17:59:19 RRSAgent has joined #social 17:59:19 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-social-irc 17:59:21 RRSAgent, make logs public 17:59:23 Zakim, this will be SOCL 17:59:23 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 17:59:24 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 17:59:24 Date: 03 November 2015 17:59:38 Made dinner, ready at 1 minute to the hour. That is good timing! 18:00:08 azaroth has joined #social 18:00:32 Present+ Rob_Sanderson 18:00:35 present+ 18:00:42 present+ 18:00:52 present+ 18:01:10 present+ cwebber 18:01:10 someone is really noisy on the call 18:01:30 Zakim, who's making... oh 18:01:30 I don't understand 'who's making... oh', cwebber2 18:01:34 we miss you Zakim ! 18:01:46 cwebber2++ 18:01:48 cwebber2 has 51 karma 18:02:20 present+ tantek 18:02:39 present+ wilkie 18:02:41 present+ sandro 18:02:48 present+ 18:03:19 I can scribe 18:03:50 Sorry, is the code still SOCL? 18:04:14 no, you need to follow the link from the meeting page 18:04:25 we can't type it here or it will be public 18:04:26 scribeNick: Shane_ 18:04:31 it's in the channel topic O.o 18:04:41 haha it's in the title 18:04:47 Hah 18:05:22 present+ eprodrom 18:05:27 Yep, I put in there just while people we're dialing in - will change it once we get everyone in. 18:05:30 present+ 18:05:43 yeah I got in with no password 18:06:00 I normally need don't need a password but did this time 18:06:25 tantek has changed the topic to: Today's agenda: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-11-03 18:06:47 RRSAgent, pointer? 18:06:47 See http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-social-irc#T18-06-47 18:07:12 tantek has changed the topic to: Today's agenda: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-11-03. IRC logs: http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/today 18:07:28 PROPOSED: Approval of Minutes of 2015-10-20 18:07:44 Scanning now 18:07:52 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-10-20-minutes 18:07:54 I think the standard procedure is drop on irc and everyone scrambles to review :) 18:07:57 present+ ben_thatmustbeme 18:08:06 +1 looks complete 18:08:09 cwebber2++ 18:08:10 +1 on approval 18:08:10 RESOLVED: Approval of Minutes of 2015-10-20 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-10-20-minutes 18:08:12 cwebber2 has 52 karma 18:08:34 Arnaud: Quickly another reminder about face to face meeting, if you haven't done so please indicate your attendance. 18:08:50 ... we will soon start working on logistics for the face to face 18:09:14 hhalpin_ has joined #social 18:09:15 with AnnB and rhiaro ! 18:09:16 ... Tantek entertained a breakout session at TPAC, about 25 people or so at the session 18:09:21 rhiaro took minutes 18:09:46 ...Not much to take away from the working group, but worth reading through the minutes 18:10:07 tantek: The discussion was very lively and had interest for participation in the WG 18:10:34 https://www.w3.org/wiki/TPAC/2015/SessionIdeas#Social_Web 18:10:59 ...Photo there, you can see lots of people there. You can see Tim Berners-Lee attended, it was very animated 18:11:05 rhiaro's minutes in IRC: http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-10-27#t1445996391422 18:11:14 Arnaud: The primary goal was to advertise the WG and any new members so much the better 18:11:41 ... Trying to streamline the discussion on the agenda 18:12:03 ... Evan has voluntered to be a co-editor 18:12:11 +1 to Evan being co-editor 18:12:17 ... If anyone is concerned, let us know 18:12:17 massive +1 to Evan being co-editor 18:12:18 +1 and Evan++ 18:12:33 +1 18:12:37 +1 18:12:42 Evan: My only question is if there is any conflict with being a chair and co-editor? 18:12:57 I'm also happy to be an editor if that would be helpful, though I think Evan + James is more than sufficient 18:13:03 +1 18:13:03 Its unusual but three chairs is also unusual. 18:13:13 Arnaud: If you are willing to put in the time it takes, you are very welcome 18:13:15 +1 18:13:24 +1 18:13:25 +1 18:13:26 Thanks everyone 18:13:27 INFORMALLY_RESOLVED :) 18:13:29 I would suggest that if you feel there is a conflict of interest between the two roles, you simply tell the other chairs and editor. 18:14:28 Arnaud: I sent an email about the agenda, there was a lot of different proposals regarding AS 2.0 and it would be time consuming to go through them one by one 18:14:28 in the batch of "proposed to accept", let's pull [Activity Streams 2.0] Proposal: Remove @context from all examples - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/233 (Ben) out separately. 