Meeting minutes
housekeeping
<mlagally> Feb-7
Lagally: minutes from Feb 7, last use cases call
… small typo in spelling of requirements
Kaz: fixed
Lagally: no objections to publishing?
… none, let's publish
PRs
PR #205
<kaz> PR 205 - UC and requirement process - new WG charter
Lagally: UC and requirements process
… is a PPTX, will provide a PDF
… skip for now
PR #210
<kaz> PR 210 - Fix the links to the templates
Lagally: fixes links in template
McCool: should we use absolute links to be safer?
Lagally: should not matter in this case
McCool: ok, let's merge
PR #211
<kaz> PR 211 - SIFIS-Home use-case
Lagally: SIFIS use case
… need Luca for this, will defer
PR #212
<kaz> PR 212 - Remove Business Impact from Requirements Template
Lagally: removes business justification
McCool: should probably be a filtering/prioritization step in the *process*; maybe create an issue for followup?
Lagally: creates issue #220
Kaz: I agree it would be useful to have description on business need. However, as already noted the other day, I'm not sure "Business Justification" would be the best term for this purpose.
McCool: probably something like "Business Motivation" would be better.
Kaz: agree
McCool: we can define later, will have to put comments on issue
<kaz> Issue 220 - Process needs to take Business motivation into account
Lagally: merges PR
PR #214
<kaz> PR 214 - Create geolocation-requirements.md
McCool: just a start, but I wanted to describe the variants
… but still a lot of work to do, missing sections, etc.
<kaz> geolocation-requirements.md (rendered)
McCool: can either merge and create issue, or leave open and ask for comments on PR
Lagally: let's leave it open and ask for input and reviews
McCool: if people can use the "suggestion" features in github for concrete comments
… for large changes, make a PR against my branch
Kaz: if large changes are expected then better to merge and make PRs against the repo
McCool: suggest leave open for week to capture comments, then merge, then do bigger PRs
Lagally: reminder that is an example, so comments on the template also useful
Kaz: still better to merge in my opinion
McCool: either is ok with me; will probably immediately create a new PR
Kaz: also suggest we merge the template PR as well
Lagally: fine with me
Lagally: ok, let me merge the template PR
McCool: geolocation as well
Lagally: including some changes, including adding "Draft" to title; merged
PR #216
<kaz> PR 216 - A new usecase about smart agriculture
Lagally: by Changkyu Lee
… et al
Changkyu: feel IoT is useful in agriculture, want to submit several use cases for this industry
… two new use cases actually, #216 is for livestock management
<kaz> diff - 2.1.6 Livestock Health Management
Changkyu: IoT is useful to track health status, combined with AI to do prediction
… can send alerts if it detects problems
… need sensors, cameras, need wireless networks, need environmental controls, some systems to analyze the data
… have some expected data as well, some means to detect disease
… environmental controls also useful: humidity, temperature, CO2 levels, etc.
… result is a plan to address issues
Changkyu: as for requirements, have communication, sensors, etc.
… note that failures need to be dealt with
McCool: could see clearer requirements, e.g. for protocols esp for streaming
… and analytics
Luca: interesting that have three kinds of sensors
… one is biometric
… another is multimedia, e.g. video
… both need to identify entities, i.e. a particular cow, where it is, etc.
… would be good to cross-reference with other use cases
… for example, with geolocation and identity
… other issues, on-site vs. off-site compute
McCool: what third category of sensor?
Luca: biometric, multimedia, identity
Kaz: would be useful to consider variations, e.g. might be differences between how chickens and cows are managed; also differences by country and area
Lagally: a bit more of a description of what benefits the AI would bring; I see predictive results, etc.
… but maybe also learning from other farms?
… for example, discovering communicable diseases early
… by comparing data across farms
Lagally: in summary I think it is a useful addition; we have plants, but not animals, which has additional aspects like dynamic location
Lagally: do you want to refine it or merge it now?
McCool: I suggest we merge it and look for future PRs to improve
… as it is it is quite good, comments are in the nature of improvements, not blockers
Kaz: agree to merge, but if possible, would like to see a diagram if possible (as a future improvement)
Lagally: what would you like to see in the diagram? Logical components?
Kaz: how to get data and how to flow data into server
Lagally: would you want to do an image in a future PR?
Changkyu: yes, would like to merge this version and do another PR for improvements
Kaz: agree would be useful have a diagram for dataflow, but can be done later
… diagram can also include stakeholders
Lagally: ok, we agree to merge - done. Looking forward to further improvements.
Lagally: let's close the meeting here, will look at other topics next week
<kaz> [adjourned]