[PlugFest/Test] minutes - 1 August 2018

available at:

also as text below.

Please respond to the Doodle poll for the online PlugFest at:
as well.





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

                               - DRAFT -

                              WoT PlugFest

01 Aug 2018


      [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/PlugFest_WebConf#Agenda_01.08.2018


          Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Ege_Korkan,
          Kunihiko_Toumura, Toru_Kawaguchi, Tomoaki_Mizushima,
          Ryuichi_Matsukrua, Michael_Koster, Matthias_Kovatsch


          McCool, Kaz



     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Agenda
         2. [5]Testing updates
         3. [6]PlugFest reports
         4. [7]Panasonic report
         5. [8]Hitachi report
         6. [9]Goals for next plugfest
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     * [11]Summary of Resolutions

   <scribe> scribenick: kaz


   McCool: basically PlugFest but want to use 5mins for testing

Testing updates


     [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/testing/plan.md

   McCool: testing updates
   ... testing plan document updated
   ... there are "ToDo"s
   ... thingweb playground is now scriptable
   ... there is still some issue to make it work correctly
   ... got this tool for test specifications
   ... extract normative assertions
   ... (shows normative assertions summary)
   ... have another PR to include all the tables
   ... need to work on assertions for that

   Ege: testing topic is done?
   ... wanted to mention again that playground is scriptable

   McCool: we can review the tools next time

PlugFest reports

   McCool: several people updated their reports
   ... who would start?

   Kaz: maybe starting with Matsukura-san?


     [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/plugfest/2018-bundang/result.md

   Matsukura: have made a template for the whole results
   ... want to give some explanation
   ... based on preparation.md format
   ... this report starts with section 3
   ... section 2 is servients list
   ... a table representing all the registered servients
   ... so would like to start with section 3 (as the actual
   ... 3.1 Testing individually
   ... 3.2 Testing in Client Role
   ... 3.3 Testing in Server Role
   ... we started with simple description
   ... for the next PlugFest

   Matthias: clarification question about OK/NG/NA
   ... did you define them?

   Matsukura: OK is succeed
   ... NG is failed
   ... NA is couldn't checked this time

   Matthias: ETSI PlugTest has 4 categories
   ... OK, NO, NA, Out of Time (OT)

   Matsukura: OK
   ... can use that definition

   Matthias: and you can add a legend at the top

   Matsukura: ok
   ... (goes through the results)
   ... 3.1.1 validate simplified TDs
   ... Fujitsu, Hitachi, Panasonic: all OK
   ... Hitachi and Panasonic have some comments
   ... wanted to include Intel, etc., as well but couldn't

   Kaz: do you want to the others, i.e., Intel, Oracle, Siemens,
   to put their information into this template?

   Matsukura: yes

   Matthias: just to make sure
   ... using this template for each company
   ... not directly into this file

   Matsukura: right

   Sebastian: playground is updated and the previous TDs are not

   Matthias: maybe need to validate again
   ... in the future, playground should be configured for a
   specific version

   Kaz: like HTML validator's having version switch :)

   Matthias: yeah...
   ... but old versions are just drafts

   Kaz: ok

   Matthias: let's discuss this with Ege

   Kaz: Matsukura-san, are you done?

   Matsukura: yes

   Kaz: maybe we can ask Kawaguchi-san and Toumura-san for

   Toru: key points are already covered by Matsukura-san
   ... can provide some more detail

Panasonic report


     [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/plugfest/2018-bundang/result-panasonic.md

   Toru: this is Panasonic results
   ... copied the content from the preparation-panasonic.md
   ... and then added the actual results
   ... the structure is similar to Matsukura-san's report
   ... (the report includes some diagrams/pictures)
   ... regarding individual testing
   ... not significant to mention
   ... registration with Thing Directory
   ... some issue is identified
   ... Interaction with things on Remote Proxy was NOT successful
   due to some internal issue of the proxy.
   ... and then
   ... 3.2 Testing in Client Role
   ... testing with Oracle
   ... some difference on how to interpret
   ... Oracle's Fest Simulator with following local modification.
   ... Changed "type" from "boolean" to "object" with
   "properties": {"PumpStatus" : { "type": "boolean" }}, to align
   with actual endpoint implementation.
   ... and testing with Intel
   ... ntel's Button, Light, Motion and RGB- Light.
   ... Issue: Only first binding could be chosen from Multiple
   HTTP bindings written in Intel's TD, since there seems to be no
   way to distinguish and specify particular binding through
   Scripting API (?)
   ... due to multiple security configurations
   ... not sure how to specify particular setting
   ... with multiple security configurations

   McCool: iteration?

