17:05:32 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
17:05:32 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/03/24-social-irc
17:05:34 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
17:05:36 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SOCL
17:05:36 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see T&S_SOCWG()1:00PM scheduled to start 5 minutes ago
17:05:37 <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
17:05:37 <trackbot> Date: 24 March 2015
17:05:43 <cwebber2> I can scribe
17:05:47 <cwebber2> since I can't talk anyway
17:05:48 <eprodrom> Zakim, who's on the call?
17:05:48 <Zakim> I notice T&S_SOCWG()1:00PM has restarted
17:05:49 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell
17:05:53 <eprodrom> scribenick cwebber2
17:05:56 <cwebber2> woo
17:05:57 <cwebber2> okay
17:06:26 <cwebber2> eprodrom: first order of business for today is to approve the minutes from 10th of march, unfortunately those minutes seem to not be prepared
17:06:35 <cwebber2> eprodrom: tantek, do you remember who scribed?
17:06:41 <cwebber2> tantek: let's see if I took notes
17:06:56 <cwebber2> ... looks like it was aaronpk
17:07:05 <cwebber2> eprodrom: great, I am going to open up an action
17:07:12 <eprodrom> ACTION aaronpk upload the 2015-03-10 minutes to the wiki
17:07:12 <trackbot> Created ACTION-55 - Upload the 2015-03-10 minutes to the wiki [on Aaron Parecki - due 2015-03-31].
17:07:37 <cwebber2> eprodrom: okay unfortunately we can't confirm those
17:07:41 <cwebber2> ... hopefully we can move on
17:07:53 <cwebber2> ... next item is approval for minutes for face to face
17:08:02 <cwebber2> ... harry was putting those together but is not on the call
17:08:14 <cwebber2> ... I will do another action on harry to assemble the minutes from the face to face
17:08:21 <eprodrom> ACTION harry Assemble the minutes from March F2F
17:08:21 <trackbot> Created ACTION-56 - Assemble the minutes from march f2f [on Harry Halpin - due 2015-03-31].
17:08:22 <cwebber2> AnnB: the minutes from the 10th of may are messed up
17:08:33 <cwebber2> AnnB: minutes from the 17th, sorry, not 10th
17:08:38 <cwebber2> cwebber2: probably my bad
17:08:38 <Zakim> +Sandro
17:08:58 <cwebber2> AnnB: the irc log is correct, but the w3c has a bot that makes the minutes, this is the part that's screwed up
17:09:02 <cwebber2> ... something seems wacky
17:09:09 <cwebber2> ... sandro, do you know more?
17:09:18 <Zakim> +??P11
17:09:24 <cwebber2> sandro: don't know, sorry, I think harry said he will clean them up manually
17:09:43 <cwebber2> ... there's a problem where if a group meeting goes past midnight
17:09:46 <eprodrom> rhiaro: can you mute please? I think you're getting some feedback
17:09:48 <cwebber2> AnnB: oh no the midnight problem
17:09:56 <cwebber2> sandro: harry claimed that problem
17:10:02 <Loqi> Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-24]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83096&oldid=83050
17:10:03 <Loqi> Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-10]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83097&oldid=82751
17:10:04 <Loqi> Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-24]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83098&oldid=83096
17:10:13 <cwebber2> eprodrom: I think harry's on minutes from the march f2f, harry's on march 10th, so hopefully that can be done
17:10:18 <AnnB> past midnight <somewhere in world> .. can't remember .. (we certainly did not meet past midnight in real life)
17:10:24 <cwebber2> ... minute approving is everyone's favorite part but we gotta skip it
17:10:34 <cwebber2> ... next meeting I think we have no  conflicts, arnaud will chair
17:10:46 <cwebber2> ... that brings us to the next issue on the agenda which is the next f2f
17:11:04 <tantek> I've added links to our IRC logs for the f2f and redlinked where the minutes will go here: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17#Social_Web_WG_Face_to_Face_Meeting_at_MIT_.28F2F2.29
17:11:13 <cwebber2> ... we had an idea come up in the f2f where we definitely will do a f2f at the next tpac in september, but would like to another between now and then
17:11:37 <cwebber2> ... there are a couple of candidates for times that would work, one is the upcoming meeting in paris, another is indiewebcamp in edinborough at the end of july
17:11:48 <eprodrom> http://doodle.com/8fa27m9ryx6d26rb
17:11:52 <cwebber2> ... we have an open doodle poll with unfortunately the wrong dates, if you responded before you may need to do it again
17:11:55 <Arnaud> +q
17:12:05 <cwebber2> ... I'm not sure, do we want to close this poll at this point?
17:12:21 <tantek> q?
17:12:24 <cwebber2> ... the big issue is we need to make a decision soon, if people make travel plans to paris in may, they need to do it in a week or two if not this week
17:12:29 <eprodrom> ack Arnaud
17:12:32 <cwebber2> ... would like to close this by the end of the week
17:12:48 <cwebber2> Arnaud: I'd like to move faster on it, I'm one of the people who have to make travel plans, it's hard to keep waiting
17:12:59 <cwebber2> ... there's not much debate, the main option seems to be the july one
17:13:09 <cwebber2> ... I'd be inclined to propose that we settle on the main dates in paris
17:13:15 <cwebber2> ... but do we have a host in paris?
