14:11:47 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot
14:11:51 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-irc
14:11:58 <kaz> meeting: 6th WoT WG Charter Meeting - Day 1
14:12:02 <kaz> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#Agenda_Session_6.2C_Day_1_-_Mar_13
14:12:08 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Kunihiko_Toumura, Luca_Barbato, Tomoaki_Mizushima
14:12:18 <kaz> present+ Michael_Lagally
14:12:27 <kaz> scribenick: luca_barbato
14:13:01 <kaz> topic: Issues around Architecture
14:13:49 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/issues/15 Issue 15 - Architecture Brainstorming
14:14:39 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/issues/16 Issue 16 - Architecture Restructuring
14:15:03 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/pull/82 PR 82 - Add Architecture as a normative deliverable
14:15:04 <luca_barbato> McCool: #82: ben's remark regarding TLS
14:15:07 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/82 : Updates and stub for DI text.
14:15:39 <luca_barbato> ... some assertion in the TD document should be moved in a separate document
14:16:00 <kaz> i|#82|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/pull/82#issuecomment-1461744144 Ben's comments on TLS|
14:16:03 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/82 : Updates and stub for DI text.
14:16:15 <kaz> s/#82: //
14:16:16 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/82 : Updates and stub for DI text.
14:16:42 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/82 : Updates and stub for DI text.||
14:16:44 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/82 : Updates and stub for DI text.||
14:16:44 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot/pull/82 : Updates and stub for DI text.||
14:16:49 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
14:16:53 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:16:54 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:17:02 <luca_barbato> mlagally: we do not have other descriptions: such as how to describe consumers
14:17:13 <kaz> q+
14:17:17 <luca_barbato> ..., servients, ...
14:17:26 <luca_barbato> ... TD is not enough
14:18:19 <luca_barbato> mccool: We have assertions in the wrong documents and we should refactor them
14:18:37 <kaz> i|We have|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/pull/82#issuecomment-1465807920 Lagally's comments for PR 82|
14:18:43 <kaz> present+ Jan_Romann
14:19:08 <luca_barbato> ... the other questions is: security aside do we have other assertions that should be refactored
14:19:12 <kaz> chair: McCool
14:19:40 <luca_barbato> ... it is not obvious which are the assertions without going through many pages
14:20:31 <luca_barbato> q+
14:21:41 <luca_barbato> kaz: My feeling about this long discussion is that it that this discussion is not fully related to the charter discussion
14:22:17 <luca_barbato> ... we should focus on the specification and not the assertion and testing
14:22:42 <kaz> ack k
14:22:45 <kaz> ack l
14:22:56 <kaz> lb: would agree with Kaz :)
14:23:13 <kaz> ... would try to summarize my points as well
14:23:15 <Mizushima> +1 kaz
14:23:50 <kaz> lb: is WoT "glue" or "full stack"?
14:24:05 <kaz> mm: agree there are multiple points mixed up here
14:24:49 <kaz> s/the other questions/another question/
14:24:57 <luca_barbato> mm: We have statements about WoT as whole
14:25:04 <kaz> i/would ag/scribenick: kaz/
14:25:15 <kaz> i/We have/scribenick: luca_barbato/
14:25:16 <luca_barbato> ... is WoT about Thing Description or how to implement a full stack about connected devices
14:25:59 <Mizushima> q+
14:26:03 <luca_barbato> ... (summarising as a comment in https://github.com/w3c/wot-charter-drafts/pull/82)
14:26:03 <Ege> Ege has joined #wot
14:26:31 <luca_barbato> ... do we need to do normative statements regarding WoT as whole?
