[wot-discovery] minutes - 7 December 2020

available at:
  https://www.w3.org/2020/12/07-wot-discovery-minutes.html

also as text below.

Thanks a lot for taking the minutes, Farshid!

Kazuyuki

---
   [1]W3C

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

                             WoT Discovery

07 Dec 2020

   [2]Agenda

      [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Discovery_WebConf#7_December_2020

Attendees

   Present
          Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_McCool, Farshid_Tavakolizadeh,
          Jack_Dickinson, Kunihiko_Toumura, Tomoaki_Mizushima,
          Andrea_Cimmino, Michael_Koster

   Regrets
          Christian_Glomb

   Chair
          McCool

   Scribe
          FarshidT

Contents

     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]minutes
         2. [5]scheduling
         3. [6]PR: Updated document with federation
            (https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/105)
         4. [7]Issue: Links
            (https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34)
         5. [8]next meeting
     * [9]Summary of Action Items
     * [10]Summary of Resolutions
     __________________________________________________________

   <kaz> scribenick: FarshidT

minutes

   <McCool>
   [11]https://www.w3.org/2020/11/30-wot-discovery-minutes.html

     [11] https://www.w3.org/2020/11/30-wot-discovery-minutes.html

   no objections to publishing the minutes

scheduling

   McCool: on vacation starting next week. Someone else could
   chair

   Farshid: I can chair if we have other things to work on. Let's
   see how the meeting goes today

PR: Updated document with federation
([12]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/105)

     [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/pull/105)

   McCool: there are a couple of issues.
   ... writing comments on the PR...
   ... suggests breaking the current federation assertion into two
   assertions.

   Andrea: I agree, will change it for the next meeting

   McCool: also, use "WoT Thing Description Directory"
   consistently in the document
   ... commenting on How do we handle federation in SPARQL queries
   ([13]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/97)
   ... linked the PR to close the above-mentioned issue
   automatically

     [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/97)

Issue: Links ([14]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34)

     [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34)

   McCool: looking at
   [15]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34#issuecomment
   -668508701
   ... One constraint is that we are reserving the type "Link"
   which prevents others from using it
   ... we can store the TD of another directory, links are not
   necessary here

     [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34#issuecomment-668508701

   Andrea: it is necessary to have a distinct type for directory
   TDs

   McCool: what is the use of having Links instead of TDs inside
   the TDD?

   Farshid: it could be for privacy reasons, highly dynamic TDs,
   very large TDs
   ... the link could point to a Thing or Directory TD

   McCool: documenting use cases on the issue
   ... security and securityDefinitions are mandatory but useless
   if we only have links. I argued against making it mandatory at
   the time.

   Koster: we could also use URI instead of Link value for type

   Andrea: there is already a Link type, so there will be
   collision

   McCool: few cons, what are the pros?

   Farshid: all existing mechanisms for TD will work out of the
   box

   Andrea: why do we need a new type for links? why not just use
   the Thing/Directory types?

   McCool: we could look at relation type to know too.
   ... but it is good to know it in advance

   Koster: there could be a way to have alternative TD schemes
   without mandatory TD fields

   McCool: another examples is the storage of Thing Models
   ... I think @type with expanded URI is the best way to go

   Farshid: A full TD will allow adding metadata which is useful
   for search.

   McCool: also for adding metadata (annotations) to other
   internal TDs without changing those TDs
   ... comments:
   [16]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34#issuecomment
   -740004060

     [16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34#issuecomment-740004060

   <McCool> proposal: use a special "Link" TD as discussed in
   [17]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34 to refer to
   TD held elsewhere from a directory

     [17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34

   RESOLUTION: use a special "Link" TD as discussed in
   [18]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34 to refer to
   TD held elsewhere from a directory

     [18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34

   McCool: suggesting TDLink or TDPointer

   Koster: TDPointer is usually for only a reference

   McCool: to create a PR and specify the details
   ... added example for the resolution:
   [19]https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34#issuecomment
   -740009713

     [19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34#issuecomment-740009713

next meeting

   McCool: canceled. Next meeting on January 4th

   <kaz> [adjourned]

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

    1. [20]use a special "Link" TD as discussed in
       https://github.com/w3c/wot-discovery/issues/34 to refer to
       TD held elsewhere from a directory

   [End of minutes]
     __________________________________________________________


    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [21]scribe.perl version ([22]CVS log)
    $Date: 2021/01/11 04:50:13 $

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

Received on Monday, 11 January 2021 04:51:33 UTC