18:14:49 +1 to separating 233, per email 18:14:54 present+ hhalpin 18:14:57 ... I took the liberty to bunch together some propsals, proposing to approve all as a batch 18:15:10 ... If you have any concerns with any one proposal, say so. No need to justify now 18:16:04 ... Please speak up, otherwise we will vote on the rest and hopefully agree these are the proposals, then focus on the others on a more systematic approach 18:16:15 yay to the idea of resolving many proposals at once :) 18:16:18 woot 18:16:19 q+ removal of @context example 18:16:37 ben_thatmustbeme: heh! 18:16:43 q- removal of @context example 18:16:43 q- removal 18:16:49 Arnaud: There are proposals from a few people 18:17:12 that one has had a fair number of -1s 18:17:20 q- m4nu 18:17:37 The Proposal then is to approve: #220, #218, #225, #226, #227, #213, #229, and #232 18:18:07 Arnaud: Is there any request for removal from that batch? 18:18:14 PROPOSED: Approve the following proposals: #220, #218, #225, #226, #227, #213, #229, and #232 18:18:19 +1 18:18:21 +1 18:18:21 +1 18:18:23 +1 18:18:24 +1 18:18:28 +1 18:18:37 +1 18:18:39 wait, that list is missing 223 18:18:45 that's correct 18:18:48 it's missing 233 18:18:48 ben_thatmustbeme: that's up for seaprate discussion 18:18:50 okay 18:18:54 +1 18:19:04 the remove @context from all examples - postponed to specific discussion after this poll 18:19:07 wasn't sure the way it was nested 18:19:11 Arnaud: Ben, we can look at that one next 18:19:20 +1 18:19:28 RESOLVED: Approve the following proposals: #220, #218, #225, #226, #227, #213, #229, and #232 18:19:30 +1 18:19:36 whooo, talk about getting stuff done! 18:19:55 Aside: I think that was a reasonable improvement on the flat/FIFO agenda building. 18:20:03 [Activity Streams 2.0] Proposal: `mediaType` on Content objects - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/223#issuecomment-151176900 (James) 18:20:04 Hhalpin made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86647&oldid=86627 18:20:05 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-10-20-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86648&oldid=86072 18:20:09 present+ 18:20:57 jasnell: This proposal is from Elf, he may be able to explain it better. It is about whether we need object types for Blob, such as image data. We already have Image and Video but that is for describing metadata of the image. The proposal is about the actual data. 18:21:04 Arnaud: Elf is not on today 18:21:18 jasnell: Defer it until he is here 18:21:23 elves with invisibility cloaks 18:21:24 Arnaud: Unless anyone else wants to speak up? 18:21:48 jasnell: #229 should cover it, but will wait for Elf 18:21:58 Arnaud: There is the @context, do we want to start with that one? 18:22:38 just the 9 digit one 18:22:44 q+ to say that I'm okay to waiting for this on non-telcon time 18:22:47 Arnaud: Happy to leave it to those who are involved in the discussion, if they would gain from using the teleconference time 18:22:50 q? 18:22:52 ack ben_thatmustbeme 18:22:52 ben_thatmustbeme, you wanted to say that I'm okay to waiting for this on non-telcon time 18:22:53 POTS via google 18:22:55 q+ 18:23:08 q+ 18:23:14 ack tantek 18:23:15 ben_thatmustbeme: I'm ok with not wasting time on it. Sounds like annotations group are going to go other direction on it 18:23:39 tantek: The only thing I was going to add is since we have rob and ben on the phone it may be good to have the chance for them to discuss it 18:23:50 q- 18:24:39 Rob: The annotations group originally left them off to make samples clearer, we reversed it on the grounds of developers being likely to cut and paste and make sure their code produces code that looks like the samples. Which is not what we wanted to end up with 18:24:47 ... We haven't yet published the reversal 18:24:49 q+ 18:25:03 Arnaud: Ben, since the discussion is still going do you want to respond? 18:25:16 fwiw, I'm -1 on #233. having the @context there doesn't hurt and is beneficial 18:25:23 Ben: I'm ok with leaving them there, there have been several -1s so I would be ok leaving them there 18:25:34 paying attention to @context is optional for *some* users 18:25:37 not all 18:25:43 ... James has said context is optional in the past, based on other arguments people say it must be there for JSON-LD 18:25:45 +q 18:25:48 shouldn't it use a default context when absent? 