IRC log of social on 2015-11-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:02:08 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #social
18:02:08 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/11/24-social-irc
18:02:09 [azaroth]
Present+ Rob_Sanderson
18:02:10 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
18:02:12 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SOCL
18:02:12 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
18:02:13 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
18:02:13 [trackbot]
Date: 24 November 2015
18:02:18 [ben_thatmustbeme]
present+
18:02:24 [aaronpk]
present+
18:02:37 [tantek]
trackbot, start meeting
18:02:39 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
18:02:41 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SOCL
18:02:41 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
18:02:42 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
18:02:42 [trackbot]
Date: 24 November 2015
18:02:46 [tantek]
present+
18:02:49 [Arnaud]
present+
18:02:51 [azaroth]
Present+ Rob_Sanderson
18:02:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
present+
18:02:59 [aaronpk]
present+
18:03:15 [ben_thatmustbeme]
there are only 5 people dialed in
18:03:25 [tantek]
Zakim, who is here
18:03:25 [Zakim]
tantek, you need to end that query with '?'
18:03:30 [wilkie]
present+
18:03:37 [azaroth]
ScribeNick: azaroth
18:03:41 [ben_thatmustbeme]
azaroth++
18:03:42 [azaroth]
Scribe: Rob_Sanderson
18:03:43 [Loqi]
azaroth has 1 karma
18:03:48 [tantek]
Zakim, who is here?
18:03:48 [Zakim]
Present: Arnaud, csarven, rhiaro, aaronpk, shanehudson, sandro, elf-pavlik, kevinmarks, wilkie, eprodrom, jasnell, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber, tantek, hhalpin, james, tsyesika,
18:03:48 [tantek]
scribe: azaroth
18:03:48 [cwebber2]
cwebber2 has joined #social
18:03:52 [Zakim]
... wseltzer, akuckartz, shepazu, Rob_Sanderson, Shane_, rene, cwebber2, Benjamin_Young
18:03:52 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, bengo, eprodrom, tantek, azaroth, bblfish_, the_frey, melvster, bigbluehat, bitbear, dwhly, shepazu, Arnaud, csarven, kevinmarks, wilkie, oshepherd, raucao,
18:03:52 [Zakim]
... ben_thatmustbeme, tommorris_, tessierashpool_, ElijahLynn, bret, tsyesika, jet, aaronpk, Loqi, rhiaro_, rrika, Zakim, pdurbin, rhiaro, sandro, trackbot, wseltzer
18:03:52 [tantek]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-11-10-minutes
18:03:53 [cwebber2]
whoops, calling in!
18:03:59 [azaroth]
Tantek: Approval of minutes. Last week's called cancelled, so the week before.
18:04:09 [wilkie]
+1
18:04:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
18:04:22 [azaroth]
... +1s?
18:04:27 [bengo]
present+
18:04:31 [azaroth]
+1
18:04:52 [azaroth]
... Resolved
18:05:09 [azaroth]
... Next on the agenda, next week we'll be meeting face to face in San Francisco
18:05:12 [tantek]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-01
18:05:24 [azaroth]
... Dec 1,2 at Mozilla San Francisco
18:05:35 [azaroth]
... Enter on the first floor and will get a badge and directions
18:05:37 [the_frey]
the_frey has joined #social
18:05:46 [azaroth]
... Calling out the required reading section. Everyone who's participating is expected to read it
18:05:58 [azaroth]
... We'll discuss those docs directly, and will not summarize them
18:06:05 [tantek]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-01#Required_Reading
18:06:10 [cwebber2]
I just got in
18:06:10 [azaroth]
... If there's anything you want to resolve / approve / etc, then please read them first
18:06:20 [azaroth]
... We'll be linking them up soon
18:06:22 [aaronpk]
present+ cwebber2
18:06:26 [azaroth]
... (Or anyone else can too)
18:06:35 [azaroth]
... Questions?
18:07:06 [azaroth]
... Will try to be on IRC, but of course have Thanksgiving Thursday/Friday
18:07:21 [azaroth]
... So those two days probably not, so any questions please send them in sooner rather than later
18:07:21 [wilkie]
I am flying Thanksgiving night to SF. thank goodness for cheap flights.
18:07:30 [azaroth]
Topic: Technical items for discussion
18:07:34 [cwebber2]
thanks aaronpk
18:07:48 [tantek]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-11-24#Technical_Items
18:07:48 [azaroth]
Tantek: James sent his regrets, so propose we defer discussion of AS items until the F2F
18:08:05 [azaroth]
... If there's specific items that people here think they can make progress on without James, please say?
18:08:14 [azaroth]
... Any items we can move forward on?
18:08:33 [azaroth]
... tumbleweed ...
18:08:41 [cwebber2]
:)
18:08:52 [azaroth]
... Silence as acceptance to defer
18:08:52 [melvster]
was there anything in the queue from last time?
18:09:15 [azaroth]
... Please Q+ anything that comes up. Most were in the queue from last time.
18:09:23 [tantek]
Federation protocol: Webmention ready as editor's draft
18:09:36 [azaroth]
... Next area ... aaronpk has added WebMention.
