15:25:54 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
15:25:54 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/07/22-social-irc
15:25:56 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:25:56 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #social
15:25:58 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SOCL
15:25:58 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
15:25:59 <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
15:25:59 <trackbot> Date: 22 July 2015
15:26:45 <ben_thatmustbeme> Meeting: Social Web Interest Group Teleconference
15:26:57 <AnnB> thanks ben .. I was just looking that up
15:27:33 <AnnB> https://github.com/w3c-social/social-ucr/issues/3
15:27:33 <ben_thatmustbeme> https://github.com/w3c-social/social-ucr/labels/Minor%20objections
15:30:25 <ben_thatmustbeme> perhaps it is important to specify that the "group" getting deleted, is really just disassociated from the group
15:31:03 <AnnB> appears to us that the main objection, by @kevinmarks and agreed with by us, is line #11 in the original user story -- that Roger deletes the group
15:31:33 <AnnB> we agree there needs to be some sort of 'governance" on how deletes are handled -- who gets to delete what
15:32:08 <AnnB> lehawes: also, discussion on github between @elfpavlik
15:32:58 <AnnB> .. and @kevinmarks is questioning whether that's pertinent to API or not
15:33:22 <ben_thatmustbeme> that would be very useful
15:33:33 <ben_thatmustbeme> thats why i try to listen in to the IG too
15:34:21 <ben_thatmustbeme> AnnB: we skipped this week
15:34:27 <ben_thatmustbeme> we are moving to every other week
15:34:56 <ben_thatmustbeme> I think that can work. those times work much better for me
15:35:36 <lehawes> I like idea of using a WG "off" week to schedule a session for IG to work through Minor Objections with those WG members who have registered them.
15:36:25 <ben_thatmustbeme> the conversation i was on was about finding a vocabulary for profiles
15:36:38 <cwebber2> aaronpk: ha, yeah is it the devops chris webber? :)
15:37:30 <shepazu_> shepazu_ has joined #social
15:38:25 <ben_thatmustbeme> also concern of https://xkcd.com/927/ :)
15:38:45 <ben_thatmustbeme> yes
15:40:11 <AnnB> lehawes:  hoping Vocab Task Force can make recommendation on which vocab to use
15:40:37 <lehawes> At July 8 meeting, the IG came up with two recommended actions.
15:40:45 <AnnB> ... foundational for profiles
15:40:50 <ben_thatmustbeme> the other part of the discussion was that while the vocabulary for profiles might not be important for V1 of the social API, it may be important for v1 of FEDERATION API
15:41:45 <lehawes> 1. To have the Vocabulary TF vet potential base vocabularies for social profile and recommend one that can be extended and implemented. Primary candidates seem to be Vcard and Hcard.
15:42:05 <ben_thatmustbeme> the "social API" is you connecting to your service (use any app to connect to your service)  "Federation API" would be between sevices
15:42:17 <ben_thatmustbeme> at least thats how i understand it
15:43:08 <lehawes> 2. Get consensus between IG and WG that the profile vocabulary will not be hooked to V1 of the Social API, but wait until V2. However, the vocabulary will be needed for V1 of the Federation API.
15:43:09 <Loqi> that doesn't make sense
15:43:27 <lehawes> Heres the link to the July 8 meeting minutes: http://www.w3.org/2015/07/08-social-minutes.html
15:44:05 <Lynn> ann, lost your sound
15:44:29 <AnnB> hmm .. what?
15:44:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> AnnB: woah... WAY delayed
15:44:56 <ben_thatmustbeme> you are like 30 seconds behind
15:45:06 <ben_thatmustbeme> oh, i think i caught up
15:45:10 <ben_thatmustbeme> it*
15:45:34 <rhiaro_> rhiaro_ has joined #social
15:45:45 <Lynn> Ann: for profiles, work on vocabulary
15:46:10 <ben_thatmustbeme> I agree with Kevin on that one, I think it may be a wording change on you cannot delete posts (aside from possibly internally)
15:46:40 <ben_thatmustbeme> I'll see if i can get his attention off channel too
15:46:41 <AnnB> I think we all agree on KevinMarks ' deletion question / objection
15:46:59 <AnnB> .. we just haven't been able to confirm alternatives or have discussion with him
15:47:05 <KevinMarks> morning annb, what was up?
15:47:09 <lehawes> I will keep trying to get Kevin Marks' attention and see if my proposed wording change to the user story would remove his objection. I'll do that via GitHub
15:47:13 <AnnB> YO, hi!
15:47:20 <ben_thatmustbeme> KevinMarks: IG call going on right now
15:47:35 <AnnB> any chance you could dial into WebEx .. we're discussing a user story objection you had
15:47:44 <AnnB> we all agree with you ... just not clear on how to resolve
15:47:50 <ben_thatmustbeme> https://mit.webex.com/mit/j.php?MTID=m1c9b9d40b3433e56aa40be2d6d7800aa
15:48:54 <KevinMarks> can't easily dial in at the moment, but can chat here
15:49:20 <AnnB> ok
15:49:22 <KevinMarks> my problem is that the story doesn't make it clear what 'deleting the group' means -
15:49:26 <lehawes> Hey KevinMarks! You objected to the Groups user story.
15:49:28 <AnnB> we agree
15:49:44 <lehawes> Specifically, the ability for any group member to delete a post or the entire group.
15:49:45 <AnnB> (lehawes is typing ... )
15:50:06 <KevinMarks> there is an implicit silo assumption there that it is his group and the others are posting in it
15:50:14 <AnnB> right
15:50:24 <lehawes> We agree that is not tenable, but are wondering if you would be OK with the story saying that an administrator/community manager would be the only one with those rights.
