Meeting minutes
IEs
Koster: We do not have any new members, but we onboarded Charith
Kaz: We had the call with him and he is okay to become task force lead
… just to make sure, he wanted to talk to Michael McCool to talk about more details
… so it would be great if you could answer him on the email thread, Michael
McCool: Missed the call, also because it was at 6 AM in my timezone, but we can schedule another one
<kaz> onboarding minutes (member-only)
Kaz: Walked through various topics, such as spec work and tooling
… no need to dive in the details, but he is getting used to the W3C's work and is okay with become TF moderator
McCool: I will give him my input, he needs it to get up to speed
… I also encourage him to join this meeting if he can
Koster: He hasn't joined yet
… any other comments?
None
Minutes Review
Prev minutes
<kaz> Oct-9
Koster: Just do a quick check, everyone should already had a look
… let's have a look
… do we still need to go over the TPAC minutes?
McCool: Need a resolution at the end, don't need to go over them now
Koster: Okay, should we on the agenda at some point
… the Thingweb meeting, is that this week?
Ege: No, is only next week
McCool: Are there any conflicts?
Ege: Not my presentation, but as it is the whole week, will conflict with all calls
Koster: Is the Eclipse Experience, hope you will have a good time
… then, we scheduled a call with the WoT CG
… discussed OPC liason
… TPAC presentation, CGs, WoT Week
… that was all
… any comments? Any objections to approving them?
None, minutes are approved
TPAC Minutes
<kaz> Day 1
<kaz> Day 2
Koster: I will just quickly go through them
… just skim through and see if anything sticks out
McCool: Can also skip the requirements part
Koster: Requirements discussion, architecture discussion, things that aren't testable... I guess this includes everything that we talked about
McCool: Can't ignore the assertions we already had in the previous architecture topic
Koster: Need to create a work item to go through and discuss these assertions
… and decide whether to turn them informative or remove them
McCool: There is also a resolution
Koster: Oh, yeah, this probably includes what I said and more
McCool: Let's follow up on that
… need to discuss _when_ to follow up as we don't have an architecture meeting
Koster: Could this be an agenda item for the main call?
McCool: Let's discuss it in the taskforce section
… as this is going to be difficult to implement
Koster: There was also a resolution to defer the work on discovery
… to the next charter
McCool: My suggestion is to just publish an errata
… saying that Discovery can also be used with TD 2.0
… not really the purpose of a errata, but this will do it
Koster: can be used to clarify that Discovery is not bound to a certain version, also corresonding with the interoperability contract we have
Koster: Then there is the ETSI CIM ISG liaison
… and AIoT
Kaz: Need to adjust the second line in that section
Koster: That is one small change, not any others so far
… discussed the joint call with JSON-LD
… minutes are slim, but I guess no issue with them
… then canonicalization, all topics for JSON-LD
… really comprehensive meeting with them
… any changes?
McCool: Would be good if someone could summarize the JSON-LD minutes
… under the liason section in the wot repo
… could also be discussed in the TD call
Koster: Let's create an item there
Ege: In the TD call, we actually already summarized the JSON-LD part
<kaz> TPAC summary during the TD call on Oct 9
Koster: Any objections to approving them?
… let's first review the second day, though
… (opens the second minutes)
… spatial data, seems to make progress, has been a long path
McCool: Just a summary of a proposal I made three years ago
… just a question of when it will come to the front of the queue
… needs a champion that cares about the geolocation use case
… probably highly relevant for the smart city use case
Koster: can be a driver
… then SDW charter report
… a lot going on here
… anything coming out of this? No action item, just two links
McCool: We are just saying that the meeting had to be rescheduled
… will be doing one in two weeks
Koster: Alright. Then we had the report from the two hour meeting
Ege: We also reviewed this in the TD call
Koster: and I think we had no amendments to make here
Kaz: By the way, Ege, do you have the link for the TD session slides?
Ege: I have added it (?)
Kaz: I can add the link to the minutes
… can convert the "@"s in the minutes
Koster: There is a small typo in the minutes
Koster: We also discussed use case extraction, will also talk about that today
… discussed the tranformation from requirements analysis
… then we discussed the relationship between bindings and profiles, but not all the relevant people were there
<kaz> (link for the slides for "TD, Profile" session has been added)
Koster: then we discussed policies, we did not make any decisions, but we discussed how to go forward
… there are a few small changes, but we can go ahead with approving the minutes
… are there any objections? We do not need a formal resolution, right?
<McCool> proposal: Accept the TPAC 2024 minutes.
Koster: does anyone have any further input?
RESOLUTION: Accept the TPAC 2024 minutes.
