[wot-usecases] minutes - 28 May 2020

available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2020/05/28-wot-uc-minutes.html

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Michael McCool!

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                             WoT Use Cases

28 May 2020

Attendees

   Present
          Kaz_Ashimura, Jennifer_Lin, Michael_Lagally,
          Clerley_Silveira, Michael_McCool, Ryuichi_Matsukura,
          Tomoaki_Mizuhima, David_Ezell, Sebastian_Kaebisch

   Regrets

   Chair
          Lagally

   Scribe
          McCool

Contents

     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]F2F/plugfest
     * [4]Summary of Action Items
     * [5]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <kaz> scribenick: McCool

   Lagally: gave summary of purpose of call, reviewed architecture
   TF work items, including use cases and process
   ... presentation on process (insert link...)

   <kaz> [6]Use Cases - Next steps-200514.pdf Lagally's slides

      [6] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/blob/master/proposals/WoT

   Lagally: was suggestion to make use cases a separate document
   ... discussion in architecture call this morning
   ... had a resolution to hand over the content of the USE-CASE
   directory to the use-case TF, however that was only have the
   architecture group
   ... need to still meet in second call to finalize
   ... however did draft a use case document
   ... right now still discussing who should be editors

   <mlagally> [7]Pullrequest for the initial draft of the WoT Use
   Cases document

      [7] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/506

   <mlagally> [8]Statically rendered version HTML

      [8] https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot-architecture/788f2567b34151e1636a5cac4f3fbeecb2a4cdc5/USE-CASES/wot-use-cases/index.html?env=dev

   Lagally: reviewing structure of new document; still an outline,
   several sections need to be filled in
   ... in fact, mostly empty sections, just an outline

   McCool: I am willing to volunteer as an editor
   ... what issues can we move over to use-case repo?
   ... suggest we could make issues for additional use cases
   needed, scenarios for the plugfest, and prioritization of
   current use cases

   Lagally: created a questionnaire to prioritize use cases

   <kaz> [9]draft questionnaire on priority

      [9] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/wot-uc-priority-202005/

   <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to mention Kaz can move the Issues to
   wot-usecases repo if needed based on

   <kaz> Lagally: would be better to close the existing
   issues/pullrequests on the wot-architecture repo, and then
   start the new work on wot-usecases

   <kaz> Kaz: will update the questionnaire based on the updated
   resources

   McCool: even after we create doc, many of them still need some
   work
   ... regarding new use cases, I would like to see some simple
   use cases captured, for instance "Developer Documentation"
   ... but for now we can just create an issue for it
   ... and by "documentation" I mean "unified formal specification
   of the interface and semantics"

   Lagally: creates issue
   [10]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/510

     [10] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/510

   McCool: this is not what I meant, but I will edit the issue to
   say what I meant

   <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to add labels corresponding to the
   level of priority after moving the resources to the
   wot-usecases repo and start to maintain the resource there

   Kaz: would be good to add labels to use cases for priorities,
   etc.

   Lagally: probably want to wait on that for a bit
   ... in addition, there was an interesting presentation in the
   main call
   ... from ITU-T, have a large number (about 30) of requirements
   documents
   ... including use cases

   <kaz> [11]ITU-T presentation

     [11] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/PRESENTATIONS/20200527_ITU_SG20-WoT-Activities.pdf

   Lagally: need someone from ITU-T

   McCool: need to be careful about IP, liaison agreement
   ... can't just extract text and insert it in our document

   Lagally: we also need someone familiar with the documents

   Kaz: need to establish a concrete liaison

   McCool: I would suggest that we extract the actual document
   names and numbers and put them in the issue for more direct
   reference
   ... note this was ITU-T SG20

   <kaz> kaz: +1 and we can mention our plan within an Issue as a
   placeholder

   McCool: I suggest we also add an "accessibility review" for our
   use cases; can be future work

   <kaz> [12]placeholder issue 511

     [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/511

   <kaz> [13]accessibility review

     [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/512

   Lagally: also concerned that we have some use cases where the
   champions have moved away
   ... we need some replacements

   McCool: for automotive in particular, we can reach out to the
   W3C Automotive WG
   ... are there others lacking champions?
   ... I think edge computing use case makes sense...
   ... it is a "horizontal" use case, focused on a technology as
   opposed to a user
   ... but I suggest we do it anyway and then cross-reference with
   other use cases that use edge computing

   <kaz> Kaz: can ask Access and Aptpod about there interest for
   Automotive use cases.

   Sebastian: Kajimoto-san is now with a company that does
   automotive

   Kaz: although they are not currently a W3C member

   McCool: although we have a good argument for making
   Kajimoto-san an invited expert

   Kaz: we can at least invite him once or twice as a guest, then
   I will talk to Alan Bird if we need Kajimoto-san's help
   regularly

   Lagally: ok, let's do that; Sebastian, can you follow up?

F2F/plugfest

   Lagally: today reviewed the F2F topics page, added Use Case
   prioritization

   McCool: we should do as much prework as possible, for instance,
   maybe have the prioritization done first

   <kaz> [14]June online meeting topics

     [14] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/F2F_meeting,_1-12_June_2020,_Online#T2TRG.2FWoT_Workshop_Topics_.28Tentative.29

   <mlagally>
   [15]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/tree/master/REQUIRE
   MENTS

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/tree/master/REQUIREMENTS

   McCool: maybe we should discussion requirements process
   ... perhaps "horizontal" use cases should be "requirements"

   Lagally: geolocation requirements is a good example

   McCool: for example, we might want to pull out
   "Vocabulary/Semantics" and "Schemas" as specific requirement
   topics
   ... note also there is an issue in the TD to add static
   location information
   ... and there is a spatial data group in the W3C
   ... we should ideally make these consistent

   <kaz> kaz: and possible collaboration on schema (e.g., with
   OGC)

   Lagally: another example is the digital twin
   ... this one is fairly horizontal

   McCool: I think for horizontal use cases we should
   cross-reference other uses to which it applies

   Sebastian: I have to go, want to mention I am working on a
   smart building use case
   ... still WIP

   Lagally: do you want us to include it in the questionnaire?

   Sebastian: it's ok to merge for this purpose...

   Lagally: ok, we will review in this afternoon's architecture
   call
   ... aob?

   <kaz> none

   <kaz> [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [16]scribe.perl version ([17]CVS log)
    $Date: 2020/06/02 07:32:13 $

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

Received on Monday, 10 August 2020 06:26:21 UTC