- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 17:54:07 +0900
- To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAJ8iq9XfEaDt--ZvMgHbUkAUKZsmg_5Gd_JHomB7prTycWvU0g@mail.gmail.com>
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-wot-td-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Victor!
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
TD Restructuring
05 Oct 2016
[2]Agenda
[2]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-ig/2016Oct/0001.html
See also: [3]IRC log
[3] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-wot-td-irc
Attendees
Present
Kaz_Ashimura, Achille_Zappa, Daniel_Peintner,
Dave_Raggett, Lionel_Medini, Matthias_Kovatsch,
Soumya_Kanti_Datta, Taki_Kamiya, Victor_Carpenay,
Katsuyoshi_Naka, Andrei_Ciortea, Maxime_Lefrancois,
Antoine_Zimmermann, Darko_Anicic
Regrets
Chair
Sebastian
Scribe
Victor, kaz
Contents
* [4]Topics
1. [5]Logistics
2. [6]Problem statements
3. [7]Problem statements 2
4. [8]Classification
5. [9]First TD Restructuring Ideas
* [10]Summary of Action Items
* [11]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<kaz> scribenick: Victor
(Waiting a few minutes more...)
Logistics
Sebastian_(SK): let's start. Goal here: discuss TD structure
more in details. First of a series of telcos until next
PlugFest (February)
SK: more precisely: around 5 telcos, then time for
implementation until February.
<kaz> [12]TD Restructuring proposal
[12] https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/proposals/td-restructuring
Problem statements
SK: Motivation to restructure TD: feedback provided during
PlugFests, on Github and by external organizations (OCF, BIG
IoT)
<kaz> [13]TD Restructuring proposal (revisited)
[13] https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/proposals/td-restructuring
1. when to use properties/acton/event?
see [14]https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/247
[14] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/247
not only related to TD.
2. properties/actions/events are not self-contained
<mlefranc> [15]https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/251
[15] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/251
example: URI resolution if relative / different protocols or
encodings at the interaction level (vs. thing level)
<Zakim> dsr, you wanted to comment on a process question
Maxime_(ML): question: RDFS range for "encodings" defined? If
not, one can defined it as Thing or Property/Action/Event.
SK: should be possible.
<mlefranc> Dave: encourages the TD subgroup to adopt a more
formal process
<mlefranc> use cases, requirements, .. prepare a solid ground
for the WG
<mlefranc> part of this work has been started at the beginning
of the IG
Dave_(DR): we should adopt a more formal approach here: update
use case & requirements if we are about to change the TD.
Example: many encodings and protocols across platforms, which
ones are we addressing?
<mlefranc> +1 for Dave's proposal
SK: volunteers to work on that?
Kaz: we can do the following in parallel: 1. asking for
volunteers to update the use case document itself and 2.
providing proposals for TD Restructuring (during calls and on
emails) along with concrete use cases
<mlefranc> Dave: this should be done in parallel
SK: idea of the PlugFests was to have quick iterations
<mlefranc> ... what is important is to be able to refer back to
a decision to justify a feature
DR: this should be done in parallel
Daniel_(DP): should be possible to keep track of
changes/proposals with concrete use cases and example
notations.
Kaz: Wiki page to gather all propsals?
Matthias_(MK): having Github issues is maybe enough
<dsr> Dave thinks very few members of the IG look at the github
issues, so that in practice results in only very limited
scrutiny.
<kaz> Kaz: GitHub issues is ok and people are encouraged to add
concrete usecases and examples
SK: what about regularly compiling the issues in a "changelog"?
Back to the queue. Darko?
<dsr> Dave thinks that it is important to keep requirements
distinct, as JSON is just one possible way to represent
metadata
Darko_(DA): previous point: relative URIs might be a limitation
but they also have benefits, such as "templating" (only the
base URI is changing between things)
<mlefranc> +1 for Dave's comment
SK: next in the queue
DR: we should really separate requirements from proposals.
Should engage a discussion in the mailing-list
<DarkoAnicic> ACTION: Darko to create an issue: properties,
actions, events can be saved in the TD repository separately as
templates. A TD can be created based on a concrete set of them
and instantiate with a concrete URI. In this settings, the
current proposal with href makes sense. [recorded in
[16]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-wot-td-minutes.html#action01]
[16] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-wot-td-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-77 - Create an issue: properties,
actions, events can be saved in the td repository separately as
templates. a td can be created based on a concrete set of them
and instantiate with a concrete uri. in this settings, the
current proposal with href makes sense. [on Anicic Darko - due
2016-10-12].
SK: Matthias proposed having first issues and then a summary
document allows commenting on each topic
DR: one should be able to comment on the documents as well.
