13:58:33 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-td
13:58:37 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-irc
14:01:30 <kaz> meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF
14:02:53 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan
14:05:33 <kaz> present+ Daniel_Peintner
14:09:38 <luca_barbato_> luca_barbato_ has joined #wot-td
14:09:59 <kaz> present+ Michael_Koster, Luca_Barbato
14:10:29 <mjk> mjk has joined #wot-td
14:10:43 <kaz> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#April_5.2C_2023
14:11:04 <mjk> topic: minutes review
14:11:45 <kaz> q+
14:11:51 <kaz> ack k
14:11:58 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/2023/03/29-wot-td-minutes.html Mar-29
14:12:47 <dape> dape has joined #wot-td
14:13:42 <kaz> ack k
14:14:47 <mjk> ege: Any changes to the minutes?
14:14:56 <mjk> ... OK to publish
14:15:14 <mjk> topic: binding template issues
14:15:54 <kaz> present+ Tomoaki_Mizushima
14:15:55 <mjk> ege: have gone through and tried to resolve
14:16:13 <mjk> subtopic: issue #232
14:16:38 <mjk> ... any objections to close?
14:17:02 <mjk> subtopic: issue #213
14:17:27 <kaz> q+
14:18:23 <mjk> kaz: we are already working on the next charter which includes this, we could label for next charter
14:18:33 <kaz> ack k
14:18:44 <mjk> ... create a new label for "refactoring"
14:19:06 <kaz> i|any object|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/232 Issue 232 - Next WG Note Path|
14:19:12 <mjk> ege: done
14:19:33 <mjk> ... we can use this label for other issues
14:19:36 <kaz> i|we are|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/213 Issue 213 - Need for improving the description within the Binding Templates document|
14:19:42 <kaz> rrsagent, make log public
14:19:46 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:19:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
14:19:54 <mjk> subtopic: issue #152
14:20:01 <mjk> ege: the PR has already been merged, we can close
14:20:21 <kaz> i|the PR has|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/152 Issue 152 - Use case due diligence|
14:20:24 <mjk> subtopic: issue #110
14:20:37 <mjk> ege: this is very old and out of date
14:21:07 <mjk> ... not relevant anymore, so we can close
14:21:27 <mjk> subtopic: issue #97, CoAP ontology
14:21:43 <mjk> ege: this is done, so we can close
14:22:12 <mjk> subtopic:issue #135
14:22:50 <mjk> ege: we will maintain the HTTP default vocabulary in the binding template documents
14:23:00 <kaz> i|this is ve|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/110 Issue 110 - Removing Section 4.3|
14:23:00 <mjk> ... any objections?
14:23:09 <mjk> ... closing
14:23:27 <kaz> i|we will m|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/135 Issue 135 - Consider removing section 2.2 HTTP Default Vocabulary Terms|
14:23:30 <cris_> cris_ has joined #wot-td
14:24:23 <mjk> subtopic: issue # 239
14:24:48 <kaz> chair: Ege
14:25:08 <kaz> i/Any changes to/scribenick: mjk/
14:25:15 <mjk> ege: propose to create a general assertion for ontology prefixes
14:25:17 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:25:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
14:25:30 <kaz> present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi
14:25:31 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:25:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
14:25:48 <dape> q+
14:25:53 <mjk> ... should the prefix recommendation extend to TD in general?
14:26:03 <luca_barbato_> q+
14:26:13 <mjk> dape: in node-wot we check for known prefixes
14:26:20 <kaz> i|propose to cre|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/239 Issue 239 - Disallow changing prefix of binding ontology|
14:26:44 <mjk> ... if we can agree on a fixed set of prefixes
14:27:04 <mjk> ege: there might be a problem with versioned ontology
14:27:16 <dape> ack dape
14:27:16 <mjk> s/ontology/ontologies
14:28:20 <kaz> q+
14:28:51 <mjk> luca: if TD producers use JSON-LD, there could be prefixes for adding meaning. In the protocol binding, we have a registry
14:29:54 <mjk> ... there is a concern that JSON-LD would not be fully supported
14:30:42 <mjk> .. with bindings, we are required to understand the prefixes
14:30:59 <mjk> ... in the general case, the prefixes may be optional
14:31:20 <mjk> q?
