W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-ig@w3.org > June 2016

[wot] minutes - 1 June 2016

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 04:17:34 +0900
Message-ID: <CAJ8iq9WuQSnhUjUQe0Fjj32yBAGTRfFAr0k1LdTEoFU0tOdQZQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>
available at:

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Daniel!



      [1] http://www.w3.org/

                               - DRAFT -

                                 WoT IG

01 Jun 2016



   See also: [3]IRC log

      [3] http://www.w3.org/2016/06/01-wot-irc


          Kaz, Dave, Michael, Achille, Daniel, Katsuyoshi,
          Sebastian, Joerg, Johannes, Kazuaki, Masato, Matthias,
          Ryuichi, Takuki, Toru, Victor, Yingying, Yun,
          Sebastian_Kaebisch, Carsten, Kazuo




     * [4]Topics
         1. [5]Quick Status Updates
         2. [6]F2F Beijing
         3. [7]Architecture document
         4. [8]Current Practices document
         5. [9]Charters
         6. [10]Proposals
         7. [11]AOB
     * [12]Summary of Action Items
     * [13]Summary of Resolutions

   <scribe> scribe: dape

   <scribe> scribeNick: DP

   <inserted> scribenick: dape

Quick Status Updates

   MK: Any quick issue?
   ... none heard

F2F Beijing

   YY: Send out information for F2F

   <kaz> [14]f2f wiki


   YY: Email contains all information about registering



   YY: please fill in form.. deadline is 24th June
   ... there is limited number of rooms
   ... also, please register for meeting
   ... moreover, for VISA there is information as well on wiki
   ... detailed agenda for first 2 days is on wiki also

   MK: Any more information w.r.t network setup?

   YY: network should be OK, no credentials needed
   ... we still need to test our requirements

   <dsr> with support for wifi and cabled Ethernet

   YY: Daniel proposed test tool

   DP: will provide test tool soon

   Koster: looked into VPN as well..
   ... need to check whether VPN is possible as well? could send
   pre-configured RASPI
   ... could I send the device or is it blocked?

   YY: There are some website outside China which we can't access

   Koster: we should check whether some webpages work as well...
   ... should have fallback... e.g., with VPN

   MK: should also try router and connect it to the network...

   YY: Switch?

   MK: a basic Wifi router

   Koster: local network maybe better also

   a,_Beijing#Requirements PlugFest Requirements wiki


   DP: should collect requirements on wiki

   DR: peer-to-peer messaging also important! Does tool handle

   Koster: local network could be a solution

   DP: p2p might be more tricky...

   YY: guideline might be good

   Kaz: Daniel could work on guideline...

   Daniel: Will try...

   Kaz: Should fix requirements table as soon as possible
   ... Soumya might be planning remote plugfest participation..

   YY: will check with Soumya

Architecture document

   <kaz> [17]WoT Architecture

     [17] http://w3c.github.io/wot/architecture/wot-architecture.html

   Toru shows Architecture document

   Toru: document is on github and has 7 chapters
   ... 1. introduction
   ... 2. Terminology
   ... 3. chapter is about requirements... general info about
   flexibility, compatibiliyt, and safety
   ... please comment if you have issues
   ... 4. chapter is about scenarios
   ... Nimurasan worked on those scenarios
   ... inside home but also outside home
   ... also variations whether to have home hub instead of direct
   ... other scenarios through proxy in cloud
   ... other scenario is about factory and connected car ... both
   need gateway
   ... finally thing-to-thing scenario (e.g, sensor to air
   ... 5. chapter is about "mapping variations"
   ... similar to 4... but more detailed behavior is explained
   ... e.g. fig 14, between gateway and cloud
   ... 6. chapter is about WoT servient
   ... also handles interfaces... discovery, server, ..
   ... also propitiatory API
   ... 7. Conclusion

   Nimurasan: based on scenario section I updated use-case

   <kaz> [18]Use Case document

     [18] http://w3c.github.io/wot/wot-ucr.html

   Nimurasan: I added smart home scenario

   Kaz: we should clarify relationship between use-case and
   architecture document
   ... could simple merge them
   ... or have separate documents ...
   ... use-case scenario section should be before requirements
   ... use-cases in architecture document could go right after

   Toru: use-cases more user perspective while scenarios more

   Kaz: scenario should be part of use-case description.. if it's
   rather description on concrete deployed systems, the title here
   (which is currently "Scenarios") should be something like that
   (deployed system images)

   Toru: could you make pull-request Kaz?

   Kaz: Also, content of Section 4 should appear before
   requirements section

   <Zakim> dsr, you wanted to ask about clarifying role of
   firewall for smart homes in the architecture and to clarify
   whether we expect electronic appliances to be WoT servients, or
   not? and

   Dave: document shows firewall...
   ... what about smart meters ... clarify firewall role
   ... Fig1. shows WoT Server ... WoT should show that we also
   support devices that not support WoT per se
   ... lots of discussion about sensor networks...
   ... also home health care .. where to put it, in the
   arch-document or use-cases?

   Toru: w.r.t. scenario we don't want to exclude non WoT
   devices... there are just examples

   Dave: could say "each example illustrates ..."

