W3C

– DRAFT –
WoT Use Cases

10 January 2023

Attendees

Present
Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
-
Chair
Lagally
Scribe
kaz

Meeting minutes

Minutes

Dec-20

approved

Contributions

PR 200

PR 200 - Add new use cases for smart agriculture-Milking

Lagally: MunHwan has updated the PR

merged

PR 204

PR 204 - carry over profile requirements from profile spec

merged

PR 193

PR 193 - Add new requirement fields for the template

Lagally: this in an improvement for the Use Cases template
… we have to add similar changes to the HTML doc as well

Kaz: adding information on implied requirements would be useful
… however, I'm not sure if it would be the best way to put that information directly into the Use Case template
… because some use cases could be related to multiple requirements
… and some requirements could be related to multiple use cases
… we should avoid potential redundancy if possible

Lagally: (shows his slides on extracting requirements from the use cases)

Kaz: yeah
… I agree we need to define our procedure for extracting requirements clearer
… e.g., what is needed for which use case for what purpose

Lagally: (refines the diagram of requirements extraction a bit)
… this was not really included in today's agenda
… but would be very important for the next Charter activity

ack

Kaz: would personally call the "shortlist" "categorization of the basic need"

Lagally: ok
… (put "categorization of the basic need based on the business priority and resources")

mizu: that discussion is important, and I agree
… would point out that we should consider actual needs from non-Engineer stakeholders
… because we've mainly asking engineers to provide use cases

Lagally: yes, that's very important
… completely agree
… that implies we need to ask people outside of the WoT WG as well to provide use cases

Kaz: right

Lagally: any other comments?

(none)

Use case coverage

coverage.csv

coverage-gaps.md

Kaz: thinking about those technical topics is important, but most of them are "technical topics" than "use cases and their coverage"
… so I'd suggest we clarify actual use cases for each technical topic quickly again to see the "coverage of our use cases"

Lagally: right
… (shows the coverage.csv as well)

Kaz: for example, we can add "Important technical topics which are not covered yet" at the top of the coverage-gaps.md
… and should put which use case or use cases are related to each technical topic

Lagally: how to add clarifications to each technical topic?

Kaz: we should start with a basic list of topics first
… so should not add too much detail at the moment

Lagally: (quickly skim the list of topics)

Kaz: probably it would be better to put several categories to this document as well
… e.g., data including geolocation and time, wide review viewpoints including security, privacy, accessibility and internationalization

Lagally: yeah
… we can try that kind of restructure during the next calls

Next calls

Lagally: we won't have a use case call next Tuesday

Kaz: in that case, we should clarify when to have the next call

Lagally: yeah, let's think about the schedule after the Charter discussion

[adjourned]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 197 (Tue Nov 8 15:42:48 2022 UTC).