15:06:46 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot
15:06:46 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-irc
15:07:00 <kaz> meeting: WoT TPAC F2F - Day 1
15:07:02 <Mizushima> present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
15:07:38 <kaz> present+ Manu_Sporny, David_Ezell, Kaz_Ashimura
15:09:52 <Fady> Fady has joined #wot
15:10:57 <kaz> topic: Logistics
15:11:03 <kaz> no recording
15:11:17 <kaz> transcription turned on
15:11:33 <Ege> present+
15:11:39 <glomb> glomb has joined #wot
15:11:45 <kaz> q?
15:12:07 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #wot
15:12:08 <kaz> q?
15:12:20 <kaz> zakim, who is on the call?
15:12:20 <Zakim> Present: (no one)
15:12:33 <kaz> present+ Manu_Sporny, David_Ezell, Kaz_Ashimura
15:12:42 <glomb> present+
15:12:43 <dape> present+
15:12:46 <mlagally> present ?
15:12:49 <endo> present+
15:12:52 <McCool> present+
15:12:55 <cris_> cris_ has joined #wot
15:12:56 <ktoumura> present+
15:12:58 <mlagally> present+ Michael_Lagally
15:13:02 <cris_> present+
15:13:20 <cris_> present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi
15:13:21 <mlagally> present+ Sebastian_Käbische, Fady_Salama, Ege_Korkan
15:13:32 <mlagally> s/sche/sch/
15:13:38 <Jiye> present+
15:14:34 <endo> present+ Hiroki_Endo
15:15:00 <Ege> topic: Agenda
15:15:27 <kaz> i|Agenda|remember the TPAC guidelines at https://www.w3.org/2022/Talks/TPAC/hybrid-training/
15:15:35 <manu> q+ to ask about where DIDs, VCs fit in?
15:15:39 <Ege> mm: we will not do the resolutions today
15:15:50 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_September_2022#TPAC_Agenda TPAC WoT Agenda
15:15:59 <sebastian> sebastian has joined #wot
15:16:06 <kdeangs1> kdeangs1 has joined #wot
15:16:13 <kdeangs1> present+
15:16:35 <Ege> ms: When could I talk about DID and VC?
15:16:48 <Ege> mm: today or wednesday?
15:18:03 <Ege> ms: wednesday would also work
15:18:15 <Ege> mm: sorry that my computer is slow and that github is slow
15:19:06 <Ege> topic: charter proposals
15:19:15 <Ege> mm: we have left them open as PRs
15:19:31 <mlagally> q+
15:19:34 <matsuda> matsuda has joined #wot
15:19:40 <motokim> motokim has joined #wot
15:20:11 <GeunHyung> GeunHyung has joined #wot
15:20:55 <dezell> scribenick: dezell
15:20:58 <GeunHyung> present+
15:21:19 <aliciamr> aliciamr has joined #wot
15:21:31 <kaz> q+
15:21:53 <dezell> Ege: started with a number of topics with the CG.
15:21:59 <kaz> ack manu
15:21:59 <Zakim> manu, you wanted to ask about where DIDs, VCs fit in?
15:22:06 <kaz> acm k
15:22:12 <kaz> s/acm m//
15:22:21 <kaz> ack k
15:22:36 <dezell> ...: many of these were tabled - looked into a ppull request for issue #978.
15:22:41 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/978 : Goals and Deliverable Discussion for WoT WG 2023 Proposed Charter
15:22:47 <dezell> s/ppull/pull
15:23:20 <dezell> ...: (discussion)
15:23:36 <kangseukyoon> kangseukyoon has joined #wot
15:23:51 <kangseukyoon> present+
15:23:57 <dezell> ...: it's a very large topic, not actually covered well in the current charter.
15:25:16 <dezell> ...: another topic, payload driven protocols.  Using different protocols defeats interoperability, so it's a diffiduct subject.
15:25:20 <kaz> rrsagetn, make log public
15:25:28 <kaz> s/rrsagetn, make log public//
15:25:29 <dezell> s/diffiduct/difficult/
15:25:36 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
15:25:40 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:25:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:26:22 <dezell> mccool: JSON RPC has come a long way, and some pub/sub protocols are used.
15:26:33 <zkis> zkis has joined #wot
15:26:56 <dezell> ege:  this protocol topic area is very large.
15:27:12 <dezell> mccool: charter should probably be adjusted to accomodate.
15:28:11 <Ege> q?
15:28:13 <dezell> ege:  "href" we keep putting it TD seems not to be useful. An initial URI is required for MQTT and WebSockets.