18:10:02 [azaroth]
aaronpk: We've talked about WebMention in the past. A few of us have been working on cleaning it up to share with the group
18:10:17 [azaroth]
... We have a draft that should be sufficient as an ED for the group
18:10:18 [aaronpk]
http://webmention.net/
18:10:45 [azaroth]
... Nothing new from the specification side, but the document is new
18:10:54 [azaroth]
... A start towards the federation protocol
18:11:08 [azaroth]
... It's not tied to microformats, though most implementations use them at the moment
18:11:15 [azaroth]
... should be applicable to other types of documents as well
18:11:17 [azaroth]
... Any questions?
18:11:23 [tantek]
q?
18:11:42 [azaroth]
Tantek: Thanks for getting this into ED state, really appreciate that.
18:12:15 [azaroth]
... Lots of time spent on AS as the most mature doc we had coming in. WebMention explicitly mentioned as input in the charter, so good to make progress in multiple areas
18:12:27 [azaroth]
... We can just go ahead and accept it as ED, but a spearate step to publish as FPWD
18:12:49 [cwebber2]
... (should we be submitting activitypump to editor's draft status?)
18:12:49 [azaroth]
... Want to ask those on the call if there's objections? Or questions?
18:13:14 [azaroth]
q+
18:13:32 [melvster]
webmention is stated as a *possible* input as is linked data platform
18:13:53 [azaroth]
azaroth: Where to send feedback on the doc? github issues?
18:13:55 [tantek]
q+ to ask How soon can Webmention editor's draft be ready for FPWD?
18:13:59 [tantek]
ack azaroth
18:14:00 [sandro]
present+ sandro
18:14:20 [azaroth]
aaronpk: Thinking about it :) I like using github for questions, nice threaded view. Will get back to you on that
18:14:21 [rhiaro_]
present+ rhiaro
18:14:34 [azaroth]
Tantek: Looking at the header at the top, I see a wiki for open issues.
18:14:51 [azaroth]
... I share the question, and that gh issues could be considered
18:14:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk, i'd agree, that github usually works well
18:15:05 [azaroth]
... I created an issues only gh for post-type discovery draft, that could be something to consider
18:15:14 [wilkie]
there are two places I see mentioned: http://indiewebcamp.com/Webmention-brainstorming">http://indiewebcamp.com/Webmention-brainstorming http://indiewebcamp.com/Webmention
18:15:16 [azaroth]
aaronpk: Should I make it in the socialWG account?
18:15:21 [azaroth]
tantek: Yes, that seems the best
18:15:33 [tantek]
https://github.com/w3c-social/post-type-discovery/issues
18:15:42 [azaroth]
... As an example ^^ the post type discovery spec
18:15:51 [tantek]
q?
18:15:52 [azaroth]
aaronpk: I'd be happy to do that
18:15:55 [azaroth]
azaroth: No problem :)
18:16:01 [tantek]
ack
18:16:05 [tantek]
ack tantek
18:16:05 [Zakim]
tantek, you wanted to ask How soon can Webmention editor's draft be ready for FPWD?
18:16:35 [azaroth]
tantek: Looks fairly spec like, what do you need to be ready for FPWD? What are you blocked on, or is it ready?
18:16:57 [azaroth]
aaronpk: From my perspective it's functional enough to push forwards, however I'd love to get feedback
18:17:05 [azaroth]
... Make sure it's clear enough from an implementation perspective
18:17:24 [azaroth]
... Also just more technical clean up to move things around, but mostly just removing / reorienting text
18:17:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
would that be after accepting as editor's draft though?
18:17:51 [azaroth]
tantek: Would like to add to required reading
18:18:12 [cwebber2]
no objections, but
18:18:13 [cwebber2]
q+
18:18:13 [azaroth]
... it looks like it's been through a lot of iterations, we can approve at the f2f
18:18:16 [azaroth]
... objections?
18:18:20 [bengo]
+1 to required reading
18:18:21 [tantek]
q?
18:18:25 [tantek]
ack cwebber2
18:18:31 [wilkie]
that sounds good to read it for the f2f
18:18:50 [azaroth]
cwebber2: No objections, wondering whether it makes sense to do the same for activity pump?
18:19:25 [azaroth]
tantek: To be clear, which area of the charter do you think activity pump comes in?
18:19:32 [azaroth]
cwebber2: Under social api and federation api
18:19:38 [sandro]
q?
18:19:41 [sandro]
q+
18:19:53 [azaroth]
tantek: I think that's something we should add. I see no problem adding. Did you have something ready?
18:20:02 [Loqi]
Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86893&oldid=86892
18:20:04 [azaroth]
... a separate topic
18:20:06 [sandro]
q-
18:20:09 [cwebber2]
sorry
18:20:24 [azaroth]
... Adding to agenda.
18:20:25 [cwebber2]
I did mean to queue it for the next topic but wasn't sure how to do that
18:20:27 [cwebber2]
in this queue
18:20:28 [cwebber2]
;p
18:20:31 [tantek]
q?
