W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-ig@w3.org > September 2017

[wot-ig/wg] minutes - 20 September 2017

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 22:29:17 +0900
Message-ID: <CAJ8iq9VNunWtyZsWSsLnq3k3_AdCN+Q1bhG1xQKRScmD66vwyw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:

also as text  below.

Thanks for taking these notes, Dave!




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

                               - DRAFT -

                               WoT IG/WG

20 Sep 2017

   See also: [2]IRC log

      [2] http://www.w3.org/2017/09/20-wot-irc


          Zoltan_Kis, Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Dave_Raggett,
          Kazuo_Kajimoto, Michael_Koster, Niklas_Widell,
          Ryuichi_Matsukura, Takeshi_Yamada, Taki_Kamiya,
          Tomoaki_Mizushima, Daniel_Peintner, Soumya_Kanti_Datta,
          Barry_Leiba, DarkoAnicic, Kunihiko_Toumura,
          Masato_Ohura, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Wonsuk_Lee,
          Keiichi_Tokuyama, Toru_Kawaguchi

          Matthias, Uday

          McCool, Kajimoto



     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Quick updates
         2. [5]PlugFest planning
         3. [6]WebSockets
         4. [7]Task Force reports
     * [8]Summary of Action Items
     * [9]Summary of Resolutions

   <McCool> waiting until 5m past; any new agenda items, let me

   <scribe> scribenick: dsr

Quick updates

   Michael reports the news that the 3 FPWDs were successfully
   published as planned.


     [10] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-wg/2017Sep/0006.html

   He has been working on the security workshop plans and wants to
   have the security document published in good time to support
   the workshop

   <kaz> [11]Michael McCool's message on the IEEE S&P Workshop

     [11] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-ig/2017Sep/0001.html

   There is some 12 hours left to make changes to the workshop
   proposal so please send comments

PlugFest planning

   Michael: any updates on the plugfest planning?

   <kaz> [12]PlugFest wiki

     [12] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_4-10_November_2017,_Burlingame,_CA,_USA#PlugFest_.284-5_Nov_2017.29

   Matsukura-san emailed updated slides just before today’s call

   <McCool> see issue #346

   It is titled “Issues for TPAC Plugfest”. He presents it using
   the webex shared screen facility

   <kaz> [13]Matsukura-san's slides

     [13] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-ig/2017Sep/att-0011/update_Issues_for_TPAC_plugfest_170920.pptx

   The main focus is on communication between servients

   <McCool> [14]https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/346 Issue for
   "[Plugfest] Planning for next step"

     [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/346

   Matsukura-san talks us through each slide in turn

   A device can act as a servient, or it could involve a gateway
   to expose a thing for another servient to consume

   One issue is that the URL can be different on either side of a
   NAT firewall

   We need some joint discussion on discovery, exchange of thing
   descriptions and their management.

   McCool: we should support the use of ACE where practical. For
   events, I would like to support the subscription model, but to
   allow for other possibilities. I hope the approach here is
   descriptive and will allow for other approaches in future

   kaz: the question is how to map addresses across NAT, right?

   <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to ask if Matsukura-san's point is how
   to handle local device's address from the remote side within TD
   and how to transfer TD for that purpose

   Matsukura-san: yes

   kaz: you should make that clearer

   sebastian: you showed one servient as a gateway, what do you
   mean by a gateway?

   if you want to provide access to devices from outside of the
   firewall, the gateway can help

   is the idea that the clients can get access direct to local
   devices or what is your intention?

   if the former, a better term might be a bridge

   Matsukura-san: the gateway provides a means to create shadows
   of things

   <mjkoster> There is a proxy device in the gateway

   (aka digital twins)

   <kaz> dsr: came across the issue on URL with local/remote

   <kaz> ... my solution was embedding the address of the gateway
   into the TD

   <kaz> ... thousands of thermostats

   <kaz> ... looks very straight-forward

   <kaz> ... the question is what would be the best solution

   Dave: what’s the best means for us to share ideas, as I have
   been working on the same problem for gateways and cloud hubs

   McCool: is the issue tracker the right place for this?

   kaz: the gateway can manage multiple devices on the same local
   area network or in the local vicinity

   <inserted> ... Matsukura-san and Nimura-san would like to
   clarify the need/requirement for that kind of Management Thing
   as well

   McCool: are the servients going to come from different people?