18:25:59 q- 18:26:04 Arnaud: There are people pushing for just JSON. We should not tie this question to the bigger issue 18:26:08 wilkie: it does 18:26:12 ... We should separate the discussions 18:26:15 ack tantek 18:26:25 jasnell: ok. that makes it seem like less a big deal either way then. 18:26:31 PROPOSED: Keep @context from all examples - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/233 (Ben) 18:26:43 +1 to keeping @context 18:26:49 +1 18:26:54 +1 18:26:58 0 18:27:01 0 18:27:01 I agree taht we need to have that other discussion 18:27:03 +0 18:27:05 +0 18:27:09 i can live with it 18:27:13 +0 I have no reason not to, not a big fan though 18:27:22 +0 18:27:26 +1 18:28:03 q+ to clarify 18:28:13 jasnell: The annotations working group have the option of requring JSON-LD things, in this WG we decided to say JSON as in charter but never required JSON-LD 18:28:19 tantek: I think the points you're raising are important, I agree with Arnaud that we need to have that larger conversation to clarify this 18:28:28 Shane_ that's not me talking 18:28:42 Oh whoops, it is ben then? 18:28:52 Shane_: it was tantek 18:29:03 oops, sorry! 18:29:08 looking at the current drafts it seems a lot like JSON-LD is the primary serialization the WG is looking at 18:29:14 Arnaud: It was approved by the working group 18:29:30 tantek: Then we have a difference between a couple of the chairs, we can discuss later 18:29:33 RESOLVED: Keep @context from all examples - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/233 (Ben) 18:29:33 at the time we discussed JSON-LD we were told that @context was optional 18:29:39 Arnaud: I can live with a 0 and so will call it resolved 18:29:41 kevinmarks: it is optional still 18:29:43 q- 18:29:54 Proposal: Remove "hreflang" - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/219 18:29:54 kevinmarks: maybe it can be better clarified in the docs, I need to re-look 18:29:59 Arnaud: A proposal to remove href lang 18:30:00 the context is implied, so 18:30:11 right kevinmarks, we only ever resolved that optional JSON-LD was ok. I don't remember ever resolving to require JSONLD in AS2. If we did then we have bigger problems. :/ 18:30:25 kevinmarks, cwebber2: +1 to clarifying. 1.2 of AS-core implies it's required, at least to me 18:30:29 what we resolved in boston iirc 18:30:30 cwebber2: The object wasn't designed to have parity, the justification for removing it hasn't been made 18:30:31 q+ 18:30:35 was that the context was implied 18:30:35 right, cwebber2 - the implied @context was the way to map the JSON to JSON-LD for those who want it 18:30:37 Arnaud: Ok, anyone wants to speak to the flip side? 18:30:38 ack ben_thatmustbeme 18:30:39 and that way 18:30:43 you could have json-ld 18:30:57 but someone who just has json can just use json 18:31:12 q+ to agree with jasnell that it's useful 18:31:15 Ben: I can't see how it is useful, yes it is in html but so is a lot of things. We should prove useful not what's not useful. You can't prove a negative 18:31:16 +1 on being required to prove that it is useful 18:31:26 I think you can prove a 'negative' if its not used by developers in the wild. 18:31:29 so simultaneously it's both json-ld but not needing to be json-ld 18:31:36 That's an empirical question, but we're a bit early here. 18:31:46 We could see if href was heavily used in Atom though. 18:31:50 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/219#issuecomment-150356695 18:31:55 s/href/hreflang 18:32:06 Ben: I didn't see anything very conclusive, I didn't see anything in the language spec/best practises spec that was published 18:32:19 q? 18:32:45 Arnaud: Are you saying you don't buy it as being valid? 18:32:47 q+ 18:32:50 if you remove this, how does an extension add it back? 18:32:50 Ben: Not really 18:33:02 ack azaroth 18:33:02 azaroth, you wanted to agree with jasnell that it's useful 18:33:02 it's not new... http://www.nomensa.com/blog/2010/7-tips-and-techniques-for-multi-lingual-website-accessibility 18:33:22 can we postpone it from AS2? whose implementation needs this? 18:33:41 azaroth: We had the same use case with the same outcome, we useful DC language but the result is the same 18:33:55 ... The language are not available by content negotiation 18:34:14 ack hhalpin_ 18:34:19 ...The annotation might be the only source of language, you may not know which source to use 