Meeting minutes
Guests, IEs
no
McCool: no guests here but one possible IE application being discussed
minutes
McCool: reviewed them in yesterday's chair's call
any objections?
no
minutes approved
Quick items
McCool: be awaere of the daylight saving changes
… starts in US next week
<kaz> [ the call starts one hour earlier in Europe and Japan ]
IG charter
<kaz> strategy issue 440 for the IG Charter
McCool: wide review is ongoing
… there are some comments
Kaz: there are missing tags
… will look into the bugs
W3C Breakout Day
<kaz> Issue to gather ideas
<kaz> breakout issue 15 - Schemata Discussion - Follow up from TPAC23
<kaz> breakout issue 18 - Registries for W3C Specifications
McCool: there are two calls, one is about schemata
… another one is about registries
<MM updates the times at the wiki>
Ege: do you have people you want me to contact?
McCool: would be good to know who is already invited?
… would be good people from JSON Schema
and SHACL
… for the registry, DID would be good
Kaz: some more experts from other groups should be invited such as DID
<kaz> ack
David: I chaired XML Schema Working Group, many people are now retired
… we should invite the Team Contact of the DID WG
Kaz: that's Pierre-Antoine :)
Profile
McCool: Profile starts next week
… 12. March-13 UTC, however, this conflicts with the w3c breakout day
McCool: ok, let's postpone profile call for one week
McCool: is this ok for you, Luca?
Luca: is ok for me
… I will have a preparation meeting with Michael Lagally this week
<kaz> WoT Profile Calendar
Meetups
WoT CG
Ege: next meeting is planned March 14
… there is a presentation about Matter from Deutsche Telekom
WoT JP CG
McCool: next meeting on WoT Security in 2 days
Nordic Smart Cities and WoT CG
McCool: no news
… next meeting March 18
Kaz: should move this to Liaisons section
McCool: yes
Other
Ege: WoT presentation at the HiveMQ Community Event on March 26
Meeting Schedule Changes
<MM shows the latest cancellations entries>
<kaz> Holidays and Cancellations
McCool: any holidays to be aware of?
<kaz> Mar 12:
<kaz> Defer start of Profile call to Mar 19.
<kaz> Mar 20:
<kaz> Use Case call is cancelled.
McCool: is it ok cancel main call on March 20 also?
no objections
sk: also we should think about Hannover Fair
… because that's a very big industry show
<kaz> Hannover Fair 2024
F2F Planning
Sebastian: Web of Things event planned from Siemens standardization, and to show how WoT is used in products and industry compared to the event in 2019
… my boss would like to plan this event in June, do we want to have beside this special event a plugfest?
… in the chairs call last week we discussed about this, and wondered how many people will be able to travel to such an event considering the limited budget and travel restrictions of companies
… we should think about this question and ask your company if its possible to travel
… the event will take place in Berlin
McCool: do we want to do an email survey?
Sebastian: we could maybe setup a wiki page where people could mention their availability
McCool: let's try to make a draft ready
… I think we need to do a concrete proposal
… I will be able to attend with high probability
… There is some work I am involved with Microsoft regarding AI, we could have a AI theme too
Sebastian: lets make a draft in the chairs call
McCool: see who could do demos and talks
<sebastian> sorry, I have to leave the meeting
Kaz: I agree we should clarify logistic and create a dedicated wiki page, for that purpose, probably we need to clarify the estimated date and content and additional discussion
McCool: we will create a wiki page and clarify those things and try to get all stakeholders to agree to the plan
Resources
McCool: Is there any updates?
McCool: my hope is that there will be eventually a policy regarding semantic versioning, the discovery is proceeding under a assumption on version policy
McCool: is the TD TF taking a lead on this?
mjk: yes, we are expected to report in the next TD call
<kaz> Web of Things (WoT) Discovery Ontology (Editor's Draft)
McCool: we updated our rendering in the discovery, the blue boxes are because of the domain and range not present, we recently transferred a issue under the TD directory for security ontology
McCool: I suggest we fix that first
Ege: we should have a good proposal in the next TD call
… the semantic versioning is only one small aspect of the versioning topic
<Ege_> wot-thing-description PR 1969 - WIP: Concrete Versioning Proposal
Ege: today in the TD call, we will discuss what are the requirements for versioning
McCool: As part of our rendering of the ontology, we have a template, we also have a changelog, and the final resource will output the release
… we need to do some work to align with the TD script
Ege: we need to seperate the versioning from the toolchain for now, the versioning is about the outputs
McCool: my intention is that the output needs to be consistent
Kaz: Michael Mccool and the discovery guys have been working on a proposal, we should make a consolidation. We should also include David as an expert
Kaz: would you be available for today's TD call, tomorrow's TD call or main call next week?
