Social Interest Group Teleconference -- 04 Feb 2015

<trackbot> Date: 04 February 2015

<AdamB> thats me

<AdamB> already did

<AdamB> yep :)

<AdamB> unique i think

<elf-pavlik> trackbot, status

<elf-pavlik> http://www.w3.org/Social/InterestGroup/track/products

<eprodrom> Hi all

<AnnB> W3C public list for social Web WG: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2015Feb/thread.html

<dahacouk> Sure. Cool.

<dahacouk> Thanks

<AnnB> User stories:

<AnnB> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories

<eprodrom> Wait, that's it?

<elf-pavlik> scribenick: elf-pavlik

<AdamB> i can

<eprodrom> I can't stay after 12:30 unfortunately

<scribe> scribenick: AdamB

yep, thats what i thought too

<elf-pavlik> AdamB++

<Loqi> AdamB has 1 karma

ann: need to approve minutes from last time? any objections ..... no, so lets approve

<dahacouk> Why superseeded?

<dahacouk> Yes, DAniel HArris CO UK ;-)

ann: social wg needs use cases .... that has really superseded in that the social wg has begun work on some user stories

<AnnB> thanks Daniel

Social API User stories

<eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API

eprodrom: one of the the wg task is to work on a social api .... have been working through the process ... start with going over existing apis and looking at examples. still need to look at other international social networks
... collected a lot from the existing social apis

<eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/Requirements

eprodrom: next step was to collect common requirements from those apis .... had done some work on this in before
... last week the idea was more or less a checklist that says you can do X with the api

<eprodrom> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/federatedsocialweb/wiki/SWAT0

eprodrom: had some push back on those because they weren't as narrative as swat0 which would be more conducive to getting contributions to the group as proposals

<elf-pavlik> ACTION: pelf to Gather API requirements (User stories) from Diaspora and Friendica developers [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/04-socialig-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1 - Gather api requirements (user stories) from diaspora and friendica developers [on Pavlik elf - due 2015-02-11].

eprodrom: swat0 is a nice clear concise user story which lead to the idea that can we come up with a set of user stories that matches the set of requirements we have
... yesterday in social wg meeting got on track by working to put together user stories over the next week. after that week the following week the wg members will be voting on those user stories

<elf-pavlik> trackbot, link action-1 to product-1

<trackbot> action-1 (Gather api requirements (user stories) from diaspora and friendica developers) associated with product-1.

eprodrom: votes include: this is important to me, not important to me, i'll be implementing this
... so had request to get user stories up as soon as possible for others to contribute as well
... will be honest not 100% sure where that matches to the what the IG has already. they are informal, not robust not covering error situations etc
... they are not fine grained requirements but do give an idea of "here is a cluster of functionality" so we can make decisions on inclusion in the api

ann: fabulous overview!

<dahacouk> Yes

ann: anybody have any questions ?

<elf-pavlik> eprodrom++

<Loqi> eprodrom has 2 karma

<dahacouk> +q

<eprodrom> loud and clear

dahacouk: two things spring to mind, a lot of things seem to be happening in calls

annb: is that because you are not part of the wg ... they do have the mailing list the wiki etc

<elf-pavlik> also each call has minutes published! https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Past_Telecons_.26_Meetings

dahacouk: the main thing, are we mapping out to the limit of what is happening right now or are we trying to create a much more dynamic, fluid things that might come along in the future
... i'm seeing things like groups and in my mind i'm thinking about groups that get created dynamically which can die off and then can start another one

I'm sorry who's speaking?

oh its evan :)

<AnnB> yes

eprodrom: i don't feel its incumbent upon me to come up with new interactions
... in the last 5-8 years we've had a certain set of functionality that has shaken out already
... part of the api is kind of "paving those cow paths"
... as a developer i would be looking for end points and mechanisms for doing things that i was used to doing with other social network apis

<dahacouk> That's cool, we're taking what exists right now. Cool.

eprodrom: would have a harder time with brand new modes of communication that i was not used to before

<elf-pavlik> action-1

<trackbot> action-1 -- Pavlik elf to Gather api requirements (user stories) from diaspora and friendica developers -- due 2015-02-11 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/InterestGroup/track/actions/1

elf-pavrik:

elf-pavlik: i created an action

<elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Managing_economic_interactions

elf-pavlik: i will be working next week in gathering requirements from xyxyx
... have question to evan .. can you take a quick look at the wiki page and provide feedback

<dahacouk> I think I heard AnnB say that we should be able to cater or update to new use cases (when they arrive).

<AnnB> or, not build in barriers

<elf-pavlik> thanks eprodrom!

eprodrom: i think its fine, its a fine user story would suggest breaking it up, if you think you can put in single user story that might be easier to get it in there ... following multiple paths through the stories makes it harder to read

<dahacouk> Thanks

<dahacouk> How can we be the most supportive at this time?

annb: thats my plan that the IG reads the user stories and look for gaps or input etc but at the same time we need to be cautious not to derail the process and the WG is trying to get their work complete before the charter runs out. thank you elf for bringing up the financial user story

<elf-pavlik> i would say economic, not necessarly financial ;)

<eprodrom> B-)

<dahacouk> WG tells IG what they need at this time?

annb: evan couple of notes i made about the user profile story, what if somebody wants to delete their profile or dump it somewhere?

