- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 13:26:35 +0900
- To: public-wot-ig@w3.org, public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at: https://www.w3.org/2021/02/23-wot-uc-minutes.html also as text below. Thanks, Kazuyuki --- [1]W3C [1] https://www.w3.org/ WoT Use Cases 23 February 2021 [2]Agenda. [3]IRC log. [2] https://www.w3.org/WoT/IG/wiki/IG_UseCase_WebConf#Agenda_23.2. [3] https://www.w3.org/2021/02/23-wot-uc-irc Attendees Present Christine_Perey, Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Michael_McCool, Philip_Tran, Philipp_Blum, Rob_Smith, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Tomoaki_Mizushima Regrets - Chair Lagally Scribe kaz Contents 1. [4]Prev minutes 2. [5]Liaisons 3. [6]MR 97 - add edge-computing.md into index.html 4. [7]MR 86 - Update Smartcity Dashboard UC 5. [8]MR 94 - Focus AR/VR Guide use case on AR 6. [9]MR 90 - Joint activity for a standardized OPC UA Binding 7. [10]Linked Building Data CG (revisited) 8. [11]WG Note planning Meeting minutes Prev minutes [12]Feb-9 [12] https://www.w3.org/2021/02/09-wot-uc-minutes.html Lagally: (goes through the minutes) Lagally: any objections? (none) approved Liaisons Lagally: OPC-UA, etc. … how to proceed? [13]OPC UA cooperation proposal [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/master/charters/wot-ocpua-2021-charter-draft.md Lagally: wondering about this "purpose" The purpose is the development of an OPC UA Binding for the W3C Web of Things through an OPC UA Companion specification and mirrored as a W3C Recommendation/Note(?) document. ]] McCool: this is a propose Charter for the OPC UA side, I thought Kaz: also think we need to update the description … we had discussion during the TD call as well … we should concentrate on simple liaison on datamodel definition for binding and ontology reference for TD, etc. Lagally: who would improve this? Kaz: we should ask Sebastian McCool: yeah, we should leave this to Sebastian … if we have something normative on the W3C side, we need to think about how to handle that … note that we can't change our own WoT Charter for the current period (some more discussion) Lagally: yeah, I agree we need to identify clear plan … we should discuss this with Sebastian … next Linked Building Data CG Kaz: this is also handled mainly by Sebastian :) McCool: yeah, need to follow it up with him … interested in geological information inside buildings Lagally: do we expect some more additional input? McCool: use case description, you mean? … we're talking about geolocation information model, etc., already … e.g., for smart buildings (Sebastian joins) Lagally: (asks Sebastian about the OPC UA topic) … maybe you can give some comments on your plan? … how/who would create the target document mentioned here? McCool: someone needs to take the lead Sebastian: originally expecting a joint group but we had some discussion during the TD call … about the expected collaboration … the idea should be more OPC UA's taking lead for their work … and we can follow their work … we expect to hold a dedicated call on further discussion related to liaison Lagally: think we should review their specs, etc. Sebastian: my question is who would be actively working on the collaboration Kaz: I'll create a doodle poll for further discussion quickly Lagally: ok. let's move on then … next ITU-T SG 20 … unfortunately, not available today … plan to have a follow-up discussion during the vF2F in March … the topic is gaps and next steps based our summary [14]ITU-T use case summary [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/blob/master/CONTRIBUTIONS/ITU-T-Use-case-summary.md McCool: agree Lagally: btw, regarding the Linked Building Data CG … any plan to create use case descriptions? … would like to publish the first draft of the WoT Use Cases within a few weeks Sebastian: unfortunately, not able to join the use cases call for a while … so not really sure about the plan Lagally: we had a joint call with them Sebastian: will ping the CG guys Lagally: great Kaz: have been talking with the ECHONET guys … will talk with them again on March 5 … will get back to you all … possibly could have input for future use cases MR 97 - add edge-computing.md into index.html [15]MR 97 [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/97 Lagally: would merge this (merged) MR 86 - Update Smartcity Dashboard UC [16]MR 86 [16] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/86 Philipp: added comments [17]Philip Tran's comments [17] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/86#pullrequestreview-595141626 Lagally: can make these changes McCool: updates with missing references as well [18]diff [18] https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/wot-usecases/86/20a5eb5...mmccool:89774c2.html Philipp: what kind of references? McCool: existing standards, etc. … e.g., OGC's work Lagally: why don't we merge this and McCool can make editorial changes McCool: ok (merged) MR 94 - Focus AR/VR Guide use case on AR Lagally: work on AR/VR originally proposed by Rob and Kaz … updated by McCool McCool: would suggest we merge this Christine: the use case is actually AR guide. right? McCool: VR might not require geolocation information though AR does … that's why focus on AR here Christine: ok Lagally: (goes through Rob's comments) [19]Rob's comments [19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/94#pullrequestreview-586653088 Rob: there is a guidance on responsible use case of spatial data by the SDW IG [20]The Responsible Use of Spatial Data [20] https://w3c.github.io/sdw/responsible-use/ Rob: related security/privacy issues as well McCool: will look at it Rob: tx Lagally: would make sense to extend the security/privacy section? McCool: that's my plan :) Rob: great Lagally: can we merge this MR itself and then work on the comments? McCool: that's fine ka: I'm OK too (merged) MR 90 - Joint activity for a standardized OPC UA Binding [21]MR 90 [21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-usecases/pull/90 Sebastian: this is the main README but not sure if it's still relevant … should have the discussion during the separate call Lagally: OK to keep it open then? Sebastian: ok Linked Building Data CG (revisited) <sebastian> [22]https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/ blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md [22] https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md <sebastian> [23]https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/ blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md [23] https://github.com/w3c-lbd-cg/wot-usecases/blob/feature_UpdateWithBim/USE-CASES/W3C-LBD-CG.md Sebastian: got response from the Linked Building guys … they're working on a use case description Lagally: great WG Note planning Lagally: basic timeline - consolidated draft in next call - two week's review - publication approval in vF2F ]] [24]Use Cases draft [24] https://w3c.github.io/wot-usecases/ Lagally: wondering about if we could have dedicated contributions from the co-Editors McCool: we'll have the PlugFest next week … should prioritize the work items … how to bring it to the vF2F? Lagally: would have email discussion Kaz: given the tight schedule, would suggest we make the TF resolution today instead of the next UC call in 2 weeks … and bring the draft to the main call tomorrow on Feb 24 … we can add some note mentioning there might be some minor changes <Mizushima> +1 Lagally: asking the whole group for review asap is good … but would like to confirm the draft is ready during the next call in 2 weeks McCool: we need to think about when to have use case discussion during the vF2F Lagally: ok let's talk about that during the main call tomorrow [adjourned] Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by [25]scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC). [25] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html
Received on Monday, 12 July 2021 04:26:42 UTC