- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 10:33:01 +0900
- To: Public Web of Things IG <public-wot-ig@w3.org>, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2018/05/09-wot-test-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks a lot for taking these minutes, Michael Koster!
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WoT Testing
09 May 2018
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/Test_WebConf#Agenda
Attendees
Present
Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Kunihiko_Toumura,
Matthias_Kovatsch, Michael_Koster, Soumya_Kanti_Datta,
Tomoaki_Mizushima, Toru_Kawaguchi, Takeshi_Yamada,
Michael_Lagally
Regrets
Chair
McCool
Scribe
mjkoster
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]review minutes
2. [5]progress against plan
3. [6]Online test things
4. [7]setup for the AC meeting
5. [8]plugfest planning
* [9]Summary of Action Items
* [10]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<kaz> scribenick: mjkoster
review minutes
<kaz> [11]prev minutes
[11] https://www.w3.org/2018/05/02-wot-test-minutes.html
(accepted)
progress against plan
<kaz> [12]Scripting API draft - Conformance section
[12] https://w3c.github.io/wot-scripting-api/#conformance
<McCool> Looks like scripting API making some progress on
marking normative assertions
<McCool> also they do have the conformance text now
<McCool>
[13]https://rawgit.com/zolkis/wot-scripting-api/master/index.ht
ml
[13] https://rawgit.com/zolkis/wot-scripting-api/master/index.html
[14]https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description
[14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description
McCool: will ask about progress on Friday at the TD meeting
<inserted> kaz: got some feedback from the CSS WG about how to
extract assertions from specs:
1) Blocks of normative text: split the document in sections at
H1-H6, remove well-known non-normative sections based on their
ID (status, bibliography, ToC, etc.), remove other
non-normative sections based on their first line containing "is
informative" or "is not normative", and remove notes
(class=note) and examples (class=example). But extracting
individual assertions from the remaining text would require
knowledge of English.
2) All CSS properties and descriptors with several of their
characteristics (property-specific syntax, inheritance, media).
Properties are rather well marked up, because various tools
rely on that mark-up (such as Bikeshed, which makes alphabetic
indexes and cross-references).
3) The productions of the generic syntax of CSS and productions
that are shared by several properties are often, but not always
marked up with class=prod. This is less consistent, because
nobody in the WG itself extracts them automatically. For some
parts there are no productions at all, because they have been
replaced by an example top-down, left-to-right parsing
algorithm in English.
]]
(toumura leaves)
McCool: will clean up and create a conventions section
... based on these 3 items
... there needs to be a conformance section
kaz: initial sentence at the beginning of each section to
indicate whether it is normative or informative
McCool: next step is extraction of normative statements to
create test cases
... security and bindings are informative
... binding templates will be incorporated into TD and have
some normative content at that point
Online test things
McCool: example of a remote access thing
... has basic auth as a security example
... planning to host a Thing Directory also
<kaz> [15]Online Test Things
[15] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/testing/online.md
McCool: people should put things online for remote access
... can the Oracle implementation be available online?
Lagally: it is online since Prague
... want to give people some hands-on help and be careful about
access
McCool: we need a way to distribute credentials
setup for the AC meeting
Matthias: want to discuss setup for the AC meeting
... what things are safe to use in the Panasonic demo? What
about the blinds?
... tried the hangout but couldn't get the lab camera
Kawaguchi: will check into it
Matthias: will be set up to pitch WoT during the entire session
... has a Nabaztag bunny for control
plugfest planning
McCool: what security protocols will we support
... time to start on the preparation documents
... can we make it easier to record results?
Matthias: the result document is easy to use, it is a good
summary
McCool: thinking about a template per project
... each one can be smaller
kaz: would it include all of the elements, including proxy,
etc?
McCool: yes, separate documents for each project
Matthias: it might go too far to the fine grain extreme and
result in too many small documents
... maybe there is some balance where common components are
documented together
McCool: we should try to have some basic security implemented
... what is expected to be supported by node-wot for the next
plugfest?
Matthias: bearer token and http basic are implemented
... could add digest
McCool: we should work up some scenarios
... would be good to have an ACE interoperability test
Matthias: can we make a security questionnaire and make it
demand driven?
... some way to pick from a few options
McCool: what about planning separate meetings for testing and
plugfest?
Koster: eventually will need a separate planning cycle for the
plugfest
McCool: still developing an overall test plan
<kaz> [adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes formatted by David Booth's [16]scribe.perl version
1.152 ([17]CVS log)
$Date: 2018/05/10 01:31:05 $
[16] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[17] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Thursday, 10 May 2018 01:34:07 UTC