[Scripting] minutes - 4 May 2020

available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2020/05/04-wot-minutes.html

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for takint the minutes, Zoltan!

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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

                               - DRAFT -

                             WoT Scripting

04 May 2020

Attendees

   Present
          Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Kaz_Ashimura,
          Tomoaki_Mizushima, Zoltan_Kis

   Regrets

   Chair
          Zoltan

   Scribe
          zkis

Contents

     * [2]Topics
         1. [3]approving previous minutes
         2. [4]issue 214,
            https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/214
         3. [5]pull request
            https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/209
         4. [6]issue 213,
            https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/213
     * [7]Summary of Action Items
     * [8]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <scribe> scribe: zkis

approving previous minutes

   Past minutes: [9]https://www.w3.org/2020/04/27-wot-minutes.html

      [9] https://www.w3.org/2020/04/27-wot-minutes.html

   Minutes approved.

issue 214, [10]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/214

     [10] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/214

   Daniel: Cristiano is working to implement OAuth2 and filed this
   issue.

   <Ege>
   [11]https://github.com/owncloud/oauth2/wiki/OAuth-code-Flow-Seq
   uence-Diagram

     [11] https://github.com/owncloud/oauth2/wiki/OAuth-code-Flow-Sequence-Diagram

   Zoltan: need to check if it is enough to have Promises

   Daniel: use might get a popup before the Promise resolves

   Zoltan: that is fine, but in a headless system you should be
   provisioned and not need a popup

   Ege: quick authorize can happen through scripting, but in other
   cases there is a human involved

   Zoltan: how is a human involved? popup?

   Ege: yes

   Zoltan: even then the Promise would be on hold, so the API
   works with or without a human in the loop
   ... the question is, do we need to change the API, but so far I
   don't see the need
   ... will comment on the issue

pull request [12]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/209

     [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/209

   Daniel: suggested
   [13]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/209#issuecomm
   ent-619905410

     [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/pull/209#issuecomment-619905410

   Zoltan: the proposal of moving properties of InteractionData to
   InteractionOptions for writes works for me, actually I like it
   ... showing example from Web NFC, writing takes more
   possibilities and will switch on developer provided type

   Daniel: I see an issue that we have different
   InteractionOptions for writing than for reading
   ... I would prefer TypeScript approach

   Zoltan: but this is an accepted pattern, it should be fine

   Daniel: for one, would NOT like if we moved stuff in
   InteractionOptions for writing
   ... then, would like to have InteractionData both for reading
   and writing

   Zoltan: is there a TypeScript related issue or an esthetic
   concern?

   Daniel: both

   Zoltan: implementation should still determine the type from
   value
   ... in the current PR, it doesn't break the API and handles the
   extra information

   Daniel: I would prefer the explicit InteractionData structure
   (only) on both reading and writing
   ... how other APIs handle "any"?

   Zoltan: there was some discussion that a typedef is preferred,
   need to check
   ... so let's write examples in all the styles

   Ege: that sounds good

   Daniel: we could actually merge the PR and then experiment

   Ege: how could we ask developers about preferences?

   Zoltan: we'd need to reach out and ask specific people

   Daniel: open a separate issue with this and ping some people

   Zoltan: maybe we can use issue 201:
   [14]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/201
   ... and I can ask TAG members for advice

     [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/201

issue 213, [15]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/213

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/213

   Zoltan: we need a convention for simply exposing strings

   Daniel: in most cases the implementation knows the encoding (in
   closed environments)
   ... also, ASCII only strings could always be exposed

   Zoltan: right
   ... but we need to specify these in the algorithms

   Daniel: did we get any comments about language or encoding?
   ... enumerations should work language independent

   Zoltan: right, but e.g. error messages won't
   ... apps may want to ask a certain language

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [16]scribe.perl version 1.154 ([17]CVS log)
    $Date: 2020/05/07 14:32:15 $

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

Received on Wednesday, 13 May 2020 09:34:55 UTC