W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wot-wg@w3.org > February 2021

[wot-discovery] minutes - 18 January 2020

From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 21:42:13 +0900
Message-ID: <87ft1xfqoq.wl-ashimura@w3.org>
To: public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at:

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for takng the minutes, Christiano!



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

                             WoT Discovery

18 January 2021

   [2]Agenda. [3]IRC log.

      [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Discovery_WebConf#18_January_2021
      [3] https://www.w3.org/2021/01/18-wot-discovery-irc


          Andrea_Cimmino, Christian_Glomb, Christine_Perey,
          Cristiano_Aguzzi, Farshid_Tavakolizadeh, Kaz_Ashimura,
          Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_McCool, Tomoaki_Mizushima





    1. [4]Guests
    2. [5]Schedule and publication requirements
    3. [6]Joint meeting on AR use cases
    4. [7]Issue 54
    5. [8]PR 110
    6. [9]PR 109
    7. [10]PR 107

Meeting minutes


   Kaz: we have Christine as a guest

  Schedule and publication requirements

   McCool: about implementation report do you need it before PR

   Kaz: yes, we need implementation plan the report for PR but we
   need to provide the implementation report plan including the
   assertions for CR.

   McCool: (noting down deadlines in the agenda)

   <McCool> [11]Thing Description implementation report

     [11] https://w3c.github.io/wot-thing-description/testing/report.html

   McCool: (showing example of an implementation report)

   McCool: I have to deal with the fact that need to generate test
   cases for our assertions

   McCool: failures are not a big problem as long as we have a
   least two passing implementations.

   McCool: some features cannot be test automatically. Manual
   assertion cover this use-case. Implementers just state that
   they comply with a particular feature of the specification

   Farshid: could we maybe script all of this tests? maybe with
   Github Actions?

   McCool: you can't always test all the assertion in the
   specification. However automated testes are useful. We can talk
   about it. First I'll try to adapt the work done in TD assertion
   … the next plug fest is a good place to start talking about how
   to improve our testing workflow

   McCool: last year we prepared a list of failing tests as a
   implementation plan

   Farshid: for linksmart thing directory we have already a bunch
   of unit tests. Also the APIs are covered

  Joint meeting on AR use cases

   <kaz> [12]Issue 955 on the joint meeting about AR use cases

     [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot/issues/955

   McCool: tomorrow we'll have a meeting with Spatial Data on the
   Web IG

   McCool: there's a meeting link in issue 955 of wot repository

   Christine: which IRC channel should we use?

   McCool: I'll propose wot-uc

   Christine: agree

   McCool: this meeting is more on AR
   … Christine brought up differences in how geospatial queries
   are done in AR
   … I hope to discuss about it tomorrow
   … by the way AR = Augmented Reality. Digital objects are
   overlaid on a real world video
   … about the Geolocation queries I was thinking about a
   point-radius method.
   … but in AR field of view is more relevant

   Christine: It is important to instruct users where is the
   device. (i.e., device behind you; turn around to interact)

   Christine: we use the terms of 6 degree of freedom when we are
   referring to if the user can look up or down.
   … body area networks have tons use-cases in industrial

   McCool: it is the problem of the "semantic" locations (i.e.,
   arm, leg, living room...)

   McCool: ideally there are two orthogonal problems. Geospatial
   should work regardless "semantic" locations.

   Kaz: robotics and Autonomous vehicles are typical use-cases.

   McCool: I'll catch more input tomorrow and I report them in a
   PR or document.

   McCool: any other issues to discuss?

   Farshid: there're some comments

  Issue 54

   <kaz> [13]Issue 54 - Need to define the added Directory TD

     [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/54

   McCool: issue #54

   McCool: terms for TD should go to the Thing Description

   Farshid: should we had to the TD context
   … or another context?

   McCool: it should be another context

   Cristiano: I agree

   McCool: (capturing the statement in a comment)

   McCool: we can close combo scheme issue

   McCool: I am currently working other PRs for security. I worked
   also for alternateResposes.

   McCool: about #43, how to identify a directory from a TD?

   <kaz> [14]Issue 43 - Define the WoT-Directory type somewhere
   (eg in new version of context, in 1.1)

     [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/43

   McCool: we could check a context file used
   … but it is a bit implicit. it is better to use the type
   … we could use both.
   … but it doesn't stop others to use our terms for their goals
   … I prefer to move the type to the core TD vocabulary.

   Cristiano: my point is that we need the context file anyway

   McCool: probably is best to talk with TD task force

   McCool: I'll cross reference the isse there

   Farshid: remember that we need a type for links.

   McCool: is there an issue about this topic?

   Farshid: yes it is.

   <kaz> [15]Issue 54

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/54

   McCool: any more issues to be linked in the issue?

   Farshid: yeah the full list is already in the first issue

   <kaz> [16]TD Issue 1033 - Consider defining additional
   vocabulary supporting Discovery

     [16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1033

  PR 110

   <kaz> [17]PR 110 - Update README.md to point at WOT-Usecases

     [17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/110

   McCool: we have a PR from Christine. However, she hasn't the
   permission to contribute

   McCool: We'll ping sebastian to propose her as an Invited

  PR 109

   <kaz> [18]PR 109 - Correct combo scheme

     [18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/109

   Farshid: #109 just a minor edit

   McCool: it is fine, merged

  PR 107

   <kaz> [19]PR 107 - Update SPARQL DDoS ed note

     [19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/107

   McCool: #107 needs more discussion

   <kaz> [adjourned]

    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    [20]scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC).

     [20] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html
Received on Monday, 15 February 2021 12:42:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 15 February 2021 12:42:23 UTC