Meeting minutes
guests
no guests today
minutes
<kaz> Aug-6
Koster: any comments?
… or change requests?
there are no objections, minutes are approved
Quick Items
Koster: there is the open question about Profile if it can be published as Note or not
Kaz: received a message from PLH, let's move this to a seperate agenda item
Koster: there are no other quick news
Notices
Koster: there are no other notices either
TPAC planning
Registration
Sebastian: early bird registration will be over soon
Kaz: subtopic: Breakout room the room for the breakout session, there is a question how lon would we need for the preperation and wrapping up
Sebastian: I think, 30min should be ok for wrapping up
Remote participation and invited guests
McCool: how does the registration work for remote participants?
Kaz: You should talk with the event team.
McCool: is the breakout session also open for non members?
Kaz: who do you have in mind?
McCool: I'm thinking about the NGSI-LD people
Sebastian: for the PlugFest there will be a seperate call after this call
Sebastian: started to have breakout proposal for our WoT Demos on Wednesday: w3c/
Kaz: we will start the discussion on the agenda details in September
Schedule and Cancellations
<kaz> Schedule updates
Koster: Sebastian will be on vacation from next week. McCool will be less available after end of August
<MK shows the publication schedule page of all deliveries>
https://
<kaz> WG Schedule
McCool: would suggest we remove the section around "Discovery" given there is no TF at the moment
Koster: what is the status of the IG schedule
McCool: its mainly use case topics
… not completely on track, but we are making good progress
… there will be some another updates. Major missing is links forms
McCool: shall we publish a Note under the IG or should we wait?
Kaz: we need to clarify the updated charter and get this review beforehand
… we need to update the IG schedule content, e.g., mid-August already passed
McCool: I will discuss this in the next UC meeting
New Charter
<kaz> current WoT WG Charter
Koster: where is the line input from the TD TF?
Kaz: it could be useful to have a template HTML for further discussion based on the latest charter template
ACTION: Kaz will create a template HTML for WoT WG charter
Ben: wondering about the Profile agenda item
McCool: this is part of the charter discussion
Profile
Kaz: received response from PLH
… even a discontinued draft allows to continue to work on Profile such as for Profile 2.0
… there are difficulties with the legal counsel. we need to talk with all companies if we want to publish as Note. I think there are 3 possible options, (1) updated WD, (2) CR or (3) changing to Note Track. The final decision should be made by the whole WG.
Ben: i secured an EU grant to spend 6 month working on profiles and the grant is desinged to try and help move on with the standard to the next stage
… I dont think the discontinued draft would be a sufficient outcome for the grant funding
Kaz: the final decission should be made by whole WG
Kaz: if we want to go directly to publish the 2.0 Profile we need still need to talk with PLH how to handle this. A solution can be to change the name.
McCool: are there some rules how many changes can make to be a CR without having to have it be called a new thing?
Ben: thanks MM for the proposal to go to a CR
<benfrancis> "A technical report should not switch away from the Recommendation Track without due consideration of the Patent Policy implications and approval of W3C’s legal counsel if the Working Group envisions a likelihood of returning to it later. "
<benfrancis> https://
Ben: does legal counsel needs to be involved when the we move back to REC track?
Kaz: moving back to REC would be easier; however, moving forward from REC Track to Note is already a big burden.
Ben: let's continue the discussion when we move on with the CR track
… what if we split out all individual profiles to seperate documents, similar we have for bindings
Koster: this would be cleaner
Ben: I think the bar is higher getting a CR than for a Note
McCool: you don't need implementation experiences for everything
Kaz: Please note that "Discontinued Draft" is the mechanism to show a spec is abandoned like we used to use Note for that purpose. If we don't want to use the mechanism of Continued Draft we can still use or choose CR or update
Ege: the process document was updated, there is no Proposed Recommendation phase at all anymore
… regarding the splitting aspect, in the binding case it is speficied in the TD which is a normative way
Sebastian: are the seperated documents notes or recs?
Ben: they are notes
McCool: PLH should know that Bens work is constrained on his grant.
Kaz: suggest to have a meeting together with PLH, Ben and chairs
Sebastian: agree
<kaz> [adjourned]