W3C

– DRAFT –
WoT-WG - TD-TF Slot 1

27 March 2024

Attendees

Present
Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Jan_Romann, Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, Luca_Barbato, Michael_Koster, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
Mahda
Chair
Ege, Koster
Scribe
Ege, kaz

Meeting minutes

Minutes Review

<kaz> Mar-13

Ege: minutes of wednesday look good

Ege: minutes are approved

Schedule

Ege: Wednesday: Toolchain and TTWG Registry analysis. Thursday: Resource Management Joint Discussion

Toolchain

Ege: toolchain requirements are documented at https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/main/toolchain/requirements.md

Ege: we need to think of the features of the information model

Ege: we also need to see the higher level diagram

Higher-level diagram

<kaz> Issue 1958 - Higher level toolchain diagram

PR 1989 - High-level Diagram for Toolchain

https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/blob/d48c451f17a75a771377782c1638cc87e58e8d3b/toolchain/README.md

Ege: this is a very simple diagram with the usual inputs and what kind of outputs we expect

Cristiano: what is the difference between the template and source of truth?

Ege: the templates are written in the beginning and are not changed much. The source of truth is where we work on and add features

Kaz: Thank you. I am ok with the direction. We need to clarify with the input and output resources
… also we should merge this with the requirements document

Ege: I have noted the changes needed in the PR

TD Information Model features

<kaz> toolchain analysis

Ege: Mahda has found some of the features of our information model

Ege: we have these features in the information model that will be important when we are picking a tool, like something being a string or an array of string is important in security keyword
… we should think whether this list is correct and needs more rows

Luca: we should evaluate if it makes sense to keep all the features that are not easily supported by other tools

Ege: I would think of the user first instead of the tool but I also kind of agree

Luca: yes but as a user I am also annoyed with the type/type array

Cristiano: type/type array is causing problems in the array. Dropping single string is sort of backwards compatible. in node-wot it is always causing extra work

Cristiano: Since we are targeting TD 2.0 tools but it would be interesting to know what other features they have since we can add new features to the model in the future

Ege: I agree

Luca: We have two candidates two candidates to try first. LinkML is the richest and feels best candidate. TreeLDR is a close second with missing items.

Ege: Mahda has done some tests to see how linkml works. Also, a colleague of mine has put the TD JSON Schema to LinkML to generate the model

Kaz: Thanks for the hard work on the analysis. We should name the leftmost column as requirements

Ege: (adds the column name)

Kaz: so this should be merged with the requirements document

Kaz: we can also use O and X for the source code

Ege: I can do that

The discussion continues at w3c/wot-thing-description#1991

PR 1970

PR 1970 - Prettier alignment

Ege: We had a small discussion was whether the action should overwrite the commit or not

Cristiano: We can choose "However, there's an option in this action where the action overwrites the latest commit with formatting."

Ege: okw

Cristiano: otherwise the timeline is filled with prettification commits

Kaz: What is prettier doing?

Ege: basic formatting like tidyhtml

Kaz: ok then we should explain this in the PR

Kaz: so it will reduce git diffs right?

Ege: yes

TTWG Registry Analysis

Ege: (describes the TTWG's work on registry)

ttwg discussion 241 - Registries in TTWG Specifications

Ege: what is important is how to apply to the registry
… also need to think about how to work with ReSpec to generate actual HTML
… their discussion 241 lists some more registries also
… also they have a dedicated registry area

ttwg/boilerplate/registry

TTML Media Type Definition and Profile Registry

Kaz: did talk with PLH about registry
… would continue to talk with the Strategy Team
… on the other hand, I've started to think it might make sense to have a dedicated Project Review on "Registries within W3C"
… we can invite the other groups' Chairs and participants there
… though that slot is TD slot 2 slot :)

Ege: good idea

Ege: btw, would include the TTWG work into our registry analysis

wot Issue 1188 - Incorporating TTWG work into the registry analysis

Agenda Debriefing

Ege: regarding the TD agenda, would suggest we move the topics around use cases to the Use Cases TF
… also would make the agenda wiki look nicer

Kaz: agree we should move the use case topic to the Use Cases TF
… Mizushima-san is also OK
… so would suggest you create a small Issue for that purpose on the wot-usecases repo

Ege: ok

[adjourned]

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