17:13:23 <AnnB> no, cwebber2 .. the main option is MAY
17:13:31 <rhiaro> harry said he could book Centre Pompidou
17:13:35 <cwebber2> ... (correction: the main option is in may)
17:13:41 <cwebber2> cwebber2: thanks annb
17:13:46 <AnnB> np
17:13:52 <cwebber2> Arnaud: harry said there was a place we can go to
17:13:57 <cwebber2> ... we can confirm later
17:14:03 <cwebber2> ... I encourage others to respond right now
17:14:26 <cwebber2> ... it seems to be a pretty clear cut to me (based on yes/nos)
17:14:33 <cwebber2> AnnB: even if there was an informal gathering, seems worth it
17:14:40 <ben_thatmustbeme> Zakim, who is on the call
17:14:41 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the call', ben_thatmustbeme
17:14:46 <cwebber2> Arnaud: maybe we can give a few minutes, but then we can do 5 minutes then we can close on this?
17:14:52 <elf-pavlik> Zakim, who's on the call?
17:14:52 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell, Sandro, rhiaro (muted)
17:14:53 <cwebber2> Arnaud: but I would like to have a decision
17:15:01 <cwebber2> tantek: I think you need a confirmation from the host
17:15:14 <cwebber2> Arnaud: we can close on that pending confirmation from harry
17:15:18 <cwebber2> tantek: yes we can do that
17:16:01 <cwebber2> eprodrom: yeah, so we'll put this off to the end of the call so all of you can open your airline of choice in another browser window and see if you can make it oo the meeting.  Let's see what we can do.  I will push it off to the end of the hour, ok harry?
17:16:03 <cwebber2> er,
17:16:08 <cwebber2> ... (okay arnaud)
17:16:28 <cwebber2> eprodrom: we have some perpetual issues
17:16:38 <cwebber2> ... any activity on open issues/actions that we can close today?
17:16:47 <cwebber2> ... take a moment please to look at them and see what need to be closed
17:17:04 <cwebber2> *click clack*
17:17:12 <eprodrom> q?
17:17:16 <cwebber2> ... okay if we have nothing
17:17:25 <cwebber2> tantek: looks like on 26(?) that I think that's been merged
17:17:38 <jasnell> tantek++ for PR
17:17:40 <cwebber2> ... so now it's back to see about more pull requests, thanks james for that merge
17:17:40 <Loqi> tantek has 170 karma
17:17:44 <Zakim> +??P1
17:17:50 <cwebber2> ... will keep going to see how far I can get with the examples
17:17:52 <tantek> action-26
17:17:52 <trackbot> action-26 -- Tantek Çelik to Review microformats examples in AS2.0 specs -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN
17:17:52 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/26
17:17:59 <cwebber2> eprodrom: harry's got an action open, 37 for testing
17:18:05 <tantek> action-37
17:18:06 <trackbot> action-37 -- Harry Halpin to Put forth the test suite plan using standard js tools -- due 2015-02-10 -- OPEN
17:18:06 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/37
17:18:12 <cwebber2> ... i've kind of taken this on myself, I'd like to edit this action and have it defer
17:18:18 <cwebber2> ... I think there's no easy way to say it's closed
17:18:23 <tantek> action-50
17:18:23 <trackbot> action-50 -- Evan Prodromou to Extract the examples from the main documents, pick properties and put together a test for those examples -- due 2015-03-24 -- OPEN
17:18:23 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/50
17:18:26 <cwebber2> ... because action 50 supercedes it
17:18:31 <cwebber2> ... but i will write it in the notes
17:18:40 <cwebber2> cwebber2: hopefully me too :)
17:18:41 <eprodrom> supersedes
17:18:59 <cwebber2> eprodrom: any other actions we need to get moving?
17:19:04 <cwebber2> ... is henry on?
17:19:05 <ben_thatmustbeme> Zakim, who is on the call?
17:19:05 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell, Sandro, rhiaro (muted), elf-pavlik (muted)
17:19:08 <ben_thatmustbeme> no
17:19:09 <eprodrom> bblfish: Are you on the call?
17:19:32 <cwebber2> ... henry / bblfish mentioned doing ontology examples for the activitystreams testing
17:19:39 <bblfish> ah I am on another call too
17:19:42 <cwebber2> ... it would be great to see what tools we could use
17:19:47 <bblfish> pretty complex
17:19:49 <cwebber2> ... oh okay sorry about that bblfish
17:20:01 <Loqi> Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83099&oldid=83035
17:20:08 <cwebber2> ... given that I'd like to close up the open actions, we have a pretty big pile of issues on the agenda for today
17:20:20 <tantek> are we looking at http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/raised ?
17:20:23 <cwebber2> ... I am going to try to get these, these are all on the f2f agenda, a few came over
17:20:27 <tantek> to decided whether to accept / open them or not?
17:20:27 <cwebber2> ... we have a number for AS 2.0
17:20:38 <elf-pavlik> eprodrom, Raised issues?
