12:18:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-script
12:18:05 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2022/12/19-wot-script-irc
12:18:08 <kaz> meeting: WoT Scripting API
12:18:32 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Cristiano_Aguzi, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Tomoaki_Mizushima
12:19:38 <dape> dape has joined #wot-script
12:20:19 <kaz> q+
12:21:25 <dape> scribe: dape
12:22:14 <dape> TOPIC: Previous minutes
12:22:16 <kaz> ack k
12:22:19 <dape> ... no meeting
12:22:31 <kaz> s/... no/ca: no/
12:22:31 <dape> TOPIC: Quick updates
12:22:45 <dape> SUBTOPIC: Co-Chairing
12:23:32 <dape> PROPOSAL: Cristiano being the co-chair of the scripting call. Will be announced in main call.
12:23:56 <dape> RESOLUTION: Cristiano being the co-chair of the scripting call. Will be announced in main call.
12:24:18 <dape> TOPIC: PRs
12:24:25 <Mizushima> q+
12:25:10 <zkis> zkis has joined #wot-script
12:25:12 <dape> SUBTOPIC: PR#424
12:25:22 <kaz> q+
12:25:23 <dape> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/424
12:25:32 <dape> CA: Updated notation for internal slots
12:26:28 <dape> ... PR ready for review
12:26:47 <dape> ... with latest respec configuration
12:27:14 <dape> ... citing now uses proper definition
12:27:28 <dape> ... ConsumedThing references are complete
12:27:39 <dape> ... node-wot follow the same structure
12:28:00 <dape> ... for ExposedThing ... some internal slots are missing
12:28:28 <dape> ... for property internal slot has been added
12:28:38 <dape> ... some todos
12:28:48 <dape> ... internal slot for events
12:29:02 <dape> ... check "subscribers" internal slot
12:29:10 <dape> q+
12:29:14 <dape> ack Mizushima
12:29:18 <kaz> ack k
12:29:24 <dape> ack kaz
12:29:45 <kaz> s/424/424 PR 424 - Fix internal slots/
12:29:47 <kaz> ack d
12:30:04 <dape> DP: Shall we wait for the todos to be done in this pr?
12:30:33 <dape> CA: Suggest to add todos in another pr
12:31:37 <dape> DP: Makes sense, will review after this call
12:31:54 <dape> CA: OK, changed PR ready for review
12:32:59 <kaz> q?
12:33:05 <cris_> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/441
12:33:05 <dape> SUBTOPIC: PR#441
12:33:27 <dape> CA: Gave review
12:33:48 <dape> ... still need to check your comments
12:34:01 <dape> ... propose to split one text in 2 different cases
12:34:19 <dape> ... added another comment
12:34:35 <kaz> i|Gave review|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/441 PR 441 - Align the discovery API with the Discovery spec|
12:34:44 <dape> ZK: pushed commit to split into 2 cases
12:35:01 <dape> ... btw, filter is not supported
12:35:58 <dape> CA: I think this resolves my first comment
12:36:23 <dape> ... w.r.t. the 2 comment... I suggest to be more explicit
12:36:41 <dape> ZK: What about the other errors
12:36:59 <dape> ... need to be more specific for other places as well
12:37:19 <dape> CA: Could do the same as for fetching TD
12:37:51 <dape> ZK: If we go into those details.. we need to add a lot of details
12:38:02 <dape> CA: I see
12:38:20 <dape> ... maybe adding some explanation text might help
12:38:40 <dape> ZK: We need algorithm for fetching TDs
12:38:59 <dape> ... not sure how to link it to protocol bindings
12:39:32 <dape> CA: I guess we can resolve  this comment also
12:39:40 <dape> ZK: Suggest to open new issue
12:39:49 <dape> q+
12:41:53 <dape> DP: Should discuss this in new issue... but there are different uri schemes .. and many errors and such might pop up
12:42:00 <dape> CA: I see
12:42:20 <dape> ZK: BTW, there is a complete spec that defines fetch...
12:42:28 <dape> ... TAG might raise issues
12:42:42 <dape> CA: I would point to protocol bindings ..
