- From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:49:20 +0100
- To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <EFEA4C63-A23E-4D55-98C8-14F0950623F8@w3.org>
See: http://www.w3.org/2016/06/22-wot-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2016/06/22-wot-minutes.html>
Web of Things IG
22 Jun 2016
See also: [2]IRC log
[2] http://www.w3.org/2016/06/22-wot-irc
Attendees
Present
Daniel_Peintner, Toru_Kawaguchi, Kaz, Sebastian_Kaebisch
Regrets
Chair
Matthias
Scribe
Dave
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]status updates
2. [5]WG Charter Roadmap
3. [6]Plugfest preparation
4. [7]Any other business
* [8]Summary of Action Items
* [9]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<kaz_> [ present now: Kaz, Dave, Michael, Daniel, Darko, Joerg,
Kazuaki, Matthias, Pankesh, Takuki, Toru, Yingying ]
<scribe> scribenick: dsr
status updates
Daniel: I noticed that there are still some open issues in the
old charter space, so we should clean these up.
Matthias: what space?
<dape> see [10]https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/
[10] https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/
Sebastian: ….
Matthias: we need to close our issues and remove the old draft
Kaz: we can add a status note to the old draft to point people
to the new charter
... we can simply close the issues, right?
Matthias: Sebastian, you could close them as a lot of them are
yours, right?
I will ask Kaz to help with this
Kaz: I wanted to mention the status of the IG charter review
<kaz_> [11]ac review results (member-only)
[11] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/33280/wot-ig-2016/results
Kaz: So far we have 5 reviews and we need to get a lot more,
and I want some help with reaching out
Matthias: so this is something for everyone in the IG to follow
through on.
<scribe> ACTION: Joerg to email the IG list to ask people to
contact their AC Reps to respond to the IG charter AC Review
[recorded in
[12]http://www.w3.org/2016/06/22-wot-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-59 - Email the ig list to ask people
to contact their ac reps to respond to the ig charter ac review
[on Joerg Heuer - due 2016-06-29].
WG Charter Roadmap
Joerg: in Montreal I had some discussion with Jeff Jaffe (W3C
CEO) on a roadmap for preparation of a WoT WG
(Joerg projects a slide with the roadmap)
He talks us through the roadmap
We had discussions in May on the draft charter. In June the
idea is to agree on integration of comments by other
stakeholders.
The roadmap also covers a milestone for the current practices
document in the run up to Beijing
We’re also working on a public call for implementations.
Daniel, can you give a status update on that?
Daniel: we sent that out and are collecting material on the
wiki.
<dape> [13]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Implementations
[13] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Implementations
There are 2 more I will add later today
The deadline for final IG comments on the WG charter is 22nd
June.
The idea is to encourage a peer to peer discussion with
external contacts on the WG charter
This is expected to continue for 4 to 5 weeks
<kaz> [ present+ Carsten, Frank, Katsuyoshi, Masato ]
In July, we want to record the outcome of the plugfest in
Beijing, and to integrate comments into the WG charter.
In August, we want to finalize the WG charter and get it ready
for AC Review in September
The aim is to have the WG launched six weeks or so after the AC
Review starts
Joerg: any comments?
Dave: we’re missing milestones for the work on use case
requirements and tech landscape
we need to document and encourage discussion on technologies
which isn’t happening in the current practices doc
Matthias: we wanted to have public releases for these documents
to show companies
I understand that we’re ready to do this for the architecture
document and to then work on a more detailed architecture in
the WG
Dave: We’ve been operating since the start of 2015, and it is
kind of weird that we’ve not yet published any reports
We need to identify editors and then to trigger a call for
comments on publishing a snap shot of the document as IG notes.
This could last a week, and result in a formal resolution in
the next IG call
<mkovatsc>
[14]http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-ig-2016.html
[14] http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-ig-2016.html
Matthias: we have editors so that’s ok
Matthias summarises the editors involved, some of whom aren’t
on the call today
<inserted> kaz: I agree what you're saying is important, but
we're now discussing "WG Charter Roadmap". So we should talk
about IG document timeline later separately, shoulnd't we?
Joerg: we need a clear understanding of what needs to be done
Kaz: can we defer the discussion of the publication of IG
reports in a later agendum?
Joerg: we need to add the documents we plan to publish to the
roadmap
Kaz: can we split the roadmap into one for the WG and another
for the IG?
Dave summarises the short term for the IG rechartering process
and the need for discussion on what’s missing
Daniel: how are we going to publish the roadmap?
We need to provide roadmaps for the IG and the WG
Matthias: agreed that it should be publicly accessible, perhaps
the wiki?
Daniel: my preference is for github for issue tracking
Matthias: the issues will be about the work, and not the
roadmap so much
<kaz> +1 to put the roadmap on the wiki and manage issues using
github
Matthias: so let’s publish the roadmap on the wiki
Kaz: given that the roadmap has us closing the WG charter
today, we should discuss this now. I chatted with Dave and
others and we agree that we need to add content for the
relationships to W3C and external groups ASAP. Also we should
review the draft charter specifically from the viewpoint of how
to handle "semantic" and "abstraction".
Joerg: the idea for the current milestone is to be ready for
outreach to external stakeholders.
I will update the roadmap to clarify this goal
<joerg> Rephrase to [Milestone-Jun-4] Deadline for final
comments on WG Charter for the purpose of P2P review comments
(22nd of June)
Kaz: In that case, you actually mean we'll discuss the draft
charter during the Beijing F2F as well.
