Social Web Working Group Teleconference -- 29 Sep 2015

<trackbot> Date: 29 September 2015

<tantek> Agenda is in the /topic but just in case: http://www.w3.org/wiki/socialwg/2015-09-29

i can scribe

<ben_thatmustbeme> i cannot this time

<tantek> scribe: aaronpk

<scribe> scribenick: aaronpk

last week's minutes

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-09-22-minutes

tantek: any objections or can we get some +1s

<ben_thatmustbeme> +1

<eprodrom> +1

<hhalpin> +1

RESOLUTION: approved Sep 22 minutes

upcoming face to face

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-09-29#Social_Web_WG_F2F_Fall_2015

tantek: we have converged on Dec 1-2 in SF based on the doodle poll
... hosted by mozilla, and if for some reason that falls through, IBM has offered to be a backup
... expect details on that soon, but you can start planning travel
... mozilla locatino is in san francisco proper

<Arnaud> not really! if you'd been on the chairs call you would know I guess

tantek: you can fly in to either the oakland or SFO you can get there by transit

<KevinMarks> SJC also doable by transit

sandro: is there a particular hotel you would recommend?

tantek: SF has this odd hotel market, hotels are typically very expensive, so I don't tend to recommend them
... i can give you the location of the venue

<tantek> venue https://wiki.mozilla.org/SF

tantek: so many of the hotels around town are within minutes via transit, so it's mostly personal preference
... there are a lot of folks who are price sensitive, so I would strongly encourage looking at getting an airbnb
... which is also a good option to go in on and share

<hhalpin> There' s some hotels in SF that W3C usually uses: http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/organization.html

<Loqi> Pelf made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-09-29]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85800&oldid=85799

<hhalpin> but haven't looked into their distance from this particular venue

tantek: if there are specific hotels you have questions about I am happy to take those offline
... but I would generally recommend airbnb near transit
... any other questions abotu the f2f
... is there anyone here who can defintiely make it or definitely not?

<cwebber2> I have to look into ticket prices and crashspace

<hhalpin> +1 (likely, need to ask travel permission)

sandro: why do we not think the doodle poll is accurate

tantek: sometimes things change

sandro: at this point i woudl think the doodle poll is accurate

tantek: okay i think that's reasonable

<AnnB> as time passes, then you might want to check

<tantek> http://doodle.com/poll/sc29irgniqqseqtp

tantek: Ann you're on the call but i don't see you on the poll

AnnB: that's because Boeing is dropping out, and I won't be able to be an invited expert for 3 months according to process

<eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-01

tantek: we will miss you ann!

<cwebber2> AnnB: we will miss you, but look forward working with you when all things work out :)

AnnB: I am exploring the possibility of an ongoing role (not a paid job) with the w3c, because i think the work is important

hhalpin: i'm sure we can do an invited expert thing

<jasnell> will be there shortly

<jasnell> running late

AnnB: Dec 11 is my last day, i'mt aking a voluntary layoff

tantek: we definitely appreciate all of your contributions

<sandro> For the more adventurous WG members looking for an AIRBNB, a shared yacht! https://www.airbnb.com/rooms/6481703?checkin=11%2F30%2F2015&checkout=12%2F02%2F2015&s=hPpw895R

<jasnell> I'm on

<eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-01

<KevinMarks> for dreamforce they moored a cruise liner in SF

eprodrom: I started a wiki page for the f2f so wec an start put together a list of actual attendees
... as well as starting to put together the agenda

<tantek> eprodrom++ for starting the wiki page for the f2f!

<Loqi> eprodrom has 26 karma

eprodrom: so that's the place to put your name if you'd like to express your interest or regrets

<AnnB> Evan is a rock star

tantek: sounds good, loks like the only person on the call who did not answer the doodle is jessica

<tsyesika> I'm probably not coming

<tsyesika> unfortunately

tantek: sorry to hear that. we'l try to set up some sort of remote participation

<tsyesika> I'll definitely participate remotely though

tantek: any other questions on the f2f?
... i'm pretty excited about this, if we do get about a dozen people there according to the poll we would have a very productive session
... looking forward to seeing everyone there

