- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 14:53:58 +0900
- To: public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at: https://www.w3.org/2020/03/30-wot-minutes.html also as text below. Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Zoltan! Kazuyuki --- [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ - DRAFT - WoT Scripting 30 Mar 2020 Attendees Present Kaz_Ashimura, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Zoltan_Kis, Tomoaki_Mizushima Regrets Chair Zoltan Scribe zkis Contents * [2]Topics 1. [3]Past minutes https://www.w3.org/2020/03/23-wot-minutes.html 2. [4]Issues, #208 https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/208 3. [5]Issue_204 https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/204 4. [6]Issue_201 https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/201 * [7]Summary of Action Items * [8]Summary of Resolutions __________________________________________________________ <scribe> scribe: zkis Past minutes [9]https://www.w3.org/2020/03/23-wot-minutes.html [9] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/23-wot-minutes.html past minutes approved Daniel: MMc also asked for approving the F2F minutes <kaz> [10]monday minutes [10] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/16-wot-minutes.html no objections, minutes approved Issues, #208 [11]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/208 [11] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/208 Daniel: on the TD call the issue was acknowledged and more work is needed on the Event affordance Ege: we need some ideas from existing experience, e.g. M. Lagally Zoltan: does it make sense to expose subscribe id's or keep them private in the impl? Ege: usually not, except perhaps in few use cases ... subscription payload might make sense in certain application ... maybe we can say if there is a use case, we come back to this Zoltan: so until then we identify events by names in Scripting Daniel: the implementations needs to keep them as a state ... today we don't expose the subscriber id's ... we don't fully support yet any filtering on events Zoltan: do implementations understand subscription data or is it opaque? ... in the current bindings? Daniel: at most we pass subscription data along in node-wot Zoltan: the Oracle use case would need that node-wot passes on the data Daniel: yes Issue_204 [12]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/204 [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/204 DP made a semantic layer prototype in [13]https://github.com/danielpeintner/thingweb.node-wot/commit/ 844e199357d84494030549dadd655d20fe8a0706 [13] https://github.com/danielpeintner/thingweb.node-wot/commit/844e199357d84494030549dadd655d20fe8a0706 Daniel: this is a layer built on the top of the existing Scripting API ... enables fetching e.g. a semantic Property ... supported for ConsumedThing ... this is for experimenting Zoltan: I like it's a layered approach, like a library; not sure we should standardize yet Daniel: it would be good to standardize Ege: would not oppose this, and should be standardized Zoltan: the standardization could happen in a new spec, like Generic Sensor vs Accelerometer specifications <kaz> [14]6. The ConsumedThing interface [14] https://w3c.github.io/wot-scripting-api/#the-consumedthing-interface Zoltan: it could be separate conformance class Daniel: it makes sense to do it in other spec that extends the current API ... we should get M. Koster and other and experiment with it in plugfests etc ... for instance about parameters etc ... we should look into semantic extensions Zoltan: what are next steps? plugfest PoC? Daniel: will work on implementation in node-wot, but need input and feedback from M. Koster and others Zoltan: so first part of the work will be in node-wot Daniel: there will be the plugfest call, any plans for the virtual plugfest? Ege: there was the VPN tool proposed and needs to be tested ... so that we could make virtual plugfests easiers <kaz> [15]Mar-25 PlugFest minutes [15] https://www.w3.org/2020/03/25-wot-pf-minutes.html Issue_201 [16]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/201 [16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/201 Zoltan: should we introduce a Scripting-specific data description type that would merge mediaType (contentType from Forms) and DataSchema? ... otherwise in order to extend the algorithms, we'd need to define everything the TD spec defines Daniel: going with Value would be fine, we don't even need DataSchema there ... it's repetitive Zoltan: that is true also for mediaType Daniel: we need the mediaType because we don't know which form was used ... app can look just at the mediaType Zoltan: we can get DataSchema by property name from the TD Daniel: right ... we need this both on input and output ... we still need the formIndex in InteractionOptions Zoltan: I can create an experimental PR for this Ege: makes sense to me, too Daniel: the only fear is to break existing implementations Zoltan: that requires some thinking ... should we include API version in the spec? Daniel: never seen a good solution with a version Zoltan: let's continue in the issue discussion <kaz> [adjourned] Summary of Action Items Summary of Resolutions [End of minutes] __________________________________________________________ Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's [17]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([18]CVS log) $Date: 2020/04/07 05:52:31 $ [17] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm [18] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 7 April 2020 05:53:59 UTC