15:29:04 <dezell> mlagally: we should note into the use cases documents some of these new requirements.  There is an initial classification
15:29:09 <kaz_> kaz_ has joined #wot
15:29:23 <dezell> ...: where these things would be documented - not a perfect fit, but we should do that soon.
15:30:32 <kaz_> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:30:32 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz_
15:30:42 <dezell> ege: "timeseries" - sometimes called historical data.  Currently no way to model this kind of history data.  maybe a new affordance.
15:30:50 <kaz_> chair: McCool, Sebastian
15:31:12 <dezell> ...: We are looking for a generic way to do this recording, keeping timestamps, etc.
15:31:16 <McCool> q?
15:31:16 <McCool> q?
15:31:32 <kaz_> ack ml
15:31:35 <mlagally> ack m
15:31:57 <dezell> mccool:  re discovery - work with Home Assistant, there are several rules triggered with historical data.
15:32:21 <dezell> ...: e.g., system state may change subsequent output.
15:32:37 <kaz_> i/we will not/scribenick: Ege/
15:32:49 <kaz_> i/no recording/scribenick: kaz/
15:32:56 <dezell> ege:  security definitions - inline needs to be simplified.
15:33:03 <dape> q+ relation between TD core spec and profiles (sub-set vs. super-set)
15:33:10 <dape> q+ to relation between TD core spec and profiles (sub-set vs. super-set)
15:33:17 <kaz_> s/acm k//
15:33:32 <McCool> q?
15:33:35 <dezell> ...: Versioning - this topic is underspecified.  M. Lagally suggests Semantic V. but we need to be more specific.
15:33:43 <kaz_> i/started with/subtopic: TD/
15:34:31 <mlagally> q+
15:34:33 <kaz_> i|started with|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1033 PR 1033 - Create new charter items for TD|
15:34:37 <McCool> q+
15:34:52 <dezell> daniel: re profiling - core TD spec and Profiles relationships aren't well definied, e.g., should a profile be a subset of the TD spec?
15:35:01 <dape> ack dape
15:35:01 <Zakim> dape, you wanted to relation between TD core spec and profiles (sub-set vs. super-set)
15:35:09 <dezell> ...: we'd like to discuss whether subsetting is the right way to go.
15:35:13 <McCool> q?
15:35:20 <kaz_> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:35:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz_
15:36:15 <dezell> mlagally: I think we need some tweaks to align these, but we should list points of required alignment.
15:36:49 <benfrancis> q+
15:36:58 <McCool> ack ml
15:36:59 <dezell> daniel: question is should >all< profiles be a superset of a TD?
15:38:00 <dezell> mlagally: I think we need a few new things in TD, new constraints.
15:38:41 <dezell> mccool: TDs do allow extension vocabularies.  I think all these things should be extensions.
15:39:04 <kaz> present+ Takuya_Sakamoto
15:39:20 <dezell> ...: re behavior, when is it a superset, and when is it a subset.  It's a subset if it contrains, and a superset if there's additional knowledge in the TD that you can't consume.
15:39:32 <dezell> s/TD/contained in the TD/
15:40:11 <kaz> q+
15:40:28 <kaz> ack mc
15:40:31 <kaz> ack ben
15:40:34 <dezell> ben: I agree with concerns of Profiles going beyond TDs.  What we've used profiles for is to define additional requirements for additional protocols.
15:41:01 <Ege> q+
15:41:03 <dezell> ...: even with sub/super sets, there is still going to need to be some allowance for protocol definitions in the TD.
15:41:54 <McCool> q+
15:42:09 <dezell> kaz:  meta question - we are talking about not the TD per se, but relations to other specifications.  We should clarify in the next charter.
15:42:10 <kaz> ack k
15:42:15 <dezell> ...: we need a better topic name.
15:42:30 <kaz> ack ege
15:43:14 <dezell> ege: super/sub set might be the right terminology.  I think we should write the protocol specification (in general) before writing any other specification.
15:43:30 <benfrancis> +1 to what Ege said.
15:43:34 <kaz> present+ Geunhyung_Kim
15:43:40 <dezell> mccool: I agree with Kaz and Ege, which is where is the best place too put stuff.
15:43:42 <sebastian> q+
15:43:51 <kaz> ack mc
15:44:07 <dezell> ...: we've tried to cram a lot of stuff in profile, and we might want to refactor.
