Meeting minutes
Guests, IE
McCool: asking the IE applicant about his possible presentation
… but have not got response yet
Minutes
typos fixed
approved
Notices
none
McCool: could move (some of) the meetups/events to here in the future
Wiki organization
McCool: still working on action items and collaborations
Meeting schedule changes
no additional changes
Publication schedule
McCool: created a PR to update it
… expecting Sebastian's update also
wot PR 1173 - Update schedule.md
to be updated/maintained
Kaz: we need to keep updating it based on the actual progress
McCool: right
Publications
none
Resources
McCool: ongoing discussion
… e.g., on Thursday during the TD slot 2 call
… unfortunately, can't make it this week (Wed/Thu) or next week (Wed)
… could discuss it again on next Wed as part of the WG policy discussion
… or during the TD slot 2 call on Thursday
Ege: both slots are fine
McCool: wondering how much time to be used
Ege: 30 mins?
McCool: we need to clarify our policy for resource management too
Meetups
WoT CG
Ege: had a tutorial
… updated PR 139 also
… around the results from the previous meetup
… slides also
<Ege> https://
Ege: next meetup on Feb 15
… about medical equipments
… also will welcome Ben Francis after that
… two more planned
Lagally: which company?
Ege: opensource project organized by some university
Kaz: please think about possible use case description based on those presentations :)
Ege: yeah
Wiki issue
Lagally: btw, I found some problem about the wiki
(detail to be clarified)
Meetups - revisited
WoT-JP CG
<mlagally> s#wiki#wiki page at: https://
Mizushima: planning to hold a seminar on "Web-based Smart Cities" on Feb-2
… also planning to hold another seminar on "WoT Security" on Mar-8
McCool: any links?
Web-based Smart Cities Seminar
Nordic CG
no updates
Others
Ege: Global Summit for Node.js on Feb 21
… also HiveMQ Community Event on Mar 26
… first one requires participation fee
… second one is free
… videos will be available
McCool: Ege, do you have presentations ready?
Ege: not yet
… thinking about live coding
Liaisons, Collaborations
McCool: moved the content to a sub page
McCool: need to be updated
… also could request to review documents, e.g., to IRTF T2TRG
… should update it
… Kaz, as the official W3C liaison, you might want to add the link from this wiki page to the W3C official liaison table
Kaz: ok
McCool: will continue to work on Collaborations section and Actions section to make them separate sub pages
Ege: ASHRAE is listed as "Possible"
… what about BACnet?
… BACnet is a trademark of ASHRAE. right?
Koster: it's just a working group within ASHRAE
McCool: (fixes those 2 lines into one: ASHRAE (BACnet))
TF reports
McCool: some of the TFs are skipped this week
Scripting
Daniel: missed the first part
… collecting issues to be solved first
… and discussing how to proceed
Marketing
Ege: Mastodon is now nicely integrated
… accessible link based on W3C requirements
… keep Mastodon account
<Ege> WoT Marketing page
McCool: (shows the marketing page including the Mastodon instance)
Use Cases
Mizushima: held a call today
… myself proposed a basic workflow
… and approved
… then started concrete discussion
… create GitHub Issues based on the feedback from the previous call
… then discussed GitHub Issues, e.g., Functional vs Technical
… will continue the discussion
TD/Binding
Ege: identified 150 issues
… 4-5 people already working on
… process improvement collaboratively done with the Use Cases TF
Kaz: also the discussion around resource management :)
Ege: right
McCool: will continue the discussion next week again
Profile TF
Lagally: what about the Profile TF?
… getting a volunteer for the moderator
McCool: good question
… to select a new TF leader, we should send a call-for-nominations
… and then can accept a volunteer
… Luca already has volunteered as a moderator
Luca: yes
McCool: we still open the door to everybody, and should wait for some more responses too
<Ege> +1 to that
Lagally: how to manage the wiki page?
McCool: should have separate wiki pages one by one, one for Architecture and another for Profile
Kaz: will we send out a reminder about the Call-for-nomination for Profile TF leader?
