- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 21:33:25 +0900
- To: public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:
https://www.w3.org/2020/08/10-wot-discovery-minutes.html
also as text below.
Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Andrea!
Kazuyuki
---
[1]W3C
[1] http://www.w3.org/
- DRAFT -
WoT Discovery
10 Aug 2020
[2]Agenda
[2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Discovery_WebConf#10_August_2020
Attendees
Present
Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Andrea_Cimmino,
Christian_Kurze, Cristiano_Aguzzi,
Farshid_Tavakolizadeh, David_Ezell, Kunihiko_Toumura,
Tomoaki_Mizushima, Michael_Koster
Regrets
Chair
McCool
Scribe
andrea_cimmino, kaz
Contents
* [3]Topics
1. [4]Guests
2. [5]Previous minutes
3. [6]MongoDB
4. [7]PR 38
5. [8]PR 47
* [9]Summary of Action Items
* [10]Summary of Resolutions
__________________________________________________________
<kaz> scribenick: andrea_cimmino
Guests
christian from MongoDB is present
meeting starts with christian presenting himself
<kaz> (Christian has read the W3C Patent Policy and understands
the RF commitment)
Previous minutes
McCool: minutes from last meeting are reviewed
<inserted> [11]August-3
[11] https://www.w3.org/2020/08/03-wot-discovery-minutes.html
McCool: PR for anonymous TD was created, as stated in the
minutes
... remind McCool to create issue for the spec issues/43
... remind McCool during MongoDB discussion to create an
idempotent issue
... minutes proposed for publication with no further comments
minutes reviewed and publish, changing topic now to MongoDB
MongoDB
McCool: Does MongoDB supports JSON-LD? and XPath?
Christian: it supports Json-LD
... regarding XPath, MongoDB supports a similar query language
McCool: it would be good to have the spec of such language
... the place to collaborate is to have a second implementation
based on MongoDB
Farshid: current implementation is not based on MongoDB
... instead the implementation uses LevelDB
Christian: how does LevelDB is used?
Farshid: the key is the ID and the value the TD
McCool: the TDD have an API to register, and then someone can
filter the TD. TDs have an id field, which is optional,
therefore sometimes the ids must have a created on the fly id
... there could be other meta-data, also not included.
Therefore we rely on a wrapper object to support such
information
... ids can be updated, they are not immutable
... the general idea is that authorized devices can receive
notifications, so basically, when the TD changes de id it has
to be deleted first, re-created, and then notify those devices
... when created on the fly, maybe, ids should not be changed
if TD is updated
... bottom line, the draft needs to include how to deal with
this stuff
... implementation time should be until January 2022
... candidate recommendation July 2021 (CR)
... final for December 2021
... ideally, July 2021 we should have two implementations that
satisfy the requirements
<kaz> (Implementation report plan by CR transition;
Implementation Report with concrete results by PR transition)
McCool: implementations do not need to be Open Source, but they
must pass the tests
farshid: our implementation is based on the requirements of a
project, from which we got involved in this initiative
... there are things outside the specifications, like how the
data is stored, and instead, the specification details the APIs
... in this way someone can implement internally the spec with
the desired technologies, but still implement the same spec
McCool describes how the current draft is structured
McCool: the draft does not specifies the internal functioning
... one of the issues are the type of search supported: XPath,
Json Path, and SPARQL
... we will need a SPARQL-based implementation if SPARQL is
included
... Xpath and Json path are still under discussion
<kaz> (Kaz's note: basic expectation is all the features
including optional features should have more than one
implementation; but there should be multiple implementations
given SPARQL is also a W3C Recommendation.)
McCool: clarification, the project of Farshid was originally
LinkSmart, from which other projects were derived and this
component enhanced
... having an open SPARQL can be dangerous, therefore, it will
be used for advanced implementation
... the baseline is Json Path and XPath
... in general, regarding the architecture, privacy is a
concern
... since distributing data can be used to infer information
and also track people
... in the discovery there will be two steps: introducing first
(only informative), and then the exploration mechanisms
... even if christian does not implement a version, your
contribution and experience will be very valuable
... for instance, in the idempotent issue
Christian: the problem here is how to identify anonymous TD
... a hash could be calculated, but the order of the keys is
important
... the full td should be used for the hash, so two TD are
identical only if their whole content is the same
McCool: here the thing is that the same device could create
different TDs that are the same, exactly the same content
Farshid: some UC may include this beahviour
... for these cases maybe a short life span may help
... two devices are identical, and publishing the same TD, and
only their payloads are different
... these, once registered, get a unique ID. But this ID is
unknown during registration. Everything should work fine
McCool: maybe we should register a special TD, get the ID, and
then register the right TD with the ID
... let's further discuss this
... let's create an issue and discuss (assigned to farshid)
<FarshidT> Issue to discuss how to handle anonymous TD and
avoid duplicates:
[12]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/48
[12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/48
PR 38
<kaz> [13]PR 38
[13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/38
discussion about last befrancis issue, farshid already replied
Farshid: the comments are outside the scope of directory
... like, having a TDD that automatically creates TDs from
adapters
McCool: maybe we could approach this creating micro-services
that perform different tasks
... nevertheless, McCool agrees with Farshid
McCool replies in the PR
McCool proposes merging the PR, since no objections are done,
PR is merged
PR 47
scribenick: kaz
<kaz> [14]PR 47
[14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/47
<kaz> [15]diff
[15] https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/wot-discovery/47/5ff4fe9...AndreaCimminoArriaga:0f50db5.html
<kaz> [16]changes
[16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/47/files
McCool: (captures several issues as comments)
[17]McCool's comments
[17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/47#issuecomment-671409816
<Zakim> kaz, you wanted to suggest we use <h2> with <section>
for ReSpec. Please see also:
[18]https://github.com/w3c/respec/wiki/section
[18] https://github.com/w3c/respec/wiki/section
<kaz> (<h5> surrounded by <section> and </section> is OK,
though)
[adjourned]
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
__________________________________________________________
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
David Booth's [19]scribe.perl version ([20]CVS log)
$Date: 2020/08/17 14:19:26 $
[19] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
[20] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2020 12:33:30 UTC