15:44:11 <dezell> sebastian:
15:44:41 <kaz> present+ Seukyoon_Kang
15:45:16 <dezell> sebasitian: we should have a standard "binding" document which should be referenced as a single point of truth.
15:45:21 <Ege> q?
15:45:23 <Ege> ack s
15:45:50 <dezell> ...: that relieves some of the friction about where exactly that binding can be used.
15:45:58 <benfrancis> q+
15:46:01 <Mizushima> +1 kaz
15:46:06 <McCool> q?
15:46:12 <kaz> q+
15:46:16 <dezell> ben:
15:47:16 <dezell> ben: important to distinguish between a "protocol binding template" and a "protocol binding". I think we tend to approve.  The template is required, but it doesn't replace an actual binding for a specific case.
15:47:50 <dezell> ...: protocol bindings should be in a central registry, and those reference templates.
15:48:05 <dezell> mccool: we'll leave these PRs open so people can comment.
15:49:18 <dezell> Topic: new charter items for TD
15:49:23 <kaz> s/subtopic: TD/subtopic: TD and other WoT specs/
15:49:53 <kaz> ack k
15:50:01 <kaz> ack b
15:50:24 <McCool> q+
15:50:36 <kaz> s/Topic: new charter items for TD/subtopic: Binding Templates/
15:50:38 <dezell> ege: the first issue touches the topic just discussed.  Question is do we need multiple rec-track documents?
15:50:49 <kaz> present+ Kevin_Dean
15:51:25 <JKRhb> JKRhb has joined #wot
15:51:41 <dezell> ...: I suggest we try the approach with our existing protocols, and then move on to the new protocols.
15:52:08 <McCool> q?
15:52:13 <kaz> present+ Ralph_Swick
15:52:22 <dezell> ...: JSON content protocols will be easiest, and then move to oother contents
15:52:29 <dezell> s/oother/other/
15:52:44 <sebastian> q+
15:53:15 <dezell> mccool: binding templates have "sub standards" published as needed, and separately versioned (in profiles).
15:53:42 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:53:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:53:46 <mlagally> q+
15:53:52 <dezell> ...: maybe profiles should reference bindings, with a flexible structure.
15:53:56 <McCool> ack m
15:54:38 <McCool> ack s
15:54:41 <sebastian> ack s
15:54:41 <McCool> ack m
15:54:44 <kaz> q+
15:54:53 <dezell> scribe: missed sebastian's comment
15:55:22 <McCool> q+
15:55:31 <dezell> mlagally: I'm not really clear on what we're trying to do here.
15:55:37 <sebastian> It was just about the missing OPC UA in the list
15:55:42 <McCool> q+ ege
15:55:55 <McCool> qq+ ege
15:55:59 <McCool> ack e
15:56:02 <McCool> ack e
15:56:02 <Zakim> ege, you wanted to react to McCool
15:56:06 <McCool> qq+ ege
15:56:11 <McCool> ack k
15:56:11 <dezell> kaz: meta - we should start with the whole picture of the specifications for WoT.  We are too deep into the specifics.
15:56:25 <mlagally> s/on what we're trying to do here./how these vocabularies would be tested in a plugfest/
15:57:09 <bkardell_> bkardell_ has joined #wot
15:57:30 <dezell> ege:  we have been working with profiles, more or less successfully, but I understand.
15:57:59 <dezell> mccool: going back to profile templates, vs. profiles.
15:58:20 <mlagally> q+
15:58:28 <McCool> qq+
15:58:40 <dezell> ege:  so we could create a language or CoAP to express what's needed in a standard way.
15:58:49 <kaz> ack ege
15:58:49 <Zakim> ege, you wanted to react to ege
15:58:52 <dezell> ...: the features are not complex.
15:58:54 <Mizushima> Mizushima has joined #wot
15:59:08 <kaz> ack mc
15:59:15 <kaz> ack mc
15:59:15 <Zakim> McCool, you wanted to react to kaz
15:59:23 <kaz> ack ml
15:59:26 <dezell> mccool: JSON RPC may have different requirements in this regard than CoAP (for instance).
15:59:38 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:59:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz
16:00:13 <McCool> q?
16:00:20 <dezell> mlagally: it i snot sufficieent to specify the protocol req/resp, but also "edge" cases where there are failures.  Good cases are simple.  Errors are hard.