ActivityStreams 2.0

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-09-29#Activity_Streams_2.0

tantek: in particular, two things there, publication status...

jasnell: i have the updated draft ready to go, waiting on some things on the w3c side
... the pubchecker doesn't support the new publication license, so it errors when I attempt to publish

tantek: is this is the Echidna pubchecker?
... were you able to file a github issue against it?

jasnell: working on it, following up later on this morning

tantek: sandro think you can help james out?

sandro: pretty sure it's being taken care of, the patch is being done and now it's just the copyright

Arnaud: there are two parts to this problem, the first one was fixed with respec getting updated for the new license, tbut the rules checker is not yet done

jasnell: as soon as that's done i can get it published

tantek: did the folks applying the patch have an ETA for when the updated pubrules checker would be live?

<Loqi> Eprodrom made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85802&oldid=0

tantek: I wanted to offer my thanks for being the w3c canary in the new license coal mine and finding the obstacles in the process
... every other group adopting this licesnse will benefit from the work being done

ActivityStreams issues

tantek: james were there specific issues you wanted to discuss?

jasnell: no, I think we're pretty much stable
... I know some others have raised issues but none from me

<eprodrom> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/8

eprodrom: the issue I want to make sure we bring attention to is #8, the test suite
... this iss osmething we need to get done to go to CR and it's languishing
... we need to put more interest in it as a group
... we had for a while a developer from IBM, I don't think he's still pushing this forward
... so my question is what can we do to push forward the test suite
... is the code we have a good basis for moving forward and if not how do we get there
... and in particular who would like to work on the test suite

tantek: i agree the test suite is one of the essential items for us to make progress
... it also helps to signal that a working draft is being implemented
... because that typically means there are implementers coding against those tests
... it helps demonstrate that we've been doing our homeworok properly
... i want to repeat evan's call for volunteers, we definitely need folks to contribute to the test suite

<eprodrom> jasnell_: did we lose you?

tantek: prefereably people who are actually implementing

<jasnell_> I'm still here

tantek: but of course anyone, even if you are publishing or consuming can contribute tests

hhalpin: quick question, i think we could try to devote some thoughtworks resources to it
... they have a contract to contribute to AS2.0, did we approve their IE access?

tantek: just to make it clear, what's the realtionship between W3C and thoughtworks?

hhalpin: thoughtworks is on a contract not from w3c with three city govs, finland spain and iceland, they are buidling some software using AS2.0 to share public data
... finland is map data, spain is policy data
... they're asking me when their IE status is approved

tantek: so that contract is not with the w3c but they are being paid by whoever they are contracted with

hhalpin: yes the european commission

tantek: is the european commission a member of the w3c

hhalpin: no

eprodrom: we didn't have a lot of information on thoughtworks so we wanted more information before we approve their application

tantek: so evan you've already taken an action to

eprodrom: yes, hopefully we'll have that discussion next week

tantek: hopefully we'll have a thumbsup/down status on their participation before the call next week
... assuming they are accepted would be great to have them on the call next week
... any other specific AS issues to discuss?

Social API

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-09-29#Social_API

tantek: amy is not here, aaron is minuting
... chris or jessica, want to provide a status update on the collaborative work?

<tsyesika> I've been busy this week so I'm probably not the best person to ask

cwebber2: i haven't been active on it, haven't spoken to amy or aaron this week

tantek: aaron want to speak?

aaronpk: I've been working on my implemenation this week, specifically abotu collections and multiple feeds, so nothing to share just yet but hopfully soon

<eprodrom> from before

tracking of actions and issues

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-09-29#Tracking_of_Actions_and_Issues

tantek: looking quickly there aren't any pending or raised issues
... anyone have specific issues they have new information to report?
... i have an update on issue 4

<tantek> issue 4

issue-4

<trackbot> issue-4 -- Do we rely on explicit typing or support implicit typing based on explicit property names? -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/4

<tantek> action-35

<trackbot> action-35 -- Tantek Çelik to Come up with a simple proposal for implicit typing based on property names -- due 2015-02-10 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/35

tantek: i've completed that one with a proposal that i've written up
... based on existing work in the indiewebcamp community, i'm bringing it to the WG for consideration

