See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 21 October 2009
<rreck> cant put one past you can we Zakim?
<MacTed> I may be worse than your worst other option.
<hhalpin> scribe: tpa
<tinkster> I can take over from Tim.
<tinkster> #6 on the agenda is from last week.
either was is fine
<hhalpin> roll call, comments on the agenda.
<hhalpin> PROPOSED: to approve SWXG WG Weekly -- 14th October 2009 as a true record
<hhalpin> RESOLVED: to approve SWXG WG Weekly -- 14th October 2009 as a true record
<hhalpin> PROPOSED: to meet again Wed. October 28th
<rreck> +1 proposed to meet again
<hhalpin> Joseph Smarr of Plaxo, and PortableContacts (XML and API for contacts that used by OpenSocial) will be presenting on his work.
hhalpin: Joseph from Plaxo (& Portable contacts) will be there
<hhalpin> RESOLVED: to meet again Wed. October 28th
<mischat_> hello all
??: we put the page live for TPAC, late last week
<danbri> thx tinkster
…we already have 28 signups, which is good
<rreck> wow, 28 people signed up is great
<bblfish> more tweeting, more blogging!
…we need to do some more evangelism about the event, get some more people engaged
…some good people showing up, start-up people, social web notables, etc.
…we need to organize the time a little bit so we have a least a framework organization
…usually you'd start a barcamp with a blank schedule
…but I want to organize it a bit more, have a panel at the top of the day
…get a technology, social & user perspective. And also a business perspective
…what does the social web means as a “disruptive force” because that's integral to the whole story here
<danbri> nice msg from Evan Prodromou (our identica/statusnet guest recently): "I'm very excited about this event; we'll have StatusNet Inc. staff there, and hopefully some of the other devs in the area will be able to attend."
<oshani> ... tpa: social web camp in Paris was productive
<oshani> DKA: how many people were there?
<oshani> tpa: it was full, and lot of ppl were confused about what social web meant
<bblfish> I think 60 people turned up
<bblfish> yes, one needs a bit of an introduction, otherwise the conversation goes all over the place. One needs to have an intro that puts everyone on the same level.
<hhalpin> DKA - maybe throw the link out there in IRC?
<hhalpin> for structuring?
<oshani> DKA: Feel free to edit the agenda for the TPAC. We have many sessions including a coding session
<oshani> tpa: don't think it's a venue to code, and it's better to have less structure
<oshani> DKA: like to have a more detailed discussion on this
<hhalpin> scribe: oshani
scribe: moving to TPAC and IIW
<hhalpin> Review of code-bases (Elgg, riseup.net, daisycha.in)
<tpa> hhalpin: John said we were too far ahead of time to talk about w3.org implementing social web stuff
<hhalpin> scribe: oshani
<hhalpin> scribe: tpa
… I'd just like to make sure that we have the relevant codebase covered to implement social networking features at w3.org
<bblfish> I will go
hhalpin: Another point is that we had a request for XG people to come to IIW (Internet Identity Workshop)
<hajons> me to
<bblfish> but yes, I should put my name down
hhalpin: David is speaking again on the social web at TPAC, maybe on a panel with DKA
DKA: whatever is best for TPAC
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] mischa to write up Peter's talk on XMPP [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action01]
hhalpin: and Kevin ?? is going to do the Developer Day
<hhalpin> ACTION: [DONE] tinkster to summarize Evan's talk [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action02]
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] DKA to summarize OSLO and geoLocation conversation in order to spread knowledge of these efforts among W3C members. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action03]
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] Mischa to describe/implement a report of terms and conditions, and how they change between now and the end of the XG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action04]
<bblfish> if people from this group want to go IIWS then you have to be there 8:30am to get a slot on Wednesday
<bblfish> if you want to go there Tuesday you need to speak to identity woman now, as that will be a structured day, and there are not many slots available
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] Adam to write up Matt Lee's talk [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action05]
DKA: is anybody on the call made a decision to come out that week
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] mtuffied to put up wiki page about social networks deploying these technologies. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action06]
hhalpin: TPAC registration ends in two days
<Adam> i'll be at the bar camp and tpac through thursday
<hhalpin> ACTION: [DONE] hhalpin to make agenda for TPAC Tuesday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action07]
<hajons> i'll be at tpac tuesday, IIW rest of the week
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] danbri to find someone from Opera to talk Widgets [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action08]
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] cperey to book global lockbox as an invited speaker [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action09]
hhalpin: Invited Guests
<hhalpin> ACTION: [CONTINUES] mtiffiel to invite BBC Persia people to talk about their use of social media [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action10]
… we need to get someone to talk about Widgets
<danbri> i had a nice starter thread going, ... will ping people for dates
<hhalpin> ACTION: [DONE] petef to look into activitystreams invite, maybe Chris Messina. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/10/21-swxg-minutes.html#action11]
<hhalpin> We should prefer later.