McCool: lets wait until the work in progress policy is done, and in two weeks from now we plan and put on the agenda
McCool: maybe 21st March to have a joint discussion during the TD call
McCool: A note added on the agenda
<kaz> [ that is Mar 21 at 9am EDT ]
TF Reports
McCool: does anyone else who wants to report on the TF reports
Marketing TF
Ege: we have an issue in finding a timesolt in the marketting call, once we consider the chairs and kaz it gets tricky
McCool: proposal could be once a month you guys join the chairs call
McCool: let's dicuss this in the chair meeting next time
Kaz: we probably need to do a doodle
McCool: in the doodle add half an hour after the new chairs call as one of the options
ACTION: kaz to create a doodle to find a possible slot for Marketing (first call of the month)
Ege: I think it would fit well in the chairs call
McCool: would be helpful to setup a doodle
… any other reports?
Ege: not only from the TD, but would affect others. The project management proposal is more concrete. We looked with Michael Koster and Kaz, I would send the rendered version and pull request
<Ege_> Rendered Version: https://
McCool: is it a policy?
Ege: it is a process
<Ege_> PR: w3c/
Kaz: I would suggest to finalize the draft today in the TD call first, and then send it to the whole group
McCool: maybe we can finalize the versioning and project management together in the main TD call
Architecture
McCool: We will defer it until the profiles get going
Kaz: We'll restart the Profile TF in two weeks, and the TF probably will discuss what to be done by the Profile TF and the Profile document, then bring the feedback to the main call. We can discuss how to handle the Architecture during the main call at that time.
McCool: right. we should focus on giving profiles speed until we find someone to work on the architecture
Policies
McCool: let's go for 30m only since some people have to leave early
mk: ok
<kaz> Policy Issues and PRs
Assertion IDs
<mjk> PR 1181 - Assertion id policy proposal
mk: PR #1181
<kaz> rendered assertion-id.md
Ege: lots of variations in ids, not consistent
… for TD spec, agreed to always start with td or tm
Ege: also, if there are subsections, best to include those
McCool: also, please don't use section *numbers* - they change!
… also, don't do sub-sub-sections, just two levels is enough
Ege: include doc prefix so can recognize if taken out of context
McCool: agree; within a doc, redundant, but helpful if taken out of context
… so agree with prefixes; also ok with both td and tm
<Ege_> +1 to kaz
Kaz: could define a template, eg. PP-SS-DESC
… would also be good to define each prefix
McCool: I think the prefixes are clear from context
Kaz: editors and group participants can tell, but would be good to have a description
McCool: where would the description go?
… the implementation report? The readme?
mjk: would make sense to make a little formal spec, maybe in the policy
Ege: can add a bit to the current PR
McCool: I think the current PR is moving in the right direction, however
Kaz: for assertionid.md itself, would explain what's wrong with each incorrect example, how it should be fixed
… but policy should also state that assertion id formats and prefixes should be defined in Implementation Reports
Chair Decision Process
<kaz> PR 1128 - [Policy] Move chair-decision-process.md from "proposals" to "policies"
McCool: I made the suggested changes, removed "voting"
<kaz> rendered proposal
McCool: still have a 2/3 quorum
McCool: but should remove the "no more than a day earlier"
mjk: ok (removes clause)
Kaz: quorum is still there
McCool: yes; note that 1 chair can't make unilateral decisions
mjk: but two can
Kaz: opinion is that we should stick to consensus and just wait until we get all three
McCool: suggest we add a line of the form "However, if possible, when a chair cannot attend..."
… the "if possible" is to cover the case when we do have to make an immediate decision
Kaz: what about team contact's input?
mjk: true, we haven't a problem
McCool: suggest we don't merge this PR for now - can discuss further in chairs' call
mjk: out of time, adjourn