<kaz> kaz: thinking about how to record those two topics
separately would make sense
Problem statements 2
SK: explicit vs. implicit knowledge
MK: OCF is using other methods than WoT for the same
operations, we should be able to specifiy methods in the TD as
well.
SK: second point, we should also refine spec. of encodings
(define them at the interaction level, use media types)
ML: methodology? Who resolves the issues, who takes action?
SK: first proposal in a separate folder, then discussion during
the calls until we reach agreement
ML: what about using PRs?
MK: precisions about our process: 1. proposal, 2. discussion ->
consensus?, 3 integrated in the current practices doc (PR?)
ML: deadline on issues (like 1 month)?
MK: not sure it is a good idea: some issues have taken longer
in the past (e.g. charters)
DP: precisions needed: from 1 issue, 2 were created during the
discussion -> 3 issues now open that relate to the same one.
MK: one can reference issues from other issues. We should use
similar labels (tags?). Common sense needed.
the person who opened the issue is supposed to track what
happens and close it when required
Taki_(TK): possible to notify the mailing-list when an issue is
open?
SK: you can also "watch" the repository (see Github)
Kaz: we encourage all to subscribe the "WoT" repository
<kaz> [17]WoT repository subscription
[17] https://github.com/w3c/wot/subscription
SK: we should send an e-mail to the group pointing that out
MK: only summaries and clean reports should be sent to the
mailing-list
more technical discussions should happen on Github
ML: from the experience of the Spatial Data on the Web WG (that
duplicates every issue), the WoT process seems a bit better
MK: should be raised in our general call today
Classification
SK: for all issues mentioned here: restructuring/renaming/new
vocabulary needed?
slides to be found in the proposal folder (Github)
First TD Restructuring Ideas
<kaz> [18]Today's Basic TD Structure
[18]
https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/proposals/td-restructuring#user-content-todays-td-basic-structure
<lmedini> Should we plan to provide mappings with other
vocabularies, such as Hydra?
<kaz> [19]Proposed Basic TD Structure
[19]
https://github.com/w3c/wot/tree/master/proposals/td-restructuring#user-content-sample
SK: maybe go back to the original TD structure? With key
"interactions" instead of "properties","actions","events"
+ "encodings" and "url" defined for each interaction
<inserted> scribenick: kaz
lmedini: mappings with other vocabularies, e.g., Hydra?
sk: some discussion on Hydra during TPAC
-> [20]https://www.w3.org/2016/09/22-wot-td-minutes.html#item02
Hydra breakout during TPAC
[20] https://www.w3.org/2016/09/22-wot-td-minutes.html#item02
<kaz> scribenick: Victor
Victor_(VC): there is an action item pending regarding Hydra (I
have to take). A separate discussion will take place soon
VC: I'll create an issue and add a proposal.
SK: (shows an example with the new structure)
<lmedini> Yes, thanks victor
key "endpoint" is added. interactions: [ "name", "endpoint": {
"urls", "encoding" } ]
DA: how to provide kind of templates then?
<dsr> We should feel free to go beyond JSON-LD provided we give
a means to map to RDF
<mlefranc> +1 for each of us
MK: it actually depends on the serialization (here JSON-LD). We
should maybe focus on the "abstract" model instead
<lmedini> +1 for abstract model.
SK: then, how to continue? Which tools should we use to work on
an abstract model?
ML: Protégé is a tool the Semantic Web community uses.
MK: one point: with using JSON-LD we had the hope to attract
Web developers.
DA: at the beginning, we created an (OWL) ontology. But it got
outdated quickly because of too many changes in the JSON-LD
version.
<kaz> maxime: can help Victor for that purpose
Antoine_(AZ): what we should agree on is a rough structure for
the TD. We could use Turtle for that purpose within the group.
To the world, we should present JSON-LD examples
<DarkoAnicic> Darko: I am also willing to contribute on the
Turtle model for TD
SK: agreement on working at a more abstract level?
Combining Turtle (internally) and JSON-LD (externally)?
action items to turn into issues on Github!
<kaz> [ adjourned ]
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: Darko to create an issue: properties, actions,
events can be saved in the TD repository separately as
templates. A TD can be created based on a concrete set of them
and instantiate with a concrete URI. In this settings, the
current proposal with href makes sense. [recorded in
[21]http://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-wot-td-minutes.html#action01]
[21] http://www.w3.org/2016/10/05-wot-td-minutes.html#action01
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [22]scribe.perl version
1.144 ([23]CVS log)
$Date: 2016/10/05 08:51:02 $
[22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2016 08:55:24 UTC