Koster: given that no one has any input, we can accept the minutes from TPAC, both days
McCool: Made a resolution
Koster: Thank you
General Policy
McCool: Just a reminder
Koster: Reminder that everyone should review the minutes beforehand, can save a lot of time during the meeting
… was okay today, since it was TPAC, was generally we should streamline the process
Quick Items
There are no quick items
Eclipse Thingweb
Koster: Ege will present the Thingweb project at the Eclipse Experience
Meetups
WoT CG
Ege: The meeting on the 14th took place
… there will be meetings on the 28th and the 5th of November
Koster: Yesterday was great, learned a lot
McCool: I want to complain a bit about the conflicts, though
… ETSI call was scheduled for weeks
… should not happen
… there was another conflict with the chairs call some time ago
McCool: should have a policy that there should not be any conflicts with WG call
Ege: I don't think there are any conflicts
McCool: We had known the 14th for the ETSI call for a while
… should try to avoid that, were both very important calls
… going forward, we should generally reserve the Monday slot for the ETSI call
Koster: Probably was kind of a race conditions
… for the other calls, we need to be careful. There is one on Monday, does that one conflict?
Ege: No, there is no conflict
Koster: Then the CG had office hours etc. Any more comments on the meetups?
Smart Cities IG
Koster: Had a kickoff
Kaz: Kickoff happened at TPAC, hope to get more participants
… I am asking interested people to join the call, starting the end of this month
Liasons
OPC Foundation
Koster: Open for everyone to join, try to create a protocol binding
… probably interesting, since there are going to be new concepts
ETSI ISG CIM
Koster: Next meeting will be on the 28th
… every two weeks after that
Kaz: Just to make sure: We need to ask the ETSI guys to register at w3.org to be able to share calendar invites with them
… on the 28th, we can start the discussion on concrete liason topics
Schedule
<kaz> Cancellations
Cristiano: Added a topic here, do you have anything else in mind here before talking about the Scripting API call?
<kaz> Doodle result for new Scripting slot
Koster: I don't think so, we just need to call about cancellations and so on
… not cancelling columbus call
… use case call with not be canceled
… can discuss about new use cases next week
Cristiano: We discussed some while ago that we wanted to move the Scripting API call to another slot that is better for everyone
… current proposal is to move the call to Wednesdays, 11 AM CET
… not sure if everyone got the Doodle poll, though
… alternative would be Tuesdays, 11 AM
<kaz> Wednesday, 11am CEST
McCool: That is very early for the pacific timezone, that is 2 AM
… most participants are from Europe, but for other timezones it is awkward
… would be great if another slot could integrate other timezones as well
Cristiano: Were the only slots that worked for the current partipants, but we will keep it in mind
Publication schedule
<kaz> schedule.md
Koster: Some of the dates in the schedule are coming up, need to be aware of them
… still a couple of months off the first deadline, though
… any comments?
None
F2F Planning
<kaz> WoT Week wiki
Koster: For WoT Week, registration is open
… there is a bunch of stuff happening that week
McCool: One comment:
… Sebastian is not here, we should be ready to set up remote participation
Koster: We have a plugfest meeting after this one, need to talk about VPN setup
McCool: Cannot make the call, should schedule Zoom meetings and put them on the calendar
Ege: For the F2F meetings, should we plan with the whole day?
… European morning will be quite early
McCool: As they are companies, they have business hours, but maybe we can set up somethin like 10 AM
Koster: and have a recap in the afternoon
… setting up the Zoom calls sounds like an action item
… let's see the participants list
… oh, it has grown
David: I am not sure whether a lot of newcomers will be able to participate, maybe even one call would be enough
… as it is 7 AM mountain time (?)
… for organizational matters, it is fine, but the plugfest event might be too early
… they are serious, though, and will attend in person
McCool: In general, starting a bit later would be great for remote participants
… except for people from Japan, who have the opposite problem
Koster: Any other final comments on the F2F planning topic?
None
Policies
Koster: Need to get these PRs merged
… and we have a number of other pending aspects
Use Cases and Requirements
McCool: A lot of topics come from the TD call
… the use cases call is quite early for people outside Europe
… maybe next week we can have a discussion in the TD call on Wednesday
… and then we can get the requirements process rolling
… maybe we can schedule a slot for that on Thursday next week
Koster: Where are we standing on TD use cases at the moment?
… should we put filling out the use cases template on the agenda?
McCool: Should only add new use cases if we need them
… most things we need to add are feature requests
… can review them in the TD call or the use cases call
… can organize them via adding labels, then we can review them beforehand
… and make an actionable plan on next Thursday
Koster: important to identify uses cases and feature requests
… and define the process
… since we also wanted a bit of user story even for feature requests
Koster: Other discussions under this agenda item?
… already talked about security
McCool: Talked about architecture, need to do work here, but we don't have a lead
… should at least update the references, even if we don't do anything
<kaz> Architecture resolution during TPAC
Koster: So we should create a work item for that
McCool: we discussed this before, even doing the clean up would take about three to four weeks
… could do an errata
Koster: It will become a note, though, right?
McCool: Even then moving things around will take time
… cannot undo a REC
… could be deferred to the next charter, not super critical
… could publish an errata for broken links
Koster: Just wanted to point out that it is a work item for the WG since we don't have a TF
McCool: just need to make sure that nothing is broken
Kaz: Regarding architecture work, I can just mention our resolution to PLH at the moment
… and then we can talk to him more seriously once we are ready to work on a Note
AOB
None
[adjourned]