Meeting minutes
Meeting Minutes
<kaz> Sep-27
Ege: anyting to change?
Ege: I am hearing none, minutes approved
Agenda Cleanup
Ege: I have added an archive header and created a file with the previous agendas
kaz: you can create another page
Ege: ok I was not aware of that feature, I will do it for next week
… the proposal in the agenda is not needed in this case
JSON Schema Case Study
<kaz> Issue 329 - JSON Schema Case Study
Ege: they have discussed in their meeting and others from JSON Schema have reviewed it too. It should be published soon
Cristiano: where will it be published?
Ege: on their blog page
PRs
PR 351 Discovery Draft Name update
<kaz> PR 351 - update infos for Discovery publication
<cris_> +1 for merging :)
Ege: I have reviewed it, we can merge. It is a trivial change
Kaz: do we have enough quorum to decide on PRs
Ege: I think that three people is enough to guarantee that there is no draw at least
Kaz: we should bring this to the main call
Ege: I will be happy to
PR 352 to have obsolete directory
Ege: we can merge it since it is just moving content
Daniel: better this way than to delete
Twitter Account
Ege: I would like to see Michael McCool or Sebastian here to get more context
Daniel: I would prefer to have a single account to not split
Cristiano: I think we can prepend WG to make sure it is from a single group
Cristiano: do we want to revise this?
Ege: I think so
Kaz: if you think we need ig/wg co chairs in this call, we do not have quorum
Kaz: WoT CG is not representing the W3C while the WoT-IG/WG have been representing the IG and WG based on the Charters.
Kaz: So I also would like to suggest the CG have another twitter account.
Ege: I think that we have quorum to discuss PRs not this twitter account discussion since the discussion is started by the chairs in the main call
Ege: we should change the twitter name in this case
Kaz: you should be clear about who you are representing
Daniel: we should have a resolution in the main call for tweets in this case?
Kaz: if ege tweets without the review period, we should be clear about the representation
Daniel: we should discuss this in the main call
… and have a resolution there
Kaz: bringing to the main call is fine, but you should be clear about the proposal
personal proposal: the W3C Web of Things twitter account can be used for any posts (tweets, retweets) that is about any web of things activity in the w3c
… if this is not fine, the name of the account should be changed
Ege: we can talk in third person all the time
Kaz: so being a neutralist might be fine, we should talk about it in the main call
Ege: yes but I think we do not have the terms to talk about this in the W3C
Kaz: The W3C Process is kind of like a constitution and doesn't define each possible item in detail, so we should talk with the whole IG to make the decision. For that purpose, you should clarify what you want to do during the main call.
proposal: The W3C Web of Things twitter account can be used for any posts (tweets, retweets) that is about any web of things activity in the w3c. This includes the WoT IG, WG, WoT CG, WoT Japanese CG. The posts should be phrased in a neutral tone and the group that is involved should be made clear. Examples: The WoT WG has published TD 1.1, check it out here ; The WoT CG is holding an event X, check it out here. The WoT Japanese CG is holding a [CUT]
… check it out here ; The Web Thing Protocol CG is holding an event at X, check it out here.
Kaz: One of the key questions here is who to represent which group using this Twitter account.
Ege: that is unclear I think. They should have access I guess and should be responsible to tweet. Otherwise, Ege or the WoT IG Chairs should be responsible?
Ege: for the record, it was not a CG decision to use the twitter account. I have just tweeted anything about web of things.
Kaz: that means that the webthing chair ben, wot jp chairs toumura-san and mizushima-san can also use it.
Kaz: that may imply that you become sort of a marcomm team for wot and that might be too much
Ege: I can see what can happen
Kaz: you can get too many requests
Kaz: the timing is a bit bad with the W3C restructuring at the moment
Kaz: we should focus on the spec work
Ege: ka: also we should think about (1) some kind of training on W3C standardization to the CG participants, (2) how to generate use cases based on their ideas and (3) how to bring the extracted use cases to the WoT IG so that we can update the WoT Use Cases document. Let's talk about that kind of work flow next time.?
<kaz> (none)
<kaz> [adjourned]