- From: Kazuyuki Ashimura <ashimura@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2021 19:08:54 +0900
- To: public-wot-wg@w3.org
available at: https://www.w3.org/2021/01/27-wot-td-minutes.html also as text below. Thanks, Kazuyuki --- [1]W3C [1] https://www.w3.org/ WoT-WG - TD-TF 27 January 2021 [2]IRC log. [2] https://www.w3.org/2021/01/27-wot-td-irc Attendees Present Cristiano_Aguzzi, Daniel_Peintner, Ege_Korkan, Farshid_Tavakoizadeh, Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Koster, Michael_McCool, Sebastian_Kaebisch, Tomoaki_Mizushima Regrets - Chair Sebastian Scribe kaz Contents 1. [3]Minute check from last week 2. [4]Defer issue to TD 2.0 3. [5]PR 1038 4. [6]PR 1031 5. [7]PR 1032 6. [8]PR 1038 (revisited) 7. [9]PR 1024 Meeting minutes Minute check from last week <sebastian> [10]https://www.w3.org/2021/01/ 20-wot-td-minutes.html [10] https://www.w3.org/2021/01/20-wot-td-minutes.html Sebastian: quick look at issues … postponing some of them to v2 … some PRs … including ReSpec errors … also relation types … cardinality … still ongoing … then security McCool: yes Sebastian: then multiple op values … and several issues … reliability McCool: need an expert Kaz: I'm now contacting the IEC expert as well McCool: related to geolocation and time series data Sebastian: ok … we'll continue the discussion <sebastian> any objections to bring the minutes to public? <sebastian> no approved Defer issue to TD 2.0 [11]Issues marked as 2.0 [11] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues?q=is:issue+is:open+label:"Defer+to+TD+2.0" Sebastian: let me know if any problems PR 1038 [12]PR 1038 [12] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1038 [13]related issue 1036 [13] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/1036 Sebastian: we can't change the TD REC itself … this is a tentative URL McCool: this PR itself wouldn't solve the actual problem? … do we want to use one specific schema for both v 1.0 and v 1.1? … having two ones separately would make sense Cristiano: right Ege: combo schema should be also removed then? Kaz: if we really need to update the 1.0 REC for implementations, we need to update the 1.0 REC … but if not, we don't have to do so … and having a separate schema for v1.1 is fine … note that at some point maybe in 2 years, there is a possibility we even might want to deprecate the v1.0 REC … so we should think about our timeline as well Sebastian: (adds comments to PR 1038) [14]Sebastian's comments [14] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1038#issuecomment-768363336 PR 1031 [15]PR 1031 [15] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1031 [16]Preview of 5.3.3.6 APIKeySecurityScheme [16] https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/mmccool/wot-thing-description/pull/1031.html#apikeysecurityscheme Sebastian: (goes through section 5.3.3.1) [17]Preview of 5.3.3.1 SecurityScheme [17] https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/mmccool/wot-thing-description/pull/1031.html#securityscheme McCool: think it's ready to merge Sebastian: (merges it) prsent+ Michael_Koster PR 1032 [18]PR 1032 [18] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1032 McCool: (goes through his recent comments) [19]McCool's comments [19] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1032#issuecomment-766835622 McCool: not ready for merge and would update it [20]Preview of 5.3.3.6 APIKeySecurityScheme [20] https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/mmccool/wot-thing-description/pull/1032.html#apikeysecurityscheme Kaz: the first row is broken McCool: will fix it as well … working on it (Farshid joins) PR 1038 (revisited) Sebastian: note that we've just talked about your PR 1038 Farshid: can the schema upper compatible? McCool: we can bug-fix it if needed but not really upper compatible McCool: we need some unified validation mechanism … but having the two different schemas would make sense … though we need to fix bugs … from my viewpoint, accepting the two schemas is OK Sebastian: then I'll remove the comment inside the "Files changed" <McCool> I feel we should use a w3c URL for the schema, not github <cris> +1 also from my side... also full github address with the commit hash is super long :) Kaz: I don't really recognize any concrete/big differences between (1) the resources are installed on the W3C server and (2) installed on GitHub with a redirection from some W3C URL (we need to discuss our policy a bit more) PR 1024 [21]PR 1024 [21] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1024 Sebastian: comments from Jan Romann, a student from Carsten's lab [22]Sebastian's response to Jan's comments [22] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/pull/1024#issuecomment-767449507 Sebastian: wo kind of imports are necessary: … an "extend" import to have the full definition of an other existing TM. For that the link container can be used with 'rel=extend' … an import mechanism that allows to import sub-definitions of other existing TMs. This is the direction that is explained here. [23]ASDF - 4.4 sdfRef [23] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-asdf-sdf-01#section-4.4 <Ege> [24]https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/ 168 [24] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/168 McCool: we just do Thing Model and use TD for instanciation Sebastian: need to leave now... Ege: can postpone till the next call … but there is a related issue 168 [25]Issue 168 [25] https://github.com/w3c/wot-thing-description/issues/168 Ege: import/extend functionality in TD Sebastian: Thing Model is used to generate a valid TD McCool: let's continue the discussion using GitHub, etc. Sebastian: ok … let's continue the discussion next week [adjourned] Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by [26]scribe.perl version 127 (Wed Dec 30 17:39:58 2020 UTC). [26] https://w3c.github.io/scribe2/scribedoc.html
Received on Wednesday, 3 March 2021 10:09:00 UTC