<danbri> hi davidrecordon
… Chris Messina is available November 4th
<hhalpin> And Joseph Smarr is next week.
<davidrecordon> just dialed in too :)
… we should prefer later as this is in the middle of TPAC
DKA: I think we shouldn't have a talk that week
hhalpin: happy to cancel that call
<hhalpin> PROPOSED: Cancel Call Nov 4th?
<hhalpin> RESOLVED: Call cancel Nov 4th.
<danbri> someone is making clicking noises
<mischat_> hhalpin: I have put a first pass at summarising the XMPP talk : http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/wiki/InvitedGuestSummaries
<mischat_> hhalpin: i will edit it tonight and polish off the language.
<hhalpin> Oshani - Henry let's do a separate telecon next week to get this done for TPAC and IIW.
<bblfish> the user cases?
<lshepard> (this is luke from facebook) 773-742 is mine, not sure where that sound came from as it's really quiet here
<bblfish> yes. good. Sorry been taken up 100% on Social Web Camp
<davidrecordon> Zakam, aahh is really davidrecordon
<mischat_> hhalpin: i have also contacted the BBC, am trying to find someone suitable to talk about BBC's reporting of the IranElection's via social media, hopefully I will get through to someone soon
hhalpin: let's move on to David
<davidrecordon> I might be mooted though :P
<mischat_> ok tinkster will google and look into it
<tinkster> Someone's riding a horse?
<rreck> david i think
<danbri> david, there are clippety clop noises in the b/g
<rreck> me too, its too quiet
<mischat_> thank danbri
<davidrecordon> let me switch phones
<davidrecordon> while luke introduces himself
<mischat_> yay this is better
Luke: really happy to be here, thanks for inviting us
… I worked on Facebook Connect and a lot of OpenID stuff
… both the relying partners and identity provider side
… mostly interested today in answering your questions or finding what you're interested in
<mischat_> ... also interested in OAuth in activity streams stuff ...
<hhalpin> much more clear!
davidrecordon: we're very excited to be here
… we focused on OpenID and OAuth and those areas at Facebook
… we can both talk about OpenID and OAuth have been developed, but with Chris Messina & others coming on
… it would make more sense for us to talk about our stance on privacy, identity
davidrecordon: feel free to jump in when you want
… but when we think about web standards, we ran into some challenges
… we move extremely quickly from an engineering perspective
… a lot of things done by very few people
… teams of 2-3 people (or less)
… Luke did OpenID himself
… we have really small teams working by themselves
… To balance this, we try to think about how to be involved in Standardization efforts
davidrecordon: When we did things like Facebook connect, we were really trying to go fast, find partners, iterate
<hhalpin> notes that this continual iteration is not built into W3C right now...but we could recommend that in our final report.
… in contrast standards efforts take a lot of time (we understand why, we appreciate that)
… but the challenges we face as a company were how to go at this quickly and iteratively
hhalpin: one thing the XG is doing is to write a report to the W3C and all member, advisory board
<rreck> lite.facebook.com has apparently cached email messages i previously deleted
… including: “here's what the W3C could do to make its process more lightweight and more appealing to social web people, etc.”