14:31:57 <mjk> ... the context will make it clear what the prefix is
14:32:29 <mjk> ... the prefix in the binding enables operation with plain JSON
14:32:50 <mjk> q+
14:33:41 <mjk> kaz: does this mean specifying namespace in the context?
14:33:54 <jkrhb> jkrhb has joined #wot-td
14:33:54 <luca_barbato_> q+
14:34:02 <jkrhb> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:34:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html jkrhb
14:34:24 <mjk> ... changing TD ontology prefix is a different thing from changing namespaces
14:34:47 <mjk> ... we should consult with JSON-LD experts on this
14:35:35 <mjk> ege: Greg Kellogg commented on this at one point
14:36:22 <mjk> s/Greg/Gregg
14:36:33 <cris_> q+
14:36:40 <Ege> ack l
14:36:42 <Ege> ack k
14:37:51 <luca_barbato_> q+
14:37:56 <mjk> kaz: as W3C WG, we can't specify this kind of implementation detail, and should only be a recommendation, not a requirement "should", not "shall"
14:38:11 <kaz> s/W3C WG/W3C WoT WG/
14:38:42 <mjk> ack mjk
14:38:47 <kaz> s/on this/on this kind of issue/
14:39:46 <mjk> cris: either the consumer is a JSON-LD capable processor, or not
14:40:17 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
14:40:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
14:40:24 <mjk> ... the downside is that some applications may need to select prefixes that don't conflict with the fixed ones
14:41:41 <mjk> ... we need to keep our approach consistent with JSON-LD
14:42:02 <mjk> luca: a valid JSON-LD can use any prefix it wants
14:42:27 <mjk> s/a valid/the problem is that a valid
14:42:44 <kaz> s/not a requirement "should", not "shall"/not a "MUST" but maybe could be a "SHOULD". However, we should talk with the JSON-LD experts and VC/DVD experts, who also have the same issues, because we, W3C WoT WG, should be inline with their approaches./
14:43:18 <mjk> luca: valid TDs would be rejected if they don't have context for the prefixes
14:43:34 <cris_> q+
14:43:36 <cris_> ack cr
14:43:39 <cris_> q+
14:44:15 <mjk> ... if we mandate a full JSON-LD processor on the consuming side, it is wasteful
14:45:19 <mjk> ... if we don't claim to be JSON-LD compliant but JSON-LD -like markup, then we can expect people to implement the prefixes
14:45:48 <mjk> ege: don't think we can accommodate the generic case
14:46:27 <mjk> luca: maybe there is a reduced capability way to process TDs that a non- JSON-LD processor can use
14:46:34 <mjk> q?
14:47:23 <Ege> ack l
14:47:24 <mjk> ... such that only a JSON-LD processor can use the full functionality
14:47:54 <mjk> ... how much burden we want to put on who
14:48:53 <mjk> cris: a JSON-LD processor would be able to use all of the extensions
14:49:48 <mjk> luca: there is no place where this issue is clearly stated in the documents
14:50:11 <mjk> ... right now we aren't mandating a JSON-LD processor
14:50:46 <mjk> cris: a lot of the tools depend on JSON-LD processing
14:51:05 <mjk> ... but we expect a lot of implementations could use plain JSON
14:51:12 <mjk> q?
14:51:14 <cris_> ack c
14:51:21 <mjk> q+
14:53:07 <mjk> ack mjk
14:55:05 <kaz> q?
14:55:13 <kaz> q+
14:55:21 <mjk> mjk: point out that the td+json content format is the governing document for plain JSON processors
14:55:52 <mjk> topic: interaction vocabularies
14:56:13 <kaz> ack k
14:56:44 <cris_> q+
14:56:48 <kaz> -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/216 Issue 216 - Instructions on how to create a vocabulary and publish should be provided
14:57:03 <mjk> ege: how do we document the interaction vocabularies?
14:57:28 <mjk> ... should there be a required md file?