We should add a milestone in early September on IG release of
the WG charter for AC Review
<joerg> Add –[Milestone-Aug/Sep-2] Release Charter for AC
review
Kaz: we should clarify the timing for bringing the WG Charter
to W3M approval for the AC Review
Matthias: we expect to make changes following discussion in
Beijing, and taking into account feedback from external
stakeholders.
Dave: after that we need a IG Resolution on seeking W3M
Approval for initiating the AC Review
Kaz: if we want to review the WG charter in Lisbon, we don’t
want to seek W3M approval before then
In other words we should have the resolution in Lisbon on Sep
19
Toru asks for clarification of the process
Kaz: the IG resolves to seek W3M approval for starting an AC
Review. W3M then needs review from some W3M Members, resulting
in some changes, and then W3M will approve the start of the
review, which is then normally 4 week in duration.
Toru: is there a way to accelerate this?
Maybe we should start outreach to stakeholders in July
Kaz: some of us have already started outreach with key
stakeholders, but AC review will take 4 weeks in any way.
If we want to accelerate the timescale we can bring forward the
IG resolution to end of August with the aim of starting the AC
Review in mid September
Joerg: the stakeholder feedback is very important
and this may alter the timeline according to what we’re told
<mkovatsc> Proposal: bilateral outreach now, detailed review
and issue collection in Beijing, start resolving issues and
group resolution 2 weeks after Beijing, start W3C mgmt review
directly so it is done at TPAC, start AC Review at TPAC for
more promotion
Matthias: we should start outreach now and collect the issues
in Beijing and resolve then soon after
Dave recaps how we handled this for the IG charter
Matthias: we can use TPAC to reach out to the AC
Dave: Joerg could perhaps briefly talk about this during the AC
meeting at TPAC
Joerg: so I should ask for an AC agendum on the WoT IG AC
Review
Kaz: we should also use the plenary day for outreach
Dave: indeed
Nimura-san: we will discuss the comments in Beijing, right?
Matthias: yes
<knimura> just use f2f for comments resolution
Matthias: 2 issues open, one on capitalisation that I will deal
with and another on being more neutral in respect to protocols
Daniel: we can remove the names of protocols in the WG charter
<kaz> [15]GitHub Issues
[15] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues
Sebastian: for security I can ask Oliver for rewording
Matthias: Oliver’s text was hard for non-experts to understand
Sebastian: we need to be neutral and try to find descriptions
that reflect that
Matthias: the security section is the one that is most effected
... you need to give some concrete examples, e.g. in the
introduction
Sebastian: in the introduction that’s fine, but we should be
very careful in the scope section
Kaz: it should be okay to include examples so long as we made
clear that these are just examples and not a prescriptive list
Matthias: I will check the wording on this
Plugfest preparation
Matthias: we had the document freeze but there were a few
things missing
We still need an explanation on security.
<mkovatsc>
[16]http://w3c.github.io/wot/current-practices/wot-practices-be
ijing-2016.html
[16] http://w3c.github.io/wot/current-practices/wot-practices-beijing-2016.html
Daniel: we will include the links we had from the Sophia
Antiplois F2F
Matthias: I created a copy of the document, see above link.
Please review this and provide feedback on what’s missing
I also want to talk about discovery. We want to use a
repository. There is a possibility for experimenting with ideas
from the IETF and OCF
Who has used the repository?
Daniel: we have in the EU ThingWeb project
Matthias: would you be able to adapt the process quickly, so
that it aligns with the CORE WG resource discovery approach
Daniel: yes this should be ok
Darko describes some details …
Matthias: perhaps some others using the client we provided?
Perhaps we can look at who was involved in the previous face to
face meetings and check with them?
Matthias: I will update the current practices document to
include text on how the repository is supposed to work
<kaz> [ present+ Johannes ]
Yingying tells us that we can’t use a router, but will be able
to use a static block of IP addresses
<yingying> yes. That's what I got from hotel IT person.
Matthias: we need to assign static IP addresses, and there is
not need for a wifi password of HTTP based credentials in the
wiki, I can assign you an address when you register.
Michael will only be able to participate remotely
Michael: I will be in Berlin, but can’t make it to Beijing
Matthias: one of us can carry a router as a backup
<mkovatsc>
[17]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_Chin
a,_Beijing#Participation
[17] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_China,_Beijing#Participation
Matthias: we will list all of the IP settings on the wiki
Please enter what ever you’re bringing to Beijing in the wiki
(see link above)
<dape>
[18]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_Chin
a,_Beijing#Requirements
[18] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_China,_Beijing#Requirements
Daniel: we should encourage people to provide more details on
their requirements, e.g. whether you need to add an external
service so that we can test it.
Matthias: this especially applies to Panasonic
Toru: for security reasons we don’t want to include the IP
address on the wiki
Matthias: fine, just contact Daniel so we can update the test
tool
Toru: we use skype for business, and would like to use that in
Beijing
Daniel: that is hard for us to test
Kaz: and we can try webex as well
Kaz asks Yinying if she has tried skype and webex from the
hotel network?
Yingying: we can try that tomorrow
Any other business
Sebastian: just a reminder to Dave and Louay on web sockets and
Bluetooth Smart where we’re expecting pull requests
Dave to chase Louay on that
Matthias: ok that’s it for today, bye!
<scribe> scribe: Dave
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Joerg to email the IG list to ask people to
contact their AC Reps to respond to the IG charter AC Review
[recorded in
[19]http://www.w3.org/2016/06/22-wot-minutes.html#action01]
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
—
Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org <mailto:dsr@w3.org>>
Received on Wednesday, 22 June 2016 14:49:31 UTC