IRC log of swxg on 2010-04-21

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:00:31 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #swxg
15:00:31 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:00:33 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
15:00:33 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #swxg
15:00:35 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 7994
15:00:35 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see INC_SWXG()11:00AM scheduled to start now
15:00:36 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Incubator Group Teleconference
15:00:36 [trackbot]
Date: 21 April 2010
15:00:47 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's here?
15:00:47 [Zakim]
INC_SWXG()11:00AM has not yet started, MacTed
15:00:52 [MacTed]
Zakim, this is 7994
15:00:52 [Zakim]
ok, MacTed; that matches INC_SWXG()11:00AM
15:00:57 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's here?
15:00:57 [Zakim]
On the phone I see OpenLink_Software
15:01:06 [MacTed]
Zakim, OpenLink_Software is temporarily me
15:01:06 [Zakim]
+MacTed; got it
15:01:08 [MacTed]
Zakim, mute me
15:01:08 [Zakim]
sorry, MacTed, muting is not permitted when only one person is present
15:01:12 [Zakim]
+ +95177aaaa
15:01:14 [DKA]
DKA has joined #swxg
15:01:19 [MacTed]
Zakim, mute me
15:01:19 [Zakim]
MacTed should now be muted
15:01:20 [pchampin]
zakim, aaaa is me
15:01:20 [Zakim]
+pchampin; got it
15:01:23 [pchampin]
zakim, mute me
15:01:23 [Zakim]
pchampin should now be muted
15:01:42 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's here?
15:01:42 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MacTed (muted), pchampin (muted)
15:01:50 [MacTed]
but why don't you see anyone on channel?
15:01:57 [hhalpin]
hhalpin has joined #swxg
15:02:57 [MacTed]
hhalpin - I've told trackbot to start the meeting, and RRSAgent and Zakim are doing their things ... except that Zakim doesn't seem to see anyone on channel, only on the phone...
15:03:23 [Zakim]
15:03:49 [DKA]
Hi all.
15:03:57 [Zakim]
15:04:30 [Zakim]
15:04:57 [Zakim]
15:04:59 [Zakim]
15:05:06 [MacTed]
Zakim, unmute me
15:05:06 [Zakim]
MacTed should no longer be muted
15:05:07 [DKA]
can hear you
15:05:16 [Zakim]
+ +049172247aabb
15:05:19 [hhalpin]
trackbot, start meeting
15:05:22 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
15:05:24 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 7994
15:05:24 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see INC_SWXG()11:00AM scheduled to start 5 minutes ago
15:05:25 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Incubator Group Teleconference
15:05:25 [trackbot]
Date: 21 April 2010
15:05:28 [DKA]
zakim, mute me
15:05:31 [Zakim]
sorry, DKA, I don't know what conference this is
15:05:35 [DKA]
Can't chair - but could scribe.
15:05:38 [MacTed]
Zakim, this is 7994
15:05:38 [Zakim]
ok, MacTed; that matches INC_SWXG()11:00AM
15:05:45 [hhalpin]
Zakim, this is swxg
15:05:45 [Zakim]
hhalpin, this was already INC_SWXG()11:00AM
15:05:46 [Zakim]
ok, hhalpin; that matches INC_SWXG()11:00AM
15:05:59 [hhalpin]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:05:59 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MacTed, DKA, [IPcaller], +049172247aabb
15:06:00 [DKA]
Chair: Harry
15:06:06 [DKA]
Scribe: Dan
15:06:10 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's here?
15:06:10 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MacTed, DKA, [IPcaller], +049172247aabb
15:06:11 [DKA]
ScribeNick: DKA
15:06:16 [rreck]
rreck has joined #SWXG
15:06:22 [AnitaD]
AnitaD has joined #swxg
15:06:35 [Zakim]
15:06:49 [yoshiaki]
zakim, ??P7 is me
15:06:49 [Zakim]
+yoshiaki; got it
15:07:02 [Zakim]
15:07:04 [DKA]
Harry: Jeff Jaffee is very interested in [process changes?] in w3c. Hoping we can come to consensus on some of these issues.
15:07:06 [Zakim]
15:07:15 [pchampin]
zakim, mute me
15:07:15 [Zakim]
pchampin should now be muted
15:07:15 [melvster]
Zakim, ??P25 is me
15:07:16 [Zakim]
+melvster; got it
15:07:16 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's on irc?
15:07:16 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, MacTed.
15:07:21 [DKA]
Harry can you share the link?
15:07:23 [MacTed]
Zakim, who's on channel?
