Meeting minutes
Minutes
<kaz> Aug-3
McCool: minutes approved
McCool: it would good to add the links
planning
<kaz> Planning section of today's agenda
McCool: we need additional results
Ege: we need to explain people where to submit and that they can do this
McCool: I can send an email with a readme
McCool: I will check it daily
McCool: people have forgotten to link their manual.csv in the batch validation
McCool: it is annoying to keep versions of everything organized
Ege: this time we had too many changes and events
McCool: we need testimonials and implementation descriptions
Ege: better to send an email I think
McCool: I can make a PR and direct people there
Plugfest after TPAC
McCool: it would be good to put one week between
Ege: we should not get that tired this time but some actually travel
McCool: also giving people time to get organized for profile
McCool: we have numbers about the Implementation Reports
McCool: we need a doodle for the post TPAC plugfest
McCool: in discovery we have more manual assertions
TD Implementation Report
<kaz> TD Implementation Report
McCool: mutual side authentication
… it is difficult to implement
Ege: I can try it in my mqtt implementation, not sure though
Ege: these were added due to wide-reviews no?
McCool: true. this is a procedural question
Kaz: w3c process says remove features at risk and we can go for the PR stage, but we can re-publish another CR with those features as informative.
Kaz: not we need 2 tests for optional features as well
McCool: optional is different from informative though
Kaz: if you mean "removing RFC2119 keywords from the text of the unimplemented features" by "making the at-risk features informative", probably we need to publish an updated CR for that purpose.
Ege: I do not understand some assertions at all. Could you add clarifications?
McCool: I will look into rewording them
Kaz: agree we should add clarification to the assertions so that implementers can understand the meaning easily. On the other had, after we clarify the current implementation status, we should clarify the procedure on how to provide implementation results and ask all the WG/IG participants to help again. Also we should ask external potential implementers as well for help. For that purpose, we need to identify which features are important and need implementations and which can be marked as at-risk (which will be removed if we can't get sufficient implementations).
Discovery Implementation Report
<kaz> Discovery Implementation Report
McCool: we have a lack of manual assertions tested
<kaz> [adjourned]