how to deal with that later based on the action item above

(some errors are fixed by PR 348)

PR 348 - fix tm:extends in Siemens TDs

Sebastian: would suggest we record features marked as "at-risk" and continue to work on them

McCool: working on additional capability to identify the features at-risk and list them for the TD spec

Kaz: there is one more PR (PR 340). should we look into that?

McCool: still working on that

Kaz: as Sebastian also mentioned, let's identify the features at-risk at the moment, and think about how to deal with them as the next step

Updated TD implementation report

(McCool regenerates the TD implementation report, report11.html)

Kaz: should we record the features at-risk here on the minutes?

McCool: can record the detail on a dedicated CSV file on wot-testing

Kaz: ok
… and we can add a link from these minutes to that file

(McCool creates a file, todo.csv)

Kaz: we're getting out of time
… so let's record the features at-risk now
… and ask you, Sebastian, Ege and the other implementers to check the tools and results (TD and CSV) based on that (=todo.csv)

<McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/main/testing/todo.csv

wot-thing-description PR 1533 - Update June 2022 impl report has been also merged

Kaz: tx
… let's continue the discussion on how to deal with the results next week

Ege: note that we need to think about Architecture as well

Kaz: yes, the Testfest this week was targeted only to TD and Discovery
… and we need to think about how to deal with Architecture and Profile as well
… let's continue the discussion next week

Sebastian: before closing the call, would like to appreciate all the efforts of everybody including the tooling by Fady and Ege

[adjourned]

Summary of action items

  1. McCool to check the vocabulary assertions
  2. McCool (and somebody) to check old 1.0 results
  3. group to consider how to deal with results from multiple implementations which are based on one specific code base and multiple implementations from one organization (including the results from Ver. 1.0 implementation results)
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 185 (Thu Dec 2 18:51:55 2021 UTC).