Meeting minutes
Minutes
approved
Logistics
McCool: timezone change due to the DST
… European time will be back in two weeks
Jiye: I myself am fine with the current time
Security PRs
PR 219
McCool: seems fine
Jiye: fine by me
merged
PR 218
PR 218 - Remove Editor's note on RFC references
McCool: seems ok
… but removing two <p> tags...
… (fixes the HTML)
… should be valid now
merged
PR 217
PR 217 - Expand introduction section
McCool: references are added
… document outline subsection is nailed down here...
McCool: expanded to include references on all the sections
… a bit odd to have the terminology section at the end but should be ok
… why don't we do the following...
… (adds some fixed to the text for "Introduction")
… (then adds "Discovery" to the "Related W3C Documents")
Kaz: maybe it would be better to mention "Related WoT Specs" first
… then "WoT group pages" next
… separately
McCool: sure
… (adds some more editorial fixes)
… any other thoughts?
Kaz: maybe we can't fix this part, but it would be better to have the Terminology section earlier
McCool: right
… let's handle that separately
merged
PR 210
PR 210 - Proposed Changes for 2023 Update
McCool: there is some ongoing discussion around Profile
… basic profile vs generic password keys, etc.
… want to get feedback
… that's a pretty long discussion
Charter topics
McCool: discussion on Architecture
Issue 16
Issue 16 - Architecture Restructuring
McCool: there is some discussion around the Charter to make the Architecture spec potentially informative
… how to deal with all the security portions within Architecture if it becomes an informative Note?
McCool: onboarding is important
… thinking about smart homes, smart cities, smart factories, etc., as well
… need key management for smart factories
Jiye: are we working on Onboarding for the next Charter?
McCool: took out Onboarding from the Charter itself
… we got feedback on Onboarding
… my personal opinion is keep the Architecture normative
… if we move topics from the Architecture out to another spec, it might be going to make it (Architecture) have Security as the only normative content
… note that changing the Charter would require another AC Review
… if we have four year for the next Charter, it might make sense to have a normative deliverable for Security
… but we just have two years
… so my suggestion is
… keeping the Architecture normative
… and extend the security portions within it
Jiye: think that would be reasonable
McCool: that said we still need further investigation around prototypes
… one question to be asked more broadly about full stack of WoT
… think supports from the Security TF about my proposed direction
… keeping the Architecture spec normative
… let me capture that
<McCool> proposed text for arch feedback for next charter: Notes from Security TF call: - Discussed whether it would be better to have normative security content in Architecture or in a new normative Security document - Consensus was that since it is still unclear whether we will be doing onboarding, and without it the normative security content is relatively short, it would be better to leave the normative security content in Architecture
(the above text is fine)
AOB
McCool: Profile topics to be discussed next week
[adjourned]