<elf-pavlik> dahacouk, WG suggests what IG could prioritise to help with work in WG

annb: would you like those types of concepts entered? just worried about editing them directly.

<dahacouk> elf-pavlik: nicely worded

eprodrom: in that particular case typically with apis we looked at those types of things were not part of them, that was done out of band. through a UI.
... creating a profile doesn't necessarily mean you have an account
... or having a profile doesn't mean you have an account

<dahacouk> +1 to profile <> account/login

eprodrom: when thinking of an api i try to think of a third party login account

i agree on the out of band use case not being part of the api

annb: how would you describe the things that go on that don't on in the api? the stuff that goes on in the web interface?

<dahacouk> Social API is all about interaction between users...?

eprodrom: yeah i think we are going to come up with a lot of other social activity that might not fit in a server api. for example, one that came up earlier is federating a profile. where as this api is about client to server
... the federation is not really in scope for this client to server api

annb: and that to us, federating profiles within boeing, is a big deal for us. we have engineering systems, social tools, etc and we don't want to have users recreating profiles in multiple systems

<dahacouk> eprodrom: Thanks!

<elf-pavlik> thanks eprodrom++

eprodrom: i'll be back next week on the call again

<Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss ported one of IG use cases to WG user story https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Managing_economic_interactions and to discuss

<elf-pavlik> http://opencreds.org/specs/source/identity-credentials/

elf-pavlik: wanted to mention that i also participate in the web credentials group and there is a lot of work on identity and online profiles
... would be good to look at the work going on there as well
... a lot of work on this federated social profiles maybe have a task force to coordinate with that group

annb: is the discussion in those groups about the federation of your credentials?

<elf-pavlik> http://standard.openbadges.org/

<elf-pavlik> ACTION: pelf to Discuss Social Profile requirements with Credentials CG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/04-socialig-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-2 - Discuss social profile requirements with credentials cg [on Pavlik elf - due 2015-02-11].

<elf-pavlik> trackbot, link action-2 to product-1

<trackbot> action-2 (Discuss social profile requirements with credentials cg) associated with product-1.

annb: what i was imagining in evans description is focused on the api stuff that has to go in to a standard it would include work around credentials etc but his explanation about it just being the hooks for the client to server api only

dahacouk: my feeling on this is what happened to the wg, its awesome its mapping whats going on and its getting a common idea of common actions
... what i was thinking about before was how is that implemented a fluid dynamic peer to peer environment
... it would be interested if i get time to see how that would be stored in a lot of places.
... i'd be willing to have a different discussion about different profiles in different places etc and talk about what do i want? kind of a blue sky conversation about what is that we want to happen

<elf-pavlik> dahacouk, how about starting with putting on the wiki one or two use cases, which you would like specs from WG to cover?

annb: i think that what you are describing is thinking about this in what is a general functionality of a social environment when things are fluid and we are not all going to be in the same social network
... i encourage you to go read that discussion in the WG going on right now
... and its being focused on the actions in a social api
... so it will be up to all the developers in the world to take the foundational blocks and build what they want to build

<dahacouk> +q

dahacouk: i'm gussing, i will read the conversation, but both seem really valid. we need to track and document and standardize what is the manner in how the social networks operate
... and two, we need to look at what / where we want to go
... its interesting, there are two sides of the w3c .. one where its about standardizing what is out there and at other times its out there creating new things

annb: my impression from the wg yesterday is they are really feeling pressure to come up with something before the charter runs out
... and i think the voting is aimed to figure out what goes in version 1 and then maybe what comes later

<dahacouk> When does charter run out? 31 December 2016?

<AnnB> don't remember

lloyd_fassett: to me focus on apis that to social network that already have apis. if we standardize what the apis of the facebooks and tumblr etc we'll be solidifying their position in the world

<elf-pavlik> dahacouk, yes http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html

lloyd_fassett: if the first api just reinforces the existing social networks then don't see it being adopted much

<elf-pavlik> dahacouk, still on q ?

lloyd_fassett: but if we focus on what does the market want to do then that looks more towards the future and enables ...

<dahacouk> -q

lloyd_fassett: now would be the time for the IG to come together and present to the WG that here is a list of what we think are the real world things we see are needed

<dahacouk> lloyd: I agree with both you and me! ;-)

annb: i hear you saying they are focused on the existing apis that are out there rather than moving to the world that could be
... and that was what i believe i heard henry story was suggesting as well in the email discussion

<Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss ecnomic interactions oriented user stories

elf-pavlik: you do have to be a member of the wg mailing list without being a member of the group. everyone can read it but not everyone can post to it
... but will double check

question, if the wg is just standardizing what is already out there who would really have a need to adopt it?

<dahacouk> +q

<dahacouk> elf-pavlik: yes, let's do it.

elf-pavlik: need to make sure the api is extensible so that new things can be added on to it for future growth

dahacouk: i've got some free time in the next few weeks to just concentrate on work so i'll work with elf on this.

