IRC log of social on 2015-10-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:00:56 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #social
17:00:56 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/10/13-social-irc
17:00:58 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
17:01:00 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SOCL
17:01:00 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
17:01:00 [aaronpk]
present+ aaronpk
17:01:01 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
17:01:01 [trackbot]
Date: 13 October 2015
17:01:01 [hhalpin]
present+ hhalpin
17:01:16 [tantek]
present+ tantek
17:01:19 [eprodrom]
present+ eprodrom
17:01:33 [eprodrom]
o/ hhalpin
17:01:39 [ben_thatmustbeme]
present+ ben_thatmustbeme
17:01:53 [bblfish]
bblfish has joined #social
17:02:04 [eprodrom]
any scribes?
17:02:07 [cwebber2]
present+ cwebber
17:02:27 [csarven]
csarven has joined #social
17:02:29 [kevinmarks]
present+ kevinmarks
17:02:35 [csarven]
present+ csarven
17:02:54 [eprodrom]
jasnell: are you on your way?
17:02:57 [eprodrom]
Arnaud: joined?
17:03:07 [rhiaro_]
present+ rhiaro
17:03:08 [wilkie]
present+ wilkie
17:03:09 [jasnell]
will be there in a couple
17:03:11 [hhalpin]
My feeling is that the RDF and microformat discussion has been quite predominant, and would be good to simply call it a truce and go back to JSON for interop.
17:03:24 [ben_thatmustbeme]
we are up to 12 on the call
17:03:25 [hhalpin]
And if folks want to treat like that JSON(LD) that's good, but let's not get religious about it.
17:03:28 [ben_thatmustbeme]
Arnaud is on
17:03:38 [ben_thatmustbeme]
at least his name is there
17:03:41 [hhalpin]
As pragmatically, most developers will likely treat it as JSON
17:04:05 [Arnaud]
present+ Arnaud
17:04:12 [Arnaud]
go ahead
17:04:16 [eprodrom]
scribe?
17:04:31 [ben_thatmustbeme]
\me Arnaud, i did hear you for a moment there
17:04:40 [eprodrom]
Zakim, who's on the call?
17:04:40 [Zakim]
Present: Arnaud, csarven, rhiaro, aaronpk, shanehudson, sandro, elf-pavlik, kevinmarks, wilkie, eprodrom, jasnell, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber, tantek, hhalpin
17:04:42 [jasnell]
present+ james
17:04:44 [hhalpin]
Happy to scribe
17:04:49 [hhalpin]
scribe: hhalpin
17:05:00 [tsyesika]
present+ tsyesika
17:05:07 [eprodrom]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-10-13
17:05:24 [wseltzer]
present+ wseltzer
17:05:25 [hhalpin]
topic: Approval of minutes from last week
17:05:28 [eprodrom]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-10-06-minutes
17:05:32 [hhalpin]
+1
17:05:43 [cwebber2]
+1
17:05:46 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
17:05:49 [eprodrom]
+1
17:05:50 [wilkie]
+1
17:06:05 [tantek]
looks fine. +1
17:06:07 [hhalpin]
APPROVED: Minutes of 10-6-2015 approved
17:06:29 [hhalpin]
topic: Discussion of F2F
17:06:32 [eprodrom]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-01
17:06:37 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: Our agenda is developing nicely
17:06:42 [hhalpin]
... good number of people attending
17:06:45 [akuckartz]
present+ akuckartz
17:06:55 [eprodrom]
q?
17:07:07 [cwebber2]
I need to find crashspace, thoug.
17:07:08 [hhalpin]
... do we have space?
17:07:09 [cwebber2]
though
17:07:17 [hhalpin]
tantek: I can confirm space for up to 12 without difficulty
17:07:32 [hhalpin]
... by end of month, if we need space for more than 12 we're fine
17:07:37 [hhalpin]
... right now, we have 6
17:07:38 [Arnaud]
we're still missing a lot of names on the wiki
17:07:40 [cwebber2]
6 now
17:07:43 [cwebber2]
I just added myself :)
17:07:50 [hhalpin]
I'll ask for W3C if they will support travel.