16:00:36 <kaz> s/i snot/is not/
16:00:50 <kaz> s/sufficieent/sufficient/
16:01:09 <Ege> scribenick: ege
16:01:18 <kaz> scribenick: Ege
16:01:22 <Ege> ml: I have extended the profile proposal
16:01:22 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:01:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz
16:01:35 <Ege> topic: Profile Spec proposal
16:02:20 <Ege> ml: I have elaborated the two or more profiles. Digital Twin which can model twins
16:02:50 <McCool> q+
16:03:02 <Ege> ... maybe even an organization as a twin
16:04:02 <Ege> mm: I propose to reword will be part to something like may be. This way we are not constrained
16:04:07 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:04:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz
16:04:18 <Ege> ml: next one is cloud profile. To control a wide variety of devices
16:04:43 <sebastian> q+
16:05:03 <kaz> i/I have extended/subtopic: Profile/
16:05:29 <Ege> mm: ben's comment is about what is needed in cloud that is not already in http baseline
16:05:42 <kaz> i|I have ex|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1034 PR 1034 - Update profiles.md|
16:05:51 <Ege>  ml: we would have more guarantees
16:05:53 <Ege> q+
16:05:54 <benfrancis> q+
16:06:21 <Ege> ml: third one is about more profiles about constrained devices and other protocols
16:06:23 <McCool> ack m
16:06:26 <McCool> q+
16:06:45 <kaz> q+
16:07:44 <McCool> ack s
16:07:47 <Ege> ml: we should definitely not do vertical profiles
16:08:03 <Ege> sk: I think the digital twin and cloud profile is not needed
16:08:33 <kaz> present+ Wonsuk_Lee
16:08:43 <Ege> sk: we should work together with other SDOs in these domains
16:08:55 <mlagally> qq++
16:09:01 <mlagally> q++
16:09:04 <mlagally> qq+
16:09:05 <McCool> ack +
16:09:06 <Zakim> +, you wanted to react to sebastian and to
16:09:22 <Ege> ... otherwise we invent another way to do something
16:09:25 <kaz> ack ml
16:09:25 <Zakim> mlagally, you wanted to react to sebastian
16:09:39 <Ege> ml: plus 1 to working together with SDOs
16:09:51 <McCool> ack e
16:10:13 <kaz> ege: transitioning to profile to application area
16:10:44 <kaz> ... from my viewpoint, this seems to be a guideline
16:10:54 <kaz> ... how to use protocol binding, etc.
16:11:10 <kaz> ack ben
16:11:17 <kaz> ben: agree with Ege
16:11:43 <kaz> ... new profiles suggested here, e.g., digital twins, is implementation specific
16:11:50 <Ege> bf: I agree with Ege, we have http baseline, sse, webhook. These new suggestions are going for a use case or a deployment scenario
16:12:14 <kaz> i/transition/scribenick: kaz/
16:12:23 <dezell> q+ to consider "movable" protocols classes.
16:12:25 <kaz> i/http/scribenick: Ege
16:12:26 <mlagally> q?
16:12:34 <kaz> ack mc
16:12:36 <Ege> bf: the existing profiles should be extended based on requirements we collect
16:13:20 <benfrancis> qq+
16:13:29 <wonsuk> wonsuk has joined #wot
16:13:39 <Ege> mm: It would be nice to have two cloud profile work out of the box
16:13:50 <mlagally> qq+
16:14:28 <Ege> bf: I disagree with the proposed profiles. We should define profiles to restrict protocols to have interop inside that protocol
16:14:50 <McCool> ack b
16:14:50 <Zakim> benfrancis, you wanted to react to McCool
16:15:01 <Ege> ml: I wanted to respond to ben. We are in the middle of a requirement discussion
16:15:05 <McCool> q+
16:15:10 <Ege> ... we can defer naming these profiles
16:15:31 <McCool> ack ml
16:15:31 <Zakim> mlagally, you wanted to react to McCool
16:15:31 <benfrancis> mlagally: Yep, that makes more sense.
16:15:46 <Ege> kaz: I partly agree with sebastian, ben and ege. we should think about the objective
16:16:28 <Ege> kaz: what we want to with profile specification should be clarified
16:16:48 <Mizushima> +1 kaz
16:17:44 <Ege> de: this issue is something we struggle with at connexxus. the td and basic profile are good ways   to do abstraction
16:18:05 <Ege> ... the ability to abstract the interfaces is essential
16:18:40 <Ege> mm: I want to resonate with what is Kaz was talking about. The profile spec is the one at most risk
16:19:18 <Ege> ... we have to clarify what is profile for and for me it is out of the box interoperability
16:19:47 <Ege> ... it could be about interop with UI systems or documentation systems
16:19:48 <kaz> present+ Alexandre_Bertails
16:19:51 <McCool> q?
