[wot-archtiecture] mintues - 27 February 2020

availabel at:
  https://www.w3.org/2020/02/27-wot-arch-minutes.html

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Michael Koster!

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                            WoT-Architecture

27 Feb 2020

   [2]Agenda

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

Attendees

   Present
          Call1: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Kunihiko_Toumura,
          Jennifer_Lin, Zoltan_Kis, Philip_Tran
          Call2: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Michael_Koster,
          Michael_McCool

   Regrets

   Chair
          Lagally

   Scribe
          kaz, mjkoster

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Call 1
         1. [5]Agenda
         2. [6]Invited guests
         3. [7]Previous minutes
         4. [8]Issues
         5. [9]Use cases
     * [10]Call 2

    1. [11]Agenda
    2. [12]Prev minutes approval
    3. [13]Singapore govtech collab
    4. [14]Prev minutes approval (revisited)
    5. [15]Issues

     [16]Summary of Action Items

     [17]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <kaz> scribenick: kaz

Call 1

Agenda

   Lagally: (goes through the agenda)
   ... minutes, issues, MRs, use cases, presentation on DID
   ... can consider the use case from the Singapore govtech as
   well if possible

   Jennifer: have one public use case as well
   ... normal one using GPS sensors
   ... the scale is quite small

   Lagally: if you can send it to us by email, we can add it for
   the next call
   ... we'll have the same agenda for the 2nd call as well

Invited guests

   Kaz: we're inviting people from Singapore Govtech
   ... (explains the W3C patent policy for invited guests)

   [18]W3C Patent Policy - Section 5. W3C Royalty-Free (RF)
   Licensing Requirements

     [18] https://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20170801/#sec-Requirements

   [19]Patent Policy FAQ 6

     [19] https://www.w3.org/2003/12/22-pp-faq.html#non-participants

   Lagally: W3C specs are provided based the royalty-free policy
   ... but we'll have use case discussion today

Previous minutes

   [20]Feb-20 minutes

     [20] https://www.w3.org/2020/02/20-wot-arch-minutes.html

   Lagally: don't think there is any problem/concern
   ... just quickly go through the minutes
   ... issues, pullrequests, terminology, ...
   ... verifiable credentials, use case categorization
   ... use cases from old document
   ... recap from the 1st call
   ... presentation on DID
   ... discussion to be continued during the main call, etc.

   [21]McCool's slides

     [21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/blob/master/proposals/2020-02-WoT-DID.pdf

   Lagally: any concerns to approve the minutes?

   (none)

   Lagally: minutes approved

Issues

   Lagally: Chris Needham from MEIG mentioned some use cases to be
   discussed
   ... would invite NHK, etc.
   ... one thing Chris mentioned audio/video streaming protocols

   [22]Issue 442

     [22] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/442

   Jennifer: we want to look into use cases for node-wot but is
   this Architecture call relevant?

   Lagally: there is no specific telco for node-wot

   Zoltan: we can invite Daniel Peintner if needed
   ... we can have some discussion during the Scripting API call
   as well

   <zkis> [23]https://github.com/eclipse/thingweb.node-wot

     [23] https://github.com/eclipse/thingweb.node-wot

   <mlagally> [24]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api

     [24] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api

   <zkis> For node-wot please contact Daniel Peintner and
   Christian Glomb

   Kaz: explains the structure of the WoT work

   <zkis> Scripting call details in
   [25]https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-wg/2018Feb/
   0033.html

     [25] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-wot-wg/2018Feb/0033.html

   Kaz: initial discussion about use cases is done here during the
   Architecture call
   ... so you're encouraged to start with this call
   ... and then if needed/interested, you can join the Scripting
   API calls about the API definition and the Thing Description
   calls about the data model definition
   ... note that node-wot is one of the implementations based on
   the WoT standards like the WoT Thing Description

   Lagally: a couple of issues have been discussed

   <mlagally>
   [26]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/tree/master/USE-CAS
   ES

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

   Lagally: use cases repo above
   ... we're discussing stakeholders, actors and roles

   <mlagally> Please review and contribute to
   [27]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/pull/431

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

   Lagally: also working on X-protocol interworking

   Philip: question about security
   ... what would be the provision, user credentials, etc.?