17:20:39 <cwebber2> ... I'd like to review our strategy for next steps for social api by end of the call
17:20:42 <tantek> I recall Arnaud saying we should review raised issues
17:21:00 <cwebber2> ... I count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 top level items here on AS 2.0
17:21:09 <cwebber2> ... jasnell brought up an issue around profiles
17:21:18 <cwebber2> ... maybe we should address it, let's throw it at the end
17:21:32 <cwebber2> ... let's start with the top one and move down
17:21:47 <cwebber2> ... we have a linked issue in actions, the issue is about as-link
17:22:00 <cwebber2> ... there's an action to gather options about media objects
17:22:02 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik: yes
17:22:04 <cwebber2> ... elf-pavlik, are you on the call?
17:22:10 <cwebber2> ... okay elf-pavlik is on the call
17:22:16 <cwebber2> ... how are we doing on action 42
17:22:23 <elf-pavlik> who reviewed https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/MediaObject ?
17:22:36 <tantek> FWIW I don't know what use-case / user-story is used to justify as:link so I'm in favor of dropping it.
17:22:37 <cwebber2> ... this is the issue on media object
17:23:06 <cwebber2> cwebber2: btw, Tsyesika and I added info for mediagoblin
17:23:14 <cwebber2> cwebber2: eprodrom, fyi
17:23:15 <tantek> though I'm really confused by the examples in issue-14
17:23:18 <eprodrom> q?
17:23:29 <cwebber2> eprodrom: is the question that we're going to change the activitystreams 2.0 object
17:23:46 <cwebber2> ... and what specifically will get changed?
17:23:49 <cwebber2> ... that's my main question
17:23:57 <cwebber2> ... if this work is started I'd like to close this
17:24:02 <cwebber2> tantek: I think it's related but not the same
17:24:02 <elf-pavlik> issue-14
17:24:02 <trackbot> issue-14 -- as:Link adds a lot of complexity, if we keep it we need to clarify consequences of using it instead of as:Object -- open
17:24:02 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/14
17:24:12 <cwebber2> ... issue 42 is related to issue 14 but not the same thing
17:24:28 <ben_thatmustbeme> action 42 was to give us background on issue-14 i believe
17:24:28 <trackbot> Error finding '42'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/Social/track/users>.
17:24:32 <cwebber2> eprodrom: right, 14 is about links and 42 is about objects related to AS 2.0 vocab, I'm wondering why we clumped them together
17:24:36 <cwebber2> tantek: I have a hypothesis
17:24:52 <cwebber2> Arnaud: no good to speculate, elf-pavlik  put it for the f2f, let's let him explain himself
17:24:57 <elf-pavlik> currently as:Link mostly serves as pattern for MediaObjects
17:25:19 <elf-pavlik> tantek++
17:25:20 <cwebber2> tantek: let me quote from elf-pavlik in the related notes: the as2 spec only contains as:link or related info about media objects(?) so for other thing as-link not needed
17:25:22 <Loqi> tantek has 171 karma
17:25:36 <cwebber2> tantek: so if we can remove as:link from media objects, then no need for as:link
17:25:51 <eprodrom> http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml
17:26:01 <elf-pavlik> me sorry guys, i made sure to have good audio for today but then couldn't dial code on pad of this softphone :(
17:26:06 <cwebber2> eprodrom: excellent point, but as:link particularly useful for link relationships, so the various link relationships defined for a number of items, so they're used in html as in on a tags and on link tags
17:26:09 <cwebber2> ... also used in atom
17:26:15 <cwebber2> ... a number of them used
17:26:20 <cwebber2> ... in activitystreams 1.0 used quite a bit
17:26:39 <jasnell> +1 for keeping
17:26:40 <cwebber2> ... so the link element is pretty useful even if only in the as 2.0 system for media objects, I think they're important to keep in the system
17:26:44 <cwebber2> tantek: that would help a lot
17:26:46 <elf-pavlik> i'll provide more examples where it makes processing much more convoluted
17:26:50 <cwebber2> ... because for now we don't have that information
17:27:07 <cwebber2> eprodrom: more convoluted than..... what is the alternative, not having it?
17:27:12 <elf-pavlik> imagine as:Link as member of Collection for example
17:27:18 <cwebber2> ... any time we convey info in a system it's more convoluted than not having it in the system
17:27:23 <cwebber2> ... but then we don't have that info
17:27:40 <cwebber2> tantek: I think elf was trying to provide examples of conveying info without as:link, but that's in related examples
17:27:43 <elf-pavlik> please review issue and wiki page and i'll get proper audo for next week!
17:27:52 <cwebber2> eprodrom: okay, I'd like to ask jasnell, please take the floor and address this
17:28:03 <cwebber2> jasnell: not totally sure I understand what elf-pavlik's argument is
17:28:16 <cwebber2> ... if we have as-link in there or not, we have to convey the same info
17:28:21 <cwebber2> ... so I don't see the argument.
