Meeting minutes
Guests, New Members and IEs
Koster: have an invited expert candidate today, but we do not see him yet.
Minutes
<kaz> Apr-2
Koster: Any objections to approve minutes
… Minutes approved from April 2nd
Quick Items
Koster: Any new quick items, or notices?
… No new additions
Meetups
WoT CG
Koster: No new ones coming up
Ege: last one comments was added to github
WoT JP CG
Koster: With the Japan group, we are wondering if we need to continue it if there is no action from that group
Smart Cities IG
Kaz: the group has the next call on the 28th and is getting comments from the group. We should hear new info from them. Progress is being made.
Cloud Edge CG
Koster: Any updates on CLud Edge?
McCool: No progress as of yet, need some additional stakeholders.
Liaisons
Conexxus
David: Woking on a short term plan for the web thing - web socket binding
OPC UA
Sebastian: An email was sent this morning with the status, we (as the OPC UA Binding WG) have started the review phase and would like to expand review to the main WoT group. I have attached the latest draft for review.
… Please comment on it and share the feedback based on the guide in the email.
… The wiki is updated as well with this info. Please do not share this document publicly.
Kaz: The TD Task force need to discuss this?
Sebastian: Please, that would be best if they can take a look
Koster: ETSI report? Next meeting is April 14th. Its open to everyone in this group so if you have an interest please join. They have Webinars on Wednesday
McCool: More involvement would be great and if you are interested in Smart Cities this is a good group
Koster: Any other liaisons notices?
Schedule
<kaz> Holidays
Koster: Any other holidays not documented?
Cancelations
<kaz> Cancellations
Koster: Next Wednesday meetings will be canceled. May 5th-9th will be canceled
… Any other Cancelations?
Publication Milestones
<kaz> Publication schedule
Koster: Is there anything coming up?
Sebastian: If you click the schedule it has the current data, but it is in need of updates. We are behind.
<kaz> Publication milestone calculator
McCool: THese were padded some, but its the CR transition that matters on July 3rd
Koster: We need a working draft to push to CR
McCool: we want to try to do that two weeks before the CR
Kaz: we should talk about this during the chairs call.
Policies
<kaz> Issue 1208 - [Policy Proposal] Managing moderator policy
Koster: Moderator policy is the only one left to review. There is a branch for this to be reviewed once I turn it into a PR
McCool: This is mostly about responsibilities, there is a process to follow in selection. We need to link this
Kaz: The W3C Process Document just says we can create task forces.
<kaz> W3C Process - 3.4.1. Requirements for All Chartered Groups
<kaz>
A Chair may form task forces (composed of group participants) to carry out
assignments for the group. The scope of these assignments must not exceed the scope
of the group’s charter. A group should document the process it uses to create task
forces (e.g., each task force might have an informal "charter").
Task forces do not publish technical reports; the Working Group may choose to
publish their results as part of a technical report.
McCool: so it seems we need to extend this document to have a process for selection.
McCool: It would help to have co-moderators defined as well.
… The process is to have a resolution and approved which is fine. We just need to define more if they need to have presentations etc. Just more clarification is needed.
Koster: The thing with multiple moderators, our policies is to have some assignments of responsibilities
McCool: Its really helpful to have two in case one person is not available that TF does not fall apart
Koster: Any other points to add to the document?
… Will make this into a PR for review.
… Any other policies to review?
Task Force Leads
Profile
Koster: Updates on profile meetings? When is the next meeting?
McCool: Neither of the leads are here. They were in the middle of creating a charter.
… They are not planning on having weekly meetings, but work based on PR's. They might do bi-weekly
Kaz: I personally don't think everything can be handled via GitHub. Anyway let's ask them about the next steps again.
Koster: A meeting was set every other week.
Security/Discovery
Koster: Security Discovery is still suspended. Any change in that work? It would be nice to update the document.
McCool: We agreed in TPAC to review and work these documents.
Koster: if we can activate the task force for a few weeks to go through the document.
Use cases
McCool: we need more people to step up and work on some things.
… We are collecting user stories into the new use case format. We need some work to reorganize this document. My plan is to do this before me leave.
… In this mornings meeting we received several new stories that Ege is working on reviewing. It should not become a requirement without review from another TF
Kaz: As a working group we need to discuss where to start.
McCool: we have a process in the document and if someone has a conflict they need to bring up an issue.
… We have a proposed process but no resolution to follow it.
… we are currently following that process
McCool: working through the proposals we rewrite them as user stories
Kaz: which issues should be converted to stories as priorities?
McCool: I think we have a consensus between the two task forces.
Kaz: we as the whole WoT WG/IG need to clarify the current status and the next steps to the whole group, because the fact some people are joining the meetings does not mean that is out to the whole group
McCool: suggest we add it to the next meeting to resolve this topic
Ege: One is a request for the process, and the second is what is our priority. So we need to define both these topics.
McCool: We will review the process and Ege maybe can help on priority
Koster: Any other points on UC works or TF leads?
(none)
Task Force Reports
Koster: Marketing TF resolved the logo issue
<kaz> [adjourned]