16:19:55 <kaz> ck k
16:19:58 <kaz> ack k
16:19:59 <kaz> ack d
16:20:00 <Zakim> dezell, you wanted to consider "movable" protocols classes.
16:20:03 <McCool> ack m
16:20:04 <Ege> mm: anything about the proposals? We should move on
16:21:14 <Ege> mm: I would like to leave the PRs open. Also, please use the suggestion feature of github
16:22:01 <Ege> mm: we should move on to liaison discussions
16:22:32 <kaz> topic: Deliverable progress
16:22:35 <Ege> topic: Deliverable Progress
16:22:45 <Ege> subtopic: Discovery
16:22:54 <kaz> s/topic: Deliverable progress//
16:23:06 <Ege> mm: a review process has started. We aim for resolution next week in post tpac meetings
16:23:12 <Ege> mm: our testing needs more work
16:23:29 <kaz> i|subtopic|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/charters/wg-2021-extension-plan.md WoT schedule|
16:23:31 <kaz> q+
16:23:54 <kaz> ack k
16:23:58 <Ege> kaz: we should revisit the deliverable progress markdown document
16:24:16 <kaz> s/we should/to be strict, we should/
16:24:29 <Ege> subtopic: TD
16:24:51 <kaz> s/document/document (which I put above). we can revisit it later, though./
16:25:05 <Ege> sk: first of all, we decided to call for review for CR transition
16:25:17 <Ege> ... thank you for all the reviews and comments
16:26:01 <Ege> ... I have listed the issues here and they are mostly editorial
16:26:43 <Ege> sk: one is an important change, changing the default for writemultiple operation
16:26:48 <kaz> q?
16:27:24 <McCool> q+
16:27:53 <Ege> ... if you change only parts of a resource, it is not a put anymore
16:28:22 <Ege> q+
16:28:23 <Mizushima_> Mizushima_ has joined #wot
16:28:23 <kaz> i|one is an|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1685 wot-thing-description issue 1685 - Consider changing the default HTTP verb for writemultipleproperties|
16:28:27 <kaz> q+
16:28:32 <McCool> ack m
16:28:51 <benfrancis> q+
16:28:55 <kaz> ack e
16:29:30 <McCool> q+
16:29:46 <McCool> ack k
16:30:56 <McCool> ack b
16:30:57 <Ege> ek: this is a breaking change. I would not do this now. Also, it is not incorrect (in my opinion)  that PUT is not corect
16:30:58 <McCool> ack m
16:31:36 <Ege> sk: also ben said that proxy-to relation is not explained anywhere. so a question to mccool is to what to do with this
16:31:56 <Ege> mm: people went for a link types table and put the stuff that made sense
16:32:20 <benfrancis> q+
16:33:16 <benfrancis> q-
16:33:25 <Ege> subtopic: profiles
16:33:40 <Ege> ml: we have a draft now which is targeting to be a profile 1.0 release
16:33:50 <Ege> ... it has 3 profiles, baseline, webhook, sse
16:34:10 <Ege> ... both event profiles are not normative since we lack implementation experience
16:34:24 <Ege> ... I consider the baseline feasible for implementability
16:34:33 <McCool> q+
16:34:35 <Ege> ... except for async actions
16:35:00 <Ege> ... we want to have a plugfest next week and we are looking for implementors
16:35:17 <Ege> ... and thus have 2 implementations of the baseline profile
16:35:31 <sebastian> q+
16:35:39 <Ege> ... and that is it for the profiles
16:35:54 <Ege> mm: plugfest is the week after next
16:36:13 <kaz> q+
16:36:16 <kaz> ack mc
16:37:36 <McCool> q?
