Meeting minutes
Logistics
Sebastian: (gives instruction on the IRC)
OPC UA / W3C WoT Liaison
Sebastian: have been doing
discussions
… WoT would allow people develop IoT apps
quickly
… including OPC platform
Kaz: just to make sure, OK to publish the minutes from this meeting publicly
(everybody is OK to publish the minutes publicly)
Karl: the meeting itself being recorded?
McCool: would suggest we record this time
Sebastian: any problems?
(none)
recording started
Sebastian: (starts his presentation)
Agenda
Sebastian: would like to start
introduction
… some people can't make this call but very
interested
… (shows regrets list)
… Bernd, Etienne, Heiko, Stephan
(then starts quick self introduction by the participants)
Sebastian Kaebisch, Michael McCool
Erich Barnstedt
Karl Deiretsbacher
Jim Luth
Johannes Olbort
Kevin Brohan
Matthias Arnold
Matt Wherry
Reiner Sciekofer
Michael Lagally
Kaz Ashimura
Aparna Thuluva
Cristiano Aguzzi
Darko Anicic
Kunihiko Toumura
Ryuichi Matsukura
Tetsushi Matsuda
Tomoaki Mizushima
McCool: WoT-JP CG is working with ECHONET, FYI
OPC UA Binding for WoT
[slide 1] Motivation
Sebastian: The Web and the
standards are established in our daily life and various
businesses.
… (mentions various Web services)
… multiple sub-services are integrated for a
specific service on the Web
… W3C WoT standardize building blocks for IoT like
that
… so that people can generate services
easily
… one of the building blocks should be the landing
page for IoT purposes
… that's what the WoT Thing Description should
provide
… integrate the data and function points is
needed
… on the other hand, OPC is working on industries
based on Industie 4.0
[slide 2] What is Missing?
Sebastian: important to have
documents on how to use it
… WoT binding template describes how the forms
within the WoT Thing Description should be set up
… a possible OPC UA binding template should
describe how to set it up for OPC endpoints
[slide 3] Proposed Idea
Sebastian: have been proposing
this idea
… how the official semantic should look
like
… would be greate to describe that based on the WoT
data model
… OPC UA is working on something similar to the WoT
Thing Description
… named UA NodesetFile
… W3C WoT WG/IG has been working on PoC named
Plugfest
… to evaluate working assumptions
… details on discussion on GitHub
McCool: need to clarify what kind of technical work to be done by whom
Lagally: what is important
is working together
… working hand in hand
[slide 4] Current status of collaboration
Sebastian: (describes the
history so far)
… note that the WoT WG is wrapping up our 1.1
specs
… and are considering the new topics for then 2.0
Charter period
McCool: want to finalize
the Charter work by early next year
… while the MoU is expected earlier than
that
Sebastian: important step is
working on the MoU
… would clarify a concrete plan for that
[slide 5] Proposed Next Step
Sebastian: for that purpose, would like to have another meeting by the OPCF representatives and the WoT Chairs/Staff
McCool: need to clarify the
scope for our next Charter
… assumption of focus on TD and binding
Sebastian: need to think about the major goal
McCool: one more piece is
security
… interaction with OPC would require some mechanism
to handle the security too
… maybe need something new onboard
Matt: question about the
scope
… semantic definition would be useful
Sebastian: WoT Thing
Description is generated based on semantic interoperability
… further clarification would be great
Kaz: clarifying the
scope should be the next step, I completely agree
… on the other hand, I think we should clarify the
need for the MoU
… we already have liaison between OPC and
W3C
… so we can have any king of technical
collaboration
… W3C spec work is already public and W3C can
provide any information to OPC
… so I'd like to know if OPC needs MoU for further
discussion even if we could start with public
information
Jim: we can hold
technical discussion based on the current liaison
… MoU and Charter to clarify the scope of the next
steps
Matt: possibly could work with the TCB members
Jim: yes, we could help you
Lagally: it's great to have
this discussion
… but we need another dedicated discussion by the
experts from both the sides
… need further clarification about the procedure
including MoU as well
… good step forward gradually
… let's clarify what's needed!
Sebastian: right
… let's have another call
… to clarify procedure
… and also the scope fo the technical
collaboration
… would it be OK?
McCool: logistics will be discussed by email?
Sebastian: will send
information on another doodle
… also give comments to the GitHub PR
PR 1020 - Technical Objectives and Requirements for OPC UA/WoT Binding
[adjourned]