- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 00:59:55 +0900
- To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJ8iq9VjMhsPNz=nbK_rNtTN4D+HjtDcubthenB-KX7nHL3_eQ@mail.gmail.com>
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2016/05/25-wot-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Victor!
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WoT IG
25 May 2016
[2]Agenda
[2]
https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_WebConf#Agenda_of_next_WoT_IG_WebConf:_25_May_2016
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2016/05/25-wot-irc
Attendees
Present
DarkoAnicic, Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Koster,
Soumya_Kanti_Datta, Toru_Kawaguchi, Victor_Charpenay,
Yingying_Chen, Yun_Li, Daniel_Peintner,
Matthias_Kovatsch, Takuki_Kamiya, Tuan_Tran,
Frank_Reusch, Masato_Ohura, Johannes_Hund,
Dan_Romascanu, Kazuaki_Nimura, Kazuo_Kajimoto
Regrets
Chair
Matthias
Scribe
victor
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]agenda
2. [6]Beijing f2f
3. [7]Type system
4. [8]IG Charter
5. [9]WG Charter
6. [10]next Web-conference
* [11]Summary of Action Items
* [12]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<kaz> matthias: status of the type system?
<kaz> dape: discussion on the list and need to get converged
<kaz> scribenick: victor
<kaz> agenda:
[13]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_WebConf#Agenda_of_next_Wo
T_IG_WebConf:_25_May_2016
[13]
https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_WebConf#Agenda_of_next_WoT_IG_WebConf:_25_May_2016
agenda
Matthias: Agenda: 1. quick updates (F2F, type system)
2. Charter review
Beijing f2f
<kaz> [14]f2f wiki
[14]
https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_China,_Beijing
<Yingying_> The venue is vision hotel, next to Beihang
University campus
Yingying: venue is Vision hotel, next to Beihang University
campus
participants need to fill a form (link to add to
[15]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_Chin
a,_Beijing)
[15]
https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_July_2016,_China,_Beijing)
<kaz> [16]Vision Hotel Beijing
[16] http://www.visionhotelbeijing.com/
<Yingying_>
[17]https://www.w3.org/Member/wiki/WoT/WoT_F2F_201607
[17] https://www.w3.org/Member/wiki/WoT/WoT_F2F_201607
<kaz> [18]Vision Hotel Beijing
[18] http://www.visionhotelbeijing.com/
Kaz: 2 questions: 1. [19]http://www.visionhotelbeijing.com/, is
this the right hotel?
[19] http://www.visionhotelbeijing.com/,
Yingying: indeed.
Kaz: open day, open to non-members also?
<Yingying_>
[20]https://www.w3.org/Member/wiki/WoT/WoT_F2F_201607
[20] https://www.w3.org/Member/wiki/WoT/WoT_F2F_201607
Johannes: more generally, procedure for open day, if we'd like
to propose speakers?
Yingying: hosts will take care of that. They also have their
own invited speakers.
... I'll do the intermediary.
There is an informal agreement that the more speaker we have,
the better.
<dape>
[21]https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/proposals/type-syste
m
[21] https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/proposals/type-system
Type system
Daniel: three proposals. JSON Schema is the best so far.
There are a few pending issues but we'll start to integrate the
outcome of this task to the current practice document.
Kaz: handling of number precision?
Daniel: JSON Schema allows: integer, min, max, float. No way to
say e.g. [0.1, 0.2], though
Kaz: should discuss the details at the F2F.
Matthias: JSON Schema is still a draft. We should take
advantage of this to drive the standard in a direction that
suits us.
Michael: what about payload formats?
Daniel: it is embedded in the TD. No name for the value type,
no URI.
<michael> ack
Michael: An example of a whole TD should be shown for the sake
of clarity.
Kaz: TD object model should be compatible with existing data
model. What about mappings to e.g. C struct? Exhaustive
analysis needed.
Taki: there is also CSV, flat files. How to link to existing
definitions?
<michael> There are also some JSON template languages that have
substitution features
<mkovatsc_>
[22]http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-ig-2016.html
[22] http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-ig-2016.html
IG Charter
IG Charter. How to proceed? One person responsible for a
specific section, in charge of reviewing and merging PR.
important point: deliverables. Will reach out individual people
for that.
<kaz> [23]automotive wg charter
[23] https://www.w3.org/2014/automotive/charter
we need to fix dates. Precise dates are needed? For instance:
mid-June is enough?
Kaz: even per quarter is fine.
Kajimoto: review round could start now for the Architecture
document.
Kaz: specific point: difference between semantic model (IG
deliverable) and TD?
Matthias: will make a proposal to explain that.
For the editors of the charter itself: one person responsible
for each of the following sections: introduction, scope,
deliverable?
Kajimoto: about semantic models/APIs: is a never-ending work.
Proposal: have this deliverable only in a second step.
<k_nimura> q
(after the WG is launched)
Matthias: agree. This should be clealry explained below in the
section.
Kaz: what about splitting it in two subections
(short-term/long-term)?
<k_nimura> i'm trying to talk
Matthias: agree, had the same proposal.
<k_nimura> which document would deal TD and DI discussion in
IG?
Nimura: which document would deal TD and DI discussion in IG?
Matthias: Current Practice document, from my point of view.
<k_nimura> i see
<k_nimura> yes.
<kajimoto> Yes, too!
To recap: use issues to review and comment on the current
version of the IG charter.
WG Charter
<mkovatsc_>
[24]http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-wg-2016.html
[24] http://w3c.github.io/wot/charters/wot-wg-2016.html
Matthias: links have been updated. Terminology on the figure
has been updated. Remaining TODO on privacy.
I propose to remove it. We already have a security item. Oliver
Pfaff to produce a text about "privacy by design".
deliverables are stable. Added WoT Test Cases
Test case already needed for the next PlugFest.
Kaz: the IG Charter figure about relationship WG <> IG should
also appear in the WG Charter.
WoT Test Cases should be moved to section 3.2
Kajimoto: deliverables are TD, scripting API, protocol
bindings. Might induce changes in the Architecture document.
What about adding this document in the WG Charter?
Matthias: a standard document of that kind might be needed,
that reflects the evolution in the other deliverables.
Johannes: W3C procedure on that?
Kaz: architecture document should be a W3C recommendation,
indeed.
(section 3.1 - Normative)
Matthias: comments on the privacy item?
<k_nimura> related to the WoT test case, how to deal
conformance ? how to prove something developed is fit to
recommendation documents or interoperable each other? isn't it
proper documents not like Other Deliverables?
Nimura: related to the WoT test case, how to deal with
conformance ? Isn't it a proper document like other
deliverables?
Kaz: difference between conformance test (not in the scope of
the W3C) and implementation check suite.
... about privacy, we could simply merge security and privacy.
Matthias: indeed. Oliver should write in the security section.
Kaz: back to implementation check: W3C provides a test
framework (with a test runner). Exists for HTML5
Collaboration with the automotive group is possible regarding
this.
Matthias: done with this topic. Again, please review.
<michael> I submitted a transfer layer proposal
next Web-conference
Matthias: agenda items?
Kaz: Kajimoto to present the last status of the architecture?
<michael> OK good
Mathias: also status of the Current Practice document: type
system, protocol bindings
Michael: proposal for an abstract transfer layer?
Matthias: should be part of an extra Web-conf (including
Louay)?
Michael: fine
[ 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: 2016/05/25 15:53:38 $
[25] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[26] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 25 May 2016 16:01:12 UTC