11:02:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-profile
11:02:57 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/08/10-wot-profile-irc
11:03:07 <kaz> meeting: WoT Profile
11:03:13 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally
11:03:59 <Mizushima> Mizushima has joined #wot-profile
11:06:17 <sebastian> sebastian has joined #wot-profile
11:06:23 <mlagally> mlagally has joined #wot-profile
11:07:07 <McCool> McCool has joined #wot-profile
11:07:36 <kaz> present+ Ben_Francis, Ege_Korkan, Michael_McCool, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Tomoaki_Mizushima
11:08:07 <Ege> Ege has joined #wot-profile
11:08:11 <kaz> scribenick: Ege
11:08:19 <Ege> topic: agenda
11:08:42 <kaz> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#WoT_Architecture_.28Profile.29_-_Aug_10th.2C_2022
11:08:51 <Ege> topic: minutes review
11:08:58 <kaz> i|min|-> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#WoT_Architecture_.28Profile.29_-_Aug_10th.2C_2022 agenda for today|
11:09:10 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2022/08/03-wot-profile-minutes.html Aug-3
11:11:03 <Ege> topic: spec structure and next steps
11:11:22 <Ege> ml: I have prepared a presentation
11:11:50 <Ege> ml: we seem to agree on baseline and most of the common constraints
11:12:00 <McCool> q+
11:12:23 <Ege> ack m
11:12:39 <Ege> q+
11:13:14 <Ege> mm: we need testing to proceed to REC
11:13:44 <McCool> q+
11:13:55 <McCool> ack m
11:14:03 <McCool> q+
11:14:16 <kaz> q?
11:14:18 <kaz> ack e
11:14:47 <sebastian> q+
11:15:03 <Ege> ek: I think that actions was never tested
11:15:17 <kaz> q+
11:15:30 <McCool> ack m
11:16:27 <Ege> mm: actions are at risk and we do not seem to have agreement on common constraints
11:16:54 <Ege> sk: async actions are not done, sync is easier
11:17:21 <Ege> ek: even sync actions are not done since they need a payload format
11:17:26 <kaz> q?
11:17:32 <kaz> ack s
11:17:36 <McCool> q+
11:17:46 <Ege> ml: we have implementations in the oracle and in webthings
11:18:14 <Ege> q+
11:18:16 <Ege> ack k
11:19:00 <Ege> kaz: we started talking about which features of TD are possible, not the http baseline shown as slides
11:19:10 <Ege> kaz: we should approach this problem holistically
11:19:45 <kaz> q?
11:20:21 <McCool> ack m
11:20:23 <Ege> mm: we can make normative sections we do not agree on informative
11:21:21 <Ege> ml: we have webhook and see but each have only 1 implementation
11:21:44 <Ege> ml: alternatives
11:22:12 <kaz> s/as slides/as Lagally's slides/
11:22:31 <kaz> s/we started/sorry but a bit confused because we've started/
11:22:51 <Ege> q+
11:23:01 <sebastian> q+
11:24:14 <kaz> i|I have prepared a presentation|-> @@@ Lagally's slides|
11:24:24 <McCool> q+
11:24:26 <kaz> q+
11:24:31 <kaz> ack e
11:26:04 <Ege> ek: we can also publish a document that is about an HTTP protocol
11:26:42 <Ege> ml: that would sacrifice a lot of work
11:27:23 <kaz> s/kaz: we should approach this problem holistically/kaz: if we want to revisit the implementation status of the TD features as the basis of the discussion on the Baseline Profile, we can do so. However, we should see the implementation status of all the related specifications, i.e., TD, Architecture, Discovery, Binding Templates and Scripting API to see which features are "Basic"./
11:27:37 <Ege> mm: we do not have time for major restructuring
11:27:40 <McCool> ack m
11:28:04 <McCool> q+
11:28:14 <Ege> q+
11:28:41 <benfrancis> q+
11:29:04 <Ege> sk: I am ok with C if we have a succesful plugfest
11:30:18 <kaz> [[
11:30:36 <kaz> Option C. Publihs the Profile 1.0 as a REC, make event mechanisms non-normative
11:30:42 <Ege> sk: if we cannot have a succesful plugfest and testfest, we can publish it as a note
11:30:59 <kaz> i|if we|make normative in Profile 1.1 after sufficient plugfests|
11:31:05 <kaz> i|if we|]]|
11:31:36 <Ege> ml: I propose a plugfest after tpac
11:31:39 <kaz> zakim, who is on the call?
11:31:39 <Zakim> Present: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Ben_Francis, Ege_Korkan, Michael_McCool, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Tomoaki_Mizushima
11:31:47 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
11:31:55 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
11:31:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/08/10-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz
11:31:55 <kaz> q?
11:32:00 <sebastian> ack
11:32:01 <sebastian> ack s
11:32:10 <McCool> ack m
11:32:38 <McCool> q+
11:33:06 <Ege> kaz: what is the discussion here exactly? rescoping of the document or timing of the document?
