[wot-architecture] minutes - 12 November 2020

available at:

also as text below.




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

                            WoT Architecture

12 Nov 2020


      [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/WG_WoT_Architecture_WebConf#Agenda


          Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Tomoaki_Mizushima,





     * [3]Topics
         1. [4]Minutes
         2. [5]FPWD status
         3. [6]Profile
         4. [7]Use Cases
         5. [8]Requirements
         6. [9]AOB
     * [10]Summary of Action Items
     * [11]Summary of Resolutions

   <scribe> scribenick: kaz



     [12] https://www.w3.org/2020/10/15-wot-arch-minutes.html

   Lagally: conversation during/after the vF2F
   ... got resolution for the FPWD publication

   (no objections)

   Lagally: approved

FPWD status

   [13]transition request for WoT Architecture 1.1

     [13] https://github.com/w3c/transitions/issues/282

   Lagally: approved and no blocking issue for FPWD

   Kaz: right


     [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/releases


     [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/releases/tag/FPWD-1.1

   Lagally: created release tag as above

   Kaz: ok
   ... will check the document with checkers for publication

   Lagally: btw, you mentioned a comment within the transition

   Kaz: yes

   [16]PLH's comment

     [16] https://github.com/w3c/transitions/issues/282#issuecomment-723282838


   [17]transition request for WoT Profile

     [17] https://github.com/w3c/transitions/issues/285

   Kaz: no comment from Philippe but just approved :)
   ... but I myself added a note that it would have been better to
   use "Web of Things (WoT) Profile" as the title of the document

   Lagally: let's go for it :)
   ... (creates a PR)

   Kaz: ah, I thought I had already created a PR :)

   [18]PR 53

     [18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-profile/pull/53

   Lagally: let's merge that then
   ... (and merged it)

Use Cases

   [19]wot-usecases repo

     [19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases

   Lagally: (visits the wot-usecases repo)
   ... during the Use Cases call today, we talked about two new
   use cases

   [20]VR-AR use case

     [20] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/master/USE-CASES/vr-ar-imaging.md

   Lagally: one of the two is about VR/AR use cases

   <inserted> [21]Irrigation in outdoor environment use case

     [21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/master/CONTRIBUTIONS/Agricultural-use-case2.md

   <inserted> ml: and another is on agriculture

   Lagally: (explains the use case)
   ... we need to indicate a way for accuracy

   Sebastian: we have to clarify the data
   ... metadata on the interaction level

   Lagally: get temperature and return results

   Kaz: btw, I misunderstood this proposal was generated by Lionel
   from Lyon U because he made the Pullrequest
   ... but it seems the original proposers are not Lionel himself
   ... so this proposal is related to the discussion we started
   yesterday about how to deal with proposals/contributions from
   ... I'll check with Lionel as well

   Lagally: ok
   ... need further discussion during the main call too
   ... (goes into the detailed description)

   [22]VR-AR use case

     [22] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/master/USE-CASES/vr-ar-imaging.md

   Lagally: this is about VR/AR use cases
   ... expected devices include VR goggle and 3D camera
   ... how to deal with the streaming data is important
   ... can use the VR headset to browse the resources
   ... how should we move forward with accuracy and reliability of
   the data?

   Sebastian: we should create an issue and have discussion during
   the TD calls

   Lagally: ok
   ... should discuss additional metadata, etc.?

   Sebastian: yeah, introducing new terms would not be harmful
   ... on the other hand, we should be careful about how to deal
   with the requirements
   ... need elaborate what is really needed

   Lagally: ok
   ... some of the new use cases would explain the validity of new
   ... will create an issue for the disscusion


   [23]wot-architecture repo - REQUIREMENTS area

     [23] https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/tree/master/REQUIREMENTS

   Lagally: we have several requirements descriptions
   ... agriculture, discovery, geolocation, ...
   ... link relation types
   ... requirements from the new WG Charter
   ... Thing Model

   Sebastian: we've introduced a new concept for Thing Model

   Lagally: yeah

   Sebastian: what is the meaning behind the "link" here?

   Lagally: we had some discussion yesterday (during the TD call)
   ... link relation types to be archived at IANA
   ... included related standards here


   Web Linking: [24]https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288

     [24] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288

   Link Relation Types for Web Services:

     [25] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8631

   Additional Link Relation Types:

     [26] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6903


     [27] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988

   Link Relation Types - IANA registry:

     [28] https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml


   Sebastian: there are 2 examples here. right?

   [29]wot-thing-description Issue 999

     [29] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/999

   Lagally: example of Oracle's device model above (Issue 999)

   Sebastian: what is the relationship?

   Lagally: (goes through the example codes)

   Sebastian: how to handle the device components?

   Lagally: think the recommended way should be embedding the
   models into the Thing Description

   Sebastian: ok
   ... would like to continue the discussion on Thing Model during
   the TD call next Wednesday


   Lagally: any other business for today?



Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

   [End of minutes]

    Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by
    David Booth's [30]scribe.perl version ([31]CVS log)
    $Date: 2020/12/17 14:35:46 $

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

Received on Monday, 11 January 2021 07:18:48 UTC