18:34:32 tantek: JSON LD generic processing would require @context -- list of adopters: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Media_type_for_AS2#Iterop_Considerations_-_application.2Fld.2Bjson 18:34:50 there needs to be some space for this functionality for this exact thing as extension if it is removed 18:35:03 +1 on deleting things not used in practice 18:35:06 hhalpin_: Examples are easy to make. We may be premature in using hreflang, if there are elements that are not used once we go through them then they should be removed from the AS 2.0 spec or the vocab 18:35:08 https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/189077?hl=en 18:35:21 melvster: JSON LD generic processing is not a requirement for any our WG deliverables 18:35:28 Arnaud: If there are certain features that no one wants to implement then we will delete them 18:35:29 therefore it cannot assert requirements on any specs 18:35:34 https://moz.com/learn/seo/hreflang-tag 18:35:34 That being said, making the spec as simple as possible in the beginning (rather than as complex as possible, as we get with some specs) helps you get implementers for CR! 18:35:43 Proposal: keep "hreflang" - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/219, revisit at CR 18:35:45 Ben: I'm ok waiting till CR 18:35:46 +1 to revisiting at CR 18:35:50 q+ to suggest maintaining at-risk list 18:35:52 heh 18:35:54 q- 18:36:01 Marking it 'at risk' makes sense 18:36:04 +0 18:36:07 +1 to at risk 18:36:08 +1 18:36:27 +0 18:36:29 PROPOSED: keep "hreflang" - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/219, marking it "AT RISK" 18:36:33 https://www.deepcrawl.com/knowledge/best-practice/hreflang-101-how-to-avoid-international-duplication/ 18:36:39 +1 to keep, at risk 18:36:48 +1 to keep and put it at risk 18:36:54 +1 18:36:54 that seems reasonable to me 18:36:54 +1 18:36:58 +0 18:37:05 if we remove it, and yeah maybe it shouldn't be in core, but it's too hard someone to put back in, then that'd be bad for international implementations and bilingual usages. 18:37:06 +1 to keeping, -0 to marking at risk 18:37:07 +1 18:37:09 +0 would prefer to drop early, but ok with at-risk to keep things moving forward 18:37:27 +1 keep, 0 to mark at risk 18:37:45 Arnaud: It allows you to drop things without cycling through the whole discussion again 18:37:50 RESOLVED: keep "hreflang" - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/219, marking it "AT RISK" 18:38:04 Proposal: Object partOf Collection - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/205 18:38:14 I only want it because it makes it more obvious there can be multiple representations of objects :) 18:38:15 Arnaud: We don't have Amy on the call today 18:39:28 jasnell: Previously we had a memberOf property, that was removed as there wasn't any interest at the time. When we revisited the paging model, part of that was indicating the model of the current page. 18:39:49 Arnaud: So it is two-fold, should we have this information back should we piggy back or bring old name back 18:40:11 how is this different from using categories/tags? 18:40:12 jasnell: There are memberOf in other vocabs, so could use one of those as extension 18:40:24 q+ 18:40:26 Arnaud: It sounds like she wants the relationship but doesn't care about the name 18:40:31 ack azaroth 18:40:45 q+ to ask which one is closer to AS1/JSON if either? 18:41:00 tantek: AS1 did not have a memberOf property at all 18:41:27 Rob: It would be valuable, regarding the memberOf and other vocabularies, my understanding is that AS has long since decided to create its own vocabulary regardless of other exisiting. So it shouldn't affect us here. 18:41:40 ack tantek 18:41:40 tantek, you wanted to ask which one is closer to AS1/JSON if either? 18:41:40 ...With my annotations WG head on, this would be very useful to us 18:41:52 in AS1 it was implicit 18:41:59 unfortunately I have to drop off 18:41:59 as there were many streams 18:42:11 Will read the minutes 18:42:14 Tantek: I was wondering if there is any precedant in AS 1 that could help our decision 18:42:22 jasnell: Nope 18:42:26 in my opinion, this is easily something that can be done via an extension 18:42:26 if we reject the proposal with the reason that other vocabularies can be used, I would suggest to keep a hint somewhere in the spec how this specific case should be treated with an extension 18:42:30 if it's absolutely necessary 18:42:40 -1 to