13:50:13 RRSAgent has joined #wot-td 13:50:18 logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-irc 13:50:18 ktoumura has joined #wot-td 13:50:22 meeting: WoT-WG - TD-TF - Slot 2 13:50:36 rrsagent, make log public 13:50:41 rrsagent, draft minutes 13:50:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 13:57:26 JKRhb has joined #wot-td 14:00:39 Mizushima has joined #wot-td 14:02:32 present+ Kaz_Ashimura, Ege_Korkan, Michael_Koster, Tomoaki_Mizushima 14:02:38 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:02:39 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:02:47 chair: Ege, Koster 14:03:06 mjk has joined #wot-td 14:03:11 present+ Kunihiko_Toumura 14:04:46 dape has joined #wot-td 14:04:52 present+ Daniel_Peintner 14:04:55 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:04:56 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:05:39 present+ Kazeem_Oladipupo 14:05:50 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:05:51 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:07:04 EgeKorkan has joined #wot-td 14:07:17 q+ 14:08:34 q- 14:08:59 agenda: https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Thing_Description_WebConf#February_27%2C_2025 14:09:08 scribenick: EgeKorka 14:09:10 scribenick: EgeKorkan 14:09:18 topic: Agenda Review 14:09:48 ek: review minutes, then profinet, then registry 14:09:53 present+ Cristiano_Aguzzi 14:10:00 ek: any additions to agenda? 14:10:10 topic: Minutes Review 14:10:21 i|Minutes|(none)| 14:10:56 -> https://www.w3.org/2025/02/19-wot-td-minutes.html Feb-19 14:11:45 ek: names should be changed and one link should be moved below 14:11:56 ... any other remarks? 14:13:07 -> https://www.w3.org/2025/02/20-wot-td-minutes.html 14:13:16 ... any remarks on the feb 20 minutes? 14:13:17 s/html/html Feb-20/ 14:13:25 ek: both minutes are approved 14:13:45 topic: Profinet Binding 14:14:08 https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/351 14:14:20 ek: this PR open since a while 14:14:52 ko: I am a PhD student in Siemens. OT IT integration is my focus 14:15:00 ... I focus on protocols like profinet and io link 14:15:12 s/https/-> https/ 14:15:15 ... also WoT and AAS on the IT side 14:15:36 s/351/351 wot-binding-templates PR 351 - creating a PROFINET binding template file/ 14:15:41 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:15:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:15:48 ... I have created this PR, got feedback from experts 14:16:35 ek: very present in real time protocol space 14:17:20 ... let's look at the last changes 14:17:34 cris has joined #wot-td 14:17:35 ko: I have added the recommendations from the reviewers 14:17:50 ... I have fixed some mentions of modbus that were leftover from modbus binding 14:17:54 ... also updated the JSON Schema 14:18:18 https://deploy-preview-351--wot-binding-templates.netlify.app/ 14:18:46 ek: ontology is not there yet 14:19:55 s/https/-> https/ 14:20:08 s|app/|app/ Rendered HTML| 14:20:10 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:20:11 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:20:36 ko: the terms are also available in the data schema level 14:21:45 ek: I see some small editorial things to change 14:22:13 ek: the example from a real device right? 14:22:32 q+ 14:22:33 ko: yes. it is a power meter from Siemens SI department 14:23:08 ca: can you expand on the mapping concept? 14:23:21 ko: we have buffering parameters 14:23:58 ... they are defined as objects in the affordance level 14:24:31 ... but they should be mapped to specific parts in the buffer sent on the wire 14:24:45 ... so you go through this and map to each buffer part 14:25:13 ca: the content type should be added 14:25:33 ... we can be inspired from this to generalize this concept 14:26:01 ... are there any other content type? 14:26:05 ko: not as far as I know 14:27:23 q? 14:27:24 ack c 14:27:34 ek: I am noting these feedback in the issue 14:28:28 ... once these small things are fixed, the PR can be merged 14:30:38 ek: there are more examples of this like https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1936 14:30:56 ca: we have some support for this in node-wot, but not using any custom keyword 14:31:31 ca: are there any implementations of profinet? 14:31:47 ko: typically, the protocol drivers are products 14:32:24 ek: also the protocol spec is not public 14:32:56 ko: also the device needs to be tested to get the profinet logo 14:35:07 ek: the newer standards from the same SDO are now open. I think more and more will do that 14:36:11 topic: Binding Registry 14:36:16 subtopic: PR 414 14:36:46 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:36:47 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:36:57 https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/pull/414 14:37:19 s/https/-> https/ 14:37:49 s/414/414 wot-binding-templates PR 414 - Requiring implementation experience for bindings/ 14:38:06 mjk has joined #wot-td 14:38:19 -> https://github.com/w3c/wot-binding-templates/issues/403 Related Issue 403 - Stable/Current Status Requirements 14:38:22 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:38:24 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:38:41 ek: (summarizes the PR's context) 14:38:59 ca: I have taken that proposal and added some ideas of mine too 14:39:03 ... we can discuss the comments 14:39:43 ... there are some gaps in the document. We should work on it more later on 14:40:04 ... I have tried to explain each bullet point with more text as well 14:40:14 ... we should give proof that the binding is implementable 14:40:54 ... we want to have testing events but also track these events. That way we have concrete proof about communication between devices 14:41:21 ... the events can be organized in a flexible way 14:41:35 ... we have to agree on how the test report should look like and how the events are structured 14:44:25 ... the submitter is free to specify where the implementation experience is collected 14:45:28 ek: the rest of my comments are fine 14:46:37 q? 14:47:38 ek: so the test report should be public but the resources may not be 14:47:48 ca: ok then we need more structure? 14:48:10 ek: I think we should define a template for that test report 14:49:26 ca: should we be strict on the test report format? 14:49:42 ek: maybe. requiring markdown is fine but it may have issues with tables etc. 14:50:10 q? 14:53:19 q+ 14:53:38 ca: the gap on the test report is there because the submission starts without it 14:53:48 ca: I have the point about the transition 14:54:11 ek: I think it is fine that the custodian makes the call about the transition 14:54:50 kaz: this discussion is important but this can imply that we define something like "Candidate Recommendation" 14:55:09 ... technically it is fine but we should be careful about the process 14:55:21 ... maybe we can copy some part of the candidate recommendation process 14:55:52 ... it can be a lot of work too 14:56:00 ek: so using some parts of the W3C Process? 14:56:08 kaz: yes. We can look into it 14:56:45 ek: we are kind of implying that right 14:57:32 kaz: do we make a "call for implementation" 14:57:33 ek: yes 14:57:51 s/tion"/tion"?/ 14:57:56 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:57:57 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 14:58:28 ek: any objections to the general direction? 14:59:36 ek: (adds decisions to the comment) 14:59:47 ek: AOB? 15:00:09 (none) 15:00:39 [adjourned] 15:00:41 rrsagent, draft minutes 15:00:42 I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/02/27-wot-td-minutes.html kaz 15:01:42 EgeKorka_ has joined #wot-td 15:01:56 zkis has joined #wot-td 15:02:35 EgeKorka_ has joined #wot-td 15:04:14 EgeKorka_ has joined #wot-td 16:12:33 EgeKorkan has joined #wot-td 16:17:32 EgeKorkan has joined #wot-td 16:45:54 EgeKorkan has joined #wot-td 17:02:16 Zakim has left #wot-td