Meeting minutes
Logistics
Kaz: note that the Japanese Golden Week actually starts on April 29
… and ends on May 6
… people may take additional off on May 7-9 also, though
Ege: ok
… in that case, we should cancel the TD calls next week
Minutes
Ege: (goes through the minutes)
minutes approved
Binding Registry and Terminology
<EgeKorkan> w3c/
<kaz> s|Binding Issue 143 - "Protocol Binding" vs. "Binding Template"|
email discussion on member-wot-wg (Member-only)
Ege: (skims the discussion on GitHub so far)
Kaz: Tx for the discussion so far. As I already mentioned last week, I'd suggest we clarify related concepts and entities to be defined around "WoT Binding", and think about what kind of term to be applied to which.
Ege: yeah
… what we need to handle includes these three points (JSON-LD document instance, registry entry, name for the registry)
Cristiano: I have the same concern
… don't really understand the question here
… maybe need some more clarification
… think I'd agree with Kaz
… every time, we have new concept
… and get much confusion
… should put everybody on the same page
… got some impression that all the people don't really have the same image about this issue
… we probably need to continue some more discussion
… would agree with Ege's last comment also
Ege's last comment for Issue 143
Ege: ok
… sometimes some people tend to use a bit different terminology
… we should clarify entities we want to use, and then clarify what kind of term to be applied to which entity/concept
… probably we should check with the whole group during the upcoming WoT main call as well
… Kaz, the next main call will be held in two weeks given the Japanese Golden week?
Kaz: think so
… will check with the WoT Chairs by email
<EgeKorkan> Ege's message about five concepts to be defined (Member-only)
Ege: (goes through the message)
Cristiano: I think we're getting there
… that is a god summary
Ege: should mention validation also
… technically, WoT Profile could be introduced
Cristiano: looks fine
Ege: (copies the concepts to the GitHub issue)
Kaz: tx for the discussion so far
… but having the discussion both on the GitHub and the ML is a bit confusing
… so would suggest we have the technical detailed discussion on the GitHub side only. actually, your copying the content from the ML to the GitHub is useful for that purpose :)
Ege: ah, yes
… (and updates the comments on the GitHub side)
(some more discussion about the concepts and terms)
Ege: we should look into the definitions within the other specs, e.g., WoT Architecture
Kaz: this discussion is very useful for our document refactoring as well :)
Ege: (adds links for the terminology from those specs)
AOB
Ege: seems we need to change the name of the GitHub repository for the WoT Registry based on the latest discussion
… would like to discuss new items like data mapping and manageable affordance
… also would get a resolution to work on use cases and user stories
[adjourned]