10:05:36 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wot-script
10:05:40 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/01/22-wot-script-irc
10:05:50 <kaz> meeting: WoT Scripting API
10:06:41 <janro> janro has joined #wot-script
10:07:51 <kaz> present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Daniel_Peintner, Jan_Romann
10:08:46 <cris> cris has joined #wot-script
10:08:59 <kaz> chair: Cristiano
10:09:33 <dape> scribe: dape
10:10:00 <kaz> agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Scripting_API_WebConf#January_15%2C_2025
10:10:51 <dape> TOPIC: Previous minutes
10:11:41 <dape> Jan 8 -> https://www.w3.org/2025/01/08-wot-script-minutes.html
10:12:07 <dape> CA: Minutes look fine
10:12:34 <dape> ... minutes are approved
10:12:51 <kaz> s/15%/22%/
10:12:57 <dape> TOPIC: PRs
10:13:16 <dape> SUBTOPIC: Extended return type of invokeAction() PR 561
10:13:32 <dape> CA: PR that created new issues in TD repo
10:13:44 <dape> ... TD is underspecified
10:13:56 <dape> ... a *real* fix will happen in TD2.0
10:14:10 <dape> ... as part of manageable actions
10:14:29 <dape> ... for now we can not expect anything
10:14:54 <dape> ... for the Scripting API we cannot assume anything
10:15:10 <dape> ... the application layer should be in charge
10:15:18 <dape> ... we can have 2 methods
10:15:29 <dape> ... queryaction and cancelaction
10:15:39 <dape> ... application can just read byte stream
10:15:54 <dape> q+
10:16:35 <kaz> i|PR that cr|-> https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/561 PR 561 - Extended return type of invokeAction()|
10:17:22 <dape> DP: fear the calls might (should) change in the future .. and that might conflict
10:17:44 <dape> CA: deprecate functions for TD 1.1
10:18:12 <cris> q?
10:18:16 <cris> ack d
10:18:18 <kaz> q+
10:18:19 <dape> ... since it is a major version we can loose backward compatibility
10:18:37 <dape> Kaz: We cannot fix the core problem quickly
10:18:44 <dape> q+
10:19:05 <kaz> q-
10:19:16 <dape> ... in TD2 there might be incompatible functions
10:19:45 <kaz> s/in TD2/in any case,/
10:19:59 <kaz> s/functions/functions in TD 2.0/
10:20:15 <dape> DP: unsure what it gives us to have very open calls now
10:20:31 <dape> CA: We are getting closer to feature complete ..
10:20:33 <kaz> s/2.0/2.0 (possibly not only the return type changes but also some more possible features)/
10:20:46 <dape> ... anyhow, there are others like read/write multiple
10:21:56 <dape> q+
10:22:11 <dape> CA: can add experimental features
10:23:31 <dape> DP: Need to change the return type of invokeAction
10:23:36 <dape> CA: Disagree
10:24:08 <dape> ... can have simple calls next to invokeAction
10:24:21 <dape> DP: What about parallel actions?
10:24:33 <dape> CA: Just one action at the time
10:25:13 <dape> ... a problem of the TD in the first place
10:25:18 <dape> ack dape
10:26:07 <janro> q+
10:26:18 <dape> DP: need to think about :-)
10:26:48 <dape> JR: Couldn't we use a similar pattern like observing
10:27:02 <dape> ... having a dedicated action invokeAsyncAction ?
10:27:55 <dape> CA: Assume URI variable to be used to identify which action has been started
10:28:35 <dape> ... invoke action returns ID
10:29:14 <dape> q+
10:29:45 <janro> q+
10:30:00 <dape> CA: The runtime cannot know that it needs to pass the ID to cancel/query
10:34:49 <kaz> q+
10:35:10 <dape> DP: not much difference in having the same optionality  on external method or method related to the ActionObject
10:35:32 <dape> CA: deprecation in future would cause less issues
10:35:46 <dape> ack dape
10:35:51 <janro> ack jan
10:36:15 <dape> Kaz: We should clarify how we plan to fix the issue
10:36:30 <kaz> q-
10:36:31 <dape> CA: idea is to fix the bug in 1.1
10:37:25 <dape> ... staying conservative
10:37:26 <janro> q+
10:37:28 <kaz> s/We should clarify how we plan to fix the issue/The discussion so far is nice, but we should clarify which we're talking about, (1) how to fix the bug for 1.1 or (2) how to improve the situation for 2.0./
10:37:40 <dape> JR: I agree with Cristiano
10:37:53 <dape> ... should be focusing on fixing the bug
10:38:10 <dape> ... wondering whether there is another use-case for data mapping
10:38:49 <dape> CA: Yes, good point
10:38:56 <dape> ... for the future
10:39:58 <dape> q?
10:40:08 <dape> q+
10:40:08 <janro> ack j
10:41:02 <janro> q+
10:42:05 <dape> DP: I think we can describe here where we are heading too
10:42:13 <dape> ... but create another PR
10:42:38 <dape> JR: Is this going to be the last "fix" for TD1.1 ?
10:43:11 <dape> CA: I don't have an answer right now
10:43:34 <dape> ... some TD1.1 features we will not be implemented.. I think.. like read/write multiple
10:43:56 <dape> ... we can have 2 version .. one in a branch etc
10:44:07 <dape> JR: Sounds good to me
10:44:44 <dape> CA: Yes, having branch "1.x" that tackles TD1
10:46:06 <dape> q?
10:46:09 <dape> ack dape
10:46:12 <janro> ack j
10:46:16 <kaz> q+
10:47:00 <kaz> q-
10:47:01 <dape> Kaz:  Should report back in main call later
10:47:13 <dape> s/later/later today
10:47:57 <dape> <CA describing the outcome in https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/561>
10:48:33 <janro> rrsagent, please draft the minutes
10:48:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/01/22-wot-script-minutes.html janro
10:48:51 <janro> rrsagent, make log public
10:49:05 <kaz> q+
10:50:30 <dape> Kaz: Additional features to the note should not cause any problem
10:51:29 <dape> ... no additional implementation report is needed since Scripting API is a note
10:51:50 <kaz> q-
10:54:20 <dape> CA: Good discussion
10:54:23 <dape> ... see https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/561#issuecomment-2606914249
10:54:57 <dape> [Adjourned]
10:55:04 <kaz> rrsagent, draft minutes
10:55:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/01/22-wot-script-minutes.html kaz
11:03:52 <Mizushima> Mizushima has joined #wot-script
12:04:10 <JKRhb> JKRhb has joined #wot-script
13:19:15 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wot-script
14:49:47 <JKRhb> JKRhb has joined #wot-script