W3C

– DRAFT –
WoT-WG - TD-TF - Slot 1

27 August 2025

Attendees

Present
Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Jan_Romann, Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
-
Chair
Ege, Koster
Scribe
cris, ek, EgeKorkan

Meeting minutes

agenda

<kaz> Wednesday: Schedule, Arch Spec, TD Optional Content Type, Registry Terminology

<kaz> Thursday: HTTP Binding, Binding Templates Retirement, Document Freeze TF Resolution

Ege: tomorrow we'll have Document freeze resolution

Minutes review

<kaz> Aug-20

Jan: I noticed one thing, there are some "@" characters left
… other than that it looks fine

Kaz: ok I'll remove them, and done

Ege: minutes approved

Schedule

<kaz> WG Schedule

Ege: August 28 we'll have TD document freeze
… small typos fixes can still happen
… same date for bindings registry
… for the binding templates we need to find the correct wording for "document retirement"
… after tomorrow no big changes there too.

Issues

Ege: we have to issues to track current work

Issue 2112

<kaz> TD Issue 2112 - TD 2.0 FPWD Goals

Ege: no updates so far
… but I think we can land profiles vs binding topic by tomorrow

Issue 12

<kaz> Registry Issue 12 - First Draft Registry Plan

Ege: I'm finalizing the registry description

Daniel: intro section is not there yet

<kaz> ek: (adds an action item to Issue 12 about that)

Ege: next week we will invite some people from WoT CG to get feedback about initial connection

Thing Description

Architecture specification assertion

<kaz> TD PR 2124 - Add list of assertions in Architecture document

Ege: we now have a list of assertions coming from Architecture spec
… we have to categorize them and find which ones can impact TD
… in PR 2124 you can find a list of possible categories

Ege: now we have to put the categories below

Cristiano: how are we going to work for distributing the workload about categorization?

Ege: we can take a set of assertions and create a PR with the proposals

Cristiano: ok but how to put the category should we just add an A at the end of the sentence?

Jan: assertion 1 is a good example of a non-testable assertions
… maybe add a new category for discarding those non-testable assetions

Ege: ok if this is fine I comment with the format of how to declare a category for an assertion
… is it ok to merge it ?
… I propose to close issue 2120 and create new one for the categorization

<kaz> TD Issue 2120 - Moving normative text from Architecture Specification about the TD features

Ege: created issue 2126

<kaz> TD Issue 2126 - Categorizing Architecture Assertions

Optional content type

<EgeKorkan> TD PR 2081 - Make contentType optional in ExpectedResponse and AdditionalExpectedResponse classes

Ege: we have good amount of approvals

Cristiano: I'm still not completely satisfied about how we deal the absece of payloads (inputs or outputs), I hope that in the next revision we can find something cleaner

Cristiano: so as a reminder

Ege: I update the assertions.csv file

Ege: is it ok to merge this PR ?

Jan: thank you everyone
… ok for merging

Ege: merged

Jan: since this is coming from Discovery spec, I wondering if we can fix it
… is the Discovery document will be updated soon?

Ege: it depends, but definitely in the next charter.
… currently we need more people working there
… good news is that Discovery update is in the charter draft

Profile explanation

<kaz> TD PR 2122 - Profile explanation

Ege: we have a good amount of approvals in this PR
… very simple add informative text about profiles
… ok merging

Automating assertion list

<kaz> TD PR 2125 - Automating assertion list generation

Ege: this pr synchronize the assertions csv file
… everytime we render
… any objections ?
… merged

Binding registry

PR 24

<kaz> Registry PR 24 - Make use of some terminology terms

Daniel: the terminology should be now correct
… but there still 4 warnings
… but they are from intro section which will be removed

Ege: ok

Cristiano: I think we should make it clear either with words or special characters

Daniel: we can use "concrete"

Jan: additionally sometimes we can just remove WoT X and have a simpler definition

Ege: it seems that removing the X works quite well

Cristiano: yes

Ege: we can fix it in this PR

Ege: do you prefer "concrete" or "specific" or removing WoT X ?

Cristiano: +1 for removing and see if it fits well also in other parts of the document

Cristiano: I agree removing WoT in every definition of a term

Daniel: I think it is fine to note down in this PR the future direction
… but it is better to implement that in a follow up PR

Ege: ok

Kaz: ok for option 4. About the title, we can use also Web of Things (WoT) Binding Registry
… it seems even more natural

Ege: ok not related to this PR, but the change we'll have a couple of impacts

Kaz: yes, before publication we can

<EgeKorkan> proposal: Change the name of the repository to wot-binding-registry and the name of the document to "WoT Binding Registry"

<cris> +1

<jkrhb> +1

RESOLUTION: We agree to change the name of the repository to wot-binding-registry and the name of the document to "WoT Binding Registry"

Ege: AOB?

[adjourned]

Summary of resolutions

  1. We agree to change the name of the repository to wot-binding-registry and the name of the document to "WoT Binding Registry"
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 244 (Thu Feb 27 01:23:09 2025 UTC).