11:33:53 <kaz> s/of the document/of the WoT Profile spec document/
11:34:08 <kaz> s/timing of the document/timing of the publication/
11:34:16 <kaz> ack k
11:34:25 <Ege> ml: it is not a scoping discussion
11:34:27 <McCool> (comment about scoping - profiles are basically an ongoing project, so this will always be a problem...)
11:36:26 <kaz> kaz: @@@
11:38:08 <Ege> kaz: I can wait until the end
11:38:10 <Ege> ek: me too
11:38:30 <kaz> s/@@@/if the question is re-scoping the WoT Profile specification, if we want to think about an update schedule for the WoT Profile specification for a REC, we need to clarify all the remaining problems. If the remaining problem is only about the event mechanism, option C here would make sense, but is that true?/
11:39:10 <kaz> s/the end/the end of the slides before getting the answer, though./
11:39:14 <Ege> ml: we have discussion on payload formats
11:39:41 <kaz> q?
11:39:44 <kaz> ack e
11:41:02 <kaz> q+
11:42:16 <McCool> ege: implmenting in scripting and node-wot not straightforward; we also have not really done end-to-end testing of profiles (eg consumers)
11:43:14 <McCool> seb: talked to daniel about baseline profile in node-wot; was concerned that no defn in scripting API on how to handle action cancellation, for example
11:43:25 <McCool> ... but needs to evaluate the effort needed
11:43:41 <Ege> ek: I do not think that it is easy to implement in node-wot
11:43:43 <McCool> ... but seems to not be that straightforward
11:43:48 <kaz> i/ege:/scribenick: McCool/
11:43:58 <kaz> s/implmenting/implementing/
11:43:58 <McCool> ml: what we could do is mark these sections at risk
11:44:11 <McCool> ... want to make life easier, not harder
11:44:18 <Ege> ek: also, I am not aware of any consumer implementation so far, which is more important than thing implementations in my opinion
11:44:27 <McCool> ... if some things are hard to implement, need to understand why
11:45:17 <kaz> i/also/scribenick: Ege/
11:45:29 <kaz> i/if some/scribenick: McCool/
11:45:30 <kaz> q?
11:48:10 <Ege> bf: going back to the options, C and D do not provide much value
11:48:28 <Ege> ... default http binding of the TD is enough for that
11:48:45 <Ege> ... only new thing would be async actions
11:49:49 <Ege> bf: I prefer option A, do it earlier in the next charter, i.e. not take 2 years
11:50:16 <Ege> bf: we lack a lot of implementation experience for the consumer
11:50:35 <Ege> bf: we have 3 consumer implementation plans for webthing
11:51:46 <kaz> [[
11:51:46 <kaz> A. Dont' publish Profile REC within this Charter, defer to nxt Charter
11:51:46 <kaz> B. Publish the Profifil as a WG Note in this Charter period
11:51:46 <kaz> C. Publish the Profile 1.0 as a REC ,make event mechanisms non-norative
11:51:47 <kaz> D. Publish Profile 1.0 as a REC with "HTTP Baseline" only
11:51:47 <kaz> ]]
11:52:06 <Ege> mm: adding to kaz's comment. it is not unexpected that the work is not done
11:52:24 <kaz> q?
11:52:27 <kaz> ack b
11:52:28 <kaz> ack m
11:52:49 <Ege> mm: I agree with ben on option C
11:53:40 <Ege> mm: we have to explain the difference between protocol binding and profiles
11:54:11 <Ege> q+
11:54:47 <Ege> kaz: I am ok with all options but B
11:55:01 <Ege> ... before choosing an option, we need to clarify the current status a bit more
11:55:10 <McCool> (time check: only 5m left in mtg)
11:55:18 <McCool> q?
11:55:34 <Ege> ... which issues need to be adressed here
11:56:37 <McCool> q+
11:58:22 <McCool> McCool to Ege: the thing is, there are constraints on metadata that don't have anything to do with a (sub)protocol, so...
11:59:18 <McCool> McCool to Ege: but for the specific things about webhooks, etc. sure, that might make sense
11:59:35 <kaz> kaz: @@@
12:00:42 <Ege> ml: issue filers should organize their issues
12:00:54 <Ege> ek: I find it weird that non editors do issue organization work
12:01:12 <Ege> mm: we do not have time left but we should work on the document
12:03:15 <kaz> s/@@@/when I mentioned "remaining issues", I meant not only the event mechanism issue listed in this slide but also all the remaining GitHub issues and also possible additional issues from the implementers viewpoint like Ege and Sebastian mentioned. After clarifying all the remaining issues, we should clarify which issues to be handled when (e.g., during this Charter period or next). And then we can tell when to publish the WoT Profile spec in
12:03:15 <kaz> which shape automatically./
12:03:18 <kaz> [adjourned]
12:03:25 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
12:03:41 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
12:03:41 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/08/10-wot-profile-minutes.html kaz
12:50:51 <benfrancis4> benfrancis4 has joined #wot-profile
13:09:44 <Mizushima> Mizushima has left #wot-profile
14:03:48 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-profile
15:28:46 <benfrancis8> benfrancis8 has joined #wot-profile
16:36:13 <kaz> kaz has joined #wot-profile
16:56:35 <benfrancis2> benfrancis2 has joined #wot-profile