   Lagally: authentication mechanisms can be specified within the
   TD data model

   Zoltan: are you interested in node-wot running on browser?

   Philip: yes

   Zoltan: better to have discussion with implementers

   Kaz: we should add this to the next Govtech Collab call and
   invite Daniel to that call

   Zoltan: yes
   ... probably remains application-specific
   ... there is no central server for authentication yet

   Lagally: right
   ... on the other hand, DID and VC could be a possible mechanism

   Philip: any guidelines about security?
   ... everything exposed publicly?

   <zkis> [28]https://w3c.github.io/wot-security/

     [28] https://w3c.github.io/wot-security/

   Kaz: security-related discussion is done during the Security TF
   ... there is a guideline document as well (as Zoltan pasted
   above)
   ... we should talk about Govtech's questions during the next
   Govtech call
   ... and clarify which topics to be discussed during with WoT TF
   calls

Use cases

   [29]Issue 438

     [29] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/438

   Lagally: use cases from old uc documents

   [30]old uc doc

     [30] https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/aa90b2b8/ucr-doc/index.html:

   Lagally: (goes through the old uc doc)
   ... 1.3 Domain: manufacturing
   ... shift of fuction in automation systems
   ... service platform for automation factories
   ... optimal maintenance in connected industries
   ... lifecycle management for industrial automation system (IAS)

   Zoltan: "orchestration" is usually used as the term

   Lagally: also relationship between the tasks
   ... potentially different endpoints
   ... maybe some additional requirements come out
   ... we've been talking about lifecycles
   ... on some specific engineering level

   Jennifer: a few questions about discovery

   Philip: looked at this
   ... we want to go for WoT
   ... in terms of "discovery", I'm not sure about the mechanism

   <zkis>
   [31]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/blob/master/proposals/
   directory.md

     [31] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/blob/master/proposals/directory.md

   Zoltan: there is some proposal
   ... McCool is consolidating resources
   ... discovery in different stages from the application
   lifecycle
   ... possibly local discovery
   ... would suggest you try to read the directory.md file
   ... note that we've been not using actual discovery mechanism
   for our PoC (named PlugFest)

   <zkis> See also [32]https://wotify.org/

     [32] https://wotify.org/

   Lagally: would discuss the detail during the next Govtech call

   Kaz: yes

   <zkis> Contact Ege Korkan for wotify.org

   Lagally: some more points about old use cases

   Toumura: 1.6 Domain: other
   ... can be applied other industry domains
   ... related to discovery and lifecycle managment discussion
   ... resource description like the Thind Description
   ... ensemble discovery related to management of applications
   ... if there is some more concrete use case description, we can
   discuss it more in detail

   Lagally: we don't have any specific format for payload
   ... how to define actual payload for Websocket, etc.
   ... detailed communication using Websocket

   Toumura: not necessarily depends on specific protocols
   ... it's interesting for that kind of activity

   Lagally: device management might be out of scope
   ... what should be observed?

   Kaz: I think we should clarify what kind of "management" is
   expected here

   Toumura: seems to me that management is for not WoT itself
   ... using TD as a management tool

   Kaz: we should add clarification about the scope of this use
   case
   ... I personally am very interested in a smart interaction
   management mechanism but maybe it's out of scope from the WoT
   Charter

   Jennifer: btw, I'll send my use case description to Michael
   Lagally

   Lagally: thanks, please send it to me, McCool and Kaz

   [Call 1 adjourned]
     __________________________________________________________

Call 2

   <scribe> scribenick: mjkoster

Agenda

   <kaz> Agenda:
   [33]https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#
   Agenda

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

Prev minutes approval

   <kaz> [34]Feb-20 minutes

     [34] https://www.w3.org/2020/02/20-wot-arch-minutes.html

Singapore govtech collab

   Kaz: remember Singapore Govtech's focus and requirements
   ... so far it seems they're interested in node-wot
   implementation but we should clarify their needs a bit more
   during the govtech collab calls, and then think about how to
   deal with them during our TF calls, e.g., starting with use
   case discussion during the Architecture calls

   Lagally: node-wot and also centralized directory security

   McCool: re govtech, we should separate requirements that can be
   satisfied with 1.0 vs. future work
   ... for example, the GPS is a good place to start

   Lagally: we should be selective in terms of business needs
   represented by the various use cases

   McCool: we're still in the collection phase

   Lagally: we should invite Govtech to participate in the
   plugfest call as well

Prev minutes approval (revisited)

   Lagally: any objection to publishing the minutes?

