- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 19:56:43 +0900
- To: public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at: https://www.w3.org/2021/04/12-wot-script-minutes.html also as text below. Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Zoltan! Kazuyuki --- [1]W3C [1] https://www.w3.org/ WoT Scripting API 12 April 2021 [2]Agenda. [3]IRC log. [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Scripting_API_WebConf#12_April_2021 [3] https://www.w3.org/2021/04/12-wot-script-irc Attendees Present Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Kaz_Ashimura, Tomoaki_Mizushima, Zoltan_Kis Regrets - Chair Daniel Scribe zkis Contents 1. [4]approving past minutes 2. [5]vF2F recap 3. [6]joint meetings 4. [7]simplifying discovery, #311 5. [8]security Meeting minutes approving past minutes <kaz> [9]vF2F Day 6 [9] https://www.w3.org/2021/03/15-25-wot-minutes.html#d6-t03 <dape> [10]March-8 [10] https://www.w3.org/2021/03/08-wot-script-minutes.html Minutes approved. vF2F recap <dape> [11]https://www.w3.org/2021/03/ 15-25-wot-minutes.html#d6-t03 [11] https://www.w3.org/2021/03/15-25-wot-minutes.html#d6-t03 Daniel: we need to approve the minutes Zoltan: we had 3 action points: meeting with Discovery TF, Security TF and work with TD TF on ExposedThing Zoltan: we need to allocate meetings and make tracking issues Minutes approved. <cris> daniel: back to agenda, no pending PR <cris> ... I added a list of issues that were recently updated <cris> cris: can we discuss the possible meeting with the others groups? <cris> daniel: ok joint meetings <cris> daniel: about TD joint call usually all of us are there <cris> ... we should talk about how to create an expose thing from a ThingModel <cris> ... we have a tracking issue for this <cris> ... it is still work in progress <cris> ... the other thing is about the validation. For example, title is mandatory or not <cris> [12]https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/ 1047 [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1047 Cristiano: about generation of Thing Models … we can do it in 2 steps … Thing Model --> Partial TD … then we can use the partial TD in Scripting Daniel: I see some problems, e.g. title Cristiano: we can discuss this during the next call, needs discussion in the TD call Daniel: creating tracking issues for TD … or checkboxes for TODO list simplifying discovery, #311 [13]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/311 [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/311 Zoltan: discovery methods will be direct and directory, by default directory Daniel: when making a discovery query, one could get a direct TD (fragment) or a directory Cristiano: queries are not just filters, but you can select parts of the objects … for instance just the title … that is problem with Scripting API Daniel: you can ask a directory for TDs with a certain title Zoltan: what can you do with a partial TD? what's next? Cristiano: it's like database queries, and optimizes bandwidth Zoltan: that can be done in a script, but doesn't need to be the Scripting API Daniel: we can make query from Scripting Cristiano: we could put constraints on those queries Daniel: in the implementation I would just pass it to the app Zoltan: we need to separate the use cases, understand them and then design an API for them … first we should have the API to get TDs Daniel: the discovery conformance class is separate, no need to create ConsumedThings Zoltan: the dicovery TF spec is too complex right now, we should wait for crystallized use cases Cristiano: an app could get the TD of the directory, then figure out the rest from there … the use case of returning a fragment of TD should be done with the current API Daniel: discovery API provides a TD, in node-wot we could use the TD of the directory to handle it Zoltan: that is the vanilla API and it's possible, but we could have a better API Cristiano: agreed Cristiano: handling directly directory TDs is very complex, we'd need a better abstraction indeed Zoltan: proposing small steps, implement them, play with them on plugfest, then move on Cristiano: agreed with that direction Daniel: makes sense Zoltan: will create a PR based on #311 security Cristiano: provisioning security Zoltan: a script should not be able to provision security. It needs a different API meant for another level of security for the runtime. … it belongs to the Scriping task force, but a different deliverable Cristiano: right Daniel: CA is working on a PR, so how should we continue <dape> [14]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/299 [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/299 <dape> [15]https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/298 [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-scripting-api/issues/298 Zoltan: we should make focused proposals on the security provisioning use case, developer flow and API Daniel: we also need to think about what we can do in the core API Cristiano: developers could know what security schemes are supported Zoltan: that is a valid use case for ExposedThing Daniel: if we expose a thing node-wot adds all supported security schemes Cristiano: yes, and if something is not supported it can include info for that Daniel: we need to adjourn Meeting adjourned. Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by [16]scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC). [16] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html
Received on Monday, 26 April 2021 10:56:48 UTC