12:43:02 <dape> .. anyhow, the PR looks good
12:43:13 <dape> ... and I think we can merge... any concerns?
12:44:18 <dape> ... -> none -> let's merge
12:44:42 <dape> SUBTOPIC: PR#442
12:45:11 <cris_> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/442
12:45:40 <dape> CA: Seems fixed and ready to be merged
12:45:52 <dape> ... Zoltan approved also
12:46:18 <dape> ... PR fixes issue with describing no data in event
12:46:25 <dape> ... Daniel also updated TS definittions
12:46:41 <dape> s/definittions/definitions
12:47:21 <dape> DP: related to issue 445
12:47:42 <dape> CA: Okay for merging?
12:47:51 <dape> ... no concerns .. merging
12:47:55 <dape> TOPIC: Issue
12:48:09 <dape> SUBTOPIC: Issue#417
12:48:12 <cris_> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/417
12:48:26 <dape> CA: Issue was opened by Ege
12:48:36 <dape> ... he spotted some issue in new design
12:49:00 <dape> ... added use-case description
12:49:10 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/442|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/442 PR 442 - fix: emitEvent() method allows data to be optional|
12:49:10 <dape> ... I responded to the use case
12:49:26 <dape> ... from low level api point of view
12:49:38 <dape> ... low level can offer different api
12:49:42 <dape> ... 2 cases
12:49:57 <dape> ... a) by listening to events
12:50:06 <dape> ... b) polling
12:50:38 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/417|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/417 Issue 417 - emitPropertyChange does not take low-level event apis into account|
12:50:41 <Ege> q+
12:51:04 <dape> ... the new design of emitPropertyCange
12:51:05 <dape> ack dape
12:51:18 <dape> .. we force to use read handler for property
12:51:42 <dape> ZK: might mean 2 rounds in implementation
12:51:53 <kaz> q+
12:52:03 <dape> EK: not exactly for e
12:52:21 <dape> s/for e/for events/properties
12:52:24 <zkis> q+
12:52:37 <dape> ... e.g., streaming value with property
12:52:52 <dape> ... one needs to cache value
12:53:23 <dape> CA: Not sure why get operation is needed
12:53:34 <dape> ... you have already the correct value
12:53:56 <dape> EK: IF I detect a change.. I want to send update
12:54:19 <dape> ... interacts with sensor twice
12:54:43 <dape> ZK: Talking about implementations?
12:55:08 <dape> CA: with cached values no second interaction is done
12:55:36 <dape> ... some people might use a different approach..
12:55:41 <dape> ack Ege
12:56:31 <dape> Kaz: Meta question: Do we have concrete description of expected protocols?
12:57:04 <dape> ... if we have enough knowledge we can think about the details
12:57:17 <dape> ... 2 options
12:57:22 <dape> ... give up for now
12:57:36 <dape> ... or narrow the scope (some potential use-cases)
12:57:45 <kaz> ack k
12:57:59 <dape> CA: We have clear view of use case
12:58:10 <dape> ... hard w.r.t. technology
12:58:47 <dape> ... probably we need to study more libraries
12:58:58 <dape> ZK: Fear race conditions
12:59:31 <kaz> ack z
12:59:32 <dape> ... suggest to keep issue open
12:59:50 <kaz> s/keep issue/keep this issue/
12:59:54 <dape> EK: I can have another look and provide more feedback
13:00:12 <dape> ... in the end the current proposal is fine
13:00:33 <dape> ... we just need to make developers aware of it
13:00:58 <dape> ZK: we do not guarantee that value is latest value
13:01:23 <kaz> q+
13:02:33 <dape> Kaz: we should look into popular methods  in OPCUA, ECHONET, ...
13:02:40 <dape> ... we can borrow their ideas
13:03:03 <dape> CA: Agree
13:03:19 <dape> [adjourned]
13:03:26 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
13:03:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/19-wot-script-minutes.html kaz
13:04:43 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
13:04:45 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
13:05:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/19-wot-script-minutes.html kaz
13:05:22 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
13:05:23 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
13:05:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2022/12/19-wot-script-minutes.html kaz
13:05:59 <kaz> chair: Cristiano
15:25:01 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-script