17:07:52 [Arnaud]
please, put your name, in one of the categories!
17:07:57 [cwebber2]
\o/
17:08:29 [hhalpin]
tantek: Please add yourself as a 'maybe'
17:08:36 [hhalpin]
... with whatever caveats you want to add
17:08:45 [hhalpin]
... so I can gauge scope and size of room needed
17:08:49 [hhalpin]
... also add yourself to regrets if you can't come
17:09:56 [ben_thatmustbeme]
as long as we actually get to it
17:10:02 [Loqi]
Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85935&oldid=85909
17:10:03 [Loqi]
Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85938&oldid=85937
17:10:04 [Loqi]
Cwebber2 made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85940&oldid=85876
17:10:05 [Loqi]
Hhalpin made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85937&oldid=85936
17:10:06 [Loqi]
Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85939&oldid=85938
17:10:41 [hhalpin]
topic: AS 2.0
17:10:55 [hhalpin]
jasnell: The new version was published on Tuesday with license change
17:11:02 [tantek]
jasnell++ for publishing new AS2 docs with new license!
17:11:04 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: awesome
17:11:05 [akuckartz]
URL ?
17:11:06 [Loqi]
jasnell has 31 karma
17:11:10 [hhalpin]
... what's next?
17:11:30 [tantek]
akuckartz, at the usual /TR I presume
17:11:35 [hhalpin]
... if there's any other changes
17:11:36 [hhalpin]
q+
17:12:11 [eprodrom]
ack hhalpin
17:12:31 [hhalpin]
Should we go for wider review before we push for CR?
17:12:36 [hhalpin]
Should we do this wider push before or after F2F?
17:12:40 [Arnaud]
the process requires us to have broad review before going to CR
17:12:57 [Arnaud]
it's the "virtual Last Call"
17:12:58 [hhalpin]
Indeed, noting Kevin Mark's email, looking at existing AS1.0 users
17:13:11 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: I've reached out to SugarCRM, etc.
17:13:22 [hhalpin]
... its not so much about going to Candidate or about deciding if we go to Candidate
17:13:59 [hhalpin]
... and that internal decision will be based on f2f
17:14:02 [ben_thatmustbeme]
q+ Just a point of clarity regarding CR
17:14:03 [eprodrom]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams#implementations
17:14:11 [hhalpin]
I've started some outreach to thoughtworks etc.
17:14:21 [hhalpin]
but will aim for me, let's remember we have a deadline re outreach
17:14:27 [ben_thatmustbeme]
q+ to Just a point of clarity regarding CR
17:15:24 [eprodrom]
ack ben_thatmustbeme
17:15:24 [Zakim]
ben_thatmustbeme, you wanted to Just a point of clarity regarding CR
17:16:10 [hhalpin]
ben: Don't we need wide review before hitting Last Call?
17:16:19 [hhalpin]
Arnaud: Yes, even though there is no "last call" step anymore
17:16:22 [hhalpin]
... but you need to do it before CR
17:17:01 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: Do we commit to that process or decide at our F2F?
17:17:05 [hhalpin]
... my guess is we commit at F2F
17:17:26 [hhalpin]
sandro: That decision is largely based on the amount of review beforehand
17:18:00 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: I want a number or orgs to basically agree we will be implement
17:18:14 [hhalpin]
Notes that maybe people doing outreach should put their names in the wiki after the group
17:19:43 [eprodrom]
hhalpin: still scribing?
