W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-wg@w3.org > August 2020

[wot-usecases] minutes - 23 July 2020

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 15:38:14 +0900
Message-ID: <87o8nj0zvt.wl-ashimura@w3.org>
To: public-wot-ig@w3.org, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2020/07/23-wot-uc-minutes.ht

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Michael McCool!

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                             WoT Use Cases

23 Jul 2020

Attendees

   Present
          Kaz_Ashimura, Gyu_Myoung_Lee, Michael_Lagally,
          Michael_McCool, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Ryuichi_Matsukura,
          Cristiano_Aguzzi, Jennifer_Lin, David_Ezell,
          Ilyoung_Chong, Michael_Koster

   Regrets

   Chair
          Lagally

   Scribe
          McCool, kaz

Contents

     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]Prev minutes
         2. [4]Use Cases repo updates
         3. [5]ITU-T use cases
     * [6]Summary of Action Items
     * [7]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <kaz> scribenick: McCool

Prev minutes

   will review minutes next time due to a full agenda today

Use Cases repo updates

   Lagally: review previous work on use case prioritization
   ... including assigning owners to each category

   <kaz> [8]https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases

      [8] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases

   Lagally: would be interesting to see if any of the use cases on
   this list overlap with the ITU-T use cases
   ... we also have some pull requests in the pipeline

   <kaz> [9]Pullrequests

      [9] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pulls

   Lagally: and we also have a draft index.html file compiled from
   the existing MD files

   <kaz> [10]MR35 for including MD contents into index.html

     [10] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/35

   Lagally: first time we are seeing the integrated version that
   will be the starting point of a working group note
   ... here is a skeleton that incorporates the information; but
   is just the starting point, should not spend time in this call
   looking at the details
   ... thanks to Matsukura-san and Ashimura-san; many small things
   to fix cosmetically, but a good start
   ... would like to suggest going ahead and merging

   Gyu_Myoung: would like to note Ilyoung Chong is here now and we
   can discuss the ITU-T use cases

   Lagally: ok, we are just going to merge this PR

   <inserted> (MR35 has been merged)

ITU-T use cases

   Lagally: please do a brief self-introduction

   Gyu_Myoung: am Gyu Myoung Lee
   ... ITU-T already developed many recommendations, generic idea
   for the WoT as a platform, and also developed an architecture
   and use cases
   ... virtual home environment, ska (?) environment
   ... and now looking at interoperability and data issues
   ... have invited an expert, Prof. Ilyoung Chong

   [11]Ilyoung's slides

     [11] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/master/CONTRIBUTIONS/ITU-T - WoO based Framework to Spport Data Interoperability Presentation.pdf

   Ilyoung: "Framework to Support Data Interoperability in IoT
   Environments"
   ... service level, application level, semantic level
   ... web objects and technologies applied to interoperability
   issues, especially semantic
   ... three aspects: semantics, syntax, and object abstraction
   ... solve using web object concept and standard
   ... address data interoperability issues
   ... specifically have developed three frameworks: semantic
   mediation function, syntactic mediation function, and
   interoperable object abstraction function
   ... will send another file via email with some details
   ... in each of these there are several submodules
   ... for example, objects have data classification, data
   integration, and metadata description and coding submodules
   ... for semantic interop issue, simple mapping is not possible
   ... PhD work to look at mapping
   ... using deep learning

   Lagally: thanks. probably we should ask group for questions

   <inserted> scribenick: kaz

   McCool: very interesting to see the semantic mapping
   ... please go back to slide 11
   ... semantic interoperability provisioning
   ... or maybe slide 10
   ... data interoperability provisioning framework
   ... which part is corresponding to which ITU-T document?

   Ilyoung: on document including these bullet points

   <inserted> scribenick: McCool

   Ilyoung: data interoperability is covered in D3.3
   ... two weeks ago, delivered for the first time; not published
   as a standard yet

   Kaz: thanks; interested in arch mechanism, but also interested
   in basic use cases driving these
   ... do you have any specific use case documents?

   Ilyoung: yes, in order to verify that schemes are reasonable...
   have looked at
   ... existing data set

   <ryuichi>
   [12]https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/opb/fg/T-FG-DPM-2019-3.3-
   PDF-E.pdf

     [12] https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/opb/fg/T-FG-DPM-2019-3.3-PDF-E.pdf

   Ilyoung: studying applications, see above document

   McCool: maybe we should work on this from the other direction,
   eg show what we have in the W3C WoT WG?

   Lagally: maybe, but I'd like to ask a few more questions first
   ... interoperability is a problem, often focused on technical
   communication
   ... do you have a reference device?
   ... interoperability is between communication partners, one
   side is trying to communicate with another
   ... so do you have any concrete devices in mind?

