W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-ig@w3.org > September 2015

Re: One week Call for comments: Draft collaboration text with oneM2M

From: Soumya Kanti Datta <Soumya-Kanti.Datta@eurecom.fr>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 01:13:27 +0530
To: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Cc: public-wot-ig@w3.org
Message-ID: <5605A3DF.5000605@eurecom.fr>
My comments are inline.

Soumya

Research Engineer, Eurecom, France | +33658194342 | @skdatta2010
https://sites.google.com/site/skdunfolded | Skype id: soumyakantidatta

On 25-09-2015 21:39, Dave Raggett wrote:
> See responses inline ...
>
>> On 25 Sep 2015, at 15:07, Soumya Kanti Datta 
>> <Soumya-Kanti.Datta@eurecom.fr 
>> <mailto:Soumya-Kanti.Datta@eurecom.fr>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> Thanks for the draft, looks like a very good starting point. I have 
>> couple of suggestions, see my comments below.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Soumya
>> Research Engineer, Eurecom, France | +33658194342 | @skdatta2010
>> https://sites.google.com/site/skdunfolded  | Skype id: soumyakantidatta
>> On 25-09-2015 15:47, Dave Raggett wrote:
>>> Following the informal agreement between W3C and the IIC, the W3C 
>>> staff have been discussing ideas for an informal agreement with 
>>> OneM2M. Please find below the text proposed by Omar Elloumi for the 
>>> agreement.  This is a one week call for comments on the text of the 
>>> agreement as Omar and I would like to sign off on the agreement swiftly.
>>>
>>> Note that I have accepted an invitation to talk about the W3C work 
>>> in the December workshop on M2M hosted by ETSI.  We have had some 
>>> preliminary presentation of M2M work in the Interest Group, and can 
>>> look forward to more details in a future presentation on behalf of 
>>> oneM2M.
>>>
>>> *Scope of the collaboration*:
>>>     •  IoT archiecture and protocol (interoperation between M2M/IoT 
>>> and web semantics)
>> [Soumya] The scope could also include design of a common service 
>> layer (which enables common functions like binding, enforcing access 
>> control policies, discovery etc.)
>
> I think the above bullet is sufficient for that. It would certainly be 
> interesting to look at how to map the WoT events/properties/actions to 
> the oneM2M model, so that we can define protocol bindings and connect 
> WoT servers to M2M platforms. Likewise, perhaps oneM2M could enhance 
> their treatment of data models to distinguish events and actions from 
> properties (M2M resources).
[Soumya] IoT architecture and protocol could mean several things. You 
might think of adding a couple of lines explaining your point about the 
mapping to make it clear.
>
>
>>> *Method of work*:
>>>     •  oneM2M (MAS WG) to present its work on semantic interop. to 
>>> W3C Web of Things WG and get feedback
>> [Soumya] We should also ask the testing group (TST WG) to share their 
>> ideas with us. This will eventually become very important for the WoT WG.
>
> Good idea. We can ask Omar if he is willing to add TST WG to this bullet.
>
[Soumya] Great.
>>>     •  oneM2M to provide its use cases for consideration by the W3C 
>>> Web of Things working group
>>>     •  W3C to present its work on Web of Things to oneM2M
>>>     •  W3C to keep oneM2M updated about the progress of their work 
>>> on Web of Things (e.g. semantic support for constrained devices)
>> [Soumya] Are you thinking about a liaison agreement for this one?
>
> Formal liaison agreements are expensive to set up, which is why we are 
> looking an a short informal agreement instead.
>
[Soumya] Okay.
>>>     •  Other methods of works may be developed as we 
>>> progress (incremental process)
>>> *Boundaries*: No IPR licensing or confidentiality agreement will 
>>> be provided. Instead, consultation will be established.
>>> *Deliverables*: Each organization to publish its own deliverables 
>>> (no common deliverable currently planned)
>>> *Communications*: Both organizations to list each other on 
>>> their respective web pages (when applicable), and to 
>>> identify opportunities for joint press releases when we have an 
>>> appropriate story to tell.
>>> *Timeline of expected results*: may influence R2, more 
>>> impact expected for R3
>>> *oneM2M involved WG*: MAS (primary), SEC, PRO
>> [Soumya] As suggested above, try to include TST also.
>
> Indeed - I will circle back with Omar.
>
[Soumya] Okay.
>>>
>>> Many thanks,
>>> —
>>>    Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org <mailto:dsr@w3.org>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> —
>    Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org <mailto:dsr@w3.org>>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 25 September 2015 19:43:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:26:45 UTC