tagging/categories 18:42:57 that was kevinmarks speaking about tagging/categories 18:43:06 jasnell: Folks can do it with tags and categories but this is more about the current properties 18:43:18 Arnaud: There is no backwards compatibility, the question is do we add it or not 18:43:33 ... It can be done as an extension and sounds like the annotations working group will do that 18:43:41 +1 to Defer for Amy 18:44:04 Proposal: Type for object of an Offer - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/175 (Evan 18:44:07 Arnaud: I don't want to close it without Amy being here. Let's move on 18:44:18 Arnaud: evan had to drop off 18:44:20 he left I think 18:44:29 time to defer! 18:44:42 Arnaud: I missed the fact Evan had dropped off. He has a bunch of issues 18:44:56 Arnaud: Evan and Elf next week 18:45:08 q+ 18:45:08 Media type discussions - https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/52 18:45:24 ack jasnell 18:45:38 what did AS1/JSON use for media type? 18:45:43 q+ to note discussion with IETF last week 18:45:54 jasnell: The short summary is that currently the AS spec defines the slot, the argument is the build upon the JSON-LD type with a profile parametre 18:45:56 application/ld+json; profile="http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams" 18:46:00 seeAlso: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Media_type_for_AS2 18:46:03 There seems no consensus on that we are actually building on JSON-LD 18:46:24 rene - correct, no consensus that we are building on JSONLD 18:46:39 rene - the charter only dictates JSON for the Social Syntax 18:46:46 +1 jasnell 18:46:55 +q 18:46:59 jasnell: We are not supporting all JSON-LD mechanisms, we are not requiring all implementers to use it. I think using JSON-LD is the correct way to do it. There is a discussion on going 18:47:01 ack azaroth 18:47:01 azaroth, you wanted to note discussion with IETF last week 18:47:03 -1 on JSONLD media type 18:47:13 I have offered the following compromise: https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/52#issuecomment-153404878 18:47:22 q+ 18:48:10 Rob: At TPAC we had a discussion, at IETF meeting there has just been a discussion about having media types at the same weight as the regular media types 18:48:35 ... If that was a concern then the annotations group will be pushing them on it, it should be possible 18:49:19 ... We considered that we also have a bunch of restrictions, the profile was sufficent to add in the requirements in a machine processable and normative fashion. You must do JSON-LD and use this frame, can't say that normatively of course. 18:49:32 ... Not to push this group one way or another, but worth considering 18:49:34 ack cwebber 18:50:14 cwebber2: I think this ties in partly with what tantek was discussing about requiring @context, we agreed that there would be an implied @context with JSON-LD under the hood. 18:50:25 with *optional* JSON-LD under the hood 18:50:47 under the hood == out of band 18:50:47 ... If someone with a scripting language is just hacking away, they will know it will be provided without having to worry about it. Keeping it simple. 18:51:13 example: {"@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams", "@type": "Place", "coordinates": [[1,2],[3,4]]} is valid Activity Streams 2.0 but is not valid JSON-LD because JSON-LD does not support GeoJSON lists of lists 18:51:22 q+ to ask if *every* schema should register a media type? 18:51:38 ... It seems weird as the core doesn't do much without the core vocab, the way I understood before is that we would deliver it based on having a mime type. If there are other ways to express it, technically it was always possible. 18:52:07 ...I think it is useful to have some way to say to teh users that there is a simple document, it is technically JSON-LD but no need to overcomplicate it 18:52:19 cwebber2++ this is exactly what I was distinguishing between this WGs approach and AnnotationsWG 18:52:21 cwebber2 has 53 karma 18:52:34 ack jasnell 18:53:18 jasnell: A valid AS 2.0 document is not a valid JSON-LD, it allows things to be used that are not valid. It does say there is additional processing required for some features 18:53:30 ... Advertising that as a JSON-LD document is a bit of a lie, because it is not 18:53:43 ... There is enough differences between the two that warrants AS having its own media type 18:53:58 ... Okay we can address it with a profile but