Meeting minutes
Organization
Sebastian: given less participation, let's review editorial issues on TD
… based on the previous decision, Ege can still moderate the call today
Minutes
Ege: (goes through the minutes)
approved
Next week
Ege: we need to discuss how to moderate the TD TF again
Kaz: will there be a TD call next Wednesday?
Sebastian: we confirmed we wouldn't have no TF calls except the Test call
Ege: ok
… what about May 9th?
Sebastian: not clear...
Ege: to be decided but can be cancelled due to the AC meeting
… then May 16?
… will decide on the TF moderator
… Ege still can prepare the agenda for May 16
TPAC 2023
Ege: topics for TD is being identified
* JSON-LD Collaboration ** Canonicalization ** Restricting prefixes for JSON (no JSON-LD) parsers * Linting: Maybe needs discussion with JSON-LD * Showing planned activity
Ege: anything to be added?
(none at the moment)
Binding
PR 283
PR 283 - Subprotocol improvements
Ege: any comments/objections?
(none)
merged
PR 285
PR 285 - Some very minor editorial issues
Ege: any objections?
(none)
merged
PR 286
PR 286 - Fix Editorial issues and examples
Ege: (go through the preview)
Kaz: have you talked with Koster about this change?
Ege: not yet
… so can postpone this
… will ping Koster and Cristiano as the co-Editors
PR 288
PR 288 - Make XML Binding "planned"
Sebastian: the idea is removing the link?
… there is no work yet. right?
… would be better to have some draft idea there
… thought Taki and Daniel had been working on this topic for a while
Daniel: hasn't really used widely
… OK with either way, removing the link or saying work-in-place
Kaz: I'm also OK with either option
… but given the small participation today, we should talk about this next time
Publication
Ege: would like to talk about this next time
TD
Testfest feedback
wot-thing-description/testing/atrisk.csv
Ege: (shows the latest atrisk.csv)
Sebastian: a bit surprised to see versioning still there
Ege: this CSV file is not completely updated...
Kaz: when can it be updated then?
… maybe after the Testfest tomorrow?
Ege: yeah
… can see the latest status today too
PR 1803
PR 1803 - Capitalize assertive keywords on assertive table
Ege: (shows the diff)
Kaz: we should use the RFC2119 style, shouldn't we?
Ege: the CSS Styling doesn't work within tables, it seems
Kaz: is that the case?
<em class="rfc2119" title="SHOULD">SHOULD</em>
Ege: think ReSpec will automatically add the CSS styling
Kaz: anyway
… let's create an issue to handle this strange situation that some of the capitalized "SHOULD", etc., have "rfc2119" styling explicitly, and some don't.
Jan: I think the relevant part of the ReSpec documentation can be found here: https://
PR 1801
PR 1801 - Add producer to terminology|
merged
PR 1800
PR 1800 - Mention apikey creation is only for object and arrays
Kaz: don't see it as controversial, but would be better to get wider review than today
… since this is more than typo fix
Ege: ok
PR 1799
PR 1799 - Adapt op mapping ed note
Ege: changing "ednote" style to "note" style
merged
PR 1796
PR 1796 - fix title for fadeOut action
merged
PR 1790
PR 1790 - Editorial fixes for issue 1735
Kaz: some of the changes are just removing "-" from "Thing-level"
… but some of the changes are kind of long and require some more reviews
Ege: ok
PR 1802
PR 1802 - Fix html checker errors
Kaz: this is fixing the problem pointed out by the HTML Validator. right?
Ege: right
Kaz: we need to apply these cleaning up to the draft before the Proposed REC publicaton
Jan: seems there is some removal of text there...
Kaz: why didn't you simply used HTML Tidy for this purpose?
Kaz: would suggest we keep this open, and check the HTML with the result of Tidy as well
… I can help you for that purpose
… the PR has conflicts as well
Ege: note that some problem with the TTL files as well
… which requires us manual edit
Issue 1798
Issue 1798 - 2019 urls in the context file
Sebastian: we made a decision to use the 2019 location
… when we work on WoT 2.0, we can revisit the discussion on the policy around how to deal with the namespaces
Kaz: this is also bigger than editorial typo fix
… so should have further discussion next time
Sebastian: already generated an Issue around this
[adjourned]