15:07:23 [Zakim]
I don't understand your question, MacTed.
15:07:33 [hhalpin]
Zakim, who's on the phone?
15:07:33 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MacTed, DKA, [IPcaller], +049172247aabb, yoshiaki, melvster, pchampin (muted)
15:08:00 [hhalpin]
IP caller?
15:08:01 [Zakim]
+ +1.218.296.aacc
15:08:09 [DKA]
zakim, aabb is Anita
15:08:09 [Zakim]
+Anita; got it
15:08:11 [MacTed]
Zakim, IPcaller is hhalpin
15:08:11 [Zakim]
+hhalpin; got it
15:08:11 [hhalpin]
Zakim, [IPcaller] is hhalpin
15:08:12 [Zakim]
sorry, hhalpin, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'
15:08:19 [hhalpin]
Zakim, IPcaller is hhalpin
15:08:19 [Zakim]
sorry, hhalpin, I do not recognize a party named 'IPcaller'
15:08:27 [rreck]
zakim, +1.218.296.aacc is me
15:08:27 [Zakim]
+rreck; got it
15:08:31 [DKA]
zakim, who is here?
15:08:31 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MacTed, DKA, hhalpin, Anita, yoshiaki, melvster, pchampin (muted), rreck
15:08:31 [yoshiaki]
+yoshiaki; got it
15:09:07 [rreck]
zakim, mute me
15:09:07 [Zakim]
rreck should now be muted
15:09:09 [hhalpin]
15:09:14 [hhalpin]
Approve minutes?
15:09:15 [rreck]
+1 approve
15:09:18 [DKA]
Harry: +1
15:09:25 [DKA]
15:09:27 [hhalpin]
Minutes from April 14th approved
15:09:44 [DKA]
Harry: next week should we cancel the meeting (because of www2010)?
15:09:51 [DKA]
+1 for canceling
15:09:52 [rreck]
i could be here
15:09:58 [rreck]
-1 canceling
15:10:10 [AnitaD]
-1 I cant make it
15:10:22 [hhalpin]
Next meeting cancelled
15:10:37 [hhalpin]
But resume as normal with policy language discussions and information cards
15:10:43 [yoshiaki]
15:10:51 [hhalpin]
for the first Wednesday in May
15:11:03 [DKA]
Next meeting - may 5th
15:11:07 [hhalpin]
topic: Action reminders
15:11:13 [rreck]
i think the first wed in May is the 5th
15:11:14 [DKA]
Topic: Action reminders
15:11:42 [DKA]
Harry: Please check all your actions [and report on status to the mailing list]
15:11:49 [hhalpin]
15:12:13 [hhalpin]
15:12:34 [DKA]
Topic: request from Jeff.
15:12:55 [hhalpin]
topic: Proposals for lightweight process changes
15:13:23 [hhalpin]
scribenick: hhalpin
15:13:36 [hhalpin]
DKA: there is a proposal called W3C outpost thought up by DKA
15:13:42 [hhalpin]
... and Robin Berjon
15:15:21 [DKA]
Harry: Jeff would like to get approval for some proposals of opening up W3c at next TPAc (in November).
15:15:39 [DKA]
Harry: To be discussed at www2010.
15:17:04 [DKA]
15:17:13 [AnitaD]
AnitaD has joined #swxg
15:17:16 [DKA]
That is the outposts proposal.
15:17:45 [DKA]
Most of the work done by Robin, to be clear.
15:17:45 [MacTed]
Zakim, mute me
15:17:45 [Zakim]
MacTed should now be muted
15:18:43 [hhalpin]
DKA: How can W3C help these efforts?
15:18:54 [hhalpin]
... efforts like OMB, Salmon Protocol, how can we help these efforts
15:19:06 [hhalpin]
... pose the question that way, as opposed to why these efforts aren't happening at W3C
15:19:25 [hhalpin]
... which is different than saying what's the problem, W3C is the answer
15:19:29 [hhalpin]
... the point of this proposal
15:19:39 [hhalpin]
... is for the W3C to provide tools and basic templates
15:19:52 [hhalpin]
... high quality tools like issue tracking, actions, IRC channels, stuff like trackbot
15:20:01 [hhalpin]
... and provide this as a kind of package with minimal staff impact
15:20:11 [hhalpin]
... provide some kind of IPR for efforts
15:20:44 [hhalpin]
... often the intention is to release it royalty-free, but there's issues with understanding tricky legal issues re copyright, open source
15:20:51 [hhalpin]
... so W3C could provide these tools and processes
15:20:59 [hhalpin]
... so that fledgling efforts could use them
15:21:09 [hhalpin]
... with minimal effort, like making the XG process even easier
15:21:23 [hhalpin]
... so we don't even have W3C members at all.
