[wot-usecases] minutes - 11 May 2021

available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2021/05/11-wot-uc-minutes.html


also as text below.

Thanks,

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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


                             – DRAFT –
                             WoT Use Cases

11 May 2021

   [2]IRC log.

      [2] https://www.w3.org/2021/05/11-wot-uc-irc


Attendees

   Present
          Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Michael_McCool,
          Sebastian_Kaebisch, Soumya_Kanti_Datta,
          Tomoaki_Mizushima

   Regrets
          -

   Chair
          Lagally

   Scribe
          kaz

Contents

    1. [3]Publication preparation
    2. [4]Previous minutes
    3. [5]wot-security issue 168
    4. [6]Issue 45
    5. [7]ITU-T liaison
    6. [8]Use Case proposal from Soumya

Meeting minutes

  Publication preparation

   McCool: we should create a branch to fix the current content
   for publication

   Kaz: +1

   Lagally: ok
   … let's do that offline

  Previous minutes

   Kaz: 3 minutes to be reviewed

   [9]Mar-9

      [9] https://www.w3.org/2021/03/09-wot-uc-minutes.html


   [10]Apr-13

     [10] https://www.w3.org/2021/04/13-wot-uc-minutes.html


   [11]May-4

     [11] https://www.w3.org/2021/05/04-wot-uc-minutes.html


   Lagally: any problems with Mar-9 ones?

   (none)

   Lagally: what about Apr-13?
   … discussion on the ITU-T liaison
   … any concerns?

   (none)

   Lagally: then May-4
   … anything to be changed?

   (none)

   [all the three minutes approved]

  wot-security issue 168

   [12]wot-security issue 168 - Add "Security and Privacy
   Considerations" to all use cases (or requirements)

     [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-security/issues/168


   McCool: I should set a standard for this purpose
   … for the security/privacy questions

   [13]Security/Privacy questions

     [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-security/issues/168#issuecomment-836667052


   Lagally: seems some of the questions are kind of abstract
   … what should the Editors consider?

   McCool: depends on the use cases

   Lagally: we should clarify our expectations for the guideline

   McCool: yes, and the next step should be generating a concrete
   PR for the text

   [14]related issue 84 on the wot-usecases side

     [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/84


   Lagally: (adds a comment to Issue 84)

   [15]Lagally's comment

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/84#issuecomment-838389145


  Issue 45

   [16]Issue 45 - Review EdgeX Architecture

     [16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/45


   McCool: what do they need is a question
   … for the possible hub section within the WoT Architecture spec

   [17]related wot-architecture issue 585 - Architectural
   patterns: Introduce star(hub) vs. p2p section

     [17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/585


   (Sebastian leaves)

   Lagally: (adds comments to wot-usecases issue 45)

   [18]Lagally's comments

     [18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/issues/45#issuecomment-838396050


  ITU-T liaison

   McCool: we sent a liaison statement suggesting we have a
   dedicated meeting with their experts
   … they'll have their meeting on May 17-27
   … to discuss our proposal

   [19]Kaz's liaison letter

     [19] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-ig/2021May/0012.html


   McCool: note that there is another discussion on a potential
   group for JSON-LD Signature

   Lagally: a W3C group?

   McCool: yes

   [20]Linked Data Signature Charter proposal

     [20] https://github.com/w3c/strategy/issues/262

   McCool: do we want to have a TD signature?

   Lagally: (shows the draft proposed Charter)

   [21]Proposed Linked Data Signatures Working Group Charter

     [21] https://w3c.github.io/lds-wg-charter/index.html


   <mlagally> [22]https://w3c.github.io/lds-wg-charter/index.html


     [22] https://w3c.github.io/lds-wg-charter/index.html


   Lagally: (skims the proposed Charter)
   … we should look at their expected timeline as well

   McCool: absolutely
   … the timing when they'll produce what would be related to our
   future work as well

  Use Case proposal from Soumya

   Kaz: are the slides publicly available?

   Soumya: yes, and will send them to you all
   … [IntellioT - Concepts and Use cases]
   … [EU Project Participants]
   … [NG IoT Use Cases]
   … [Concept]
   … high-level concept here
   … IoT applications on the left side
   … computation, communication infrastructure on the right side
   … using AR/VR technology for human interfaces
   … Eurecom is providing 5G connection
   … [Use case 1: Agriculture]
   … [Use cas 2: Healthcare]
   … most important use case for WoT, I think
   … the patients are equipped with some wearable devices
   … this use case is very important to WoT because it includes
   various aspects for WoT
   … [Use case 3: Manufacturing]
   … orchestration of multiple devices including robots
   … robot may encounter a thing which it have never seen yet
   … so human operator can add support
   … would like to generate descriptions for WoT Use Cases
   … any questions?

   Lagally: timeline?

   Soumya: shows a timeline
   … [Planned Work]
   … start in Oct 2020
   … End-user workshop 1: Mar-Apr 2021
   … open call 1: Oct 2021
   … use case demos 1: Feb 2022
   … end-user workshop 2: May-Jun 2022
   … open call 2: Oct 2022

   McCool: there is an existing use case description for edge
   computing and smart cities, etc.
   … please look into them
   … learning from the actual situation is interesting
   … web workers, etc., for edge computing might be also
   interesting to you
   … low-latency with reliability for robot is important

   Lagally: we have existing use cases as McCool mentioned
   … would be important for you to look into them and think about
   orthogonal proposals

   McCool: use cases are written from the users' view

   <Zakim> kaz, you wanted to mention the upcoming smart cities
   workshop

   [23]cfp

     [23] https://www.w3.org/2021/06/smartcities-workshop/index.html


   Kaz: agree with McCool and Lagally. you can generate several
   possible use cases from the viewpoints of users and industries
   first, and then generate some more horizontal/technical use
   cases and requirements based on those initial use cases.
   possibly a good topic for the upcoming Smart Cities Workshop as
   well.

   Lagally: let's talk about the horizontal use cases and
   requirements
   … please put down what are in your mind
   … AOB?

   (none)

   Lagally: thanks a lot for your proposals, Soumya!
   … the next Use Cases call will be held in 2 weeks on May 25
   … btw, due to the holiday in Germany, the Architecture call on
   May 13 will be cancelled
   … will send a notice about that

   [adjourned]


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    [24]scribe.perl version 131 (Sat Apr 24 15:23:43 2021 UTC).

     [24] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html

Received on Monday, 12 July 2021 04:44:43 UTC