15:50:25 <KevinMarks> as opposed to posting on their own sites and the group serving as an aggregation
15:51:05 <AnnB> hmm .. that's a different twist
15:51:08 <lehawes> Get it Kevin, but that isn't what you originally objected to in the user story wikipage
15:51:11 <KevinMarks> Amy's comment sums it up
15:51:32 <lehawes> Here's the link to the story: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Groups
15:51:37 <KevinMarks> no, it's he same thing - he is deleting the group - is he also deleting their posts?
15:51:45 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1 to that
15:51:48 <AnnB> I just read her comment
15:51:57 <AnnB> lehawes: makes sense
15:52:17 <AnnB> I agree to a point .. but not totally clear on how that works from a user point of view
15:53:11 <AnnB> here's Amy's comment from her vote on Groups user story:  "... perhaps the posts are attached to the users who made them, not the group itself, and it's just the aggregation of these posts that disappears rather than the posts themselves? In which case a group is a collection of users plus a collection of selected posts. "
15:53:14 <ben_thatmustbeme> remember this says nothing about how groups work internally to a business
15:53:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> it the idea, that posts could be deleted by and administrator within a single system
15:53:36 <lehawes> KevinMarks: I think Amy's comment works on the wider Social Web, but doesn't represent how employees and groups function within a business.
15:54:11 <ben_thatmustbeme> yes
15:54:24 <AnnB> s/and admin/an admin/
15:54:38 <AnnB> question for me is WHO gets to delete WHAT
15:54:53 <AnnB> seems OK for me to delete my own stuff, but not others' stuff
15:55:16 <AnnB> but at the same time ... in Boeing, we only let people edit and delete for one hour ..
15:55:31 <AnnB> ... for basic posts and comments
15:55:37 <AnnB> ... so as to preserve the record
15:56:05 <AnnB> ... if I'm the owner of a group, I can delete the group
15:56:06 <ben_thatmustbeme> you should always be able to delete your own content, if there is an administrator of that user, they can delete too.  a group administrator can remove the association of a post to the group perhaps, but does not own the content
15:56:41 <AnnB> lehawes:  I've seen it stipulated that everything from a group is archived before deletion
15:57:40 <AnnB> lynn: seems like a diff between how things work in public web versus enterprse
15:57:45 <AnnB> enterprise
15:57:48 <ben_thatmustbeme> Anything readable on the web, can be copied, forked, etc
15:57:51 <AnnB> yes, true
15:58:04 <AnnB> (to both points, lynn and ben)
15:58:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> I'll try to write up a long post on my thoughts at some point this week
15:58:47 <AnnB> in essence we're agreeing with kevinmarks' concern about deletion
15:59:14 <lehawes> I'll record here what I just said out loud. The API must allow for implementers to configure controls as to who may delete posts and groups, but it must not force implementers to apply strict controls.
15:59:27 <AnnB> but at the same time, it seems like there's a separate issue or POV if a group is a group, or is an aggregation of posts by individuals...??
16:00:24 <aaronpk> AnnB++
16:00:26 <Loqi> AnnB has 27 karma
16:00:38 <AnnB> we need to understand that better
16:00:46 <AnnB> we, the IG folks, that is
16:00:49 <KevinMarks> the same dichotomy applies on the web to some extent
16:01:03 <aaronpk> I see value in both models
16:01:13 <lehawes> Yes, Kevin! Clearly, we're all in agreement here. :>)
16:01:24 <ben_thatmustbeme> always in favor of more meetings / more discussion
16:01:28 <AnnB> we'd like to ask for a joint meeting with you guys, so we can get to ground on this
16:01:29 <ben_thatmustbeme> AnnB++
16:01:30 <Loqi> AnnB has 28 karma
16:01:35 <KevinMarks> if Roger's group is liek a blogpost with comments on his site, it's clearer that he can delete posts and indeed thw hole thing
16:01:46 <ben_thatmustbeme> !meme karma
16:01:46 <Loqi> http://meme.loqi.me/4cJrXNUT.jpg
16:02:12 <AnnB> could we perhaps use one of the intermediat weeks when the WG isn't meeting ... to meet together?
16:02:20 <KevinMarks> if it is a collection of their posts, like a storify, he can edit but not delet their orginlas
16:02:22 <AnnB> I'm going to send an invite, hoping to make that work
16:02:31 <KevinMarks> and if the orginals are rmeoved, whetehr they remain is fluid
16:02:39 <AnnB> unfortunately would be 2 weeks from now
16:02:54 <ben_thatmustbeme> good luck AnnB
16:02:57 <AnnB> OK ... sorry but I have to run ..
16:03:13 <lehawes> That's OK AnnB. Would give people lots of advance notice and we could advertise the meeting and agenda more than once.
16:03:34 <AnnB> this was an interesting session .. would be soooo interesting to actually be able to talk!
16:04:20 <lehawes> Thanks everyone for participating today!
16:04:58 <AnnB>  every time we discuss one of these stories, people come up with intriguing perspectives ...
16:05:09 <AnnB> the challenge is to "get to ground" on them
16:05:32 <AnnB> thanks so much for attending with last-minute notice
16:05:52 <AnnB> hopefully I'll get my mom set up soon, and will be able to be more attentive
16:06:00 <AnnB> gotta run ..
16:06:06 <AnnB> trackbot, end meeting
16:06:06 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:06:06 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
16:06:14 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:06:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/07/22-social-minutes.html trackbot
16:06:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:06:15 <RRSAgent> I see no action items