16:37:37 <Ege> mm: we should look into our schedule, we are quite tight on time
16:38:30 <Ege> sk: the pain point was how to implement the asynchronized action, not clear
16:38:31 <kaz> ack s
16:38:34 <mlagally> q++
16:38:44 <McCool> ack +
16:38:50 <McCool> q+
16:39:02 <Ege> ml: in my understanding is that the spec is stable for a long time already, for 9 months
16:39:40 <Ege> ml: I have implemented async actions in java and it works
16:39:47 <dape> q+
16:40:01 <sebastian> q+
16:40:02 <Ege> ml: we need to discuss what is happening and where the problem lies
16:40:28 <benfrancis> q+
16:40:43 <kaz> ack k
16:40:45 <kaz> ack mc
16:40:46 <dape> ack dape
16:40:55 <kaz> kaz: @@
16:40:55 <Ege> subtopic: architecture
16:40:56 <benfrancis> q-
16:40:58 <sebastian> ack d
16:41:03 <sebastian> ack s
16:41:03 <Ege> ml: we are reasonably stable
16:41:41 <Ege> ml: we need help from implementors to testify about their implementations
16:41:59 <Ege> ... everybody has implemented it anyways since it is the overarching specification
16:42:02 <sebastian> for ML: here is the issue about the async actions https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/259
16:42:28 <Ege> mm: we will check the implementation status in the post tpac meeting
16:42:35 <kaz> s/@@/today's session is progress check within 10 mins. So let's not dive into the details but simply record the identified issues. From my viewpoint, the bigger issue mentioned today is need for clarification on the relationship between WoT Profile and the other specs, which is related to the testing issue as well./
16:42:37 <Ege> ... we will probably do 2 CR transitions
16:42:43 <kaz> i/kaz:/scribenick: kaz/
16:43:13 <Ege> topic: Liaisons
16:43:13 <Ege> subtopic: OPC UA
16:43:16 <kaz> i/we are/scribenick: Ege/
16:43:40 <Ege> sk: we do not have too much to say, there is the PR that explains what we want to achieve
16:43:56 <McCool> q+
16:44:02 <Ege> sk: the next step is to have another meeting with the opcf people
16:44:13 <kaz> i|we do|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/1020 PR 1020 - Technical Objectives and Requirements for OPC UA/WoT Binding|
16:44:20 <Ege> ... it was difficult to find a slot but we have it on thursday
16:45:00 <Ege> https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/0d498d94-04b1-471b-9bd3-fc614db62257
16:45:24 <Ege> ek: I have pasted the OPCUA link at IRC
16:45:42 <kaz> q+
16:46:28 <kaz> ack mc
16:46:40 <McCool> seb can't hear us
16:47:14 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/liaisons/opcf/tech_reqs.md Technical Requirements for OPC UA/WoT Collaboration
16:47:45 <Ege> mm: we need kaz to attend it since it is too early in vancouver timezone
16:48:07 <Ege> mm: we should have a regular meeting schedule
16:48:13 <kaz> q?
16:48:14 <McCool> q?
16:48:24 <kaz> ack k
16:48:27 <Ege> kaz: I agree
16:48:47 <kaz> q+
16:48:59 <kaz> ack k
16:49:03 <Ege> subtopic: ECHONET
16:49:10 <Ege> kaz: matsuda-san will present
16:50:01 <Ege> matsuda: I will speak on behalf of masihira-san
16:50:50 <Ege> ... echonet is about managing smart devices that can be considered part of a smart city
16:51:01 <Ege> ... we have 3 standards
16:51:16 <Ege> ... communication, device commands and device-specific behavior
16:51:26 <Ege> ... there are 7 classes of devices
16:51:56 <Ege> ... more than 100 million compliant devices
16:52:37 <Ege> ... echonet lite web api makes it easier to control devices from anywhere
16:53:02 <Ege> ... it allows connecting multiple industries
16:53:58 <Ege> ... echonet lite web api is similar to w3c wot since it is inspired from an earlier draft
16:54:20 <Ege> ... we have done some activity together with W3C WoT WG
16:54:31 <Ege> ... we have also proposed a use case
16:54:50 <Ege> ... we also gave a presentation in the WoT Japenese CG
16:56:04 <Ege> ... we need to have periodic operation reservation, historical data processing
16:56:07 <kaz> q+
16:56:48 <kaz> ack k
16:56:48 <Ege> mm: we can use the japanese community group slot for discussions
16:57:04 <Ege> kaz: we can use those discussions for next deliverables of the WoT WG
16:57:27 <Ege> ... now you have 3 minutes for the next meeting
16:58:00 <kaz> i|matsuda|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/PRESENTATIONS/2022-09-hybrid-f2f/2022-09-12-WoT-F2F-ECHONET-Liaison.pdf ECHONET Liaison slides|
16:58:24 <kaz> topic: DID/VC discussion on Wednesday
16:59:10 <kaz> on Wednesday, Sep 14 at 9:30-10:00
16:59:23 <kaz> [adjourned]
16:59:34 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:59:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/09/12-wot-minutes.html kaz
17:11:18 <zkis_> zkis_ has joined #wot
17:28:20 <kaz> kaz has joined #wot
18:48:10 <jojifx> jojifx has joined #wot
19:25:47 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot
19:35:19 <kaz> kaz has joined #wot