Next Charter - Ideas / Proposals

[danielpeintner]

New W3C Process

In #354 we discussed a possible change w.r.t. the W3C Process.

3 possible choices

• Informative Note (Status quo)
• Formal Note, see Note Track. (allows as to use conformance sections and normative statements)
• REC track

Note: We can make up our mind as a task-force but need to check with the entire group in the end.

Next Charter Topics

see #352

Breaking Changes in API

• Discovery (see for example WIP PRs)
• Exposing process (Harmonize the exposing process #409)

[zolkis]

I wonder about the following.

1. For the Scripting API, would it make sense to include it into the CG, rather than the WG, and instead of a WG Note, should it be one or more CG spec? A counter-argument would be that the CG focuses more on a web-specific protocol for WoT, rather than a Scripting API.

2. We could include a provisioning API (a.k.a. management API) in a new, separate document, that would have different security context.

3. In the extreme, the current conformance classes could be made into separate specifications, making things more clear.

[danielpeintner]

Note: CGs don't get W3C team support and the current CG charter does not mention any deliverables.

[danielpeintner]

Note: w3c/wot#1029 is the place where possible deliverables for the next charter should go...

[mmccool]

Could you make an actual proposal as an md file in deliverable-proposals? This would be helpful even if we keep the status quo of the scripting API being informative, but I think we should at least discuss whether it should be a normative (but probably optional) spec.

[danielpeintner]

In yesterdays Pre-TPAC meeting we concluded to use a "Normative Note" for Scripting (see https://www.w3.org/2022/09/07-wot-minutes.html#r01).

Having said that, @mmccool shall we still create an MD file for deliverable-proposals. The old charter simply lists scripting under other deliverables.

[danielpeintner]

I created w3c/wot#1043 as starting point. Please comment.

BTW, I don't think we need to add a lot of prose since we will most likely be listed again under other deliverables.

[danielpeintner]

FYI: w3c/wot#1043 has been merged today by @mmccool.

Updates should go to https://github.com/w3c/wot/blob/main/charters/wot-wg-2023-draft.html

[danielpeintner]

Ads discussed today I created a PR against the current WG charter, see w3c/wot#1068

Please have a look and comment.

[relu91]

Call 20/02:

• Re-evaluate with the whole group whether it makes sense to change the spec type from Note to Recommendation

[JKRhb]

I think with the new charter in place, we can probably close this issue, right?

[danielpeintner]

I agree, I think we can close this issue. Charter has been settled by now.

Next Charter Topics can be found in #352 and other API-improvement topics under the according label.