17:19:52 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/evanp/a2test
17:20:01 [wilkie]
cwebber2
17:20:03 [Loqi]
Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-10-13]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85941&oldid=85934
17:20:04 [Loqi]
Kmarks2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=85942&oldid=85940
17:20:19 [hhalpin]
cwebber2: I discussed with Evan how to implement AS2.0 and we've started a repo for test
17:20:30 [hhalpin]
... now after some misstarts I'm working on a validator in addition to test-suite
17:20:33 [hhalpin]
... things are moving forward
17:20:52 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: We have at least a framework for a test-suite
17:20:57 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/evanp/activitystreams.js-test
17:20:58 [hhalpin]
... testing the data format
17:21:23 [hhalpin]
... requests for producing and consuming AS2.0
17:21:27 [hhalpin]
... wrapper for AS2.0 implementation
17:21:37 [akuckartz]
Answering my own question: http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/
17:21:40 [hhalpin]
... would like jasnell's review in particular, but want
17:21:50 [hhalpin]
... additional review and a wrapper for java version
17:22:01 [hhalpin]
... need to talk to TW around their implementation
17:22:14 [hhalpin]
jasnell: The java version is out of date due to lack of time
17:22:23 [hhalpin]
I think TW has some cycles for this, will be seeing them Firday
17:22:54 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: we can then do hackathons and libraries in multiple languages
17:22:58 [hhalpin]
... right now, we have node.js
17:23:05 [hhalpin]
... need python and an out of date java
17:23:20 [hhalpin]
... a hackathon before the f2f would be great
17:23:44 [hhalpin]
jasnell: I'll look at it soon
17:24:07 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: multiple types on objects etc.
17:24:51 [hhalpin]
... any github/tracker updates?
17:24:52 [eprodrom]
q?
17:25:02 [hhalpin]
jasnell: Number of issues, 8 remaining issues on github tracker
17:25:18 [jasnell]
https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues
17:25:18 [hhalpin]
... stuff we need some resolution on, please take a look and weigh in
17:25:34 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: Some are fine-grained
17:25:44 [hhalpin]
... a few interesting
17:25:49 [hhalpin]
... the media/type MIME argument
17:26:04 [hhalpin]
... can we do Editor's Choice and WG decision
17:26:04 [hhalpin]
q+
17:26:39 [hhalpin]
jasnell: lack of @id in examples, MIME type needs WG decision, etc.
17:26:46 [hhalpin]
... the rest is more 'something that we need or not'
17:27:08 [hhalpin]
... want comments on 208, 205, 175, and 152
17:27:48 [hhalpin]
jasnell: 152 and 205 may need WG discussion
17:27:57 [hhalpin]
... 175 or 157
17:28:28 [akuckartz]
Issue 52 needs input!
17:28:33 [eprodrom]
ack hhalpin
17:29:36 [cwebber2]
btw I put an item under social api for this week's agenda, but accidentally put it on last week's agenda because I added it to the latest one
17:29:45 [hhalpin]
Process point - close them by f2f, so have editor state his proposal or 'don't care', and then try to get consensus on each editor proposal
17:29:54 [hhalpin]
if not, list options and do straw polls
17:29:57 [hhalpin]
topic: Social API
17:30:09 [hhalpin]
rhiaro: Map what currently exists to what implementations we have
17:30:12 [cwebber2]
and the latest one wasn't this week's meeting up yet ;\
17:30:13 [cwebber2]
+q
17:30:25 [hhalpin]
... think its a useful way to move forward
17:30:37 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: Let's get review this week
17:30:38 [eprodrom]
ack cwebber2
17:30:45 [hhalpin]
it would be good to get a FPWD after our F2F if we have consensus
17:31:00 [eprodrom]
ack cwebber
17:31:09 [hhalpin]
cwebber2: I did write an email to the call
17:31:28 [eprodrom]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2015Oct/0013.html
17:31:52 [hhalpin]
... I was interested in whether or not AS2 should be mandatory or not
17:31:56 [hhalpin]
... we should address this
17:32:03 [hhalpin]
... two compoenents:
17:32:27 [hhalpin]
... 1) One difficulty has been a cycle of conversation between microformats vs Linked Data for the last 15 years
17:32:35 [melvster1]
linked data didnt exist 15 years ago
17:32:36 [hhalpin]
... probably not helpful to continue to have those discussions in the WG
17:32:46 [ben_thatmustbeme]
melvster1++
17:32:48 [hhalpin]
I believe it was just RDF
17:32:49 [Loqi]
melvster1 has 3 karma
17:33:04 [hhalpin]
there has been an ongoing argument betwen RDF and microformats obviously.
