- From: <kajimoto.kazuo@jp.panasonic.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:09:14 +0000
- To: <public-wot-ig@w3.org>
Dear WoT-IG members, 1 week ago, in IG teleconference, how to treat wide variety of device class, that is, from less resources sensors to rich intelligent devices which can be web server by themselves. At that time, >Specific issues > Classification of devices is defined in IETF(answering Uday's question) Proposal of introducing class concept in WoT. > In the architecture document, many implementation pattern is described depend on device class which has >constraint. Then each device ability is represented and declared in TD. > This issue is discussed in TD.(Kajimoto) How to treat constraint device is discussed in e-mail first kicked by Kajimoto. But unfortunately, I've not input, so yesterday's meeting the same issue came up again in the scripting API context. Honestly, I'm embarrassed on this classification issue. In the WoT architecture document https://w3c.github.io/wot/architecture/wot-architecture.html, IG members discussion has reflected how to treat wide variety of devices. I'm confused the scope of WoT standardization. SDOs such as Echonet Consortium, OCF, oneM2M covers very wide variety of devices by introducing device class, device type... Because such SDOs treats not only virtual device in cyber space but communication to/from concrete device. In WoT, we've discussed lo long time on the scope of standardization. Of course all of IG contributors are aware of there are wide variety of device class. But in cyber space which is Web technology's main stage, in spite of there are big difference of resource and abilities of devices, we could conclude common architecture. Please guess the implementation of sensor's connection to internet. In order to access the sensor, some intelligent GW and/or cloud-based server which aggregates the access to/from sensors and play as cyber sensor on behalf of physical sensor. On the other hand, Raspberry pie attached sensors, CHRIMEN, which has high speed CPU and Relatively rich memory spaces can provide direct internet connectivity and play as WoT Server by itself. So, the variety of device class is reflected in implementation examples in architecture document. And the scope of WoT standardization is focused building blocks of WoT servient in cyber space. IG guys, please consider this discussion history. BR, -----Original Message----- From: Kajimoto Kazuo (梶本 一夫) Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 11:34 PM To: public-wot-ig@w3.org Subject: WoT IG Teleconference Nov 16th, 2016 Quick Updates Status of AC Review Google negotiation reported by McCool. Github pull request, proposed to be reviewed by members. headlines are sent via e-mail Next process treating Google and Mozilla, window is Wendy. We should talk with W3C Management within 1 week. Next week, finalizing pull requests on charter. McCool send e-mail to Wendy tomorrow. Communication with OCF, oneM2M, OPC By next week, we fix the strategy of collaboration with SDOs. WoT Logo W3C branding policy does not allow current logo, so disappointed. OCF Data Modeling [Michael Koster] Today, no presentation slides, this is postponed next week. Michael will prepare slides and will explain. F2F Logistics [McCool] Venue candidate: Crowne plaza (USD30,000 on 4 days) Open day is issue and discussed thru e-mails Fujitsu will expertized on F2F (Kaz) Samsung might be able to help to provide meeting rooms as 2nd option.(Michael) Fujitsu also might be able to host as 3rd option. (Taki) oneM2M LS update [Yongjing] Liaison with WoT is agreed in oneM2M. Semantics model reflection, protocol binding is discussed in oneM2M (comment)Security is new topic and led by McCool. Technical Work TD [Sebastian] Today's meeting was cancelled. Closing pull request but we need volunteer to update current practice document Schedule: end of Nov. TD issues are fixed and finalized. Try to finalize current practice until next f2f Hydra [Victor] Discussion has done. Until next f2f, preparation of updated hydra related proposals. So from next teleconference remove this topic. Google, Mozilla : RDF is powerful Scripting [Johannes] We have Monday regular teleconference. Zoltan proposed call back mechanism, discovery APIs and so on. Browser venders like Google, Mozilla, some discussion on Scripting API from the view point of pre-processing is planned as next meeting. Samsung and Huawei also has JavaScript engine. (Michael) Samsung's joining is welcomed. It is better Web servicer such as Amazon enrolled (McCool) Security [McCool] Restart security TF former led by Oliver. Charter of security TF, we would like to define. Everyone interested in is welcomed. Huawei guy might help (Yongjing) Some guy maybe from Alibaba expressed on security at Beijing f2f.(Johannes) so access him (Yingin) Agenda for Next WebConf AC Review OCF Data Modeling (Michael) Next f2f logi oneM2M (yongin) Technical Work TD [Sebastian] Scripting [Johannes] Security [McCool] Participants recruiting: within IG first by survey(?), next outside communication group treats collaboration strategy, so communication group help recruiting Specific issues Classification of devices is defined in IETF(answering Uday's question) Proposal of introducing class concept in WoT. In the architecture document, many implementation pattern is described depend on device class which has constraint. Then each device ability is represented and declared in TD. This issue is discussed in TD.(Kajimoto) How to treat constraint device is discussed in e-mail first kicked by Kajimoto. ----- Kazuo Kajimoto Senior Councilor of Groupwide Software Strategy, Groupwide CTO Office, Panasonic Corporation
Received on Thursday, 24 November 2016 00:09:53 UTC