– DRAFT –
WoT Discovery

Minutes

Dec-5

approved

Logistics

McCool: this is the last meeting this year
… next meeting is a bit tricky
… normally Jan 16
… but due to the special meeting on the WG Charter, the next Discovery meeting will be on Jan 23
… anything else?

(none)

IANA registration

McCool: Kaz contacted the IANA guys
… the TXT keys are updated now

IANA registry entries for WoT

McCool: so that's done
… please double check to make sure

DID registration

McCool: the next one is DID registration, but it's problematic

Issue 402 - Register DID service names

did-spec-registries PR 486 - Add WotThing and WotDirectory service types

McCool: normative change for the WoT Discovery topic?
… the URL is describe within the example
… how to deal with that?

Kaz: if that is about an example, we could change that after CR transition

McCool: right
… what about the additional reference to the DID registry?
… that would be a normative reference, I think
… we would not add any assertion based on this change, though

Kaz: would suggest we ask PLH about that

McCool: and another possible point on adding an assertion defining the "@context"

Kaz: we need to talk with PLH about that as well

Kaz: we can add that feature but probably need to republish an updated CR

McCool: the question is that we don't have implementations about that feature

<McCool_> https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/402#issuecomment-1357835235

Kaz: in that case, my suggestion is (opt1) simply removing that feature or (opt2) adding that as an informative feature

McCool: the section "6.5 DID Documents" is already identified as "at-risk"

Kaz: "12.1 DID Service Name Registration" should be also removed if we remove "6.5 DID Documents"
… anyway, let's talk with PLH about this

McCool: ok

Next Charter

McCool: we'll talk about the next WG Charter during the week of Jan 16
… so we need to finalize what to be discussed for WoT Discovery today

deliverable-proposals/discovery.md

McCool: (goes through the proposal)
… signing for JSON-LD depends on RDF signing
… which is kind of heavy
… the second point around JSON Path
… then Geolocation
… would have a finite set of extension

Christian: would be good to come with some comment query
… based on use cases and best practices
… to see typical queries

McCool: (adds comments around that)
… filters can be a general mechanism that can also encapsulate common queries
… such as searching by keyword or id
… we should look at some common use cases for additional filters

Christian: which filters to be formulated?

McCool: potentially, something like [[?filter="goe/lat=45.5,long=123.3,r=15)"]]

Christian: need some syntax for that purpose
… would be an addition to the search endpoint

McCool: e.g.: https://tdd.example.com/list?filter="geo(lat=45.5, long=123.3, r=15)|keyword('light')"

Christian: we should add support for Thing Model

McCool: do you mean storing TMs in TDDs?

Christian: yeah

McCool: and allowing links from TDs to be resolved

Christian: can use TM for validation

McCool: would be helpful to also be able to validate a TD against a TM
… (adds "validation" as well)
… validation could be improved
… hopefully this will be improved in TD 2.0

Kaz: I agree those topics are important
… but wondering which spec(s) to handle them
… maybe not or not only the WoT Discovery spec
… but (also) TD, etc., as well

McCool: yeah
… Digital Twin may also be related

Kaz: yeah
… putting TM and Validation to this discovery.md is fine at the moment
… but during the Charter discussion next year, it would make more sense to consider which technology and which topic to be handled by which spec and which phase from the whole WoT lifecycle again

McCool: yeah, TM handling is not only for Discovery
… Validation mechanism also to be defined in the TD spec
… also other protocols
… CoAP and MQTT
… HTTP/3, QUIC
… time-based filter
… (goes through the issues with the label of "defer to Discovery 2.0")

Issues with "defer to Discovery 2.0" label

McCool: additional security features, e.g., object security/JOSE
… additional checks during registration

Christian: also Scripting API for Discovery as well?
… not really updated about the current discussion, though

McCool: Scripting API is informative, but should be consistent
… any other thoughts?

(none)

McCool: will create a PR to add these points to discovery.md

wot PR 1046 - Update discovery.md

McCool: any objection to merge this?

(none)

merged

Testing

latest Implementation Report on GitHub

McCool: still bunch of security features at-risk
… also bunch of privacy features at-risk
… then CoAP feature
… security-bootstrapping-endpoints should be easy
… still missing UDP-based features
… would make more sense to have CoAP-based directory
… or MQTT-based
… some of them are really fatal but the core functionality should be OK
… any other comments?
… please look at the updated Implementation Report as well

<McCool_> https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Special_Meetings_to_Discuss_Next_Charter

McCool: will see you at the special meeting on Charter on Jan 16
… link available above
… any other business?

(none)

[adjourned]