<elf-pavlik> dahacouk, can i create action for you? i already took two for myself today :)

<AnnB> can you at least define what you guys are going to work on?

dahacouk: i want to come back to the question on why would anyone adopt a standard for things they are doing already .... my gut feeling is that having that would make building applications easier and then having the extending capabilities

would help for people to start pushing for new things to come in to the standard

lloyd_fassett: i think the new thing is going to be data. if there is a way to standardize that. if its the social api i think that is going to be different.

<elf-pavlik> ACTION: dahacouk to write Carpooling use case (case of P2P Marketplace) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/02/04-socialig-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-3 - Write carpooling use case (case of p2p marketplace) [on Daniel Harris - due 2015-02-11].

<elf-pavlik> dahacouk, done :)

<elf-pavlik> trackbot, link action-3 to product-1

<trackbot> action-3 (Write carpooling use case (case of p2p marketplace)) associated with product-1.

<dahacouk> -q

<elf-pavlik> AdamB: part of my corncern relates to why would facebook, thumber etc. addopt this stuff

<dahacouk> Interesting... I didn't know that the big players have already said they wont use the standard.

<elf-pavlik> G+ uses schema.org (an open technology) https://developers.google.com/+/api/moment-types/

<dahacouk> +q re: we are dreamers

annb: the stuff that evan described in the user stories .. they are very foundational and as been mentioned those capabilities exist already

dahacouk: yeah probably need to have them just from the point that they are normal and already exist. it may be that things don't get adopted straight away but to me i have to keep on describing and building and that we don't need to stop others from doing the foundational stuff
... we should stay on the items where our passion is blue sky type stuff

annb: probably need to close out here

<Zakim> dahacouk, you wanted to discuss we are dreamers

<elf-pavlik> +1 meeting next week!

annb: would you guys be willing to continue next week? i feel like two weeks might be too ling

<dahacouk> yes, next week is good for me. +1

yeah, next week works +!

<dahacouk> Wow!

voting only starts next week and then last for a week

<dahacouk> Not done, let's carry on!

<elf-pavlik> vote will last 1 or 2 weeks

<dahacouk> This work is useful anyway. ;-)

<elf-pavlik> harry, action-1

<elf-pavlik> action-1

<trackbot> action-1 -- Pavlik elf to Gather api requirements (user stories) from diaspora and friendica developers -- due 2015-02-11 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/InterestGroup/track/actions/1

<dahacouk> Exactly, we get v2 ready! ;-)

<harry> Hope folks here understood the user story request from the WG

<elf-pavlik> harry, evan showed up today and clarified

<harry> Yes, I caught that.

<harry> OK, well, we're expecting those stories :)

lloyd_fassett: i think we should ask them to put off the vote for a week

annb: truthfully i don't think they are going to wait.

<elf-pavlik> harry, can IG but not WG member write on WG wiki?

harry, who can update the social wg wiki pages ?

<harry> You have to join the WG

<dahacouk> +q

<harry> as a member of Boeing, this should be no problem - just fill out the form and ping Anne to approve you

lloyd_fassett: my concern is that they create a standard on the existing stuff out there and that i don't find that promissing

<elf-pavlik> ok, i'll add user stories from people who don't have access, please just send them to IG mailing list

annb: will share the concern of some of the members of the IG

<harry> yes, I'm also noticing there seems to be some error with the minutes (trying to catch up)

<AnnB> uh oh .. what's prob with minutes?

<AnnB> and what do we need to do?

dahacouk: my feeling is that this is going to be version 1 and i still really think what we are doing in the IG is really important and is going to be very useful

<harry> No worries, we can always generate via IRC: http://www.w3.org/2015/02/04-socialig-irc.txt

<harry> which has been captured very nicely

<harry> +1 dahacouk

dahacouk: thats why i'm happy to talk to you and thinking maybe if a more in depth conversation would help

<harry> Note that we just need a version 1 out ASAP, we are not going to finalize till all members have their voices heard

harry, why the push for v1 ?

<harry> It's in our charter - we have due dates!

it is just a draft for v1

<elf-pavlik> v1 as First Public Working Draft?

ok, so date driven. got it

<harry> http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter

<Lloyd_Fassett> (541) 848-2440 PST / lloyd@azteria.com

<dahacouk> Lloyd_Fassett: OK. Then it may be tomorrow as I'm in UTC.

<harry> We were supposed to have a first draft out by end of 2014

<harry> but being up to 6 months behind is generally OK

<harry> more than that generally is a sign something has gone wrong.

annb: thank you everyone so much

<harry> +1 AnnB

<AnnB> trackbot, end meeting

<AnnB> thanks elf!

- DRAFT -

Social Interest Group Teleconference
04 Feb 2015

Attendees

Contents

Social API User stories

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

- DRAFT -

Social Interest Group Teleconference 04 Feb 2015

Attendees

Contents

Social API User stories

Summary of Action Items

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

Social Interest Group Teleconference
04 Feb 2015