[scripting]minutes -14 November 2016

available at:
https://www.w3.org/2016/11/14-wot-minutes.html

also as text below.

Best Regards,
Yingying

---

    [1]W3C

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

                         Scripting API TF Meeting

14 Nov 2016

    See also: [2]IRC log

       [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/11/14-wot-irc

Attendees

    Present
           Dave_Raggett, Kaz_Ashimura, Johannes_Hund, Uday_Davluru,
           Yingying_Chen, Zoltan_Kis, Masato_Ohura

    Regrets
    Chair
           Johannes_Hund

    Scribe
           Yingying

Contents

      * [3]Topics
          1. [4]discussion with Mozilla about the scripting API
          2. [5]discussion on how to proceed on the scripting API
             proposals and use cases
      * [6]Summary of Action Items
      * [7]Summary of Resolutions
      __________________________________________________________

    <kaz> scribe: Yingying

    <kaz> scribenick: yingying_

discussion with Mozilla about the scripting API

    <inserted> [8]discussio with Benjamin

       [8] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-ig/2016Nov/thread.html#msg0

    Johannes: the basic question is whether we should standardize
    the scripting API.
    ... my basic question is whether we should reconsider the
    standardization of scripting api and the scope.
    ... we are also looking for the solution to expose thing and
    consume thing. this is one argument however we were not so
    successful with this argument.
    ... what is the delta between the RESTful API and our scripting
    API.
    ... there are quite a lot of mail exchanges already.
    ... maybe we need to think one again why we need to standardize
    scripting api and what is the delta from REST APIs.

    Zoltan: the argument from Mozilla makes sense for client API.
    But for the server side we need the scripting API
    standardization.

    [Johannes is creating a new issue in github]

    <inserted> [9]Issue-272 on Rationale for Scripting API

       [9] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/272

    Johannes: we have the portability requirement. If no scripting
    API we could not reuse the logics between things. In my view,
    only if we have some standardized APIs we can rely on that we
    could have the portability.
    ... any other arguments for our scripting API standardization.

    <Zakim> dsr, you wanted to discuss pros and cons for low level
    API

    Dave: The level of APIs between app and resource. Negative part
    is introducing so many libraries for web developers.

    Johannes: complementing the work of TD and Protocol bindings
    and resource model.

discussion with Mozilla about the scripting API

    Johannes: we now have two proposals for the scripting API. We
    need to think how to merge these and put into current practice
    document.

    ->
    [10]https://github.com/thingweb/wot-typescript-definitons/blob/
    master/src/index.d.ts

      [10] https://github.com/thingweb/wot-typescript-definitons/blob/master/src/index.d.ts

    [Johannes is explaining the code.]

    Johannes: what do you think of dividing the objects in this
    way?

    Zoltan: I like it. We should input these kinds into github. It
    would be helpful to convert the APIs.
    ... better be agree on the context of the APIs we need to
    follow.
    ... we could synchronize using emails.

    Kaz: I agree with you both. Scripting API is specifically for
    TD. It's different from specific programming languages.
    ... for automotive, we have 2 level of APIs: javascript based
    API and WebSocket API.
    ... our scripting APIs are different from those as scripting
    APIs are for abstraction level APIs.

    Johannes: we had lot of discussion on use cases we try to
    address.
    ... let's have a short recap for this.

    Kaz: as we've been talking during the WG charter discussion, we
    should discuss again the use cases when the WG is launched.

    ->
    [11]https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/ucr-doc/WoT_CommonVi
    ew_KickOff.pdf

      [11] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/ucr-doc/WoT_CommonView_KickOff.pdf

    Johannes: can we reuse the atomic use cases we did at the very
    beginning?
    ... what are the basic functionalities for scripting APIs are
    what we want to address.

    <kaz> s/tommy/atomic/

    Johannes: how to make the catalogs?
    ... just select some of those or what else?

    Dave: the ucr document can be the starting point but we need to
    consider people's opinions who join the group.
    ... we also to consider the commercial use cases to see what
    already exist and go forward.

    Zoltan: we have couple of basic scenarios and we don't need
    much. I just need to collect some and we can create issue on
    them per people's comments.

    Kaz: I agree with Johannes, Dave and Zoltan. W3C usually hold
    use case discussions several times. The first phase UC, then
    summary of UC and more UC when new participants come in.
    ... the accessibility guys can also bring in more UCs. We can
    simply start the UC discussions and add more.
    ... we can categorize them, e.g. accessibility category, smart
    home category, etc.
    ... if there are similar UCs we can merge them into one
    category.

    Johannes: The most important thing is that we need to have the
    structure we would like to work in.

    <zkis> fully agree to work on github

    Johannes: I personally prefer to work on github rather than on
    wiki and later transfer to github.
    ... it makes sense to have a new folder in github as scripting
    to create a structure we need at the moment.

    Kaz: maybe we could start with the very first version in wiki
    and transfer it to github once we have some.

    Zoltan: I prefer github.

    Johannes: we have a wiki. If people are not familiar with
    github, they can contribute there and we can make a transfer.

    Dave: on github it's easy to create the thread but it's not
    very easy to view.

    Johannes: make a conclusion when issue closed to help people
    from creating pull request on their own.
    ... consensus is that we work on github. The editor should be
    flexible.
    ... I will create the folder and move the proposals folder and
    my type-script-definition folder into it. and add subfolder for
    UC.
    ... second document is to provide the initial template how we
    merge the comments.
    ... I will try to do that next week.
    ... there were discussions before and during TPAC, there will
    be a community group web assembly.
    ... it's just in the beginning phase. I will try to get them
    into next call.
    ... if there is other topic you want to discuss, please let me
    know.

    [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    [End of minutes]
      __________________________________________________________


     Minutes formatted by David Booth's [12]scribe.perl version
     1.148 ([13]CVS log)
     $Date: 2016/11/14 13:00:04 $

      [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
      [13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Received on Monday, 14 November 2016 13:06:43 UTC