11:05:08 RRSAgent has joined #wot-marketing 11:05:08 logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/08/02-wot-marketing-irc 11:05:12 meeting: WoT Marketing 11:06:41 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan, Michael_McCool 11:07:54 dape has joined #wot-marketing 11:08:25 present+ Daniel_Peintner 11:08:33 scribe: dape 11:09:20 TOPIC: Approve previous minutes 11:09:28 -> https://www.w3.org/2022/07/12-wot-marketing-minutes.html 11:10:32 McCool has joined #wot-marketing 11:12:53 11:14:27 s/-> https://www/.w3.org/2022/07/12-wot-marketing-minutes.html/ -> https://www.w3.org/2022/07/19-wot-marketing-minutes.html 11:14:30 s/12/19/ 11:14:49 rrsagent, make log public 11:14:55 rrsagent, draft minute 11:14:55 I'm logging. I don't understand 'draft minute', kaz. Try /msg RRSAgent help 11:14:59 s/rrsagent, draft minute// 11:15:00 rrsagent, draft minutes 11:15:00 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/08/02-wot-marketing-minutes.html kaz 11:15:13 TOPIC: PRs 11:15:23 SUBTOPIC: Moving Explainer 11:15:38 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/pull/331 11:16:19 chair: Ege 11:16:30 present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima 11:17:07 Ege: not clear from last time.. what to do with this PR 11:17:18 i|structure|-> https://www.w3.org/2022/07/19-wot-marketing-minutes.html July-19| 11:18:00 s/331/331 PR 331 - Move Explainer to Marketing repo| 11:18:03 DP: Not sure either 11:18:08 s/repo|/repo/ 11:18:29 q+ 11:19:55 Kaz: Explainer for specifications and explainer for marketing are 2 different things 11:20:20 ... suggest to *not* call marketing document "explainer" 11:20:42 MMC: should archive *old* document and not just moving 11:20:55 Ege: Name it "Intro to TD1.1"? 11:21:41 MMC: We also have explainers for Discovery and Architecture 11:22:19 ... copy .. rename and add content 11:22:40 Ege: rewriting "Documentation" page? 11:23:19 ack k 11:24:13 MMC: Architecture explainer has list to other documents as well. 11:24:26 ... we might not need that if we have it on Documentation page 11:25:13 ... copy explainers and add it to "Other Documents" section 11:25:28 q+ 11:26:13 Kaz: We should have broader discussion with editors.. how to manage spec generation procedure 11:27:02 ... explainers should stay in repos for TAG reviews etc 11:27:25 ... make clear that "marketing" task forces did not generate them 11:27:41 ack k 11:27:46 ... part of W3C process 11:28:25 Ege: Link only recent ones (ie. 1.1 and *not* 1.0) 11:31:31 TOPIC: Decisions 11:31:39 SUBTOPIC: Case Study for JSON Schema 11:31:49 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/329 11:32:29 s/329/329 Issue 329 - JSON Schema Case Study/ 11:32:36 Ege: what is left: We should mention the case study in main call 11:32:46 ... to get their opinions 11:33:05 ... Coralie confirmed we can participate in the study 11:33:27 MMC: Adding it to main call agenda sounds fine 11:33:53 Ege: or send email? 11:33:54 q+ 11:33:58 MMC: Maybe email is better 11:34:34 Kaz: wondering who generates text for case study? 11:35:15 Ege: I don't plan to be mentioned as "author"... 11:35:38 ... suggest to mention "WoT team" 11:36:09 Kaz: Can we expect reviewers ? 11:36:19 ... not sure about this ... 11:36:26 Ege: We will fill template 11:36:35 ... they have own writers 11:37:08 ... w.r.t. format 11:37:19 ... see https://github.com/w3c/wot-marketing/issues/329#issuecomment-1185328012 11:37:31 ... template asks for questions 11:37:50 ... proper text is published... not just the answers 11:38:48 ... we can also write everything ourselves 11:39:08 ... I started answering the questions 11:39:31 see https://hackmd.io/@egekorkan/json-schema-wot 11:39:49 ... everyone can leave comments 11:40:17 ... I will finish the questions today and send email 11:41:20 MMC: Suggest to use positive statements in contrast to "counter fragmentation" 11:41:38 SUBTOPIC: Using the call for CG IG collab or not 11:41:38 q+ 11:41:50 Ege: next week charter review period is over 11:42:25 Ege: wonder about collaboration, https://github.com/w3c/wot-cg/blob/main/wot-ig-collaboration.md 11:42:50 Kaz: From my viewpoint. CG is different mechanism 11:43:14 ... kind of internal liaison between WG/IG 11:43:38 ... we should think about how to split activities 11:43:58 Ege: not about long term.. just for some weeks 11:44:30 Kaz: from team-side... CG do not have team contact support 11:45:45 Ege: Question: How CG can organize PlugFest or updating Website 11:46:25 Kaz: which part of PlugFest or Website should be handled by CG? 11:46:36 ... and how to manage those resources 11:46:55 Ege: Exactly. That's what I would like clarify today 11:47:15 Kaz: This should be decided by CG group.. not in this call 11:48:14 Ege: CG decides and brings result to IG ? 11:48:48 Kaz: Separate initiative also possible.. besides IG PlugFests 11:49:01 MMC: Testing belongs to WoT 11:49:13 ... future PlugFests could be organized by CG 11:49:34 ... should make clear who is organizing events 11:50:05 Kaz: Currently, charter states PlugFests are organized by IG 11:50:20 MMC: Agree, but we might want to update this statement 11:50:30 ... in charter 11:50:43 ... CG not mentioned in charter 11:51:05 Kaz: Clarify expectation from community side 11:51:44 ... collaborative discussions should lead to the new organization of events 11:52:32 ... should be careful about IG role 11:52:45 ... what is the work of IG 11:53:24 ... liaison the only thing left? difficult for re-chartering 11:53:44 Ege: testing should remain for IG 11:53:49 MMC: or WG 11:54:07 Ege: Okay.. CG has some work to do now... 11:54:11 +1 kaz 11:54:36 [adjourned] 11:54:43 rrsagent, make log public 11:54:55 rrsagent, draft minutes 11:54:55 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/08/02-wot-marketing-minutes.html kaz 12:56:23 kaz has joined #wot-marketing 14:05:34 Zakim has left #wot-marketing