15:21:31 [hhalpin]
... just one W3C member as a suggestor, not even a sponsor
15:21:46 [hhalpin]
... the Outpost proposal is to see how W3C proposal could help these efforts around
15:21:52 [hhalpin]
... so we had this discussion at the AC meeting.
15:22:03 [hhalpin]
... so we had another discussion about how W3C standards can be fed to ISO groups
15:22:15 [hhalpin]
... and so make them "real" standards in the very formal sense of the word
15:22:23 [hhalpin]
... as W3C standards are actually recommendations
15:22:42 [hhalpin]
... so the point is at least 2 individuals from 2 different companies
15:22:54 [hhalpin]
... can then make a roadmap between that kind of work and ISO standardization
15:22:59 [hhalpin]
... in helping to bridge that gap.
15:23:18 [DKA]
Harry: any questions?
15:23:23 [melvster]
good idea
15:23:29 [MacTed]
definitely good idea
15:23:43 [yoshiaki]
good idea
15:23:44 [pchampin]
good idea indeed
15:24:22 [hhalpin]
Community Group?
15:24:24 [DKA]
Harry: 2 points - good idea, I worry about the name "outposts" - sounds like w3c colonising... rather than helping people.
15:24:50 [hhalpin]
ah, an embassy in another realm
15:24:54 [Zakim]
15:25:09 [hhalpin]
DKA: to be the opposite of colonization
15:25:15 [hhalpin]
... it should have a different identity
15:25:17 [hhalpin]
... different website
15:25:24 [MacTed]
Zakim, unmute me
15:25:24 [Zakim]
MacTed should no longer be muted
15:25:45 [hhalpin]
... to prevent developers etc. from being alienated
15:25:56 [hhalpin]
... including academic sheen
15:26:03 [hhalpin]
... the point of the name is to sound cool
15:26:20 [Zakim]
15:26:30 [Yuk]
Yuk has joined #swxg
15:26:51 [hhalpin]
MacTed: We need a better communication
15:27:02 [hhalpin]
... W3C standards aren't really standards, they're Recommendations
15:27:21 [hhalpin]
... origins were in trying to unify and stop failure of interoperability
15:27:27 [hhalpin]
... the browser wars
15:27:30 [DKA]
MacTed: I think that's more likely to happen with a better communications effort. As you say, W3C standards aren't really standards. Their origins were in efforts to aid interoperability.
15:28:04 [DKA]
MacTed: as things have been evolving, they are shifting towards forward thinking... that's a different thing?
15:28:15 [DKA]
Harry: how could the suggestion be advertised differently?
15:28:57 [DKA]
MacTed: Opening processes is definitely useful. Don't know about "outposts" as a brand. Most of the summary sounds likes a win.
15:29:43 [hhalpin]
W3C Frontier?
15:30:02 [DKA]
MacTed: ...but in the same space, creating a new space doesn't necessarily changes the perception about w3c. If there are perceptions against w3c then let's change that. Maybe "W3C Frontier" would make more sense?
15:30:24 [DKA]
Harry: idea makes sense to me. I don't like the word "frontier" either.
15:30:34 [DKA]
(I like "frontier" as well... :) )
15:31:24 [DKA]
Harry: I had a conversation with Facebook. Asked them - why are you using things like google groups - maybe google isn't a neutral 3rd party? The response I got: we would be happy to use a w3c list but [too difficult].
15:32:00 [DKA]
Harry: another point made by fb - the login. If you use a google group, most people have a google account so easy to log in...
15:32:03 [DKA]
[low friction]
15:32:20 [pchampin]
I agree
15:32:23 [hhalpin]
ah I see!
15:32:51 [pchampin]
variant: I have one google account, and people keep inviting me to google docs on another address, which I do not want to register in my google account
15:32:51 [DKA]
MacTed: I have 2 google accounts - it's very difficult to manage that in that situation...
15:33:11 [DKA]
15:33:22 [pchampin]
but I agree: this makes it easier for many people
15:33:32 [pchampin]
foaf+ssl ?
15:34:27 [melvster]
yes to both :)
15:34:36 [DKA]
MacTed: different issues in different places... If the pain they're trying to solve is - having an account in w3c space - you've got to have some kind of account if there's going to be moderation...
15:35:09 [hhalpin]
add easy comments via a webform.
