- 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