… we would love to flag this
… ie: the process being a problem for Facebook to join in
davidrecordon: when we look at OpenID, OAuth, ActivityStreams, you notice that it took them just a few years or less to get implemented by a major company
for ActivityStreams, just a few months
davidrecordon: we need to get to a point where people feel safe about specifications to ship them
<davidrecordon> tpa: and that with each one the time from start to shipping a draft on a really large site is decreasing with each specification
Luke: my only experience with standards is OpenID and OAuth but yes, it was definitely useful to have expectations of things being drafted and changing often but moving quickly
… ?? … Part of this is a cultural thing, it is sometimes better to do something ourselves rather than violate specifications
<Zakim> danbri, you wanted to ask what level of interop (eg. descriptive schemas) you look for with OpenSocial
… It helps us adapt to new challenges
<rreck> clearly adhering to a spec takes increased resource and effort
DKA: if I could jump in briefly, and reiterate: one of the things we're going to try to do here it make recommendations
… about how the W3C could be more involved in the lanscape of all of the standards
<hhalpin> notes that this is when privacy comes in.
… we are try to list and catalog the things that are done out there
… and ask the questions for each, is this something we should try to bring inside the W3C, or next steps that should be done inside the W3C
… basically, how the W3C could help build this Social Web world
danbri: we're on a fact-finding mission
<rreck> mischat: thanks again
… people say “how, the W3C will come in and offer me this big plan”
… but the W3C is offering a lot of things
… Widgets, social APIs
danbri: my question was about
... do you see a value in bringing Facebook Platform and OpenSocial towards convergence
Luke: yes, definitely I was working on a platform when OpenSocial came out
<danbri> particular q, is whether schema convergence might be cheaper/easier than protocol convergence
<danbri> between facebook platform and opensocial platform
… at that time we were moving away from the direction OS was taking
… at this point things are moving very quickly and I'm a big fan of standards, it's just a question of how to get there, but in time, yes, it'll be one big thing
davidrecordon: the questions is how can the W3C develop stuff like OpenSocial
… or other stuff like webfinger or salmon
davidrecordon: the other things is what about Facebook Platform and OS together
<DKA> davidrecordon - do you have a URL for that?
… people are looking for standards but also for the organization to get out of the way and let them do their stuff
… there's a wiki, a mailing list, a svn repository
<mischat_> http://salmon-protocol.org/ ?
… the problem the OWF is trying to tackle is Intellectual Property
… and the next thing we're working on is letting people withdraw and vote
… basically it's much easier if the process is not codified?
danbri: what you do with the foundation and make sure you have the paperwork, ensure the companies don't mess it all up :)
davidrecordon: for those efforts to be successful, they have to have corporate involvment
… from companies like Google, MS, Yahoo, MySpace
… it is a challenge; how do you involve people outside of the Bay Area?
… the social web standards tend to come from the same people but that's by accident
<hhalpin> I guess your talking about the "my name isn't accepted" by the software.
danbri: ?? If the Social platforms we build keep the schema piece separate we won't have a problem involving people from around the world
<hhalpin> scribe: oshani
Luke: lot of efforts don't come
from the international side
... separation happening in open social
... Activity streams have a separate spec
<hhalpin> sounds a bit like RDF
<rreck> taxomies for verbs
Luke: FB platform has lot of intl
... opensocial is also the same
... so even though they started in the bay area, but they've grown
<lshepard> hhalpin: there was a lot of discussion re: rdf, but activitystreams is considered easier to implement
hhalpin: what do you see as a useful role of the W3C in this area?
hhalpin: what are missing around policy, privacy and provenance from a tech level?
davidrecordon: when working with
large groups the W3C process is appropriate
... useful to think of "identitiy" and "verified identity"
<hhalpin> so sort of web of trust issues...
lshepard: enable trust using the platform
<mischat_> i met some people which are trying to use your social graph to enable online IOUs http://www.checkoutlater.com/
<rreck> IMHO, peoples' identity are instantiations of a role
<pchampin> interesting thought, rreck :)
lshepard: lot of annoymous things on the Web can be done using FB connect
<rreck> people are multifaceted right? at least complex people are
<hhalpin> and who else would be in the IRC?
davidrecordon: FB links and mutual comments can socially verify idenities
<bblfish> cool, that fits with foaf+ssl identify verification
<danbri> that makes a lot of sense (socially verified, ....)