17:28:28 <cwebber2> ... I guess I need more examples to work with
17:28:45 <cwebber2> eprodrom: seems unlikely to close this issue today, I suggest we leave it open and move on
17:28:50 <elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/MediaObject
17:28:56 <cwebber2> ... next item is also media object, it's a related issue
17:29:10 <cwebber2> ... if the issue has been updated I'm going to close this action since it's specifically about the wiki page
17:29:13 <cwebber2> ... would like to keep moving on
17:29:21 <cwebber2> ... we have action 44 which is about collections
17:29:25 <cwebber2> ... collection comparison
17:29:35 <tantek> action-44
17:29:35 <cwebber2> ... there's different ways to represent collections in as 2.0
17:29:35 <trackbot> action-44 -- Pavlik elf to Collection - compare AS2 design with LDP, Hydra, Schema.org etc. -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN
17:29:35 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/44
17:29:43 <cwebber2> ... and it looks like the question is...........
17:29:47 <elf-pavlik> someone offered adding LDP example to the wiki but never happended
17:29:50 <cwebber2> ... there's a collection comparison
17:29:56 <cwebber2> ... and with quite a few different collections
17:30:02 <Loqi> Eprodrom made 3 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-03-24]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83102&oldid=83098
17:30:09 <cwebber2> ... I think the idea is we'll change the collection structure in as 2.0
17:30:12 <elf-pavlik> no
17:30:15 <cwebber2> ... since the comparison is done I'll close this
17:30:24 <cwebber2> tantek: elf-pavlik says no
17:30:27 <cwebber2> eprodrom: oh
17:30:29 <elf-pavlik> i would like if someone adds LDP examples
17:30:30 <cwebber2> tantek: I htink
17:30:46 <cwebber2> eprodrom: ok, can someone familiar enough with ldp examples to put it in the wiki page?
17:30:55 <elf-pavlik> also we can discuss using ldp:Container instead of as:Collection if we use LDP as part of API
17:31:07 <cwebber2> ... ok, so... great.
17:31:24 <cwebber2> ... so can we or should we defer this?
17:31:47 <cwebber2> ... I'm going to close this option then we can move on with the rest of the call
17:32:02 <cwebber2> ... sorry, trying to balance out all the stuff we have here
17:32:04 <tantek> is erik here?
17:32:15 <cwebber2> ... we're moving through issues but without actually resolving htem
17:32:20 <cwebber2> ... that may not be in our best interest
17:32:31 <cwebber2> tantek: perhaps we should skip issues if person assigned/raised is not present
17:32:43 <cwebber2> ... we can't seem to be effective without their presence
17:32:48 <elf-pavlik> we CAN'T work only 1h a week during the call ...
17:33:00 <cwebber2> eprodrom: and some of these have been raised for a long time.  I'm not sure we're closer to closing them than when we raised them.
17:33:06 <cwebber2> ... perhaps part of the effort is to get them closed
17:33:06 <AdamB> do we need to get all the data in one place in order to close them ?
17:33:14 <AdamB> to have the right conversation about it
17:33:14 <cwebber2> tantek: we can worry about that when closer to last call
17:33:35 <cwebber2> eprodrom: yes but some of them are fundamental, the core vocab around activitystreams, it will be hard to close these without examples
17:33:45 <cwebber2> eprodrom: it will be hard to do an implementation without these stabilizing
17:33:57 <cwebber2> ... we should stabalize these if moving towards implementations and testing them
17:34:10 <cwebber2> ... I'll pass on these, maybe we can move on
17:34:19 <ben_thatmustbeme> Zakim, who is on the call?
17:34:19 <Zakim> On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell, Sandro, rhiaro (muted), elf-pavlik (muted)
17:34:22 <cwebber2> ... question of separating grammar/vocab, I believe erik brought it
17:34:31 <cwebber2> ... question on identity/agent/persona/account
17:34:34 <tantek> issue-17
17:34:34 <trackbot> issue-17 -- Identity, Agent, Person, Persona, Account etc. need clarifications -- open
17:34:34 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/17
17:34:35 <jasnell> we can discuss that one briefly
17:34:35 <elf-pavlik> also actor/author
17:34:46 <jasnell> the identity, agent, account, persona, profile bit
17:34:49 <cwebber2> ... uhhh, previous conversations on... agent persona account profile?
17:35:04 <cwebber2> ... I'm not sure.  Are these part of our vocabulary for activitystreams?
17:35:10 <jasnell> we have objects in the vocabulary that deal with these
17:35:13 <cwebber2> ... I'm not sure we must address these if we aren't encoding them.