17:33:09 [kevinmarks]
microformats din't either; 12 years maybe
17:33:22 [ben_thatmustbeme]
can we get back to the agenda?
17:33:23 [hhalpin]
... we should specify a deliverable
17:33:26 [tantek]
yes KevinMarks 12 years if you count XFN in 2003
17:33:47 [hhalpin]
... at last call we were worried that there would be no deliverables for client-server API, federation, etc.
17:33:59 [hhalpin]
... so I think we need to agree whether or not AS2 should be mandatory to implement
17:34:09 [hhalpin]
... then we can finally move on the API
17:34:19 [hhalpin]
... but without that level of agreement we are having trouble moving forward
17:34:29 [kevinmarks]
+q
17:34:38 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: What the resolution would look like?
17:35:00 [hhalpin]
cwebber2: To agree we implement to AS2.0 for whatever is sent to endpoint-to-endpoint
17:35:08 [hhalpin]
... then we can move forward for other things we are stuck on
17:35:15 [hhalpin]
q+ kevinmarks
17:35:21 [hhalpin]
q+
17:35:38 [hhalpin]
... tantek has figured how to map microformats to RDF's type system
17:35:42 [hhalpin]
... that seems like a good proposal
17:35:47 [tantek]
present+ tantek
17:35:57 [hhalpin]
... then we can figure out whether or not we can move forward
17:36:12 [eprodrom]
PROPOSAL: require AS2.0 for Social API and Federation Protocol
17:36:14 [kevinmarks]
-1
17:36:22 [aaronpk]
uh
17:36:24 [aaronpk]
-1
17:36:29 [cwebber2]
+1
17:36:31 [wilkie]
+1
17:36:33 [wilkie]
LOL
17:36:43 [hhalpin]
cwebber2: It's not other things are not possible, but one is mandatory
17:36:49 [hhalpin]
+1
17:36:56 [eprodrom]
+1
17:37:01 [tsyesika]
+1
17:37:06 [melvster1]
+0 need to see what AS2.0 is first (mime type will affect existing tooling)
17:37:11 [eprodrom]
ack kevinmarks
17:37:13 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: An interesting point about where dynamic is
17:37:14 [csarven]
-1
17:37:15 [akuckartz]
+0
17:37:22 [tantek]
+0 I'd like to improve AS2 more before making it mandatory for anything
17:37:26 [wilkie]
practically speaking, a good implementation will have both AS2 and render with microformats. it is practical to have one required though.
17:37:32 [hhalpin]
kevinmarks: The fundamental disagreement is are we trying to legislate or are we trying to document
17:37:35 [aaronpk]
kevinmarks++
17:37:36 [rhiaro_]
-1. AS2 could be SHOULD but not MUST
17:37:38 [Loqi]
kevinmarks has 173 karma
17:37:40 [hhalpin]
... what's actually working in the wild
17:37:58 [hhalpin]
... the point is that the microformat effort has succeeded
17:37:59 [eprodrom]
ack hhalpin
17:38:36 [wilkie]
well, we could have servers negotiate... do they serve AS2 or just tagged html and then servers will then automatically be required to do both by not requiring one
17:38:51 [wilkie]
it's a fun fact of distributed system design
17:38:59 [kevinmarks]
microformats have a consistent JSON format for all those languages now
17:39:38 [tantek]
we do have JSON explicit in our charter for Social Syntax - just pointing that out in the hopes that we at least don't have to debate that?
17:40:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
JSON is suggested in the charter
17:40:12 [csarven]
Charter says JSON, and possible JSON-LD as a convention.
17:40:21 [melvster1]
"most people will drop the @context" -- why?
17:40:36 [aaronpk]
because it's not actuall necessary to get stuff done
17:40:48 [wilkie]
melvster1: because it will probably work without it, and people do that stuff all the time
17:41:02 [ben_thatmustbeme]
csarven: i stand corrected
17:41:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
s/:/,/
17:41:13 [eprodrom]
q?
