W3C

– DRAFT –
WoT-WG - TD-TF - Slot 2

08 February 2024

Attendees

Present
Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Jan_Romann, Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, Luca_Barbato, Mahda_Noura, Michael_McCool, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
-
Chair
Ege
Scribe
luca_barbato

Meeting minutes

Minutes

<kaz> Feb-1

Ege: The minutes look good, if there is no objection let's approve

<approved>

TD

Toolchain

<Ege> w3c/wot-thing-description#1967

<kaz> PR 1967 - Documenting Ways to Further Automate the Toolchain

<kaz> rendered tool-analysis.md

Ege: Mahda prepared a PR with the presentation of the tools presented last time

Ege: any objections to this PR? I'd merge it if nobody is against it

Kaz: The toolchain is really complex, is there a way to make it simpler?

Ege: The work is done in this direction

<kaz> kaz: probably not for today, but we need to have dedicated discussion about how to deal with the tooling and documentation for them separately.

Version discussion

<Ege> PR 1965 - Reorganize Versioning document

Ege: I have a PR that is summarising the discussion so far

McCool: The recent comments from Mahda may still need to be included in the summary

<kaz> related PR 1966 - SHACL validation errors

<kaz> (going back to the main topic on Versioning)

Ege: Let me update it now

<kaz> rendered VERSIONING.md

Ege: We should include the version in the ontology metadata, Mahda?

Mahda: Correct

McCool: WoT 2.0 is not yet finalized, we can track it.

Ege: We can see if there are already applicable ideas

<Ege> https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/egekorkan-patch-1/VERSIONING.md

McCool: I'd add that for us it is important to use the version ids during intesting

Daniel: We should keep the version in sync across the produced documents, ontologies and schemas

Luca: releases should be synced, during pre-release we can bump the prerelease tags on the single document changed

McCool: For plugfest and testing we can make a internal versions/releases that easy to refer to

Ege: Before merging, anybody would like to add more?

<no more comments>

Versioning Timeline

Ege: Do we all agree to do versioning all time even before rec

McCool: We can have different namespace for rec and development
… so we have clear distinction

<mahda-noura> +1

Kaz: it is cleaner and it similar to the linux kernel and such
… but do we really need it?

Luca: semver covers the namespace needs and I think versioning this way should be easy also on our users

Ege: How to map it to URI?

McCool: There should be a generic IRI that returns the latest stable and the latest unstable version

https://semver.org/

Ege: if there is no objection, I record the preliminary decision to do versioning even before Rec

Synchronization of Changes

Ege: I'm not sure if we want to sync all the versions in the documents
… my initial thinking is to keep them separated, but it would make everything more complicated

Luca: It is more a problem of tooling if we want to keep version metadata in sync for every document produced
… Ideally the version is for the whole tree and the publishing (prerelease or release) process will add the metadata to the content
… we can have a CI task that does a weekly publishing and our user can refer to the github.io prerelease

Kaz: It seems getting quite complicated, once we have a full process we should go through it to make sure it works for everybody

McCool: I suggest to have the interested people to make a full proposal and then decide as TF after

Ege: I guess me and Luca and Mahda can come up with a full proposal

<kaz> [adjourned]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 221 (Fri Jul 21 14:01:30 2023 UTC).