that is optional for implementors to support 18:54:13 jasnell: manu was telling me there was some likely possibility that the nested lists issue might be handled 18:54:14 ... The JSON-LD spec only says what a implementation SHOULD do 18:54:15 MarkS_ has joined #social 18:54:21 in json-ld 18:54:22 in some way 18:54:24 Also, rss and atom had their own media-types, so there is precedent 18:54:37 hhalpin_ indeed 18:54:54 if it is true that a valid AS 2.0 document doesn't have to be a valid JSON-LD document, than the profile is no solution 18:55:20 Arnaud: The JSON-LD portion appears to be controversal, some people want more linked data. This is loosing sight of the fact that the spec was written for two possible views of the world, not force one view on everybody 18:55:23 jasnell: is there any blocker from the "it's technically a compacted json-ld doc" other than the geojson example 18:55:24 ? 18:55:37 q+ 18:55:45 ... The pressure I see on both sides are pushing for one view or another, the current draft is trying to carve a compromise 18:56:06 ack azaroth 18:56:06 azaroth, you wanted to ask if *every* schema should register a media type? 18:56:10 ... It would be wise to bring up things if they are required to be tuned, try not to get into religious debate about linked data or not 18:56:15 it sounds like james's proposed media type allows for the two possible views of the world, not force one view on everybody 18:56:29 I wonder whether it is necessary to allow AS 2.0 documents that look like JSON-LD but are not valid due to subtle differences 18:56:46 Rob: Given was James' said, it seems justified that a different media type be used, but I would propose that any features that are not JSON-LD compatible will be called out so that people know what would be lost 18:56:48 ack jasnell 18:57:21 +1 to rob 18:57:39 +1 to having the mimetype and also saying it SHOULD be considered a profile 18:57:45 +1 to jasnell suggestion of equivalent profile 18:57:47 jasnell: For leaving in the application activity + json activity type, but should treat with profile as being equivalent. If they don't care then it is fine. 18:57:48 because then implementers can ignore that 18:57:54 but technically, it's true 18:58:02 I think it's a good route 18:58:07 Propose that profile doc might be good place for listing non-round-trippable content? 18:58:13 Arnaud: We will not close this issue yet, hoping we are starting to see the light 18:58:25 perhaps a note of how to convert AS2 to JSON-LD ? 18:58:59 ... There are two more items on the agenda, will use the last minute to let cwebber2 make an announcement 18:59:00 if there are two worlds, why not express that in using different media types? 18:59:56 q+ to remind folks about IndieWebCamp MIT Nov 7-8! https://indiewebcamp.com/2015/MIT please sign-up on the Guest List if you want to come (no charge, no need to be member of WG) https://indiewebcamp.com/2015/MIT/Guest_List 19:00:00 cwebber2: I have a very short announcement which is I just posted to the list an implementation of AS 2.0 that tries to implement as simplified so that it uses JSON-LD behind the hood 19:00:05 ack tantek 19:00:05 tantek, you wanted to remind folks about IndieWebCamp MIT Nov 7-8! https://indiewebcamp.com/2015/MIT please sign-up on the Guest List if you want to come (no charge, no need to be 19:00:08 ... member of WG) https://indiewebcamp.com/2015/MIT/Guest_List 19:00:41 tantek: Just a quick announcement, this week coming up is IWC MIT 7th 8th all day, posted a URL into IRC. Can sign up by adding to wiki page, no charge. Welcome to bring any friends, don't need to be a member of WG 19:00:49 Arnaud: Let's close on this, thank you all for joining 19:00:50 I will have an updated WD ready to review by next week 19:01:00 thanks 19:01:01 Thanks all! 19:01:02 Arnaud: Evan should be chairing on Nov 10th 19:01:04 I added a countdown for 11/10 12:00am (#5735) 19:01:06 thank you Shane_ ! 19:01:08 Shane_++ 19:01:10 Shane_++ for scribing!! 19:01:11 Shane_ has 1 karma 19:01:11 Shane++ 19:01:12 Arnaud++ for chairing 19:01:12 trackbot, end meeting 19:01:12 Zakim, list attendees 19:01:12 As of this point the attendees have been Arnaud, csarven, rhiaro, aaronpk, shanehudson, sandro, elf-pavlik, kevinmarks, wilkie, eprodrom, jasnell, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber, 19:01:13 Shane++ 19:01:13 Shane_ has 2 karma 19:01:14 Shane has 3 karma 19:01:15 Arnaud has 27 karma 19:01:16