17:41:15 [hhalpin]
As the author of the charter, JSON is a requirement
17:41:18 [hhalpin]
JSON-LD was optional
17:41:30 [hhalpin]
Sorry guys, but that seemed a rather obvious compromise to me
17:41:38 [hhalpin]
Particularly in terms of developer community size
17:41:43 [hhalpin]
most modern developers send JSON via HTTP APIs
17:41:46 [ben_thatmustbeme]
no, thats a fine compramise to me
17:41:47 [hhalpin]
See Go, Ruby, Django, etc.
17:41:51 [kevinmarks]
documenting is moving things forward
17:41:57 [eprodrom]
http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter
17:41:59 [ben_thatmustbeme]
i was just being specific about it
17:42:06 [ben_thatmustbeme]
i'm fine with JSON
17:42:13 [kevinmarks]
mandating things that no-one implements isn't
17:42:17 [csarven]
hhalpin Makes perfect sense to me; if JSON, a "convention" needs to be picked, and so JSON-LD is a good candidate.
17:42:21 [hhalpin]
So, we just need good mappings from mf2 (needs more work but possible) and RDF (JSON-LD solves this, but RDF folks need to stop being so pushy over fine details that most JSON devs don't care about)
17:42:47 [ben_thatmustbeme]
hhalpin++
17:42:49 [Loqi]
hhalpin has 8 karma
17:42:50 [cwebber2]
why have we put all this time into AS2 if it isn't good enough of a structure? :\
17:42:51 [tantek]
eprodrom: if we are not comfortable requiring JSON as in the charter, we need to figure out alternative, if we are not comfortable requiring AS2, we need to figure out an alternative
17:42:52 [wilkie]
hhalpin++
17:42:54 [Loqi]
hhalpin has 9 karma
17:43:07 [tantek]
eprodrom: if we can't agree with the charter says, we need to come up with alternatives
17:43:13 [tantek]
eprodrom: I'm looking for some guidance
17:43:15 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: I'm looking for some guidance
17:43:15 [eprodrom]
q?
17:43:34 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: I see a lot of -1s.
17:43:50 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: Let's try to resolve this and get a proposal we can accept.
17:44:05 [hhalpin]
I'm happy to flesh out my proposal over the next week or two in terms of RDF/mf2 interop
17:44:08 [cwebber2]
it's fine, I realize it was kind of a bombshell :P
17:44:11 [akuckartz]
eprodrom++
17:44:14 [Loqi]
eprodrom has 27 karma
17:44:24 [hhalpin]
That being said, as a reality check, 99% of web devs use JSON, not mf or RDF
17:44:27 [eprodrom]
PROPOSAL: accept PTD as an editor's draft for continued development as part of the WG
17:44:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
cwebber2, bombshells are fine but maybe put it on the agenda first
17:44:42 [hhalpin]
mf has higher uptake in web-pages than any other format
17:44:48 [cwebber2]
ben_thatmustbeme: I did, I just messed up and put it on the wrong agenda :P
17:44:50 [hhalpin]
and RDF has a sizable community as well
17:44:56 [kevinmarks]
100% of web devs use HTML
17:44:58 [hhalpin]
topic: Type discovery
17:45:04 [hhalpin]
Yes, but NOT mf2
17:45:06 [cwebber2]
so yeah I failed ;p
17:45:06 [hhalpin]
sorry, but that's true
17:45:08 [tantek]
issue-4
17:45:08 [trackbot]
issue-4 -- Do we rely on explicit typing or support implicit typing based on explicit property names? -- open
17:45:08 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/4
17:45:19 [hhalpin]
So we can't force parsing HTML on people who see JSON as easier
17:45:24 [melvster1]
kevinmarks++
17:45:27 [Loqi]
kevinmarks has 174 karma
17:45:29 [eprodrom]
https://indiewebcamp.com/post-type-discovery
17:45:31 [kevinmarks]
sure, but claiming that JSON is JSON-LD is more tendentious
17:45:37 [tantek]
action-35
17:45:37 [trackbot]
action-35 -- Tantek Çelik to Come up with a simple proposal for implicit typing based on property names -- due 2015-02-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW
17:45:37 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/35
17:45:41 [hhalpin]
however, I agree with the general goal that people who embed data into web-pages using mf seems to work well
17:45:47 [eprodrom]
tantek++
17:45:50 [Loqi]
tantek has 246 karma
