- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 13:26:35 +0900
- To: public-wot-ig@w3.org, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2021/02/23-wot-uc-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks,
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] https://www.w3.org/
WoT Use Cases
23 February 2021
[2]Agenda. [3]IRC log.
[2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_UseCase_WebConf#Agenda_23.2.
[3] https://www.w3.org/2021/02/23-wot-uc-irc
Attendees
Present
Christine_Perey, Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally,
Michael_McCool, Philip_Tran, Philipp_Blum, Rob_Smith,
Sebastian_Kaebisch, Tomoaki_Mizushima
Regrets
-
Chair
Lagally
Scribe
kaz
Contents
1. [4]Prev minutes
2. [5]Liaisons
3. [6]MR 97 - add edge-computing.md into index.html
4. [7]MR 86 - Update Smartcity Dashboard UC
5. [8]MR 94 - Focus AR/VR Guide use case on AR
6. [9]MR 90 - Joint activity for a standardized OPC UA Binding
7. [10]Linked Building Data CG (revisited)
8. [11]WG Note planning
Meeting minutes
Prev minutes
[12]Feb-9
[12] https://www.w3.org/2021/02/09-wot-uc-minutes.html
Lagally: (goes through the minutes)
Lagally: any objections?
(none)
approved
Liaisons
Lagally: OPC-UA, etc.
… how to proceed?
[13]OPC UA cooperation proposal
[13] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/charters/wot-ocpua-2021-charter-draft.md
Lagally: wondering about this "purpose"
The purpose is the development of an OPC UA Binding for the W3C
Web of Things through an OPC UA Companion specification and
mirrored as a W3C Recommendation/Note(?) document.
]]
McCool: this is a propose Charter for the OPC UA side, I
thought
Kaz: also think we need to update the description
… we had discussion during the TD call as well
… we should concentrate on simple liaison on datamodel
definition for binding and ontology reference for TD, etc.
Lagally: who would improve this?
Kaz: we should ask Sebastian
McCool: yeah, we should leave this to Sebastian
… if we have something normative on the W3C side, we need to
think about how to handle that
… note that we can't change our own WoT Charter for the current
period
(some more discussion)
Lagally: yeah, I agree we need to identify clear plan
… we should discuss this with Sebastian
… next Linked Building Data CG
Kaz: this is also handled mainly by Sebastian :)
McCool: yeah, need to follow it up with him
… interested in geological information inside buildings
Lagally: do we expect some more additional input?
McCool: use case description, you mean?
… we're talking about geolocation information model, etc.,
already
… e.g., for smart buildings
(Sebastian joins)
Lagally: (asks Sebastian about the OPC UA topic)
… maybe you can give some comments on your plan?
… how/who would create the target document mentioned here?
McCool: someone needs to take the lead
Sebastian: originally expecting a joint group but we had some
discussion during the TD call
… about the expected collaboration
… the idea should be more OPC UA's taking lead for their work
… and we can follow their work
… we expect to hold a dedicated call on further discussion
related to liaison
Lagally: think we should review their specs, etc.
Sebastian: my question is who would be actively working on the
collaboration
Kaz: I'll create a doodle poll for further discussion quickly
Lagally: ok. let's move on then
… next ITU-T SG 20
… unfortunately, not available today
… plan to have a follow-up discussion during the vF2F in March
… the topic is gaps and next steps based our summary
[14]ITU-T use case summary
[14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/master/CONTRIBUTIONS/ITU-T-Use-case-summary.md
McCool: agree
Lagally: btw, regarding the Linked Building Data CG
… any plan to create use case descriptions?
… would like to publish the first draft of the WoT Use Cases
within a few weeks
Sebastian: unfortunately, not able to join the use cases call
for a while
… so not really sure about the plan
Lagally: we had a joint call with them
Sebastian: will ping the CG guys
Lagally: great
Kaz: have been talking with the ECHONET guys
… will talk with them again on March 5
… will get back to you all
… possibly could have input for future use cases
MR 97 - add edge-computing.md into index.html
[15]MR 97
[15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/97
Lagally: would merge this
(merged)
MR 86 - Update Smartcity Dashboard UC
[16]MR 86
[16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/86
Philipp: added comments
[17]Philip Tran's comments
[17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/86#pullrequestreview-595141626
Lagally: can make these changes
McCool: updates with missing references as well
[18]diff
[18] https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/wot-usecases/86/20a5eb5...mmccool:89774c2.html
Philipp: what kind of references?
McCool: existing standards, etc.
… e.g., OGC's work
Lagally: why don't we merge this and McCool can make editorial
changes
McCool: ok
(merged)
MR 94 - Focus AR/VR Guide use case on AR
Lagally: work on AR/VR originally proposed by Rob and Kaz
… updated by McCool
McCool: would suggest we merge this
Christine: the use case is actually AR guide. right?
McCool: VR might not require geolocation information though AR
does
… that's why focus on AR here
Christine: ok
Lagally: (goes through Rob's comments)
[19]Rob's comments
[19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/94#pullrequestreview-586653088
Rob: there is a guidance on responsible use case of spatial
data by the SDW IG
[20]The Responsible Use of Spatial Data
[20] https://w3c.github.io/sdw/responsible-use/
Rob: related security/privacy issues as well
McCool: will look at it
Rob: tx
Lagally: would make sense to extend the security/privacy
section?
McCool: that's my plan :)
Rob: great
Lagally: can we merge this MR itself and then work on the
comments?
McCool: that's fine
ka: I'm OK too
(merged)
MR 90 - Joint activity for a standardized OPC UA Binding
[21]MR 90
[21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/90
Sebastian: this is the main README but not sure if it's still
relevant
… should have the discussion during the separate call
Lagally: OK to keep it open then?
Sebastian: ok
Linked Building Data CG (revisited)
<sebastian> [22]https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/
blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md
[22] https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md
<sebastian> [23]https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/
blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md
[23] https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md
Sebastian: got response from the Linked Building guys
… they're working on a use case description
Lagally: great
WG Note planning
Lagally: basic timeline
- consolidated draft in next call
- two week's review
- publication approval in vF2F
]]
[24]Use Cases draft
[24] https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/
Lagally: wondering about if we could have dedicated
contributions from the co-Editors
McCool: we'll have the PlugFest next week
… should prioritize the work items
… how to bring it to the vF2F?
Lagally: would have email discussion
Kaz: given the tight schedule, would suggest we make the TF
resolution today instead of the next UC call in 2 weeks
… and bring the draft to the main call tomorrow on Feb 24
… we can add some note mentioning there might be some minor
changes
<Mizushima> +1
Lagally: asking the whole group for review asap is good
… but would like to confirm the draft is ready during the next
call in 2 weeks
McCool: we need to think about when to have use case discussion
during the vF2F
Lagally: ok
let's talk about that during the main call tomorrow
[adjourned]
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
[25]scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).
[25] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html
Received on Monday, 12 July 2021 04:26:46 UTC