Proposed topics for breakout sessions

- scopes of TD in working group including semantics & metadata

- complete tech landscape

- ontology enrichments in TD

- TD vs HATEOAS: comparison and integration

- TD and Security

- Processing & semantics for data models

- Thing vs Server metadata

- plans for the next plugfest

- ...

TD Breakout 1 (27-02-2016 11-12:30pm)

Participants

<tbd> Sebastian, Dave, Darko, Carsten, Matthias, Victor, Taki-san, Ohsumi-san, Naka-san, Reynier Overhoff, Martin Bauer, Frank Reusch, ...

Topics

overview about the current TD model

feedback from plugfest (problems, what is missing)

tech landscape (who is doing what)

Minutes

details minutes can be found here: [1]

presented slides by Sebastian can be found here: [2]

tech landscape: "Who is doing what" can be found here: [3]

ACTION: @all: finish the assigned tech landscape topics until 17. Februray 2016

ACTION: Sebastian will send regularly reminder mails ;-)

TD Breakout 2 (27-02-2016 13-16:00pm)

Participants

(all)

Topics

Joint meetings with DI, AP, and Security TF

Minutes

joint TD - DI breakout session: find detail minutes here [4]

joint TD - AP breakout session:

Sebastian provides to the AP members the missing / unclear issues during the plugfest (also see here [5])
discussion about HATEOAS:

Matthias: HATEOAS approach is perfect to recover broken links
Louay: however, how does it work with bluetooth devices?
Ari: there is a white paper on RESTful API via GW from Bluetooth SIG

discussion what kind of information is missing in TD related to protocol binding

Sebastian shows a TD sample
Carsten make a proposal what kind of information has to be changed/provided: _base (instead of "uri" vocabular) and hrefs
hrefs may be used for different kind of protocols (CoAP, HTTP(S), ble, etc.)

ACTION: group decided to setup TD samples that conains more clear protocol binding information and wukk duscuss these in one of the next TD web meetings

joint TD - SP breakout session:

Sebastian shows a TD sample and ask Oliver, how properties, action, events can be SP enabled
Oliver mention the aspect, TD has already security information in there: which protocol is used (https)
Oliver discusses two approaches which you can see in praxis today:

No access information in TD: Authoriziation has to be clearified at runtime (e.g., HTTP 403)
Access information in TD: all information has to be provided in TD where to get the security token and what kind of infomration is provided. JSON Web token provides a good input what kind of information is required

ACTION: group decided to setup a TD sample with security information and will discuss this in one of the next TD web meetings

TD Breakout 3 (28-02-2016 11-13:00pm)

Participants

Darko, Carsten, Ari, Matthias, Victor, Sebastian, Ohsumi-san, Naka-san, Taki-san, Martin Bauer, Oliver, Maxime Lefrancois, Michael Mrissa, Jasper Roes, Naka-san, Oliver, Philipp Hoschka, Reynier Overhoff

Topics

ontology enrichments in TD

scopes of TD in working group

Minutes

Darko shows an approach how the SSN can be included in a TD instance:

sample is based on a brightness proximity sensor TD
domain specific (and unspecifics) ontologies can be easily involve into the TD
there were some discussion about the aspect if we should standarize some basic, domain-independent vocabularies for the TD, e.g., on/off
this should be further discussed and may be involved in the scope list of the TD charta

group discussed the scopes and out of scopes of TD for the WoT working group #

outcome of the scopes can be found here: [6]

ACTION: get feedback of the scopes from TD/WoT members