17:35:18 <cwebber2> ... we need clarification
17:35:24 <jasnell> Actor, Person, Identity, Role, etc
17:35:30 <cwebber2> ... it would be nice if when we have items on the agenda, we have more stuff ready
17:35:42 <elf-pavlik> i proposed in reply to agenda email to move inference to next week
17:35:44 <cwebber2> ... I'm sorry, unless anyone has something to say one of these, I have nothing to move us forward
17:35:48 <cwebber2> ... they are all complex issues
17:36:04 <cwebber2> ... maybe since we do have one person with voice on the call since it's this last one
17:36:08 <cwebber2> ... maybe we should discuss it
17:36:15 <cwebber2> ... jasnell discussed issue of structured profiles
17:36:16 <eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/26
17:36:22 <tantek> issue-26
17:36:22 <trackbot> issue-26 -- Representing profiles in Activity Streams 2.0 -- raised
17:36:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/26
17:36:40 <cwebber2> jasnell: it's pretty simple, in many of our examples, social platforms we look at, the profile is pretty prominent
17:36:47 <cwebber2> ... but we lack profile in our vocabulary
17:36:53 <cwebber2> ... and it's not clear how to model that
17:36:59 <cwebber2> ... so taking a stand on user stories as example
17:37:09 <cwebber2> ... so maybe model profile as type of collection
17:37:20 <cwebber2> ... so tim added a profile, added items to it
17:37:28 <cwebber2> ... so maybe it makes sense to manage it as a collection
17:37:38 <cwebber2> ... so we could have a profile object
17:37:44 <cwebber2> ... we have an existing object, person
17:37:49 <cwebber2> ... is this sufficient as a profile
17:38:07 <elf-pavlik> jasnell, in your email "@type": "foaf:name" doesn't make sense to me in terms of use rdf:type with rdfs:Property / rdfs:Class
17:38:09 <cwebber2> ... recognizing that anyone can have multiple profiles, and profiles can represent community
17:38:18 <cwebber2> eprodrom: I would strongly say that profile is a person
17:38:42 <cwebber2> ... maybe a person object, or maybe something more abstract like a product is a type of thing that maps very closely to a person, but with brands taking that organization role
17:38:52 <cwebber2> ... I think getting really abstract with profiles would be a bad thing
17:39:04 <eprodrom> q?
17:39:06 <cwebber2> ... just treating a profile as a collection of name/value pairs might be worse than a profile object
17:39:12 <cwebber2> tantek: yes I'm curious what's driving this
17:39:27 <cwebber2> jasnell: the user stories, I'm mapping the vocab to the user stories, to make sure those are coinciding
17:39:35 <tantek> q?
17:39:39 <cwebber2> ... so we have many objects in the vocab based on a number of use cases
17:39:46 <cwebber2> ... those are not mapped to the use cases themselves
17:39:53 <cwebber2> ... we have a distinct version of profile
17:39:57 <cwebber2> ... with no idea what a profile is
17:40:06 <cwebber2> tantek: good point, I see sandro on the queue fyi
17:40:07 <eprodrom> ack Sandro
17:40:20 <cwebber2> sandro: sure, so I think the profile as a container is kind of a problem
17:40:35 <cwebber2> ... I can't figure out the logic of what it would be the container of other than a reified object of (?)
17:40:40 <cwebber2> ... I mean, we could make it work but
17:40:53 <cwebber2> ... I think of a profile as a web page that has some info about the person or the object
17:41:01 <cwebber2> ... as long as we have ideas about the person or the profiles
17:41:04 <eprodrom> q+
17:41:14 <cwebber2> ... as long as we have different access control
17:41:18 <jasnell> q+
17:41:22 <cwebber2> ... eg internal company profile and public profile
17:41:27 <elf-pavlik> I remember sandro discussing it on WebID list while ago
17:41:36 <cwebber2> ... and whether it's json or h-entries or rdf triples, we can do any by a web page
17:41:42 <cwebber2> ... plus I have a problem with a profile being a person
17:41:45 <cwebber2> ... it's not
17:41:56 <cwebber2> ... it manifests in the case of a person having multiple distinct profiles
17:42:13 <rhiaro> +1 profiles != persons
17:42:13 <cwebber2> ... it follows logically that there's different profiles, you have to distinguish between profiles and the person raising htem
17:42:53 <rhiaro> multipleprofiles++
17:42:53 <cwebber2> eprodrom: multiple profile per user seems awesome, we have no user stories that manage that, but it's a big pain to manage
17:42:54 <eprodrom> ack eprodrom
17:42:55 <Loqi> multipleprofiles has 1 karma
17:43:10 <ben_thatmustbeme> q+
17:43:15 <cwebber2> eprodrom: so you have multiple profiles on facebook?
17:43:19 <elf-pavlik> disussion from public-webid https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2014May/0103.html
17:43:25 <cwebber2> cwebber2: (who's speaking aside from eprodrom ?)
17:43:44 <tantek> q?
17:43:47 <cwebber2> sandro: there's a page that's stuff about yourself, and there's a page that others see
17:43:47 <rhiaro> multiple profiles is against facebook's TOS, but people do it because it's necessary for managing their social interactions
17:43:54 <cwebber2> eprodrom: so you see that as multiple profiles?
17:43:55 <AdamB> q+
17:44:05 <cwebber2> tantek: no it's the same profile, but different acl's
17:44:12 <elf-pavlik> i know people who have multiple accounts on both facebook and twitter
17:44:16 <tantek> q?
17:44:21 <cwebber2> eprodrom: it's complicated, I can see doing it, but it didn't come up in our user stories
17:44:31 <cwebber2> ... tbh I'd rather get something done than do something complicated
17:44:38 <cwebber2> sandro: hr has a different profile than the person
17:45:00 <AnnB> q+
17:45:00 <cwebber2> eprodrom: I could see having multiple proifles as the general case, but it's def the most complicated case
17:45:07 <elf-pavlik> rhiaro, could you document how it worked in BBC with named graphs?
17:45:10 <cwebber2> ... would be interesting to see if any apis we have can do it
17:45:20 <elf-pavlik> q?