17:45:50 [hhalpin]
so it should be supported, it has wider uptake
17:45:52 [eprodrom]
excellent guessing
17:45:56 [hhalpin]
tantek: We have implicit typing
17:46:06 [hhalpin]
... we can get interop in mf2 with AS2
17:46:08 [kevinmarks]
no-one is forcing you to parse mf2, we have many parsers for you out there
17:46:12 [hhalpin]
... its a small, modular draft
17:46:34 [hhalpin]
my point is *most* people don't use mf2 in modern webdev frameworks. They use HTTP APIs that deliver JSON
17:46:53 [cwebber2]
rhiaroif it was the same proposal, but SHOULD instead of MUST for as2
17:46:54 [hhalpin]
tantek: My request is that the group accept it as editors draft
17:46:56 [cwebber2]
rhiaro
17:47:01 [hhalpin]
however, my second point is the main issue is AS1 and AS2 has little uptake
17:47:02 [cwebber2]
would that affect your response btw?
17:47:15 [hhalpin]
My point is that JSON *itself* has much wider updake than either RDF or mf2
17:47:17 [rhiaro_]
cwebber2: I could live with SHOULD
17:47:22 [hhalpin]
so that should be a common conversion pattern
17:47:26 [cwebber2]
rhiaro_: noted
17:47:33 [csarven]
q+ ISSUE/ACTION is not clear to me.. there is a minor gap. What are the actual implications of this to current AS2? Is ACTION-25 meant to provide an alternative (implicit)?
17:47:35 [hhalpin]
tantek: I would like to keep that mechanism the same
17:47:36 [kevinmarks]
no-one is arguing against JSON
17:47:43 [csarven]
q+ ISSUE/ACTION is not clear to me..
17:47:47 [csarven]
q+ ISSUE/ACTION is not clear to me
17:47:50 [hhalpin]
furthermore, it's not a small difference: it's several orders of magnitude in terms of uptake
17:47:51 [eprodrom]
q?
17:47:54 [csarven]
q+
17:47:58 [csarven]
:)
17:48:01 [ben_thatmustbeme]
i made a quick point that i was corrected on that could have been seen as that kevinmarks
17:48:06 [eprodrom]
ack csarven
17:48:10 [kevinmarks]
mandating the specific JSON-LD vocab that is under draft was what was being proposed
17:48:35 [hhalpin]
PROPOSAL: Take up tantek's post-type discovery as a Working Draft of the WG
17:48:41 [Arnaud]
I think this is in keeping with the trend of untyped languages like Javascript with all of its pros and cons :)
17:48:49 [tantek]
hhalpin, as an Editor's draft
17:48:59 [hhalpin]
s/Working Draft/Editor's Draft
17:49:18 [hhalpin]
csarven: The result of ACTION-35 is to change from implicit to explicit approach
17:49:25 [hhalpin]
... so we have an algorithm to deal with implicit approach
17:49:44 [tantek]
https://indiewebcamp.com/post-type-discovery
17:49:45 [Arnaud]
the claim "explicit post types that are being abandoned by modern post creation UIs" probably ought to be backed up with some references though
17:49:48 [hhalpin]
tantek: Accept the document as a work-item
17:49:54 [hhalpin]
... that's all I'm proposing
17:50:08 [hhalpin]
... for systems that require explicit typing it expands content they can consumer
17:50:21 [hhalpin]
... we've had some good experience
17:50:29 [aaronpk]
Arnaud, see: facebook and twitter
17:50:32 [kevinmarks]
arnaud look at the Medium and Buzzfeed post editors if you want mainstream UI
17:50:46 [hhalpin]
I am going to note that it appears the mf2 community is the most active implementers
17:50:46 [tilgovi]
tilgovi has joined #social
17:50:53 [eprodrom]
q+
17:50:55 [hhalpin]
tantek: We've had good feedback
17:51:11 [hhalpin]
csarven: We would mention that we could say "explicit" or "implicit"
17:51:12 [Arnaud]
I'm not questioning the claim, just pointing out that this ought to have a reference, your examples would work
17:51:12 [kevinmarks]
instead of a post type, they both have a series of blocks that enable you to post different content types as part fo a post
17:51:44 [hhalpin]
tantek: I would work with jasnell to see if we could do co-ordinate and browsers tend to do this
17:51:46 [hhalpin]
q+
17:51:52 [hhalpin]
csarven: That makes sense
17:52:25 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: This is the pattern used in micropub
17:52:32 [hhalpin]
... with POST parameters for intended types of parameters
17:52:36 [hhalpin]
... correct?