<melvster> sounds a bit like web of trust
<mischat_> sounds a bit like the web ...
<rreck> in real life you have contextual cues you dont have online
<bblfish> yep, foaf+ssl uses little pieces of verified information to make identity decisions, just like Facebook. What is missing with OpenId is the social network part
lshepard: socially verified identities using soft cues (mutual connections) which users can make decision whether they can trust or not
<rreck> presenting valence on the attribute rather than a +/- might be a strategy
Adam: mutual friends can induce not-intended friendship relationships. From a business pov it is important
lshepard: lot of orgs are working on that.
davidrecordon: like to talk about
our challenges from FB
... privacy and trust
... moving to a per object privacy model
<rreck> me too
<rreck> +1 stay longer
<davidrecordon> I'm good :)
<stpeter> over time WFM
<hhalpin> I know the W3C is looking at this "policy language" idea in this area
<rreck> the relationships on fb are reciprocal but in real life that is not necessarily the case
lshepard: for each user we want to model privacy for each different fields based on the relationship between individuals
<hhalpin> seems like some sort of round-trip would be necessary for per object privacy...
<mischat_> ah, stpeter, I could I email you a link to my summary of your talk, so you can eyeball it?
<hhalpin> but the overhead there might be really high...
lshepard: activity streams will have different views based on who's viewing it
<stpeter> mischat_: sure thing, my pleasure
<mischat_> thanks stpeter
<stpeter> mischat_: but how do you know that this stpeter is the stpeter who gave a talk? ;-)
<hhalpin> "W3C Workshop on Access Control Application Scenarios"
<stpeter> mischat_: IRC doesn't have strong identity :)
<hhalpin> I know this is TimBL's main research area, oshani and lalana could speak to it..
<mischat_> your IP address points to your stpeter.im ;)
<rreck> if we could standardize on vocabulary it would be a start
<mischat_> like you said in your talk, IRC allows for IP address snooping
<stpeter> mischat_: heh, true, that's probably good enough
<stpeter> rreck: agreed
<tinkster> stpeter, NickServ provides a reasonable level of identity on some IRC servers.
bblfish: Is FB thinking of how to distribute social networks?
<hhalpin> I bet a paper from Facebook on this problem would be very much appreciated. Both how it's tackled and the interop issue.
<bblfish> is there any thinking at Facebook on how to distribute social networks? So that all sites could work using a similar mechanism of trust, but in a distributed way, where I can put my profile on my home page and link to someone on Facebook?
davidrecordon: can use FB connect
<mischat_> google seem to be touching in this direction : http://www.dataliberation.org/
davidrecordon: interacting with
other social networks is not really straightforward
... need to understand what the interactions are
hhalpin: Would you like to look over our final report and comment?
<stpeter> I'm on the phone too, but not officially logged in I suppose :)
hhalpin: in about 6 months
<hhalpin> in general? re OWF?
hhalpin: What is your opinion about the W3C patent policy?
<stpeter> I think it would be helpful for each of the speakers who've come through here could read and comment on the "manifesto"
<hhalpin> We will definitely send it to everybody and the list.
<stpeter> hhalpin: cool
<hhalpin> I mean, it doesn't exist yet. In fact, if *someone* wants to take editorship that would be great.
<hhalpin> so people don't say have to do a full patent search or talk to a lawyer just to interact with a draft.
<hhalpin> I would assume
<stpeter> hhalpin: yes, that someone would receive great praise, I'm sure :)
<hhalpin> hint hint anyone :)
<rreck> editorship of what?
<hhalpin> +1 to somehow having these tools in a central place.
<hhalpin> Just wondering if there was something obviously wrong, but if not...
<danbri> i like idea of collab around *tools* as a healthy and de-politicised way for all these different standard-y communities to collaborate
davidrecordon: We prefer a more iterative model (where everyone's involved is bound to the policy ?)
<rreck> i think consensus sometimes degrades implementation
<hhalpin> there's the news on REX.