17:45:24 <cwebber2> ... obviously it would be a reparesentation of the person in json
17:45:25 <ben_thatmustbeme> q- i think its been covered
17:45:30 <eprodrom> person class in as 1.0
17:45:30 <cwebber2> ... there's a person classin AS 1.0
17:45:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> q-
17:45:37 <cwebber2> ... that's what I'm referring to
17:45:38 <eprodrom> q?
17:45:47 <cwebber2> sandro: I might need two distinct profiles
17:45:53 <cwebber2> ... one for personal stuff one for work
17:45:57 <cwebber2> ... those are logically the same
17:46:02 <eprodrom> q?
17:46:04 <eprodrom> ack jasnell
17:46:05 <cwebber2> eprodrom: that's possible, will go to the queue
17:46:19 <cwebber2> jasnell: so I would note that google plus as an example, as a system for multiple profiles
17:46:26 <cwebber2> ... every google employee has an internal profile
17:46:33 <cwebber2> ... as well as public
17:46:36 <elf-pavlik> sandro, maybe worth adding it to https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories
17:46:38 <cwebber2> ... every user can have multiple profiles
17:46:42 <cwebber2> ... one person with multiple identities
17:46:52 <cwebber2> ... kind of going back to it
17:46:57 <rhiaro> Also G+ stuff ties into youtube, with multiple channels connected to one user account
17:47:08 <cwebber2> ... in every one of these examples, a profile is kind of a container
17:47:19 <cwebber2> ... a variety of things which are sub-categories of the profile
17:47:24 <AnnB> s/back to it/back to original question, "how to model profile?"/
17:47:33 <cwebber2> ... managed independently, who i give htese with
17:47:35 <elf-pavlik> can someone take ACTION to provide alternative to container based strategy proposed by jasnell ?
17:47:43 <cwebber2> ... same as g+, twitter, each of these has a container-like model which is there
17:47:57 <cwebber2> ... so it might not make sense to model it as a *collection*, but model it as a *container*
17:48:13 <cwebber2> ... the question is: if I'm going to model an activity as a container, what's the right way to model that in the syntax
17:48:17 <elf-pavlik> NOTE very relevant to work happening in Credentials CG http://opencreds.org/specs/source/identity-credentials/
17:48:26 <cwebber2> ... as for how the api is concerned, how will we use the profile in the ??
17:48:37 <eprodrom> q?
17:48:37 <cwebber2> ... as for whether someone has more than one of not, it's a basic modeling problem
17:48:40 <eprodrom> ack AdamB
17:49:04 <cwebber2> AdamB: we don't see that as a ?? we see that as a something with a different ???
17:49:16 <ben_thatmustbeme> This seems to overlap with profile and implies access controls on parts of profile Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Contact_Info
17:49:20 <AnnB> s/as a ??/as a web page/
17:49:26 <cwebber2> we have different profiles on multiple systems, one additional profile with multiple systems, the example is a main profile with multiple systems
17:49:33 <cwebber2> ... so we can figure out how to move that between things
17:49:36 <elf-pavlik> tantek, any comments based on rel="me" experience?
17:49:56 <cwebber2> ... we provide a bit of background on that, users can't change their hr data, but they can change other things
17:50:00 <cwebber2> ... so that's where it comes from
17:50:00 <eprodrom> ack AnnB
17:50:02 <Loqi> Abasset made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/Social API/Sorting user stories]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83103&oldid=82669
17:50:32 <cwebber2> AnnB: I would give those same examples, in addition we have multiple tools inside the company with people wanting to set up profiles, eg people setting up profiles in sharepoint and ?
17:50:37 <cwebber2> ... as well as hr data
17:50:45 <cwebber2> ... and our challenge is to pull them together in a cohesive manner
17:50:57 <ben_thatmustbeme> q?
17:50:59 <cwebber2> ... and establish their profile in one place, to handle it, how to represent it
17:51:04 <jasnell> I would also note that systems that allow me to use third party authentication to create an account generally use a multiple profile model
17:51:06 <cwebber2> ... and not recretate it over and over
17:51:12 <cwebber2> ... that's our issue about federation
17:51:18 <eprodrom> q?
17:51:19 <jasnell> for instance, I use facebook to log into spotify but my spotify profile is separate from my facebook profile
17:51:24 <jasnell> even tho they represent the same person
17:51:50 <cwebber2> eprodrom: james, I just want to ask, assuming we have a class something like as1.0 person, why not just do CRUD on that
17:51:50 <AnnB> s/recretate /recreate/
17:51:51 <eprodrom> CRUD on an AS 1.0 person
17:51:58 <cwebber2> ... eg, setters/getters on json document
17:52:04 <cwebber2> ... put it, get it, delete it, etc
17:52:12 <cwebber2> ... why isn't that about what we want to do?