   Toru: do you propose referencing use-case documents..

   Dave: Yes, .. need to say why we have those scenarios and not
   others in arch document

   <k_nimura> q

   Johannes: use cases speaks about domains.. while arch-document
   talks about deployment
   ... need to clarify this difference

   <dsr> we need to explain the criteria for including the
   examples in the architecture document, to say that we are not
   excluding other kinds of examples, but these are covered in the
   use cases document

   <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to ask if "firewall" is really a
   necessarily component of the system architecture

   Kaz: wonder whether terminology "firewall" is needed.. suggest
   removing it
   ... rather think about security and privacy separately.

   Dave: IPv4 and IPv6 ... and firewall.. important for

   Kaz: currently we have just one statement about firewall ...
   detailed explanation should go into dedicated section

   <dsr> some possible additions include healthcare, smart meters,
   sensor network examples and telemetry

   Nimurasan: Fig14 tries to show combination of servient
   ... firewall is not tackled here... should remove it

   Torusan: can remove "firewall" here

   Kaz: need more information somewhere else

   Dave: Also IPv4, IPV6 issues et cetera
   ... who are we targeting with this document?
   ... technical audience. not sure.. not enough technical details

   <kaz> kaz: would suggest we talk with Kajimoto-san :)

   Kaijmoto: security is important

   <k_nimura> q

   Kaijmoto: we should add deliverable to WG ... continue to
   discuss it in WG
   ... Security seems an endless issue

   <michael> I need to drop off for board meeting, thanks

   Dave: yes, but people will look at W3C how we handle it
   ... agree, we don't need to handle it in this document

   <dsr> I agree that we don’t need to handle security and privacy
   in this document, at least not now

   Taki: order of chapters: definition of WoT serviant in
   terminology section.. in section 6 the details are given
   ... information should come earlier

   Toru: I agree

   Kaijmoto: makes sense

   Taki: will create issue or PR

   <mkovatsc> ack

   MK: level of details is OK... more should come later... maybe
   in other WG document

   Nimurasan: propose closing document in IG... and work in WG

   MK: yes, we plan to release document soon...
   ... please add issues to github... so that editors can work on
   the final comments...
   ... release planned for mid of June

Current Practices document

   MK: Johannes updated scripting API

   <kaz> [19]current practices document

     [19] http://w3c.github.io/wot/current-practices/wot-practices.html

   MK: also talked with Sebastian... w.r.t. to new type system
   ... are there any issue / comment w.r.t. to this document?

   Kaz: got MMI wg request? Should we have github PRs?

   MK: Yes, can discuss PR?
   ... direct commit should be avoided


   MK: fixed critical issues in charters
   ... no todos left
   ... think ready to share with others
   ... one remaining issue: missing text for figure (relation
   between WG and IG)

   <kaz> [20]draft IG Charter

     [20] http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-ig-2016.html

   <kaz> [21]draft WG Charter

     [21] http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-wg-2016.html

   MK: we have figure in IG charter... and we have also text there
   ... should we have text in WG charter as well?

   Dave: Payment wg had similar issue... lets refer from WG to IG

   MK: Will do so..
   ... IG charter issue: test interoperability issue (discussion
   on mailinglist)

   <dsr> Is the following “take part in interoperability
   experiments across implementations for ideas at different
   levels of maturity”

   Dave: Jonathan wanted some explanation..
   ... is the proposed text OK?

   MK: Good for me

   Dave: will reach out to Jonathan and check
   ... plan to show IG charter next Wednesday.. make comments

   Kaz: there are 2 locations IG charter mentions testing...
   should try to converge on mailinglist

   MK: we still take comments... this might be still revised


   <jhund> aq+

   Johannes: proposed scripting API updates...

   <jhund> [22]Issue on Structure/concretisation of the Scripting

     [22] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/173

   Johannes: plan is to discuss it on Github.. will merge later in
   Current Practices document

   <jhund> [23]actual proposal on scripting API


   Johannes: please comment and discuss


   Dave: Last week I was in Spain... next Thursday I am talking
   with OPC ... about Semantics... also Industry 4.0 folks ...

   Sebastian: Would like to see more technical discussions?
   PlugFest is rather soon
   ... can we reserve some time ?

   MK: Indeed...

   Yingying: for F2F meeting: CETC would like to give some
   demos... can we have a slot for this as well?
   ... would like to explain demo
   ... 15th of June could be a good date..

   <mkovatsc> Bryan Sullivan of AT&T

   Yingying: should get in touch with Bryan Sullivan... will try
   to give a presentation

   Dave: Yes... should get updates from OMA and other groups as
   ... How do we manage it?

   <kaz> [24]wot comm mintues


   Joerg: Need to understand how to incorporate it topic-wise
   ... we need context (discussed also before)
   ... need person(s) who takes care of each liaison

   Dave: let's discuss this during next comm call

   DP: wanted to talk about "call for implementations" .. will do
   next week

   <kaz> [ adjourned ]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [25]scribe.perl version
    1.144 ([26]CVS log)
    $Date: 2016/06/02 19:12:45 $

     [25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 2 June 2016 19:18:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:27:04 UTC