McCool: will send out a call-for-resolution
… need to describe that as well within the policy
ACTION: McCool to send out a call-for-resolution for the Profile TF moderator
AOB?
none
[ break till 5min past the hour ]
IG Charter
Koster: have single PR that addresses outstanding issues in background and scope
… look at that first, then look at what else needs to be done in the document
… review and close issues
PR #143
<mjk> PR 143 - Update wot-ig-2023-draft.html
Koster: aligned mission statement with WG charter
McCool: worried that we are not reverting text we discussed before; however, I am ok with the update personally
… although note that the IG does not do specifications.
… although ok because it does not reference IG activities, but "the standards"
Koster: right, about standards, and just want to align with WG mission
Kaz: ok to be aligned, but need to differentiate IG from WG
… IG is to help WG by doing this and that
McCool: maybe add some paragraph breaks?
Koster: looks like there should be three paragraphs
Koster: ok - adds two paragraph breaks
<kaz> GitHub HTML preview for PR 143
McCool: looks good to me
Koster: also changed the dates to april to march due to the extension
Kaz: no need to worry about dates, will be updated after AC review
Koster: also updated motivation and background
… to align with WG charter, which also updated past/future tenses, etc.
… replace some text with that from the WG charter
… also moved some links
Koster: (shows rendered version)
Koster: also don't reference all docs, just Arch and TD as starting points
McCool: for the record, I'm ok with that.
Koster: also define use case and requirements as the priority
McCool: agree that is a good priority and good to state
McCool: small grammar issue, "between" is not necessary
Koster: (fixed)
<kaz> updated rendered results
Koster: update on scope section, limited to four points; three main ones
… support the WG, organize and run test events, and develop use cases and requirements; also oversee marketing TF
Koster: was wondering about the relationship image - but missing in rendering
McCool: need to use github.io to see image...
<kaz> relationship image 2019
Koster: also removed some text about reaching out and collaborating, since that seems more like a WG thing
McCool: in the past the IG served an "experimental" role, e.g. part of the plugfest, but we could also do this as part of the UC process
… better to do that than propose random new features without a motivating use case
Ege: two comments
… first, entry point to standardization;
… could also see the CG as the entry point
… e.g. if they want to submit a use case; can keep it as is, but not really what we are doing at the moment
… in particular, can take use cases from non-members
Koster: word entry point is where there is too much overlap
… but CG is a little further away from "standardization"
… see CG as an alternative way to participate
Ege: still feel someone outside reading will be confused about roles, e.g. submit a use case first, or join the CG first?
Ege: second point, IG does not really get topics submitted to it from the WG
… is this about Marketing?
Koster: one example, requirements already exist for TD being routed back; and yes, Marketing is another example
… we do have joint meetings generally, except for special topics
… when I say the IG will consider new topics, I mean that kind of interaction.
… but we could make that more specific or take it out.
Koster: maybe put it in a separate relationship section.
Koster: anyway, two point: entry points, and topic feedback - both about defining relationship.
Ege: second point, some examples would be ok.
Kaz: put link for the figure above
… figure from 2019 - probably needs update as well
… for example, does not mention CG, only WG and IG
… could add CGs under "Other W3C Groups"
Koster: there are multiple CGs however
Kaz: my original suggestion was putting CGs explicitly here, but feel we should wrap up with the simpler option, under "other"
… but would still be good to clarify relationships
Koster: we could certainly clarify relationships in the docs
… but need more time to think about it
Koster: prefer to put CGs explicitly in the diagram
Kaz: clarifying relationships is most important, and we can remove the sentence about "entry point".
McCool: agree we can remove entry point; suggest use of plural "WoT CGs" since we have more than one
… suggest keeping diagram simple, just put "including WoT CGs" in the "Other" box
Koster: and say something simple about the WoT CG relationships
Kaz: that's my suggestion as well
Koster: ok, deleting "entry point" line
McCool: need to do some repair, remove "In particular, "
Koster: will also put back in the opening sentence from the old text
Koster: now need to add a sentence about the WoT CG
McCool: How about "The WoT IG will work with the WoT CG to capture new use case and requirements."
Ege: in relationship documents, there is also outreach
… the IG can link to resources from other groups
McCool: "Plugfests, testing, and outreach."
Ege: sure
Kaz: also, make it plural to include WoT-JP CG as well :)
Koster: ok shall we merge
McCool: think we should...
Koster: (merge)
… people should review the new version, make comments, hopefully we should have a resolution in the next main call
Kaz: also need to update figure
Koster: I will update the figure also
Koster: adjourn