   Ilyoung: in order to check feasibility in real applications, we
   did not apply to specific devices
   ... been looking at ES applications, using around ten data sets

   Lagally: before getting into detailed questions, let's address
   some high-level issues
   ... what are the documents, which ones are in progress, which
   ones are published as standards, etc

   Ilyoung: our work has focused on just two issues for semantic
   interoperability, we did not study detailed application of
   device; looking at ontology mapping and alignment
   ... learning representations of source and target ontology and
   alignment

   Lagally: how do you verify the mapping?

   Ilyoung: in our university, have a reference model, but not
   public

   <kaz> [13]p28 of Technical Specification D3.3 mentions WoT

     [13] https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/opb/fg/T-FG-DPM-2019-3.3-PDF-E.pdf

   Lagally: let me share my screen
   ... was looking through set of ITU-T recommendations and
   standards

   <mlagally__>
   [14]https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/index_sg.aspx?sg=
   20

     [14] https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/index_sg.aspx?sg=20

   Lagally: Y.41xx
   ... may requirements at different levels for different use
   cases
   ... how does your work relate to these; does it, or is it new
   work?

   Gyu_Myoung: in case of WoT, documents mostly related to 4400
   ... this is the WoT framework
   ... Y4414 in particular is the service architecture
   ... Y4000 range is generally for IoT

   <mlagally__>
   [15]https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=1169
   9

     [15] https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=11699

   <mlagally__>
   [16]https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=1264
   7

     [16] https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=12647

   Gyu_Myoung: and 4414 is relevant
   ... and 4452

   <mlagally__>
   [17]https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=1302
   7

     [17] https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=13027

   Gyu_Myoung: 4452 is for web of objects
   ... there are some other documents that are not published yet;
   the above are published

   <mlagally__>
   [18]https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=1363
   7

     [18] https://www.itu.int/ITU-T/recommendations/rec.aspx?rec=13637

   Ilyoung: 4415 is also relevant; virtual home network using web
   objects

   Lagally: if someone wants to be compliant with ITU-T WoT, what
   would I have to do as a company?

   Gyu_Myoung: have documents, but have not yet dealt with
   compliance or testing
   ... but are closely collaborating with oneM2M
   ... would like to look at issues related to protocol
   implementation

   Lagally: see here a lot of requirements as well, eg. for
   e-health, agriculture, etc, etc.
   ... but see some use cases; are these the ones you are working
   against, or is there some other material we should be looking
   into?

   Kaz: was interested in use cases and requirements on ITU-T side
   ... W3C work is done based on use cases and requirements and
   implementations
   ... want to understand what technology is used for what purpose
   ... we should continue the collaboration discussion, next time
   we should focus on use cases

   Lagally: if you could send us an email for what documents we
   should be reading that would be helpful
   ... especially for use cases

   Gyu_Myoung/Ilyoung: 4412 appendix has some use cases

   Gyu_Myoung: there is another site that you should look at

   Lagally: would it make sense for us to talk again once we get a
   chance to read some documents?

   <mlagally__>
   [19]https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/dpm/Pages/default.
   aspx

     [19] https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/dpm/Pages/default.aspx

   <kaz> [20]ITU-T documts

     [20] https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/focusgroups/dpm/Pages/default.aspx

   Ilyoung: semantic interoperability configuration... should be
   important

   Lagally: propose that we each go back and read each other's
   documents; if you can please take a look at the use cases we
   have been working on it would also be helpful

   [21]MD files of WoT Use Cases

     [21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/tree/master/USE-CASES

   [22]Consolidatd initial draft index.html of WoT Use Cases

     [22] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases

   Lagally: the MD files are probably the best place to start, the
   index.html is still being edited

   Kaz: may make more sense to have the use case call weekly given
   there are many resourcs to handle?

   Lagally: is one week enough for this homework?

   McCool: maybe just start with one document for next week?

   Lagally: ok, so which one should we read?
   ... well, let's just start with the list that was given; let's
   do a doodle poll in the meantime but keep the two weeks for now

   McCool: I was wondering if there are any other documents we can
   only see once we have a liaison in place?

   Kaz: suggest we look at particular use cases next time

   Gyu_Myoung: ITU-T does not normally have detailed use cases,
   but can explain
   ... but we can review

   Lagally: is a proposal to do a weekly call, but for now we can
   stick to two weeks
   ... next time, we should read each other's documents and come
   with specific questions
   ... look for some low-hanging fruit
   ... but we have to understand our commonalities better

   <kaz> [next call in two weeks on August 6]

   Gyu_Myoung: from ITU-T side, would like to better explain use
   cases in two weeks

   Lagally: ok, let's do a meeting in two weeks; please send
   slides to me or kaz and we will archive them
   ... any other business?

   (none)

   <kaz> [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [23]scribe.perl version ([24]CVS log)
    $Date: 2020/07/30 13:22:46 $

     [23] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
     [24] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Monday, 10 August 2020 06:38:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 10 August 2020 06:38:20 UTC