15:35:21 [DKA]
Harry: Google groups also uses a blog-like interface where you can add comments very easily...
15:35:39 [DKA]
MacTed: That's an interface issue - we could do the same ...
15:36:03 [rreck]
im not sure its that appealing
15:36:06 [DKA]
Harry: any other comments on outposts or on opening up w3c?
15:36:21 [DKA]
Harry: Other comments...
15:36:55 [rreck]
if i have to ask someone if they know what w3c is, and they answer 'no' there is little point in explaining
15:36:55 [hhalpin]
perceived formality of many things?
15:37:24 [DKA]
MacTed: One offputting thing about w3c is the perceived formality - the perceived formal process which can be very offputting if you don't know what it is.
15:38:04 [hhalpin]
15:38:06 [DKA]
Harry: one of the other issues that has been made. Are people familiar with the w3c member submission process?
15:38:28 [hhalpin]
Public Submissions process?
15:38:36 [hhalpin]
Which takes submissions from the general public
15:38:48 [DKA]
Harry: If you make a spec - you can submit it to w3c as a member submission but only if you are a member. Another idea is a "public submission process" which takes submissions from the general public.
15:38:53 [hhalpin]
a separate index and formatting from actual member submissions and Rec-track work
15:39:06 [hhalpin]
get a Team comment
15:39:22 [DKA]
Harry: would allow people who already developed something to submit...
15:39:59 [DKA]
Harry: as the web has grown so exponentially it's difficult for Tim [or anyone else} to know what's going on everywhere. So this is one way to allow suggestions from all over...
15:40:23 [DKA]
MacTed: That seems like a reinvention of rfc...
15:40:28 [hhalpin]
15:40:44 [hhalpin]
is basically patent policy
15:40:46 [DKA]
Harry: it is, but with a difference - difference between ietf and w3c is patent policy.
15:41:11 [rreck]
honestly, IMHO, this sounds more like a hammer looking for a nail than a nail that needs a hammer
15:41:54 [DKA]
"W3C: Bringing hammers and nails together since 1992"
15:42:01 [rreck]
15:42:33 [hhalpin]
levels of membership?
15:42:35 [DKA]
MacTed: perhaps there's a question of levels of membership.
15:42:43 [hhalpin]
no, besides invited experts
15:42:54 [danbri]
danbri has joined #swxg
15:43:34 [hhalpin]
precisely, and jeff himself is interested in this space now
15:43:49 [hhalpin]
DKA: Let's revisit the reasons we're interested in.
15:44:09 [hhalpin]
... we need to be really careful about saying that the answer must be W3C
15:44:26 [hhalpin]
... so whether or not these assets that W3C brings to the table
15:44:51 [hhalpin]
... can make these benefits available to fledgling efforts who think
15:45:01 [hhalpin]
... they may not need the level of W3C process in collaboration
15:45:18 [hhalpin]
... but notice if they don't IP
15:45:28 [rreck]
i agree
15:45:32 [hhalpin]
... that's why I think a new website, a brand, will make a real difference.
15:45:49 [hhalpin]
... the benefit will only be realized if there is a new staff role is an evangelist type role
15:45:53 [hhalpin]
... that gets into these community
15:45:58 [rreck]
15:46:02 [hhalpin]
... that is aware and participates of these community efforts
15:46:10 [hhalpin]
... and that brings the benefits and tools to these efforts
15:46:30 [hhalpin]
... rather than say we're w3c, look at our great stuff w3c.
15:47:40 [DKA]
Harry: some of these efforts like activity streams or portable contacts would say "we're not in the wild- we already have uptake" but at the same point, they might need to start thinking about IP issues...
15:48:26 [DKA]
Harry: some of these social web efforts are fairly mature though the big problem of distributed mature social networks is far from solved...
15:48:52 [hhalpin]
DKA by suggestion do you basically kinda mean liason?
15:48:57 [DKA]
Harry: W3C doesn't have liaisons with web 2.0 social stuff...
15:49:17 [rreck]
sounds like it
15:49:47 [DKA]
MacTed: I'm becoming less clear on what the goal is... W3C has these great tools and we want to make them available... But we actually want to use them to lure you in... and there is only dues-paying membership...
15:50:38 [DKA]
Harry: Big benefit of w3c is the royalty-free patent policy. Meta-level goal is to make sure that these standards are open and royalty-free.
15:50:40 [melvster]
15:50:56 [DKA]
+1 on patent policy being a key benefit
15:51:12 [DKA]
Harry: that's why w3c has to be a member organization.