14:57:54 <kaz> q+
14:57:57 <kaz> ack c
14:58:07 <mjk> cris: the md file could have links back to the other documents
14:58:12 <cris_> ack cr
14:58:45 <mjk> ege: maybe the vocabulary is published by a third party
14:59:06 <kaz> -> https://www.w3.org/TR/2022/DRY-aac-registry-20221213/ W3C Alternative and Augmented Communication (AAC) Symbol Registry
14:59:30 <mjk> kaz: we should look into how existing registries work, as examples
14:59:39 <mjk> q?
14:59:44 <kaz> ack k
15:00:25 <mjk> jan: agree with creating a md file with links
15:01:06 <kaz> q+
15:01:53 <Ege> ack k
15:01:55 <mjk> kaz: concerned about us creating a mismatch wit other W3C registries
15:02:03 <mjk> s/wit/with
15:02:49 <mjk> topic: PR # 275
15:04:23 <mjk> ege: this adds conformance
15:04:37 <mjk> ... we should add this to the next charter
15:05:02 <mjk> jan: so far there is no conformance section in the Modbus document
15:05:51 <mjk> ege: create issue #278 for Modbus conformance
15:06:10 <mjk> ... merging PR #275
15:06:35 <mjk> ... added issue #297
15:06:37 <kaz> i|this adds|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/275 PR 275 - feat(coap): add conformance section|
15:06:52 <mjk> subtopic: PR # 276
15:07:56 <Ege> https://deploy-preview-276--wot-binding-templates.netlify.app/
15:07:56 <mjk> ege: clarifies the use of content format
15:08:41 <mjk> ... how producers and consumers use content format, including content negotiation
15:08:56 <mjk> ... this would be a good structure for other protocols
15:09:13 <Ege> q?
15:09:33 <mjk> ege: ok to merge?
15:09:43 <mjk> ... merging
15:09:59 <mjk> topic: Thing Description
15:10:44 <mjk> subtopic: updates
15:11:37 <mjk> ege: added labels to 7 open issues to propose closing
15:12:16 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:12:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
15:12:32 <mjk> q?
15:12:43 <kaz> present+ Jan_Romann
15:12:53 <McCool> McCool has joined #wot-td
15:13:13 <mjk> subtopic: PR #1791
15:13:34 <mjk> ege: adds version information to the respec content
15:13:42 <kaz> q+
15:14:00 <kaz> ack k
15:14:05 <kaz> present+ Michael_McCool
15:14:55 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1791
15:15:02 <McCool> topic: PR #1791
15:15:15 <mjk> scribenick: McCool
15:15:22 <McCool> ege: changing assertions, however fixing link to reference to point to the right specification
15:15:26 <kaz> q+
15:15:47 <kaz> ack k
15:16:00 <McCool> mm: agree this change is to capture the intended meaning and does not impact implementations
15:16:12 <kaz> i|changing|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1791 PR 1791 - Add references to TD 1.0|
15:16:32 <McCool> ege: also added a link to previous recommendation
15:17:15 <McCool> ege: validation fails, but can be ignored in this case
15:17:25 <McCool> ... any objections to merging?
15:17:44 <McCool> ... hearing none, merging.
15:18:02 <McCool> topic: PR 1790
15:18:31 <McCool> ege: relates to issue 1790
15:18:39 <McCool> ... set of editorial fixes
15:18:48 <McCool> ... some of which are inside assertions
15:18:59 <kaz> i|relates|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1790 PR 1790 - Editorial fixes for issue 1735|
15:19:07 <kaz> s/issue 1790/issue 1735/
15:19:53 <kaz> i|set of|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1735 Issue 1735 - Minor editorial changes for PR|
15:20:39 <McCool> ... adding a missing "a", italicizing some terms that are being defined for "form level" and "Thing level"
15:21:21 <McCool> mm: one concern is that italics is not used anywhere else, right?
15:22:20 <McCool> ... seems it would be more consistent to define them in "Terminology" and use caps
15:24:37 <McCool> ege: ok, will look into doing that, might add a number of definitions however; also, terminology is informative
15:24:46 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1786
15:24:46 <McCool> topic: PR 1786
15:25:17 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1786||
15:25:23 <McCool> ege: this is just updating the publication date of the td-json-schema-validation.json
15:25:33 <kaz> i|this is|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1786 PR 1786 - Update version td-json-schema-validation.json|
15:25:34 <McCool> ege: merged
15:25:43 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:25:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
15:25:50 <McCool> topic: PR 1792
15:26:04 <McCool> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1792
15:26:15 <McCool> ege: this fixes the examples to use the right context
15:26:35 <McCool> ... all examples are of course informative, so this is editorial
15:27:02 <McCool> ... merged.
