- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2019 08:49:34 +0900
- To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2019/02/27-wot-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Michael Lagally!
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WoT-IG/WG
27 Feb 2019
Attendees
Present
Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Daniel_Peintner,
Kunihiko_Toumura, Taki_Kamiya, Zoltan_Kis,
Toru_Kawaguchi, Yosuke_Nakamura, Michael_Koster,
Michael_Lagally, Ege_Korkan, Ryuichi_Matsukura,
Sebastian_Kaebisch
Regrets
Matthias
Chair
McCool
Scribe
Lagally
Contents
* [2]Topics
1. [3]Quick updates
2. [4]Daylight Saving times
3. [5]WG onboarding information
4. [6]Schedule
5. [7]TF updates
o [8]Architecture
o [9]TD
o [10]Binding
o [11]Scripting
6. [12]AOB?
* [13]Summary of Action Items
* [14]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<McCool>
[15]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#27_Feb_2019
[15] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#27_Feb_2019
<kaz> scribenick: mlagally
Quick updates
<kaz> scribenick: kaz
Lagally: had a call today on workshop
... we split the "how to participate" information from the main
CfP
... Kaz is adding information on EasyChair submission
Kaz: will check the options to handle mutiple paper types
(position paper/statement)
Lagally: pc members to be fixed by the end of this week
Kaz: if it takes longer to get confirmation, we can add them
(additional pc members) later
Lagally: we'll get back to all next week
<scribe> scribenick: mlagally
Daylight Saving times
mmc to avoid confusion enter the calls in your calendar based
on US Eastern Time
McCool: next week the main call will be at the same time, the
week after one hour earlier
... I can send around calendar entries to the members list,
which includes the call information
WG onboarding information
<kaz> [16]Kaz's message on the WG onboarding info (Member-only)
[16] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-wg/2019Feb/0034.html
(Lagally has problem with WebEx connection and rejoins)
<inserted> kaz: explains the onboarding information site
McCool: is there a list for publication schefule
Kaz: we can add that kind of information and want that kind of
feedback
... please respond to my email on the WoT WG Members list (URL
above)
McCool: btw, there's our home page and a landing page but the
landing page has old information
<kaz-win> [17]WoT landing page
[17] https://www.w3.org/WoT/
Lagally: we should fix this asap - It mentions "W3C started
standardising ..."
McCool: we can rewrite the first paragraph
... I will draft some introduction section - we should discuss
in next call and replace the content afterwards
Schedule
TAG review - Push to Friday next week before sending it to TAG
McCool: this would be worst case
... Chairs (Matthias and me) need to prepare transition
documents. Editors need to draft an explainer about the
documents. (Architecture and Thing Description)
Lagally: What about the other documents (Binding and
Scripting)?
Kaz: Only normative documents require wide reviews.
Lagally: Architecture document references Binding and Scripting
spec.
... are they also to be reviewed?
Kaz: We can reference stable documents
McCool: if documents have not been published, this may be a
concern
Kaz: This will be checked, when we do the review
McCool: we need to make sure that we push out up to date
documents
... in the CR review we need to have up to date document for
all informative documents
Lagally: do we have a template for the explainer document?
<kaz> [18]example of TAG review request
[18] https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/343
<kaz> [19]example of explainer document
[19] https://github.com/w3c/vc-data-model/blob/gh-pages/VCDMExplainer.md
McCool: yes, see the TAG review issue above.
... ideally we have editors drafts by Wednesday, March 6th -
chairs will submit to TAG by Friday March 8th.
Lagally: We only have a architecture call on Thursday, would
prefer to review in Architecture call on Thursday
... we can have a draft by Tuesday and consolidate until
Thursday.
Kaz: concrete date when the TAG review for our specs will start
is not yet decided.
... If have our expected dates in our mind, we can negotiate
the deadline with them
McCool: Other groups need to review that as well.
Kaz: I think we also need reviews by i18n, Accessibility,
JSON-LD, etc.
... documents don't have to be final.
McCool: CR deadlines are optimistic. Sebastian, are you also
ok?
Sebastian: we still have many issues - realistically the open
issues won't be covered by next week
... do we freeze a version or can we do changes during review
McCool: you can make changes, but ideally only minor changes
... JSON-LD question should be addressed before TAG review
... minor things can still change
Kaz: Sebastian (TD) and Lagally (Architecture) should start
explainer, I've already talked with the TAG Contact and raised
a heads-up but will talk with him again when we're ready
McCool: Explainer can be high level enough to still permit
structural change
Kaz: and regarding what and when to get wide reviews (including
the TAG review), I'd talk with Philippe and Yves again
TF updates
* Architecture
Lagally: architecture has moved to Thursday time slot
... we did not have a call since last week. We had text updates
from Matthias since then, some updated figures. I created a PR
yesterday, will have another one today
* TD
Sebastian: we still have to clarify the situation around
JSON-LD, this will be a topic in the call on Friday
Kaz: I talked with Ivan Herman, the Team Contact for the
JSON-LD WG. We need to ask them for a wide review. Perhaps they
can join a TD call or our email discussion
* Binding
Koster: no specific update on binding - plan to have an
extended explainer, hope to have the update soon
McCool: need an up to date document when we go to review
Koster: yes, it is important, will work on it in the next two
weeks
* Scripting
Zoltan: we discussed various options on the next API version -
fetch platform vs. convenience APIs, constructors vs. factory
methods. I made a terminlogy PR update
<zolkis>
[20]https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1HN15VhjCcZEjrSllFSU
VxUWiYhxFdslx80EtyJObNeo/edit#slide=id.g506a6ce621_0_0
[20] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1HN15VhjCcZEjrSllFSUVxUWiYhxFdslx80EtyJObNeo/edit#slide=id.g506a6ce621_0_0
<zolkis> check slides 24-27
McCool: What about note publication prior to the TAG review?
Zoltan: Depends on how the discussion goes, we should allocate
a day, since the 1 hour call is note enough
McCool: I created a PR and updated best practices - wot best
practices and testing document has not been pushed out as a
note.
... let's discuss the testing conversation in the next hour
... if you are interested, please join the plugfest call
AOB?
Kaz: wrt TAG review - I'm not sure we need to have referred
documents completely stable
McCool: "reasonably stable" would be desirable
... editors version should be consistent, there should not be
major empty sections
Kaz: note that the latest published version of binding
templates is very old
McCool: we should update the editors drafts before the TAG
review
... we should publish them as notes prior to CR transition
<sebastian> I have to go
<kaz> [21]https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/343
[21] https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/343
Lagally: what is the TAG review checking?
Kaz: document structure, basic architecture, design policy,
etc.
<kaz> [22]https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews
[22] https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version
1.152 ([24]CVS log)
$Date: 2019/03/02 23:45:51 $
[23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Saturday, 2 March 2019 23:50:37 UTC