[wot-architcture] minutes - 12 March 2020

available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2020/03/12-wot-arch-minutes.html

also as text below.

Thanks,

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                            WoT-Architecture

12 Mar 2020

Attendees

   Present
          Call 1: Kaz_Ashimura, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Lagally,
          Tomoaki_Mizushima, Zoltan_Kis
          Call 2: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Michael_Koster,
          Zoltan_Kis

   Regrets
          Call 2: McCool, Ege

   Chair
          Lagally

   Scribe
          kaz

Contents

     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]Call 1
              1. [4]Agenda
              2. [5]Prev minutes
              3. [6]Doodle poll for the new slot
              4. [7]Issues
              5. [8]Pullrequests
              6. [9]HTML for REC publication
         2. [10]Call 2
              1. [11]Agenda
              2. [12]Previous minutes
              3. [13]Updated HTML for REC publication
              4. [14]X-protocol interworking
              5. [15]Issues
              6. [16]Use cases
     * [17]Summary of Action Items
     * [18]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

Call 1

   <scribe> scribenick: kaz

   [19]Mar-11 main call minutes

     [19] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/11-wot-minutes.html

   <mlagally>
   [20]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf

     [20] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf

   <mlagally> [21]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/448

     [21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/448

Agenda

   Lagally: (goes through the agenda for today)

   [22]Agenda

     [22] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#Agenda

   Lagally: would like to start discussion on possible building
   blocks based on the use case discussion

Prev minutes

   [23]Mar-5 minutes

     [23] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/05-wot-arch-minutes.html

   Lagally: any problems?

   (none)

   Lagally: approved

Doodle poll for the new slot

   [24]Doodle results

     [24] https://doodle.com/poll/f6w4vp8uheub2hx6?utm_campaign=poll_push_close_admin&utm_medium=email&utm_source=poll_transactional&utm_content=choosefinal-cta#close

   Lagally: this time slot (9am CET) doesn't work
   ... would think we should keep the current slot in the end
   ... because Sebastian and McCool can make the Call 2
   ... so let's keep the current time

   RESOLUTION: keep the current time for Call 1

   Toumura: currently, this Doodle poll is based on UTC
   ... but the calls are allocated based on US time

   Kaz: yeah, so the original time is 7am CET and 3pm Japan now
   (till March 28)

   <mlagally>
   [25]https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?
   year=2020&month=3&day=19&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=17
   9&p4=248

     [25] https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2020&month=3&day=19&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=179&p4=248

   <mlagally> Time on March 19th

   <mlagally>
   [26]https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?
   year=2020&month=3&day=19&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=17
   9&p4=248

     [26] https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2020&month=3&day=19&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=179&p4=248

   <mlagally> Time on March 26th:

   <mlagally>
   [27]https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?
   year=2020&month=3&day=26&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=17
   9&p4=248

     [27] https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2020&month=3&day=26&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=179&p4=248

   <mlagally> April 2nd:

   <mlagally>
   [28]https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?
   year=2020&month=4&day=2&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=179
   &p4=248

     [28] https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2020&month=4&day=2&hour=7&min=0&sec=0&p1=168&p2=224&p3=179&p4=248

   Lagally: would ask people about if they have any problems with
   the current time again

   Kaz: ok

Issues

   [29]Issues

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

   Lagally: no new issues

Pullrequests

   [30]Pullrequests

     [30] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull

   [31]Pullrequest 450

     [31] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/450

   Lagally: thanks, Toumura-san
   ... let's merge it!
   ... (merged)

   <mlagally>
   [32]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/448/files

     [32] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/448/files

   [33]Pullrequest 448

     [33] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/448

   Lagally: Jennifer has created this
   ... (goes through the changes)
   ... primarily about mobile devices
   ... reusable localization module is needed
   ... there are a couple of interesting things
   ... e.g., latitude/longitude/altitude

   Kaz: there is geolocation api and generic sensor api which
   handle geolocation information, e.g., latitude/altitude
   ... maybe we should survey those existing specs

   Toumura: there is another group named Spatial Data IG

   Kaz: we can look into that group's work as well

   Lagally: shows the Charter of the IG

   [34]Spatial Data on the Web Best Practices

     [34] https://www.w3.org/TR/sdw-bp/

   Kaz: looking into related work including this would make sense

   Lagally: main requirement is need for describing location
   information
   ... various styles in various countries

   Zoltan: there is MIME type for that purpose

   <zkis> [35]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_Exchange_Format

     [35] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS_Exchange_Format

   <mlagally>
   [36]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_navigation

     [36] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_navigation

   Zoltan: application/gpx+xml and application/octet-stream
   ... we should be able to use it

   Lagally: we should ask the Govtech guys for ideas too

   Zoltan: data serialization should/could be application-specific
   ... but some normalization for the data is important

   Lagally: potential property names
   ... we had some strawman discussion for wot-profile

   <mlagally>
   [37]https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#mandatory-fields-0

     [37] https://w3c.github.io/wot-profile/#mandatory-fields-0

   Lagally: simple proposal of streamline
   ... possible issue with altitude with bridges, etc.