15:27:26 <McCool> topic: Issues
15:27:35 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Propose+closing%22
15:27:38 <McCool> ege: first, look at "Propose Closing" issues
15:27:52 <McCool> ... oldest first
15:28:00 <McCool> subtopic: Issue 1607
15:28:43 <McCool> ege: about mandating semantic versioning; but would then need to define what semantic versioning means
15:29:00 <luca_barbato_> q+
15:29:00 <McCool> ... is also now a charter work item for next charter to address this
15:29:24 <McCool> ... so resolution is to leave in the recommendation to use it, but as informative text
15:29:48 <McCool> ... we also do have a reference to SEMVER
15:30:06 <McCool> ... trouble is we don't really define what is meant by minor update
15:30:23 <McCool> q+
15:30:55 <McCool> luca: minor adds functionality, does not break compatibility
15:31:06 <McCool> ... think it is straightforward
15:31:28 <McCool> ... patch is for bugs, i.e. fixing mistakes in titles, etc.
15:31:44 <McCool> ... major is for anything that breaks compatibility
15:32:36 <McCool> mm: we can't make it an assertion at this point, however
15:32:51 <McCool> ... so decision is just about whether or not to have this informative text
15:33:08 <McCool> luca: what is this the version of?
15:33:23 <McCool> ege: of the TD itself; not of the software supporting it
15:33:39 <cris_> q+
15:33:48 <McCool> ack l
15:33:50 <McCool> ack m
15:34:21 <McCool> ege: agree on how we should handle versioning, but do we have the text in the spec
15:34:31 <Ege> ack l
15:34:32 <Ege> ack m
15:34:59 <McCool> cris: ok with mandating SEMVER, but are these policies that are difficult to test?
15:35:28 <luca_barbato_> q+
15:35:47 <McCool> mm: we *might* be able to define this in terms of testable changes to the TD
15:35:56 <kaz> q+
15:36:01 <kaz> ack c
15:36:02 <kaz> ack l
15:36:09 <McCool> luca: at the directory level that might be implementable
15:36:48 <McCool> kaz: ok with this direction, but we need to gather more information about developers expectations and best practices
15:36:55 <McCool> ... for the next charter discussion
15:37:42 <McCool> ege: at any rate, will relabel to "defer to TD 2.0"
15:37:53 <McCool> subtopic: Issue 1612
15:37:56 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1612
15:38:24 <McCool> ege: some missing links to various RFCs, related PR does this
15:38:36 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1650
15:38:41 <McCool> ... see PR #1650
15:39:01 <McCool> ... references added to table.
15:39:20 <McCool> ege: I think that means this issue is closed, as the PR was merged.
15:39:35 <McCool> subtopic: Issue 1673
15:39:41 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1612|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1612 Issue 1612 - [OracleReview] 5.3.2.7 StringSchema|
15:39:49 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:39:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
15:39:56 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1673
15:39:56 <McCool> ege: "A Thing acting as a Consumer" -> "A Consumer"
15:40:05 <McCool> ... phrase is used in several places
15:40:29 <McCool> jan: there is a linked issue, I think
15:40:38 <McCool> ... I think it has been resolved already
15:41:01 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1673|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1673 Issue 1673 - "A Thing acting as a Consumer" -> "A Consumer"|
15:41:19 <McCool> ... Issue 1675 is about expansion of IoT, related PR #1693 also fixed this problem
15:41:40 <McCool> ege: ok, issue closed.
15:42:05 <McCool> subtopic: Issue 1705
15:42:20 <McCool> ege: was a bug in examples, perhaps fixed now?
15:42:31 <Ege> https://www.w3.org/TR/wot-thing-description11/#example-4
15:42:42 <McCool> mm: what browser?