17:53:06 [hhalpin]
tantek: If you are an AS2 consumer that has explicit types
17:53:14 [hhalpin]
... the micropub use-case is an explicit one
17:53:18 [aaronpk]
q+
17:53:47 [hhalpin]
... one of the implementations is to do this
17:54:09 [eprodrom]
ack aaronpk
17:54:14 [eprodrom]
ack eprodrom
17:54:15 [melvster1]
JSON LD has implicit typing (elf posted some links to the ML)
17:54:29 [hhalpin]
aaronpk: when I receive a micropub request based on what's in it
17:54:36 [hhalpin]
... it shows up in different feeds
17:54:42 [cwebber2]
melvster1: yeah but the goal here is to help microformats->AS2
17:54:50 [cwebber2]
which I think doesn't work with elf's examples
17:55:10 [cwebber2]
in that sense it might also be helpful in getting from microformats->rdf
17:55:30 [cwebber2]
I think?
17:55:31 [eprodrom]
http://indiewebcamp.com/Webmention
17:55:34 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: There's the types mentioned in a webmention, thats where these properties came from
17:55:40 [rhiaro_]
I have my own version to decide internally how to display posts based on the properties: http://rhiaro.co.uk/2015/09/post-type
17:55:53 [hhalpin]
... are we documenting existing behavior?
17:56:02 [ben_thatmustbeme]
yes, i do something similar
17:56:08 [eprodrom]
q?
17:56:17 [ben_thatmustbeme]
but this actually helps clear some parts up and makes sense to me
17:57:03 [hhalpin]
tantek: All sorts of ways of doing responses, but its mainly trying to do things like distinguish between articles and notes
17:57:06 [eprodrom]
ack hhalpin
17:57:34 [eprodrom]
q?
17:58:05 [ben_thatmustbeme]
can we just vote on the proposal?
17:58:18 [hhalpin]
Editors draft does not mean we have consensus, just its a reasonable thing to be working on and within scope
17:58:25 [hhalpin]
usually in W3C it's a fairly low bar
17:58:40 [hhalpin]
I would vote for it as it seems useful to a particular community and necessary for interop
17:58:45 [eprodrom]
+1
17:58:46 [aaronpk]
+1
17:58:46 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
17:58:48 [hhalpin]
+1
17:58:50 [cwebber2]
+1
17:58:51 [tantek]
+1
17:58:54 [rhiaro_]
+1
17:58:54 [kevinmarks]
+1
17:58:57 [wilkie]
+1
17:58:59 [sandro]
+1
17:59:06 [akuckartz]
+0
17:59:42 [tsyesika]
+1
17:59:45 [eprodrom]
RESOLVED: Take up tantek's post-type discovery as a Working Draft of the WG
17:59:46 [hhalpin]
RESOLVED: Accept Post-type discovery as an editor's draft
18:00:06 [sandro]
present+ sandro
18:00:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
q+
18:00:10 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: Can you move this to the wiki Tantek?