17:52:33 <cwebber2> jasnell: if you look at first user story, you see that *foo* creates distinct profile adding hometown, blah blah
17:52:47 <cwebber2> ... how much to do actor kim updated actor kim, or does she update profile
17:52:57 <ben_thatmustbeme> q+
17:53:02 <elf-pavlik> jasnell, can you please explain
17:53:02 <cwebber2> ... and how to update granularity of adding profile, phone number, occupation
17:53:04 <elf-pavlik> {
17:53:04 <elf-pavlik>       "@type": "foaf:name",
17:53:04 <elf-pavlik>       "displayName": "Kim Smith"
17:53:04 <elf-pavlik>     }
17:53:08 <cwebber2> ... we want to add ? to the profile
17:53:15 <cwebber2> ... in whihc case we want profile as a unique thing
17:53:23 <cwebber2> ... eg adding profile to the object
17:53:29 <cwebber2> sandro: and how to update those parts
17:53:34 <elf-pavlik> http://opencreds.org/specs/source/identity-credentials/ proposes PATCH
17:53:37 <cwebber2> jasnell: and how to update spotify vs facebook profile
17:53:43 <cwebber2> ... same ID to log into multiple services
17:53:49 <cwebber2> ... each ID may have multiple services
17:53:53 <bengo> bengo has joined #social
17:54:01 <cwebber2> ... kim may be on both identi.ca/facebook, but they're distinct profiles
17:54:11 <cwebber2> sandro: I've noticed on facebook change, people can like the avatar change
17:54:11 <tilgovi> tilgovi has joined #social
17:54:24 <cwebber2> jasnell: so yes, how much granularity to represent?  the actions in the activitystream
17:54:34 <elf-pavlik> rel="me" and http://schema.org/sameAs take same approach IMO
17:54:37 <cwebber2> eprodrom: how to manage the person updates one profile properties
17:54:41 <cwebber2> jasnell: I'm asking do we need to
17:54:51 <cwebber2> eprodrom: okay, a good question, can we capture that particular issue?
17:55:08 <cwebber2> ... I'd probably be... that's a finer point than the "how do we represent changes to the profile" not just how to represent it
17:55:13 <ben_thatmustbeme> q-
17:55:14 <cwebber2> ... would like to raise it as an issue
17:55:17 <eprodrom> ISSUE how do we represent changes to a profile in an Activity
17:55:23 <ben_thatmustbeme> dog is going nuts, you wouldn't be able to hear me
17:55:32 <cwebber2> jasnell: both issues are important, how to represent profile vs profile changes
17:55:39 <tantek> q?
17:55:41 <cwebber2> eprodrom: we are closing up on top of the hour and I want to represent changes
17:55:44 <eprodrom> q?
17:55:53 <cwebber2> ... okay to close this and have multiple changes on it
17:55:59 <tantek> I think profile is an area that can get ridiculous complex / deep end.
17:56:07 <tantek> it's an area that needs simplification, not more options
17:56:14 <cwebber2> ... where we left social API at end of our F2F, we have a # of different approaches to APIs that we are coming at from different directions
17:56:25 <eprodrom> micropub, AS 2.0-based JSON-y system, LDP adaptation
17:56:35 <cwebber2> ... one is micropub, another is an activitystreams 2.0 JSON'y system, another is an LDP implementation
17:56:37 <tantek> I thought the three were micropub, pump.io, LDP ?
17:56:47 <tantek> this is the first I've heard of "AS 2.0-based JSON-y system"
17:56:49 <tantek> ok oh
17:56:49 <cwebber2> ... our interest was to solicit drafts
17:57:05 <cwebber2> ... json'y activitystreams 2.0 thing is probably pump.io updated to AS 2.0
17:57:06 <tantek> I'd expect all the API candidates to be somewhat compatible with AS2
17:57:19 <tantek> so I'm not sure how it's helpful to frame one in particular as "AS2.0-based"
17:57:30 <cwebber2> ... we want to solicit drafts, I don't think the other chairs will disagree with me in that we will probably not persue if we don't get drafts in for other candidates
17:57:37 <eprodrom> micropub, pump.io API, LDP
17:57:39 <jasnell> I've implemented an example server that derived from an LDP implementation but uses a AS 2.0 interface. I'll be open sourcing it soon and will have an example endpoint public hopefully later this week
17:57:40 <tantek> maybe I'm being optimistic :)
17:57:48 <cwebber2> ... okay, sorry tantek, I will frame it as pump api as 2.0
17:57:55 <cwebber2> ... appreciate the correction
17:58:05 <cwebber2> ... we are seeking documentation on one or more proposals
17:58:12 <cwebber2> ... in everyone's interest to persue on our own
17:58:27 <cwebber2> ... tantek, Arnaud feel free to correct me, but if we don't get a proposal, we will not persue
17:58:29 <tantek> btw drafts may simple normatively reference an existing *open* spec (license etc.) and provide examples
17:58:33 <cwebber2> ... tantek, Arnaud, is this fair?
17:58:39 <cwebber2> someone: yes, beep
17:58:53 <cwebber2> tantek: yes that's what we discussed at the f2f as something to consider
17:59:02 <cwebber2> ... an easier way for people to consider
17:59:07 <cwebber2> ... than just w3c submission style
17:59:11 <cwebber2> ... that's nice but not required
17:59:19 <Arnaud> the someone was me but I have nothing to do with the beep :)
17:59:22 <cwebber2> ... as long as you have openly referenced doc
17:59:43 <cwebber2> ... as long as ??? convinces submit early, submit often
17:59:49 <cwebber2> eprodrom: haha, agree that makes sense
18:00:06 <cwebber2> ... I encourage others look at oshepherd's activitypump 2.0 submission
18:00:14 <elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/Candidates#ActivityPump
18:00:16 <cwebber2> ... would love to encourage pump people to look at that
18:00:27 <cwebber2> ... for those who would like to look at that, talk to oshepherd, persue further
18:00:35 <cwebber2> ... my point on social api: make proposals sooner than later
18:00:38 <tantek> I'd like to see submission that cite an existing working API proposal, and provide examples of how one or more user stories are done with the API
18:00:42 <cwebber2> ... talk amongst yourself about getting htem working
18:00:44 <tantek> s/submission/submissions
18:00:49 <cwebber2> ... the other issue is talking about f2f in paris
18:00:55 <cwebber2> ... check ???