   (none)

   <inserted> minutes approved and to be published

Issues

   #442 media streaming protocols

   <kaz> [35]Issue 442

     [35] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/442

   McCool: there is a telepresence requirement from Govtech, where
   with BBC it is more about playback control type functions

   Lagally: it's currently a placeholder and we hope to get
   someone from the MEIG

   Kaz: the MEIG guys would like to participate after we have a
   media use case to discuss
   ... so we could generate an initial template

   Lagally: template with a description, how do we know their use
   cases?

   Kaz: I've been attending both the MEIG calls and the WoT calls,
   so I'm willing to work on an initial use case description as a
   starting point

   <mlagally>
   [36]https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/442

     [36] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/442

   McCool: maybe we could send them an email listing some ideas
   like playback control, transport control, media selectors

   <kaz> kaz: can volunteer to generate an initial use case

   <kaz> ACTION: kaz to generate an initial use case for issue 442

   <inserted> [37]Issue 438

     [37] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/issues/438

   Lagally: in the earlier meeting, they reviewed the use case
   domains by section in the document
   ... description language to describe the relations between TD
   instances
   ... there is an RFC with some mime-types that may be useful as
   link relation types

   McCool: what are relation types we can re-use for example
   instanceof

   Lagally: we should define this in the context of a couple of
   use cases

   <inserted> [38]old use case document

     [38] https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/aa90b2b8/ucr-doc/index.html

   McCool: suggest to define a section in the TD document for
   these relation types
   ... how can we use TD with openAPI?
   ... how do we add QoS information to a TD?

   Lagally: propose we look into the use cases by domain, starting
   at Smart Cities

   McCool: need to describe events better for this use case

   <inserted> [39]1.1.2 Adaptive Building

     [39] https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/aa90b2b8/ucr-doc/index.html#adaptive-building

   Lagally: adaptive buildings use case
   ... dynamic appearance and disappearance of things

   McCool: a conference room system may have user devices that
   come and go
   ... smart buildings take user preferences into account in
   settings like lighting and HVAC

   Lagally: fleet management scenarios
   ... there is a requirement to dynamically switch from one
   network to another

   McCool: how do you deal with devices that are not always
   connected?

   Lagally: part of a digital twin is the caching
   ... smart control of washing machines
   ... seems to be mostly management of user preferences

   McCool: what about push services? how do notifications really
   happen?
   ... maybe there is a generic interface for pushing messages
   that could use a TD to describe it in an interoperable way

   Lagally: what we are missing is a template mechanism
   ... template mechanism as distinct from an actual catalog of
   templates

   <inserted> [40]1.1.4 Integrated Home Automation

     [40] https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/aa90b2b8/ucr-doc/index.html#integrated-home-automation

   Lagally: home automation use case
   ... known issues of privacy

   McCool: this use case is a work in progress that isn't finished

   <inserted> [41]1.1.5 Smart home

     [41] https://cdn.statically.io/gh/w3c/wot/aa90b2b8/ucr-doc/index.html#Smart_home

   McCool: sounds like the Mozilla use case

   Koster: volunteering to fill out use case for Smart Home and
   try to get Project CHIP participants

   Lagally: create an issue for tracking smart home (Zigbee) use
   case strategy to engage Zigbee and Project CHIP

   WoT supports a loosely coupled "works with" vs. "works as"
   integration pattern

   Koster: sign up for Smart Home use case

   Lagally: strawman list of experts for various use cases
   ... aob?
   ... adjourned

Summary of Action Items

   [NEW] ACTION: kaz to generate an initial use case for issue 442

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [42]scribe.perl version
    1.152 ([43]CVS log)
    $Date: 2020/03/03 05:51:53 $

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

Received on Monday, 9 March 2020 05:17:15 UTC