<danbri> ( stpeter, is there something bad in something in http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/38482/showCommitments )
<danbri> ah thx
<davidrecordon> it's strange, having everyone bound makes it hard for companies to participate from the start
<davidrecordon> so dealing with it in the end is nicer, if you don't have to worry about withdrawl
<davidrecordon> assuming everyone is working under good intentions
<hhalpin> it would be good to get our lawyer thinking about this.
<hhalpin> Rigo should be at OpenID summit or IIW I think...
<hhalpin> but yes, "no worry about withdrawal" is perfect.
DKA: from a corporate perspective patent policies are good
<rreck> the conversation has kinda left what i wanted to say
davidrecordon: clarification on the earlier point: a lightweight process is preferred
<stpeter> we would have liked to use REX for doing SVG over XMPP, but were prevented from doing so
<danbri> i'd like to see w3c be more of a community of peers, where bad-players get named and shamed by other participating members a bit more
<davidrecordon> danbri +1 :)
<mischat_> danbri +1
<danbri> w3c team can't name-and-shame easily, because of the member fees aspect making it tricky to be rude to the paying members; but other members shouldn't be so restricted!
<hhalpin> I just wanted to know how OWF was planning on doing legal differently than W3C, and if there should be some knowledge sharing on this between W3C and OWF.
<Zakim> danbri, you wanted to ask about hosting user-owned domains within social networks (music.danbri.org vs last.fm/danbri; photos.danbri.org vs flickr.com/danbri; id.danbri.org fs
<lshepard> hey everyone i'm signing off - just realized i have a meeting to get to, so i'm going to have to sign off. thanks a ton for having us on and i look forward to seeing the manifesto when this comes out
<tlr> re CSS:
<hhalpin> thanks luke!
<tlr> note that patents were *disclosed*, but no claims *excluded*
<danbri> yes, thanks lshephard!
<hhalpin> (sorry, didn't mean to go into patent blackhole, but happy to see the conversation going in way danbri's pointing)
davidrecordon: patent policies needs to be more transparent
<rreck> right, no biggy.
danbri: W3C is not monolithic, and there are different working styles in different groups
<MacTed> and here we also see the potential trouble with name-and-shame.
<MacTed> (very loud) "they did a bad thing!" "well, no, here's what actually happened." (quietly) "oh." (but how many people heard the correction and acknowledgement?)
<MacTed> false rumors turn into "accepted truth" with disconcerting frequency -- even with visible public record of *actual* events.
<hhalpin> we could also talk about membership mode.
<hhalpin> membership model.
danbri: social verification: based on what you see on the profile
<rreck> well that is a tipping point thing
<rreck> if they are pre-established
<mischat_> danbri the hyper-conntected alpha-geek :)
danbri: have you considered the chat on the site? or a Turing chat? :)
<bblfish> or even it is difficult to pretent you are someone else, because if you tweet information for yourself, or write anything, it is difficult to be accurate about someone else's life.
<bblfish> Truth is coherent, and life is complex. So both of those together make it easy for friends to notice fakes
<rreck> why was that feature removed?
<hhalpin> I remember just lacking time to fill it in a lot!
<mischat_> right I have to go now, am moving house tomorrow, and have to head back, bye all !
davidrecordon: adding metadata to the relationship links for more social verifications
<hhalpin> basically, combining stuff like microformats and rdfa (stuff search engines can find) with protocol exchange for more secure points.
<rreck> i have another call too
<pchampin> I have to go too
<bblfish> of for authorization and authentication one can use something like http://blogs.sun.com/bblfish/entry/sketch_of_a_restful_photo
danbri: do you expect to see user owned domains hosted by social networking sites?
davidrecordon: will it be easy
for people to move stuff from their domains to SNs?
... this is not something that lot of users ask for
<hhalpin> thanks david!
<rreck> i wish we could
thank you davidrecordon and lshepard
<bblfish> thanks a lot
<hajons> thanks for a great talk
<hhalpin> just want you to know there are folks in w3 who are very pro-OpenID/OpenSocial/OAuth/PortableContacts etc.
<davidrecordon> thanks all of you!
<danbri> thankd david for coming along, sorry for the huge jumble of interconnected questions :)
<hhalpin> trackbot, end meeting