18:00:11 [hhalpin]
q+
18:00:14 [eprodrom]
q?
18:00:19 [eprodrom]
ack ben_thatmustbeme
18:00:23 [tantek]
will do! thanks everyone
18:00:57 [hhalpin]
ben: Let's have a flat agenda
18:01:09 [hhalpin]
... rather than devote too much to the first topic
18:01:14 [hhalpin]
s/too much/too much time
18:01:37 [hhalpin]
ben: Single items rather than going through actions
18:01:44 [hhalpin]
... use github issues
18:01:51 [hhalpin]
... even if it's skipping around subjets
18:01:59 [hhalpin]
s/subjets/topics
18:02:01 [eprodrom]
q?
18:02:03 [tantek]
+1 to flat agenda - allows us more freedom to FIFO different topics and make sure we get to different topics in the order raised / added to agenda
18:02:22 [eprodrom]
PROPOSAL: flat agenda where we use bullet points
18:02:32 [rhiaro_]
+1
18:02:34 [hhalpin]
tantek: CSS WG does it this way
18:02:38 [aaronpk]
+1
18:02:49 [wilkie]
+0
18:02:51 [hhalpin]
+0
18:02:52 [cwebber2]
0
18:03:00 [Arnaud]
I have to admit not to understand what a flat agenda means
18:03:01 [eprodrom]
-1
18:03:04 [akuckartz]
-0
18:03:13 [eprodrom]
q
18:03:14 [Arnaud]
it's too bad because I'd be very interested to understand
18:03:14 [eprodrom]
q?
18:03:16 [hhalpin]
We could run an experiment and try it once
18:03:20 [eprodrom]
ack hhalpin
18:03:21 [Arnaud]
but we're out of time
18:03:23 [tantek]
Arnaud - see CSS WG telcon agendas as an example
18:03:28 [tantek]
posted to www-style
18:03:53 [sandro]
-1 I want phone dialin, as much as I like mumble for some things
18:04:04 [ben_thatmustbeme]
Arnaud: it would mean this would have had more time than the last minute on the call to discuss this
18:04:07 [Arnaud]
to be more explicit: the problem seems to be about time allocation
18:04:11 [sandro]
but we could try one of the other phone dialin options
18:04:13 [hhalpin]
any objections to mumble?
18:04:19 [Arnaud]
I don't know that the format of the agenda is the problem
18:04:23 [cwebber2]
so, sounds like objections. ok!
18:04:24 [hhalpin]
What we need is mumble + phone dial-in :)
18:04:31 [akuckartz]
+1 to using open source compatible solution
18:04:33 [cwebber2]
but
18:04:41 [cwebber2]
I think we still need to handle the international phone version :P
18:04:42 [hhalpin]
Although notes non-US folks can't dial-in as easily
18:04:47 [tantek]
-1 I want phone dialin also like sandro
18:04:51 [eprodrom]
agenda item for next week?
18:04:54 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: lets revisit next week
18:05:00 [ben_thatmustbeme]
can it be the top of the agenda next week?
18:05:03 [ben_thatmustbeme]
:P
18:05:10 [tantek]
hhalpin: I'm using Google Hangouts on iOS over wifi to make a "phone call"
18:05:22 [kevinmarks]
the workaround for no-us is to use google hangouts which does require an account, but has free us calling
18:05:24 [hhalpin]
eprodrom: meeting adjourned, talk to you next week
18:05:31 [tantek]
hhalpin++ for minuting!
18:05:32 [hhalpin]
trackbot, end meeting
18:05:32 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
18:05:32 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Arnaud, csarven, rhiaro, aaronpk, shanehudson, sandro, elf-pavlik, kevinmarks, wilkie, eprodrom, jasnell, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber,
18:05:34 [Loqi]
hhalpin has 10 karma
18:05:35 [Zakim]
... tantek, hhalpin, james, tsyesika, wseltzer, akuckartz
18:05:40 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:05:40 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/10/13-social-minutes.html trackbot
18:05:41 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
18:05:41 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items