- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2018 04:00:53 +0900
- To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2018/08/29-wot-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks for taking these minutes, Dave!
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WoT-IG/WG
30 Aug 2018
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Main_WoT_WebConf#29_Aug_2018
Attendees
Present
DarkoAnicic, Kaz_Ashimura, Micael_McCool, Lindsay_Frost,
Daniel_Peintner, Darko_Anicic, Dave_Raggett,
Michael_Koster, Michael_Lagally, Taki_Kamiya,
Zoltan_Kis, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Toru_Kawaguchi,
Martin_Bauer, Graeme_Coleman, Barry_Leiba,
Ryuichi_Matsukura
Regrets
Chair
McCool
Scribe
dsr, kaz
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Quick Updates
2. [5]ETSI ISG CIM presentation
3. [6]Task Force reports
o [7]TD
o [8]Binding
o [9]Confirming publication schedule (TD, Binding)
o [10]Security
o [11]Testing
o [12]Scripting
* [13]Summary of Action Items
* [14]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<kaz> scribenick: dsr
Quick Updates
Paper submitted to permissions workshop in October
<kaz> and accepted
Request to restart architecture task force
McCool: doodle poll to decide the telco slot?
Kaz: we should ask who is interested first
... and then can poll for a time slot if needed
... but if there are just a few people, e.g., only the Editors,
they can simply decide the slot
McCool: We could use the editors call slot
Toru: would like to start with initial discussion by the
Editors of the Architecture draft
ETSI ISG CIM presentation
<kaz> @@@ slides tbd
Lindsay Frost presents.
Trying to build a bridge between traditional IoT, database
approaches and the semantic web
We’re using property graphs
and HTTP qwith JSON-LD
We decided not to use SPARQL in order to guarantee performance
over the web
we instead designed our own API instead
Our focus is on context information management
Centralised vs distributed vs federated solutions
Example involving police reporting a car accident
Lindsay explains how this uses property graphs
Next slide shows the JSON representation for the example
Lindsay recaps relationship to Web of Things
ETSI ISG CIM relates to descriptions of the context for things
We haven’t considered actions and events as yet
Slide with information model including geolocation information
and temporal aspects (observedAt, createdAt, modifiedAt)
We want to discuss how to bridge better to the web of things
Kaz: thanks Lindsay
... there are several possibilities for the next step
... first, we can add this liaison to the [15]W3C Liaison table
by specifying the liaison contact from your side (e.g.,
Lindsay, yourself) and the liaison contact from the W3C side
(e.g., myself and Dave)
... also we can discuss how to support interchange of
information
... e.g. participation in plugfest during TPAC in Lyon in late
October
[15] https://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison
Lindsay: that’s very nice but too ambitious given the timescale
We wouldn’t have a certified ETSI implementation, but one of us
could show what we have
Martin confirms this
Lindsay: I will take this back as a request to the FIWARE
Foundation
... small terms would be to agree on terminology
We’re not sure of the TD @context is directly compatible though
WoT has been focusing on services, whilst ETSI ISG CIM has been
focusing on the information models
<inserted> scribenick: kaz
dsr: this is related to property graphs
... I'm organizing a workshop on data
... in Feb in Europe
... how we can bridge the gap with RDF graphs
... opportunity for ETSI and FIWARE
<inserted> scribenick: dsr
Dave mentions upcoming W3C workshop (Feb 2019) on RDF next and
inviting Lindsay and colleagues to participate in respect to
property graphs and query languages
McCool: We are working with iot.schema.org on vocabularies for
IoT semantics
mjkoster: I would like to find out more about using sub class
of RDF resources
In iot.schema.org we’re defining terms for describing common
IoT devices
we’re focusing more on service interaction models rather than
describing the world
Our plugfests are experimental and we don’t have to nail
everything down
It would be interesting to look at the complementary roles
McCool: we also have work on modelling message payloads for
protocol descriptions
... finds the link to the editor’s draft
We’re trying to be consistent with JSON schema
McCool: let’s try to identify follow up actions
DarkoAnicic: I see that in iot.schema.org, we’ve looked at the
SAREF ontology
and it would be interesting to consider how ETSI could use the
iot.schema.org where appropriate
Lindsay: we are agnostic especially for domain vocabularies
... if there is no collision with our information model, we
should be able to integrate with the iot.schema.org terms
McCool: mentions the WISHI activity
and part of the IRTF
mjkoster: a narrow set of categories and associated properties
Lindsay: our members have also considered terms like near-to,
and the open question is where to make something part of the
API or as external vocabularies
Kaz: would we like to invite Lindsay and Martin to our task
force meetings when appropriate?
McCool: we would need to clarify the IPR policy applicable
mjkoster: the linked data task force is in the WoT IG and could
be a good forum for liaison work
<DarkoAnicic> LD-telco:
[16]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_Linked_Data_and_Semantic_
Processing_WebConf
[16] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_Linked_Data_and_Semantic_Processing_WebConf
The Linked Data TF is every 2 weeks on Friday at 4pm CET
Kaz: perhaps Lindsay could join the WoT IG officially?
Lindsay: I can look into that
Task Force reports
* TD
Sebastian is on vacation
Taki-san provides a summary on behalf of the TD task force.
<kaz>
[17]https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/166
[17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/166
One issue we discussed is versioning
McCool: I believe we closed that one
<kaz>
[18]https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/204
[18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/204
McCool: I provided a counter proposal to making CBOR as a
default for JSON encoding
I’ve also drafted a section on security considerations for
discussion
<kaz> [19]https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/207
[19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/207
* Binding
mjkoster: Binding Templates Task Force: 6 new patterns for
consideration
We’re getting close to deciding on the spec freeze for TPAC
* Confirming publication schedule (TD, Binding)
Kaz: TD draft is already frozen for publication. right?
Some discussion on getting ready for updating the public WDs
McCool: any objections to publish?
no objections …
RESOLUTION: TD draft
([20]https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/) on GH is
ready for publication
[20] https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/)
RESOLUTION: corresponding draft of Binding Templates is also
ready for publication
* Security
McCool summarises progress on security task force
* Testing
to be deferred …
* Scripting
zkis summarise progress within scripting task force
people should take a look at the current editor’s draft and we
will decide on publishing next week
scribe: end of meeting …
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
1. [21]TD draft (https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/)
on GH is ready for publication
2. [22]corresponding draft of Binding Templates is also ready
for publication
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version
1.152 ([24]CVS log)
$Date: 2018/08/30 17:19:22 $
[23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 30 August 2018 19:01:59 UTC