Meeting minutes
Agenda
McCool: no IE applications
Minutes Review
<kaz> Oct-26
McCool: any changes to the minutes?
McCool: ok, we publish. any objections?
McCool: no objections heard, publishing
Quick updates
DST
McCool: note the change
IIWOT23
McCool: pinged the organizer
cancellations
<kaz> Cancellations
McCool: there was some confusion with the slots I think
Ege: I have fixed it, I will chair the TD call next week
Sebastian: should we have main call next week?
Lagally: We can dedicate arch call of tomorrow for profile discussions
Lagally: I can host the main call next week. We need more plugfests
McCool: I am ok with Michael Lagally chairing
McCool: however, cr transition request needs work so I would propose that you spend half of the call tomorrow for arch cr transition
Kaz: Would it make sense to have the main call if we do not have the chairs
Kaz: so we cannot make any resolution
McCool: if it is about organizing the testfest, we can do it in the testing call
Kaz: if the agenda is just about the testfest, it is fine but should be done in the testing call
Lagally: it would be nice for colleagues in japan if we host it earlier
Sebastian: it might be confusing for people trying to join the main call
<kaz> [ conclusion: as put on the Cancellations section of the main wiki, Main call cancelled but Testfest call will be held. ]
Publications
McCool: we should not send the request last minute
Architecture
<kaz> Nov-2 Arch+Profile minutes
McCool: we have completed review of PRs and merged one to put CR related text
McCool: we marked entire section 7 as non-normative since it has no assertions in it
McCool: I want to have a resolution about the arch spec. we can do it in the order as well.
McCool: I prefer going in order
TD
<kaz> CR Transition request for TD 1.1
McCool: Ralph told me that we are missing CR exit criteria
McCool: I have the assertions at risk marked in the beginning of the document
McCool: I have added tooltip information for the meaning of some abbreviations
McCool: I have removed a note about the process
<kaz> wot-thing-description PR 1736 - CR exit criteria
McCool: any objections to merge TD PR 1736?
<sebastian> +1
Discovery
<kaz> CR Transition request Discovery
McCool: I have 3 PRs
… one about the at risk items, one about IR, one about the cr exit criteria
McCool: I have added a paragraph that should be reviewed. there was the same in the TD 1.0
… any objections?
<McCool> wot-discovery PR 435 - CR exit criteria
<kaz> wot-discovery PR 438 - List ALL at-risk assertions in sotd
McCool: any ojbections to merge after merge conflict resolution?
<kaz> (will be merged after resolving the conflicts)
McCool: PR 437
<kaz> wot-discovery PR 437 - IR updates: tooltips, RIOT result correction
McCool: any objections to merging PR 437
<kaz> (merged)
Architecture - revisited
<kaz> wot-architecture PR 856 - Additional terminology entry for Web Object
Lagally: we have agreed to defer that PR 856 in the Arch. It is not needed for the CR transition
<McCool> proposal: Proceed with a CR transition request for Architecture 1.1 based on the current editor's draft.
McCool: any changes?
RESOLUTION: Proceed with a CR transition request for Architecture 1.1 based on the current editor's draft.
<mlagally_> yay
McCool: some work can be done in tomorrow's arch call, mostly editorial
Profile
<kaz> discussion during the previous main call
<kaz> latest draft Implementation Report
Lagally: I expect to do 3-4 calls and then do a plugfest/testfest
McCool: we have 4 options
McCool: 1 is to defer to next charter
McCool: 2 is to publish a wd and defer
McCool: 3 is publish a CR and defer PR to next charter
McCool: 4 is to request a charter extension
… and do the pr in the extension charter
Kaz: I am ok with this kind of vote but I think it does not make sense. What is more important is clarifying the actual publication schedule
McCool: after having the plan, we can attempt to respect that plan
McCool: our current schedule is actually option 2
Lagally: we did not discuss it thoroughly in the calls
Lagally: I propose to do it when we have something on the table to decide on. We can have more implementation experience
Lagally: we can ask for implementations already
McCool: generally you want to fix the spec before a testfest
McCool: let's talk tomorrow in detail
Lagally: I agree
Kaz: we should clarify the proposal of the Profile TF and see if the proposed schedule is feasible.
McCool: let's fix the schedule
<McCool> proposal: Set Dec 8 as a target date to propose a WD candidate for Profiles to be used as the basis of gathering implementation experience in the Dec 12-16 Testfest/plugfest.
RESOLUTION: Set Dec 8 as a target date to propose a WD candidate for Profiles to be used as the basis of gathering implementation experience in the Dec 12-16 Testfest/plugfest.
<kaz> (note: Kaz won't be available on Dec 16.)
McCool: (edits the md file)
<kaz> updated schedule
Societal Impact Questionnaire
<kaz> Societal Impact Questionnaire
McCool: as of april, there is a societal impact questionnaire
McCool: we should do it before PR
McCool: any objections to me creating the PR?
McCool: hearing none
McCool: I will do it in the respective deliverables
McCool: I propose to finish testing in nov and dec
Next WG Charter
Kaz: I'm OK with any kind of plan for Testing if we can clarify the schedule and agenda for the Testfests. From my viewpoint, even more important at this stage is clarifying the work items for the next WG Charter.
McCool: please provide proposals for the charter of next wg
Kaz: having a dedicated vF2F call for Charter discussion would be useful
Kaz: not a full week but a dedicated call by a few days.
Ege: how to handle the proposals and the respective PRs?
McCool: each TF can discuss on the concrete proposals
Ege: I would support doing the proposals quickly
Lagally: how about using the use case calls in december for that
McCool: let's do the testing call at 15mins past
<kaz> [adjourned]