- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:23:06 +0900
- To: public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at: https://www.w3.org/2020/11/09-wot-script-minutes.html also as text below. Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Zoltan! Kazuyuki --- [1]W3C [1] http://www.w3.org/ - DRAFT - WoT Scripting API 09 Nov 2020 Attendees Present Kaz_Ashimura, Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Zoltan_Kis Regrets Chair Zoltan Scribe zkis Contents * [2]Topics 1. [3]Oct 19 meeting minutes review 2. [4]TPAC minutes 3. [5]issue#280 https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/280 * [6]Summary of Action Items * [7]Summary of Resolutions __________________________________________________________ <scribe> scribe: zkis Oct 19 meeting minutes review <kaz> [8]Oct-19 [8] https://www.w3.org/2020/10/19-wot-script-minutes.html Approved. TPAC minutes <kaz> [9]TPAC consolidated meeting minutes [9] https://www.w3.org/2020/10/05-22-wot-minutes.html Zoltan: we should discuss to include in the scope (or not) of the semantic API (suggested by M. Koster) and simpler API (like Dave Raggett's object API) Daniel: the semantic API can be done easily on the top of the current API ... we can publish a separate Note about it <cris> +1 also from my side The Scripting API part of the TPAC minutes approved. issue#280 [10]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/280 [10] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/280 Daniel explains the issue Connected to [11]https://github.com/eclipse/thingweb.node-wot/issues/333 [11] https://github.com/eclipse/thingweb.node-wot/issues/333 Zoltan: explains the node-wot issue discussion Cristiano: if we tag a property as read-only, scripts should control emitting notifications than the runtime Daniel: the ConsumedThing you get from expose() will also have problems writing read-only properties Cristiano: the emitPropertyChange() method solves that, since it can update the clients about the updated Property Zoltan: the ConsumedThing returned by expose() is a local object (looks the same but have different binding) Cristiano: explains why this is good Daniel: we don't need any change, we can do this already ... explains relevant node-wot code example Cristiano: we might have an internal DB and then writeProperty() would not be useful ... we should separate the issue of inheritance and emitPropertyChange() Zoltan: scripts could implement the convenience methods writeProperty() etc themselves ... we should have separate definition of a LocalThing from ConsumedThing Cristiano: that is confusing since it looks like ConsumedThing but works differently Daniel: we do have internal containers in node-wot and we could expose that in the spec perhaps Zoltan: I would first remove ConsumedThing and then experiment and see how to standardize the convenience Daniel: I would also allow LocalThing to write even readonly properties, which is why I wanted different method names ... OK, I agree we should start with removing ConsumedThing, at least that is portable Cristiano: agreed Daniel: we need to involve Ege and his students for feedback Zoltan: please comment on the issues Cristiano: agreed [adjourned] Summary of Action Items Summary of Resolutions [End of minutes] __________________________________________________________ Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's [12]scribe.perl version ([13]CVS log) $Date: 2020/11/16 04:53:15 $ [12] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm [13] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
Received on Monday, 16 November 2020 05:23:10 UTC