15:43:12 <McCool> ege: works in firefox
15:43:14 <McCool> mm: also chrome
15:43:32 <McCool> dape: perhaps whoever reported this bug had blocked scripts
15:44:20 <kaz> i|was a bug|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1705 Issue 1705 - Example 4 is empty if "default values" checkbox is off|
15:44:29 <McCool> mm: suggest we close this, ask Michael Lagally if he can still reproduce it and how; if so, we can reopen
15:44:47 <McCool> subtopic: Issue 1719
15:45:08 <McCool> ege: what to do with profile keyword if profiles is not a rec?
15:45:29 <McCool> ... conclusion was to keep it
15:45:41 <McCool> mm: also, if not at risk, we can't remove it at this point anyway
15:46:09 <McCool> subtopic: Issue 1734
15:46:10 <Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1734
15:46:50 <McCool> ege: more of a question than a change to the spec
15:47:06 <McCool> ... and the question was answered to the asker's satisfaction
15:47:11 <McCool> ege: closed
15:47:30 <McCool> subtopic: Issue 1674
15:47:37 <McCool> ege: still under discussion in Profiles
15:47:58 <McCool> topic: AOB
15:48:21 <cris_> q+
15:48:25 <McCool> mm: any followup from TD Dev Meeting?
15:48:25 <kaz> i|what to do|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1719 Issue 1719 - What to do with the profile keyword
15:48:44 <McCool> ege: a few new test results from SayWoT! team, already submitted; may be some more
15:49:13 <McCool> kaz: there was also a JP version of the meeting, will try to collect feedback as well
15:49:15 <kaz> ack k
15:49:18 <kaz> ack c
15:49:45 <McCool> cris: seems to also be a mistake wrt node-wot, will attempt to fix
15:49:51 <kaz> s|https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1734|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1734 Issue 1734 - How to specify request headers?|
15:50:33 <McCool> ege: since we have time, a bit of discussion of issue 226 in wot-binding-templates
15:50:52 <McCool> ... this is a naming issue, basically what to call bindings that have multiple aspects
15:50:56 <kaz> i|still under|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1674 Issue 1674 - Mention that protocol bindings can also be defined in profiles|
15:51:04 <McCool> ... is "Platform Bindings" appropriate?
15:51:17 <McCool> q+
15:51:45 <kaz> i|since|topic: Some more Binding topic|
15:51:55 <kaz> i|since|subtopic: Issue 226|
15:52:13 <kaz> i|since|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/226 Issue 226 - Changing the Platform Bindings to Combination Bindings|
15:52:18 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:52:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/04/05-wot-td-minutes.html kaz
15:52:54 <kaz> q+
15:53:40 <kaz> ack m
15:54:48 <McCool> mm: note that "Platform" is a defined term, and it would be better not to use a variety of terms
15:55:16 <kaz> q?
15:55:29 <McCool> ... I think "Framework" is also a reasonable term, but I would then update it everywhere
15:55:54 <McCool> kaz: in the end, there is just a mechanism for binding that includes a variety of information
15:56:07 <McCool> ... that can be used to bind ecosystem-specific information
15:56:18 <McCool> ... so I find it odd to say there are three kinds of bindings
15:56:20 <McCool> q+
15:56:24 <McCool> ack k
15:56:56 <McCool> kaz: just one binding, with several capabilities
15:57:27 <McCool> mm: agree with kaz, we just have "Bindings", and then the problem goes away
15:58:06 <kaz> ack k
15:58:31 <McCool> ege: problem I have it that we might have different requirements for the different kinds of bindings
15:58:48 <kaz> s/have it/have is/
15:58:58 <kaz> q+
15:59:03 <kaz> ack m
15:59:12 <cris_> +1
15:59:17 <Mizushima> +1 kaz
15:59:34 <Ege> q?
15:59:37 <McCool> mm: could however just have each doc list what it binds and the registry table can also list the categories
15:59:45 <McCool> ack k
16:00:06 <McCool> ka: still feel we need more developer input
16:00:16 <McCool> s/ka:/kaz:/
16:00:45 <cris_> q+
16:01:16 <McCool> cris: want to support the use of a single term
16:01:43 <kaz> q?
16:01:44 <Ege> ack c
16:01:47 <kaz> ack c
16:03:14 <McCool> ege: ok, think we resolved to just have "bindings"
16:13:07 <kaz> [adjourned]
18:04:42 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-td