<MarkCrawford> trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

<MarkCrawford> +1.202.312.aaaa is me

<dahacouk> zakim ??P60 is me

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: We last met 2 weeks ago to discuss Use Cases

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: The need was to accelerate our pace of work

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: the three action items were

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: Ann and Adam would write up Boeing's experience

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: Ed has some Use Cases to write up and is looking for time, probably this month or over the holidays. He is in Paris at a meeting for this call.

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: Second Action Item: For existing scenarios, anyone can take the existing 18 Use Cases and translate them into the template. That action item came about because we have many scenariors

<Lloyd_Fassett> Third: Lloyd agreed to add a 'Type' to the template. Lloyd did put that up with three example types.

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: The idea was that we would begin to categorize Use Cases as we put them into the template.

<Lloyd_Fassett> Mark: Anything else on Use Cases?

<Lloyd_Fassett> Larry: Not, except someone in the Jive Software community was looking to translate profiles from Jive into a community.

Lloyd_Fassett: Vocabulary coming together around Activity Streams 2.0. Tried to organize a task force meeting to discuss, but couldn't find an agreeable time, because of holidays. Lloyd will continue to try to schedule a call, to be held before the next full IG meeting.
... Purpose of Vocabulary TF call will be to review nouns and verbs that jasnell has currently built into the draft AS2.0 spec. There are no other viable alternatives to AS2.0 at this point. Schema.org does not have momentum among implementers because of governance issue.

MarkCrawford: If we can't have a separate Vocabulary TF meeting, let's dedicate time in full IG meeting agenda for next week.

<harry> Note that the W3C does not encourage "forking" of existing work unless the issue can actually not be solved.

Lloyd_Fassett: Doesn't see much value in earlier suggestion to catalog vocabulary alternatives, because AS2.0 is only one that seems viable at the moment.

<dahacouk> harry: By existing work do you mean Schema.org?

<harry> Yes

harry: Better to solve Schema.org governance issue than copying their work in AS2.0. W3C doesn't like to fork existing work. Need to engage further with Google.

Lloyd_Fassett: Confirming that stable snapshot of Schema.org could be used, if governance was under the control of W3C?

harry: We need to stabilize governance of Schema.org in cooperation with Google. If that can't happen, then W3C should go ahead with an alternate vocabulary (i.e. AS2.0), but not until then.
... I don't have a preference in the technical choice, but would like to hear what others representing large install bases have to say on the issue.

Lloyd_Fassett: Will send out a Doodle poll to identify a day/time for a Vocabulary TF meeting to be held before the next full IG meeting.

<scribe> ACTION: Lloyd-Fassett to launch Doodle poll to ID day/time for Vocabulary TF meeting. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/12/03-socialig-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

Lloyd_Fassett: So AS2.0 would be a fork of the 'intent' of Schema.org, not of the code itself.
... My main concern that whatever vocabulary is used, can be done so out of the box. Important for profile federation.

<harry> A fork of existing work is fine but only if we would probably not send a FPWD in W3C of a straightforward fork unless we have ran out of options re governance (i.e. 'snapshots' or Member Submission of relevant part of schema.org does not happen before Last Call on AS 2.0

<harry> However, there's lots of stuff not in schema.org that it will be very productive to look at

<harry> +1 expertise finding

MarkCrawford: What is the purpose of the level of detail that Lloyd is describing?

<harry> (See URL discussion re current issues with forking in W3C)

<AdamB> hrxml -> http://www.hropenstandards.org/

<AdamB> is that what you are referring to MarkCrawford?

Lloyd_Fassett: Purpose is to have standardized descriptions for jobs and roles.

MarkCrawford: That is usually accomplished via an agreed upon, authoratative list.
... Vocabulary efforts of this IG should focus on social sharing, not an attempt to define at field level.
... How do we define a profile. Need standardized vocabulary terms list, with pointers to other authoritative sources for options related to each term.
... Skills are an important part (term) of profile, but IG shouldn't define skills taxonomy. Leverage existing ones.

AdamB: We should be able to define some level of skills vocabulary definition, ideally.

MarkCrawford: Yes, but questions is how deep should we go.

AdamB: Can that contextualization be via machine reading or by user?

MarkCrawford: Ideally it is possible by both. Machine should be able to read skill set, in addition to humans.

<Lloyd_Fassett> +q

Lloyd_Fassett: I don't see a way in Schema.org to extend to vertical or functional specific vocabularies. This is possible in Activity Streams 2.0.
... There is an example in existing scenarios on the wiki. The one in which someone is selling broccoli in a B2B marketplace.

MarkCrawford: Not sure we're agreement on what "vocabulary" encompasses.

Lloyd-Fassett: When we have a Vocabulary TF call, we'll work to get consensus on what we mean by "vocabulary".

MarkCrawford: Good idea that make solve some of the goal mismatch problems we are currently having.

<scribe> ACTION: Lloyd_Fassett to create strawman definition of term "vocabulary" and then get consensus for it. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2014/12/03-socialig-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.

Lloyd_Fassett: We are more likely to see adoption if we take smaller steps first. So shouldn't go to deep on vocabularies.

MarkCrawford: Can we approve minutes from last call? Any objections? [None heard, so minutes approved]
... Next IG meeting will be next Wed., back on regular bi-weekly schedule.
... Hearing no new business, meeting is adjourned.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: lehawes
Inferring Scribes: lehawes

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: AdamB Ann IPcaller Larry Lloyd-Fassett Lloyd_Fassett Lloyd_Fassett_ Mark MarkCrawford P60 Third aaaa dahacouk harry hhalpin lehawes tantek trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy


WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Got date from IRC log name: 03 Dec 2014
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2014/12/03-socialig-minutes.html
People with action items: lloyd-fassett lloyd_fassett

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report