   <mlagally> [38]https://www.iso.org/standard/39242.html

     [38] https://www.iso.org/standard/39242.html

   Lagally: another resource from ISO

   Zoltan: 2 levels of approach here
   ... convey the data and context
   ... the other is going into deep
   ... incorporating with our vocabulary
   ... architecture-wise, how to represent the data is to be
   discussed
   ... deeper discussion would become too complicated

   Lagally: agree
   ... would see the clear description on the use cases and the
   requirements for the Architecture discussion
   ... possible extension for node-wot from implementation
   viewpoint
   ... let's go through the rest of the use case description
   ... very nice and useful use case

   Zoltan: I like those examples since they're related to actual
   life
   ... let's keep on the right approach

   Lagally: would like to merge this

   (no objections)

   Lagally: merged

HTML for REC publication

   [39]static HTML

     [39] https://w3c.github.io/wot-architecture/publication/rec/

   [40]diff from Proposed REC

     [40] https://w3c.github.io/wot-architecture/publication/rec/diff.html

   Lagally: need to look at the diff

   Kaz: we can skip the title and the status section
   ... can updated the reference URLs as well
   ... the publication date for TD should be the same day as the
   Architecture itself (as a REC :)

   Lagally: wondering about how to describe the changes

   Kaz: no normative changes
   ... just editorial fixes
   ... also was wondering about fig 18

   <mlagally> Proposal: Change log to be extended with: "No
   normative changes, minor editorial fixes and stable external
   references.

   Kaz: do we want to use the updated diagram which we generated
   for the press release?

   Lagally: no, don't think we should update the figure

   RESOLUTION: Change log to be extended with: "No normative
   changes, minor editorial fixes and stable external references.

   Lagally: Kaz, please generate an updated HTML based on the
   discussion today

   Kaz: ok

   <scribe> ACTION: kaz to update the static HTML for REC
   publication

   Lagally: any other business for this call?

   (none)

   Lagally: let's talk with some of you during the Call 2

   [Call 1 adjourned]
     __________________________________________________________

Call 2

Agenda

   Lagally: (goes through the agenda)
   ... (also the discussion during the first call)

   [41]Agenda

     [41] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#Agenda

   [42]call 1 minutes

     [42] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/12-wot-arch-minutes.html

Previous minutes

   [43]Mar-5 minutes

     [43] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/05-wot-arch-minutes.html

   Lagally: any objections to accept the minutes?

   (no objections)

   Lagally: approved

Updated HTML for REC publication

   [44]Draft for REC

     [44] https://w3c.github.io/wot-architecture/publication/rec/

   [45]Diff from Proposed REC

     [45] https://w3c.github.io/wot-architecture/publication/rec/diff.html

   Lagally: (goes through the diff above)
   ... minor editorial changes
   ... and references to be updated
   ... will create a pullrequest for the changes section
   ... part of minor editorial changes

   [46]Pullrequest 451

     [46] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/451

   Kaz: maybe we should not use "REC" specStatus for respec

   Lagally: ok
   ... (adds a comment to the pullrequest)
   ... close this pullrequest without merging
   ... note that the change description itself is already
   reflected

   Kaz: that's fine :)
   ... will regenerate the static HTML version then

X-protocol interworking

   [47]Pullrequest 431

     [47] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/431

   Lagally: would suggest we look into the detail next week

Issues

   Lagally: just quick sanity check

   [48]Issues

     [48] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues

   Lagally: media-related use cases

Use cases

   [49]Use case descriptions

     [49] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/tree/master/USE-CASES

   Lagally: (goes through the use case descriptions)
   ... want to have overviews

   [50]requirements.md

     [50] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/blob/master/REQUIREMENTS/requirements.md

   Lagally: we don't have semantic annotation requirements yet
   ... e.g., for the compatibility with iotschema.org

   Koster: right
   ... we should work on that
   ... go ahead and make an action

   Lagally: ok
   ... (creates a new Issue for that)

   <mlagally>
   [51]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/452

     [51] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/452

   Koster: W3C Thing Description being a backplane for semantic
   information

   Lagally: should I assign this issue to you?

   Koster: yes :)

   [Call 2 adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: kaz to update the static HTML for REC publication

Summary of Resolutions

    1. [52]keep the current time for Call 1
    2. [53]Change log to be extended with: "No normative changes,
       minor editorial fixes and stable external references.

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [54]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([55]CVS log)
    $Date: 2020/03/16 04:59:42 $

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

Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2020 08:51:31 UTC