– DRAFT –
WoT Plugfest/Testing

Minutes

McCool: any objections?

McCool: sorry the link was wrong

Jan-25

Testimonials

McCool: we can take one of the testimonials we have and send it as an example

McCool: I will take the one from Siemens and edit

McCool: have the AC reps reviewed the testimonials?

Kaz: To whom do you want to send this request? Directly to the AC Reps? Or maybe to the WG participants via the WG's Member list?

McCool: to the Members list
… (add appropriate changes to the message to request testimonials)

McCool: any objections to sending it around?

Kaz: we should first clarify what to do with the testimonials

McCool: I will reach out to PLH

Implementation Reports

Problems with the test results

McCool: I got weird results from playground

<McCool_> w3c/wot-testing#528

McCool: you can see the weird behaviuor in PR 528 PR 528 - Jan 2023 Result Updates.

Ege: this looks weird, I will have a look

<McCool_> https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/blob/main/testing/atrisk.csv

At-risk features

<McCool_> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/main/testing/atrisk.csv

(discussion on the problems around TM)

McCool: the problems around TM might be going somewhere if the playground bugs are fixed

Ege: right

McCool: some arch assertions are too generic

McCool: so people do not understand

McCool: we should have an event where we walk people through

Ege: but arch assertion are about deployments, not implementations

Kaz: please remember that what is required by the W3C Process is checking the implementability of the specs. For that purpose, we extracted assertions as required features and have been checking if each assertion is implementable.

McCool: I have put an item on the next agenda to plan a developer meeting to walk through at-risk items

https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/PlugFest_WebConf#Agenda_01.02.2023

<kaz> [adjourned]