<tantek> https://indiewebcamp.com/post-type-discovery

tantek: i've written it up on the IWC wiki but can easily copy it to the w3c wiki or github to take the next steps
... if this is a proposal that this group is willing to take for consideration to publish as a working draft
... i believe with this one i've completed action 35, i'll add that to the action

<hhalpin> I'd have to read it first!

tantek: the specific proposal is for the WG to accept it as an editor's draft
... and if so, then i'll go ahead and do the proper copy-paste to w3c space
... we should give the group like a week to review it to see if it's reasonable to consider
... is that enough time or does anyone want more time to review?

sandro: i'm confused abotu the discussion process here
... where is the discussion going to take place

tantek: good quetsion.
... i would prefer the discussion to be in #social wg irc channel

<melvster> -1

tantek: of course if people want to discuss it anywhere they want like the mailing list that's fine too

sandro: if people want to talk to you about it, they have to find you on irc?

tantek: what i will do which is customary with w3c working drafts is put my email address on there
... since typical drafts are discussed on the mailing list i don't see how we would differ for that, that's the convention we'd have to go with

eprodrom: tantek, i apologize here, but i don't know if there's a typical discussion mechanism on the indiewebcamp wiki
... but i know that talk pages are kind of frowned upon, is there a way we could talk on the wiki?

tantek: sure! i'm happy to add a commentary/feedback section

eprodrom: that might be a good place to centralize the converation

tantek: i've added a feedback section

<tantek> https://indiewebcamp.com/post-type-discovery#Feedback

<eprodrom> +1

tantek: that can certainly suffice for now, but if the WG adopts it as an editor's draft then the right thing to do is use the w3c discussion forums including our IRC channel and mailing list
... we'll use the usual w3c technique to put the topic tag between brackets so the email threads are clear
... that's all i had for open issues/actions

<eprodrom> +1 sounds good here

tantek: i'll mark 35 as "p[ending review" and we can discuss next week

Arnaud: yeah that's fine

tantek: the next telcon is tuesday oct 6

eprodrom: one thing i wanted to quickly point out is in previous converstaions we've talked about having some participation by non-members, inviting outside participation
... it may be good to think about what we want to do and so we can put out invitations to the public or specific developers

tantek: i agree. i think the participation that we wanted to focus on previously is around implementers in particular
... specifically, implementers of social websites, popular existing social web services
... i have a bunch of contacts at twitter if they'd want to swing by for a bit, even informally
... harry has a list of folks who came to the workshop in 2013
... so harry it would be helpful if you could ping your contacts that we have a date for the next meeting

hhalpin: the list i have is interesting, there are some possible implementers, it's mostly companies that are in the space that have their own social projects
... do we want to have a "get up to speed" session?
... some of these people all came to the first workshop but may not have been here, haven't joined w3c since the fee was too high
... i don't know how to structure the invitaion

<sandro> I'd suggest a day-before stakeholders meeting, if we can get enough people

hhalpin: would folks prefer observers? just come one day? have a get up to speed session?
... my proposal would be to have a get up to speed session the day before or early the first day, then invite them as observers but don't let them take over the meeting

<sandro> (and a hackathon after the meeting!)

tantek: i'm adding an observers section to the wiki so we can continue to discuss options there

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-01#Observers

tantek: go ahead and edit the wiki on the observers section and add your proposal and we can discuss after the call
... as much as we can focus on implementers that's one of our concerns right now, to get enough implementers to look at the specs and say can I build for this, how soon, that kind o things

hhalpin: agreed 100%, maybe we can get people who previously checked out to look at it again

tantek: i think that's it for the agenda, any additional topics?
... sandro also just suggested a hackathon after the meeting, that's a good idea

<KevinMarks> that fits the indiewebcamp model

tantek: not hearing any additional topics i'm going to close the call and give you 15 minute sback!

<eprodrom> Thanks tantek!

<tantek> aaronpk++ for minuting!

<Loqi> aaronpk has 961 karma

<AnnB> see you a few months!

trackbot, end meeting

<AnnB> be well, do good work

- DRAFT -

Social Web Working Group Teleconference

29 Sep 2015

Attendees

Contents