18:01:02 <tantek> s/working API proposal/implemented API proposal
18:01:06 <cwebber2> ... we could do it as a proposed, with +1 voting, sound reasonable Arnaud ?
18:01:17 <eprodrom> PROPOSED We have a meeting of the SocialWG in Paris May 4-5
18:01:19 <cwebber2> Arnaud: yeah sounds so, let's either doodle poll, or +1
18:01:27 <AnnB> +1
18:01:28 <ben_thatmustbeme> I think the doodle poll is fine
18:01:29 <elf-pavlik> +1
18:01:29 <Arnaud> +1
18:01:29 <cwebber2> eprodrom: sound about right?
18:01:30 <rhiaro> +1
18:01:30 <eprodrom> +1
18:01:31 <Tsyesika> +1
18:01:31 <cwebber2> Arnaud: yes
18:01:32 <tantek> +0
18:01:32 <cwebber2> +1
18:01:46 <ben_thatmustbeme> +0 (i cannot make it)
18:01:46 <bengo> bengo has joined #social
18:01:47 <cwebber2> eprodrom: okay, so I think that carries
18:01:52 <tantek> (also cannot make it)
18:01:54 <cwebber2> ... looks like we have a resolution
18:02:01 <cwebber2> sandro: let's make sure eveyrone understands ????
18:02:09 <cwebber2> ... that they're waiving their rights to 8 weeks notice
18:02:14 <AnnB> =1
18:02:15 <cwebber2> ... because we haven't had 8 weeks notice
18:02:15 <eprodrom> RESOLVED We have a meeting of the SocialWG in Paris May 4-5
18:02:16 <AnnB> +1
18:02:19 <cwebber2> ... any objections please note
18:02:25 <cwebber2> ... otherwise will mark as resolved
18:02:30 <tantek> pending host!
18:02:31 <cwebber2> ... and I will look for potential flights to paris
18:02:35 <tantek> (just a heads up folks )
18:02:40 <elf-pavlik> eprodrom++ cwebber2++
18:02:42 <Loqi> eprodrom has 9 karma
18:02:51 <cwebber2> AnnB: let me just say that the advisory committee there is a discount at novotel for w3c
18:02:57 <cwebber2> ... and this discount qulaifies
18:03:01 <cwebber2> ...  about $180/room
18:03:05 <Arnaud> yes, we need to get confirmation from Harry that he can host ASAP
18:03:07 <cwebber2> ... I'll figure out how to sen dlink
18:03:11 <elf-pavlik> please ask me for help with finding couchsurfing in Paris if interested!
18:03:12 <cwebber2> ... you have to send in a form
18:03:16 <tantek> a fax?
18:03:18 <cwebber2> ... you get breakfast and wifi with the price
18:03:21 <Zakim> -Sandro
18:03:23 <cwebber2> ... non-refundable
18:03:25 <cwebber2> ... fax works also
18:03:34 <cwebber2> ... it's south of the whatever, the eifel tower
18:03:40 <cwebber2> sandro: very central to paris
18:03:41 <cwebber2> AnnB: yes
18:03:48 <cwebber2> sandro: we have to figure out where it takes place
18:03:55 <cwebber2> AnnB: and it's only good until
18:03:57 <cwebber2> sandro: soon
18:04:01 <cwebber2> ahhhhhhhh
18:04:04 <ben_thatmustbeme> s/sandro/Arnaud/
18:04:10 <cwebber2> cwebber2: this was a crazy call
18:04:15 <elf-pavlik> cwebber2++
18:04:17 <Loqi> cwebber2 has 22 karma
18:04:18 <ben_thatmustbeme> cwebber2: ++
18:04:19 <cwebber2> eprodrom: call to close, thanks for handling
18:04:21 <ben_thatmustbeme> cwebber2++
18:04:22 <eprodrom> trackbot, end meeting
18:04:22 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
18:04:22 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme, Ann, +1.514.554.aaaa, tantek, eprodrom, Arnaud, jasnell, cwebber2, Sandro, rhiaro, elf-pavlik
18:04:23 <Loqi> cwebber2 has 23 karma
18:04:28 <Arnaud> For more information about the hotel, please see:
18:04:29 <Arnaud>    https://www.w3.org/Member/Meeting/2015ac/May/#Accommodation
18:04:29 <Zakim> -eprodrom
18:04:30 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:04:30 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/24-social-minutes.html trackbot
18:04:31 <Zakim> -Ann
18:04:31 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
18:04:31 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
18:04:31 <elf-pavlik> how do we merge karma of cwebber2 and cwebber? ;)
18:04:32 <Zakim> -jasnell