   <inserted> kaz: right, so Matsukura-san would like you as well
   to provide one of the servients :)

   McCool: the OCF bridge might fit into this pattern


   What is the URL for the slides?

   <kaz> [15]Yamada-san's slides

     [15] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-ig/2017Sep/att-0013/Event_Implementation_Proposal__HTTP_WebSocket__r3.pptx

   Yamada-san: I want to talk about a proposal for eventing

   we would like to have more discussion on eventing

   slide 1: several times of protocols for event delivery, e.g.
   HTTP long poilling, server-sent events, websockets

   The table shows some pros and cons for each protocol

   Slide 2 shows protocol message exchanges using HTTP + WebSocket

   HTTP is used to subscribe/unsubscribe and WebSockets for event

   Multiple devices can share the same WebSocket connection, so
   the message includes the device URI

   The event message should include the timestamp as proposed by

   Yamada-san presents some detailed examples

   questions or comments?

   McCool: there is more than one way to handle events, so the TD
   should state which applies

   The interaction model depends on the underlying protocol. e.g.
   HTTP vs CoAP vs WebSockets

   We should assume that there are multiple ways to support
   eventing, and the consumer needs to know what the producer is

   sebastian: the TD needs to cover the communication metadata for

   <kaz> dsr: comment first

   <kaz> ... in discussion with Ben

   <kaz> ... websocket would be a good way to go

   <kaz> ... using HTTPS for security and authentication

   <kaz> ... why did you choose websocket just for events?

   Dave: why did you choose to use WebSockets just for events and
   not for properties and actions? I have done that for my design.

   <Zakim> dsr, you wanted to ask why not use WebSockets for
   properties and actions

   McCool: we should discuss how to add the communications
   metadata for eventing

   sebastian: this Friday in the TD call we will discuss metadata
   for eventing, could Yamada-san join that call?

   Yamada-san: yes

   <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to mention VW's VIWI submission and
   Automotive WG's VISS

   kaz: I wanted to mention VW's VIWI submission and Automotive
   WG's VISS

   <kaz> [16]https://www.w3.org/TR/vehicle-information-service/

     [16] https://www.w3.org/TR/vehicle-information-service/

   these are similar approaches using WebSockets for messaging


     [17] https://www.w3.org/Submission/2016/SUBM-viwi-protocol-20161213/

   we should take a look at both of these approaches

   kajimoto-san: Mozilla are also interested in using WebSockets
   for messaging

   <inserted> kaz: as discussed during the Chairs call last week,
   I can send a reminder to Benjamin about possible joint work

   sebastian: this is not just a TD topic and is also relevant to
   the protocol binding discussion

Task Force reports

   sebastian: last week we had a TD call with invited experts to
   talk to us about the SSN ontology

   <kaz> [18]TD minutes (Member-only)

     [18] https://www.w3.org/2017/09/15-wot-td-minutes.html

   we discussed TD types, we need to be careful with naming in the
   linked data form

   this Friday we will focus on eventing and the plugfest

   <zkis> [19]https://www.w3.org/2017/09/18-wot-minutes.html

     [19] https://www.w3.org/2017/09/18-wot-minutes.html

   Zoltan talks about the scripting task force call.

   We had the FPWD and discussed a small reorganisation of the
   repo and added Johannes as an editor

   The node-wot project is considering adding the W3C license

   once that happens, other people will be able to contribute to
   the project

   <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to mention there is discussion within
   the Chairs group and the W3C Team about the license question

   kaz: discussion within the Chairs group and the W3C Team about
   the license question re node-wot

   this is to be clarified

   Daniel: I understood from Wendy that the W3C license is equal
   to the MIT license, so changing should be easy

   kaz: not 100% equal, we need to look at the details and get
   back with some recommendations

   Daniel: I am waiting on this before restructuring the node-wot

   McCool: no binding call this week, Michael Koster has some
   slides to present.

   0024.html Koster's message

     [20] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-wg/2017Sep/0024.html

   Can we defer this to next week’s call?

   Michael_Koster: I could instead present at this Friday’s TD

   McCool: some pending changes on the security draft and aiming
   for FPWD on November 1st
   ... end of meeting …

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [21]scribe.perl version
    1.152 ([22]CVS log)
    $Date: 2017/09/20 13:27:43 $

     [21] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [22] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Wednesday, 20 September 2017 13:30:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:27:16 UTC