15:52:03 [DKA]
Harry: you have to have members who have companies who have patents but a lot of the creativity comes from the community groups...
15:52:33 [rreck]
this doesnt sounds like a great idea to me
15:52:52 [hhalpin]
DKA: free membership hasn't been taken off the table
15:53:10 [hhalpin]
... there is an argument that it would bring funding into the organization
15:53:17 [hhalpin]
... although others worry it may take away the funding
15:53:34 [hhalpin]
... if there was a free category you'd have more agreement
15:54:37 [DKA]
Harry: you could imagine some slightly re-jigged invited expert status... Invited experts should not work for companies who have parents in that area...
15:54:48 [rreck]
without funding there is more work with less money
15:55:53 [DKA]
MacTed: I'm not saying that's not true but by that fact it kind of derails this other effort. You have to be able to declare patent-free whatever your contributions are. In order to do that you have to be working for an entity that will declare it for you or declare you free. There are legal costs...
15:56:10 [DKA]
Harry: the conflict only exists when you work for a company that may have patents in that area...
15:56:22 [hhalpin]
there's provisional patents as well :)
15:56:59 [DKA]
MacTed: There's all kind of aspects - employment contract law, patent law, etc... Does lend weight to "there has to be a degree of corporate involvement and therefore dues to support that" but that leads us back to where we are today...
15:57:07 [rreck]
harry is breaking up
15:59:50 [hhalpin]
DKA: pushback from people in the AAC
16:00:00 [hhalpin]
... people who are not really exposed to community driven spec development
16:00:15 [hhalpin]
... questioning from folks who had just never heard of the idea
16:00:41 [hhalpin]
... I don't want to be mean, but I think we can discount that.
16:00:41 [hhalpin]
... since it wasn't grounded in the reality we're trying to address here
16:00:41 [hhalpin]
... so overall feedback is good
16:00:52 [hhalpin]
... so there's a level of education we'll have to do to the Advisory Committee
16:01:01 [hhalpin]
... otherwise we'll get a lot of pushback from the ac-list
16:01:28 [DKA]
Harry: we could at least endorse modulo name changes the w3c outposts proposal...
16:01:35 [hhalpin]
... not clear.
16:01:56 [DKA]
MacTed: I couldn't endorse it in it's current state. The goals it's trying to achieve are not clear and how it means to achieve them are not clear.
16:02:42 [FabGandon]
FabGandon has left #swxg
16:03:02 [rreck]
what i heard today made me all sad. that is my best summation
16:03:26 [rreck]
zakim, unmute me
16:03:26 [Zakim]
rreck should no longer be muted
16:04:11 [hhalpin]
rreck: from a business-side it's unclear if we can get more resources to supplement more work
16:04:19 [hhalpin]
... so we don't want to degrade participation in what W3C has.
16:05:54 [DKA]
Harry: the outposts proposal would involve extra resources. The [risk we are trying to mitigate
16:06:16 [DKA]
...] is that "open standards" aren't really open. If they don't have a [proven
16:06:41 [DKA]
...] patent policy then there could be a problem for businesses who are trying to deploy these standards in the future.
16:07:27 [Zakim]
16:07:39 [hhalpin]
I do agree we are techies talking to techies, but then we often have a good grasp of what's going on in the field :)
16:07:45 [DKA]
MacTed: We are talking about techies talking to techies - bunch of random guys out there working for somebody who may not have a claim on what they're doing. What we want to have happen is.
16:08:01 [Zakim]
16:08:04 [DKA]
... for somebody say "I agree I am not going to charge royalties"...
16:08:26 [danbri]
zakim, who is on the phone?
16:08:26 [Zakim]
On the phone I see MacTed, DKA, hhalpin, yoshiaki, melvster, pchampin (muted), rreck, ??P0
16:09:02 [DKA]
16:09:04 [danbri]
i have no audio out
16:09:06 [DKA]
;lkasads 'k;
16:09:13 [danbri]
just nice to hear y'voices ;)
16:09:14 [rreck]
i like and agree with harry's point
16:09:17 [DKA]
16:09:19 [rreck]
last oen
16:09:23 [rreck]
16:09:43 [hhalpin]
Meeting Adjourned
16:09:52 [hhalpin]
trackbot, end meeting
16:09:52 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:09:52 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been MacTed, +95177aaaa, pchampin, DKA, +049172247aabb, yoshiaki, melvster, Anita, hhalpin, rreck
16:09:53 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:09:53 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:09:54 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:09:54 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items