[wot-discovery] minutes - 23 November 2020

available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2020/11/23-wot-discovery-minutes.html

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Farshid!

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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

                             WoT Discovery

23 Nov 2020

   [2]Agenda

      [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Discovery_WebConf#23_November_2020

Attendees

   Present
          Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Christian_Glomb,
          Farshid_Tavakolizadeh, Andrea_Cimmino, Kunihiko_Toumura,
          Tomoaki_Mizushima, Jack_Dickinson

   Regrets

   Chair
          McCool

   Scribe
          kaz, FarshidT

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Prev minutes
         2. [5]Cancellations
         3. [6]Publication status
         4. [7]Issues and PRs
         5. [8]PR
     * [9]Summary of Action Items
     * [10]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <kaz> scribenick: kaz

Prev minutes

   [11]Nov-16

     [11] https://www.w3.org/2020/11/16-wot-discovery-minutes.html

   McCool: typo "rate limit of" to be fixed as "rate limiting"

   (fixed)

   McCool: approved

Cancellations

   McCool: McCool will be not available Dec 14, 21 and 28. So
   we'll cancel those calls.
   ... and the first meeting in Jan 2021 should be Jan 11

   Kaz: note that Jan 11 will be a bank holiday in Japan

   McCool: right
   ... we can do Jan 4 and cancel Jan 11 instead, then

Publication status

   [12]draft for publication

     [12] https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/index.html

   <inserted> scribenick: FarshidT

   Kaz: FPWD is already released:
   [13]https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/inde
   x.html

     [13] https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/index.html

   <kaz> [14]minor editorial issues (already fixed)

     [14] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-wg/2020Nov/0016.html

   Kaz: there were some minor issues (css, publication date,
   duplicate ID)

   <McCool> proposal: publish the above document as the FPWD of
   the WoT Discovery deliverable

   <McCool> proposal: publish
   [15]https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/inde
   x.html as the FPWD of the WoT Discovery deliverable

     [15] https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/index.html

   RESOLUTION: publish
   [16]https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/inde
   x.html as the FPWD of the WoT Discovery deliverable

     [16] https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/index.html

   <kaz> scribenick: kaz

Issues and PRs

   McCool: cross-referenced issue on signing
   ... created for wot-profile

   [17]wot-profile issue 55

     [17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/55

   McCool: cross referenced with a TD issue

   [18]TD issue 940

     [18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/940

   [19]JSON Web Signature (RFC7515)

     [19] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7515

   McCool: (goes through the comments in the issue)

   [20]McCool's comments

     [20] https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/issues/55#issuecomment-730501826

   McCool: let's create an issue for wot-discovery as well

   Farshid: doesn't LD-proof handle this?

   McCool: not exactly

   [21]new issue 104 for wot-discovery

     [21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/104

   Farshid: should they handle it in a canonical way?

   Kaz: so we need to define "canonicalized" here. right?

   McCool: yes
   ... adds a comment "Alternative: the "signer" could
   canonicalize internally, and this might be better (less
   fragile)."

   [22]updated comment

     [22] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/104#issue-748894447

   McCool: (goes through the other issues)

   [23]Issue 99

     [23] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/99

   McCool: (adds a comment)

   [24]additional comment

     [24] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/99#issuecomment-732233425

   [25]Issue 100

     [25] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/100

   McCool: (adds a comment in response to Farshid's comment)

   [26]McCool's response

     [26] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/100#issuecomment-732234922

   McCool: joint meeting with SDW/OGC expected on Dec 10

   Farshid: (explains the examples on how to deal with geospatial
   queries base on the OTC SensorThings)

   [27]OGC SensorThings

     [27] http://docs.opengeospatial.org/is/15-078r6/15-078r6.html#54

   [28]updated comments

     [28] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/100#issuecomment-732234922

   [29]wot issue 939 also updated

     [29] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/939

   [30]Issue 98

     [30] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/98

   McCool: add "Geolocation" label to Issue 98 above
   ... (also adds links for "Geolocation" label and "Timestamps"
   label to the comment

   [31]updated comment including resources for Geolocation ad
   Timestamps

     [31] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/98#issue-743926625

   [32]Issue 97

     [32] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/97

   McCool: in general, SPARQL is expensive
   ... problems with federation here
   ... delegate queries not to be allowed

   Andrea: (gives some possible scenario)

   McCool: let's think about several possible scenarios
   ... let's wipe out what would be OK
   ... 3. returning link to other directories so a client can also
   query them is permitted

   Andrea: wondering about the model

   Kaz: maybe it would make sense to have some more concrete
   description on the scenarios 1, 2 and 3

   Andrea: ok

   McCool: let's think a bit more
   ... 1. unclear
   ... 2. a client may do an introduction and get multiple
   results, send queries to exploration services in parallel, and
   merge the results
   ... update on point 1
   ... 1. (limited to delegated/recursive federation, where a
   directory queries other directories on a client's behalf)

   Andrea: if we stick with SPARQL federation, the point 1 would
   be a bit problematic
   ... SPARQL doesn't allow "recursion" per se, delegated
   endpoints must be known in advance

   McCool: let's allow SPARQL delegation for the moment, but add
   an editor's note regarding the DoS concern.
   ... (also adds comments to option 3)
   ... these links may not be in a TD, so technically may be
   out-of-band info
   ... which would allow us to associate them with a given TD

   Farshid: related to 34

   [33]Issue 34

     [33] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34

   Farshid: link section inside TD

   McCool: we need some more text to explain those points
   ... any volunteers?

   Andrea: can work on #1

   McCool: and myself work on #2

PR

   [34]PR 103

     [34] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/103

   Farshid: minor fix on JSONPath, etc.

   McCool: wouldn't it effect the FPWD publication?

   Kaz: no

   McCool: OK
   ... (and merges PR 103)

   [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    1. [35]publish
       https://w3c.github.io/wot-discovery/publication/1-fpwd/inde
       x.html as the FPWD of the WoT Discovery deliverable

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [36]scribe.perl version ([37]CVS log)
    $Date: 2020/12/07 12:19:23 $

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

Received on Monday, 7 December 2020 12:20:33 UTC