14:26:56 <mlagally> q+
14:29:00 <luca_barbato> kaz: we should rather think about the structure and not do a deep analysis first
14:29:12 <luca_barbato> mm: I'm open to suggestion on the procedure
14:30:25 <kaz> s/we should focus on the specification and not the assertion and testing/We should focus on the Architecture specification itself rather than diving into the assertions and testability of runtimes./
14:31:09 <luca_barbato> Mizushima: we can decide if a document is informative or normative after we decide the items in the document
14:31:27 <luca_barbato> mm: The Charter requires us to mark the document as Rec or Note first
14:31:35 <luca_barbato> q+
14:31:52 <McCool_> ack mizu
14:32:10 <Ege> q+
14:32:17 <kaz> swe should rather think about the structure and not do a deep analysis first/It seems to me that people have started to work on detailed analysis of assertions one by one based on their own views, but we should rather see the whole structure of the Architecture specification starting with the sections first, and then subsections if needed./
14:32:27 <kaz> present+ Ege_Korkan
14:32:32 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
14:32:37 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:32:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:32:56 <kaz> s/ben's/Ben's/
14:32:59 <luca_barbato> ml: I think we need to introduce in the architecture in a non-ambiguous way all the components of WoT
14:34:01 <McCool_> q?
14:34:05 <kaz> s|swe should|s/we should|
14:34:06 <McCool_> ack ml
14:34:11 <kaz> ack ml
14:34:12 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:34:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:34:24 <luca_barbato> mm: if our ambition is having a full stack, we need a central place to store it
14:35:07 <luca_barbato> ege: it is a good question and I agree our ambition is being a full stack but we are far from there
14:35:43 <kaz> s|we should rather think about the structure and not do a deep analysis first|It seems to me that people have started to work on detailed analysis of assertions one by one based on their own views, but we should rather see the whole structure of the Architecture specification starting with the sections first, and then subsections if needed.|
14:35:45 <luca_barbato> ... I would say we need to all agree if we have a stack of components you must use all or a set of components you can mix and match
14:35:45 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:35:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:35:57 <McCool_> q+
14:36:07 <McCool_> ack luca
14:36:09 <McCool_> ack ege
14:37:10 <Ege> q+
14:37:30 <kaz> s|kaz: we should rather think about the structure and not do a deep analysis first|Kaz: It seems to me that people have started to work on detailed analysis of assertions one by one based on their own views, but we should rather see the whole structure of the Architecture specification starting with the sections first, and then subsections if needed.|
14:37:36 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:37:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:38:54 <luca_barbato> mm: Talk a lot on the greenfield vs brownfield
14:39:05 <luca_barbato> ... but we do not separate the discussion clearly
14:39:11 <kaz> s/I think we need to introduce in the architecture in a non-ambiguous way all the components of WoT/I think we need to introduce all the components of WoT into the Architecture in a non-ambiguous way./
14:39:12 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:39:13 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
14:39:40 <mlagally> q?
14:39:40 <Mizushima> s/Mizushima: we can decide if a document is informative or normative after we decide the items in the document/This issue focuses Architecture. But this issue is not only Architecture. We should think what is normative and what is informative in all of documents. Then We should decide to add Architecture as a normative./
14:39:42 <luca_barbato> ... we maybe need to make it clear the big picture on greenfield in the architecture
14:40:04 <kaz> i/Talk a lot/Luca: @@@/
14:40:22 <kaz> s/luca_barbato, you can add clarification about your own words later :)
14:41:15 <luca_barbato> q+
14:42:05 <luca_barbato> mm: I think I we want to make normative statements regarding WoT as whole, we should put them in Architecture
14:42:13 <kaz> ack mc
14:42:21 <mlagally> +1
14:42:21 <kaz> qq+
14:42:48 <kaz> ack k
14:42:48 <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to react to McCool_
14:43:36 <luca_barbato> ege: Assuming we go for full stack, we need more confermance effort
14:43:50 <kaz> s/@@@/Activity with Profiles is a way to bind together parts that should work together. The problems are different from for legacy systems. @@@/
14:44:17 <kaz> q+
14:44:21 <kaz> ack e
14:44:27 <luca_barbato> ... we to make sure the assertions must be read by implementors
14:44:50 <luca_barbato> ... implementors my miss them if they are embedded deep in architecture
14:45:16 <McCool_> q+
14:45:18 <McCool_> q?
