- 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