   Toru: that's my understanding

   McCool: would file an issue?

   Toru: not yet

   Matthias: if there are multiple bindings
   ... but if the first one works well
   ... why do you need to think about the second one?
   ... that's more about different binding?
   ... with scripting api, you don't have to care about that
   ... not a requirement for choosing which
   ... the use case with two bindings
   ... if there are 2 different bindings, you can test one with
   one servient
   ... and test another with another servient

   McCool: big difference with latency
   ... possibly with different network setting
   ... this is maybe implementation detail, though

   Kaz: Kawaguchi-san, do you want to describe this problem a bit
   more in detail?

   Toru: should be clearly written within the Scripting API draft

   Lagally: wondering about historical mark
   ... saying, e.g., "was part of (2)"
   ... maybe we can simply remove it?

   Matthias: introduced that notation to see the historical

   Lagally: are we suppose to compile one specific document for
   the results?
   ... what would be the best way?
   ... do people need to ready 10 different reports?

   Matthias: ideally, you can describe the details within your
   report (result-oracle.md)
   ... and give feedback to the main document (result.md)

   Lagally: make sense

   Kaz: and Matsukura-san and Koster are encouraged to keep the
   main document updated?

   Matsukura: yeah
   ... agree with Matthias
   ... summary document should be simple and easy to understand

   [15]summary report

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/plugfest/2018-bundang/result.md

   Lagally: ok
   ... and agree

   <mjkoster> i agree also

   Kaz: Kawaguchi-san, are you done?

   Toru: yeah

Hitachi report


     [16] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/plugfest/2018-bundang/result-hitachi.md

   Toumura: this is Hitachi's results
   ... only implemented the client side
   ... many checking points are not applicable
   ... but simplified TD was implemented
   ... same as Kawaguchi-san
   ... issue on how to handle multiple form entries
   ... not using scripting api but it's nice to have some
   guideline to select multiple forms
   ... and here 2nd problem
   ... implemented authentication methods
   ... basic, digest, bearer
   ... We need security metadata to designate HTTP header name for
   API key
   ... Panasonic's simulator uses "X-PWOT-TOKEN" header.
   ... for example, OpenAPI 3.0 uses following security metadata
   ... swagger has some feature for ApiKeyAuth

     [17] https://swagger.io/docs/specification/authentication/api-keys/

   McCool: adding names to indicate it?

   Toumura: yes
   ... on the other hand, server role was not implemented
   ... appendix includes the implementation detail
   ... please let me know if you have comments/questions

   McCool: any comments/questions?


Goals for next plugfest

   McCool: captured result template, Panasonic, and Hitachi
   ... we need to seriously plan the PlugFest and the online
   ... we can go into the detail today

   <mkovatsc> [18]Doodle

     [18] https://doodle.com/poll/a33qfw5te9myer23

   Matthias: Doodle poll for online plugfest
   ... Friday won't work for me for the 2nd option

   McCool: when to make the decision?

   Matthias: 2 weeks?
   ... to get responses from our usual suspects :)

   McCool: it's more than just putting things online
   ... should setup servers for security as well
   ... need VPN setting
   ... instructions on how to get connected
   ... we can create some possible sub nets as well
   ... like simulated local network
   ... is it possible to have WebEx for the whole week?

   Kaz: yes

   McCool: should we put information on the wiki?

   [19]PlugFest wiki

     [19] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/PlugFest_WebConf

   Matthias: we should have a sub directory on GitHub

   Koster: yes

   McCool: who should take the lead?

   Matthias: can provide some MD file

   McCool: ok
   ... Matthias to provide MD files under the new subdirectory
   ... the final topic is yet another doodle for the
   plugfest/testing calls
   ... combined or separate

   Matthias: why do we need to separate the call?

   McCool: can continue the joint call
   ... for now, let's keep it combined
   ... e.g., for the next week
   ... let's not do a separate meeting for now


Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [20]scribe.perl version
    1.152 ([21]CVS log)
    $Date: 2018/08/01 14:12:04 $

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

Received on Friday, 3 August 2018 05:10:04 UTC