14:45:21 <luca_barbato> ... the two problems are: if they can be implemented and if they can be found
14:46:08 <kaz> lb: the best way would be elaborate the Profile
14:46:33 <kaz> ... HTTP Basic Profile should have links to testable assertions
14:46:41 <McCool_> ack luca
14:47:19 <McCool_> ack k
14:47:28 <luca_barbato> kaz: for the charter discussion we should focus on the content of the architecture document and not focus on the testable assertion
14:49:27 <kaz> s/for the/The discussion we're holding now itself is useful. However, for the/
14:49:42 <kaz> s/architecture document/Architecture specification/
14:50:12 <luca_barbato> mm: We can avoid conformance testing as it is done in the web as alternative
14:50:22 <luca_barbato> ... conformance testing can be through profiles
14:50:34 <luca_barbato> ... but is not required for wot as whole
14:50:40 <kaz> s/not focus on the testable assertion/should not dive into the details of testability of the assertions./
14:51:53 <luca_barbato> mm: My preference is to clean up the document instead of a full overhaul
14:52:52 <luca_barbato> ... we keep architecture normative, but we rework the document to improve the visibility
14:53:05 <Ege> q+
14:53:18 <McCool_> ack m
14:53:21 <kaz> s/of the assertions./of the assertions. If we really need to think about the testability of all the assertions from the Architecture spec, we need to see the other specs as well. However, that's too much for Charter discussion now. So my suggestion is simply skimming the Architecture spec section by section first to see which sections and contents to be normatively defined./
14:53:31 <luca_barbato> ege: I have not big objections, but
14:53:56 <kaz> q+
14:54:04 <luca_barbato> ... if we refactor the document and architecture does not have assertion can we demote it to Note ?
14:54:19 <luca_barbato> mm: it is easier to demote a Rec to Note that the other way round
14:54:47 <luca_barbato> ege: We can add a security Rec document to make room for it
14:55:08 <luca_barbato> mm: A Rec Security document feels premature
14:55:39 <luca_barbato> ... we can consolidate Architecture and split in the next charter
14:55:39 <Ege> ack e
14:55:49 <luca_barbato> ... better to make sure the documents aren't too short first
14:57:11 <luca_barbato> kaz: we need more detail and organize review
14:57:33 <mlagally> q+
14:57:34 <luca_barbato> ... failed to do the rework in the past charter
14:58:42 <luca_barbato> ... if the Rec document does not have assertion is de-facto informative
14:58:58 <kaz> ack k
14:59:08 <luca_barbato> mm: there are assertion in architecture so it is premature to mark it as informative now
15:00:20 <luca_barbato> ml: I prepared some PRs that should be helpful
15:00:43 <kaz> s/we need more detail and organize review/As already mentioned, people have started their own partly detailed review of the Architecture spec again within this PR 82. However, if we really need to review the Architecture spec again, we need more detailed and well-organized reviews./
15:00:50 <luca_barbato> mm: I'd try to group PR and Issues and label the ones that apply to the Charter
15:01:43 <kaz> s/failed to do the rework in the past charter/I suggested we try that one year ago, but we failed to finalize that reorganization of the spec in the end./
15:02:32 <luca_barbato> mm: We need to find a reasonable compromise that meets the targets
15:03:09 <kaz> s/if the Rec document does not have assertion is de-facto informative/If some specification, e.g., WoT Architecture, does not have any normative text, which will be extracted as a normative assertion, that specification will be automatically an informative one./
15:03:47 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:03:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:04:25 <kaz> i/the best way would/scribenick: kaz/
15:04:45 <kaz> i/The discussion we/scribenick: luca_barbato/
15:05:18 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:05:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:06:14 <kaz> i/I prepared/kaz: Right. For example, Fundamental Concepts in addition to security portions./
15:06:17 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:06:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:06:24 <kaz> [adjourned]
15:06:25 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:06:26 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:06:41 <kaz> i/Fundam/scribencik: kaz/
15:06:53 <kaz> i/prepared some/scribenick: luca_barbato/
15:06:55 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:06:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:07:27 <kaz> i/Activity with Profiles is a/scribenick: kaz/
15:07:45 <kaz> i/Talk a lot on/scribenick: luca_barbato/
15:07:49 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:07:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:08:21 <kaz> s/scribencik/scribenick/
15:08:23 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:08:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/13-wot-minutes.html kaz
15:08:34 <kaz> rrsagent, stop