18:20:34 [cwebber2]
q-
18:20:36 [tantek]
ack cwebber2
18:20:37 [cwebber2]
done
18:20:42 [cwebber2]
++ to webmention
18:20:44 [tantek]
q?
18:20:47 [azaroth]
... Did you have a question about webmention?
18:20:57 [azaroth]
... No other questions, move on to next item.
18:20:57 [melvster]
I dont like the idea of source and target variables flying around without namespaces ... id look at semantic pingback : http://www.w3.org/wiki/Pingback#Semantic_Pingback
18:21:04 [tantek]
q?
18:21:12 [melvster]
in general I see this as a non starter
18:21:18 [tantek]
Social API: Micropub for consideration as editor's draft (Aaron)
18:21:20 [azaroth]
Topic: Social API - micropub
18:21:32 [azaroth]
tantek: Another one for aaronpk
18:21:40 [kevinmarks]
melvster: it's a defined endpoint; it doesn't need namespaces
18:22:00 [aaronpk]
(please save the arguments about webmention for later, that's not the topic of the call)
18:22:06 [azaroth]
... Noting that micropub wasn't in the initial list of docs when we started the WG, so a bit different context, but provide details for why it should be considered
18:22:15 [azaroth]
aaronpk: Going through a lot of iterations based on feedback from the group
18:22:48 [azaroth]
... It's not as mature as webmention, so not ready as ED. Proposal is to consider it as such, knowing that we'll continue to work on it and it'll evolve much more than webmention
18:22:54 [aaronpk]
http://micropub.net/
18:22:56 [azaroth]
... Link ^^
18:23:15 [azaroth]
... The text needs work, lots of cleanup needed before anyone should read through it
18:23:22 [bengo]
Other links that have been mentioned: https://w3c-social.github.io/SocialAPI/socialapi https://w3c-social.github.io/activitypump/
18:23:24 [azaroth]
... I'll send a note when it's ready to look at
18:23:31 [azaroth]
... any questions about it?
18:23:38 [azaroth]
tantek: What is the specific proposal?
18:23:45 [azaroth]
... Want it considered as ED for the group?
18:23:50 [azaroth]
aaronpk: That's correct
18:24:00 [azaroth]
... I think it fulfils the API part of the charter as a self contained building block
18:24:11 [azaroth]
... goes along side webmention but not coupled to any particular aspects
18:24:20 [tantek]
PROPOSED: Accept Micropub as an editor's draft for the Social Web WG as part of the Social API section of the charter
18:24:22 [Arnaud]
q+
18:24:32 [tantek]
q?
18:24:42 [tantek]
ack Arnaud
18:24:55 [melvster]
pointer?
18:25:00 [azaroth]
Arnaud: I'm a bit confused. I don't see how the document compares to what Amy has been putting together?
18:25:07 [tantek]
+1 to Arnaud's question
18:25:22 [azaroth]
aaronpk: This is mostly just existing micropub, but goal is to reconcile with what Amy has been doing
18:25:41 [azaroth]
... to make it work with what we've been working with collectively
18:25:52 [azaroth]
Arnaud: But if it was a rec, we wouldn't need Amy's document?
18:25:57 [bengo]
bigbluehat I think https://w3c-social.github.io/SocialAPI/socialapi
18:25:59 [rhiaro_]
http://w3c-social.github.io/SocialAPI/socialapi
18:26:05 [azaroth]
aaronpk: Can we combine them into the same proposal?
18:26:06 [bigbluehat]
bengo: thanks!
18:26:08 [azaroth]
... Amy is here?
18:26:17 [azaroth]
tantek: We had that doc accepted as ED from Amy
18:26:29 [rhiaro_]
Mine is an outline with potential spaces for the pieces. Happy to see it dissolve if other modular things can take its place
18:26:46 [azaroth]
rhiaro_: What I wrote was an outline of the different pieces
18:26:52 [azaroth]
... would like to see them replaced by individual specs
18:27:00 [azaroth]
... if there's anything left, then we can spec those later
18:27:06 [wilkie]
I was assuming amy's document should supersede any other federation api document
18:27:08 [kevinmarks]
Amy's doc refences micropub already
18:27:10 [azaroth]
... So if the doc disappeared to be replaced, that would be fine
18:27:15 [kevinmarks]
Creating content
18:27:19 [azaroth]
Sandro: Which piece of your doc does this replace?
18:27:24 [azaroth]
Amy :Creating content
18:27:31 [azaroth]
sandro: so long as it's one section, that makes sense
18:27:32 [tantek]
q?
18:27:39 [bengo]
azaroth If SocialAPI is editor's draft, should it be listed here? https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Drafts If so, are any other ED missing?
18:27:40 [azaroth]
rhiaro_: micropub is creating content, webmention is mentioning
18:27:47 [kevinmarks]
http://w3c-social.github.io/SocialAPI/socialapi#Creating%20content
18:27:52 [azaroth]
tantek: Amy's doc on the required reading list
18:28:08 [azaroth]
... also an ED for the WG. My preference would be to see both docs move forwards. Premature to say one could replace the other
18:28:19 [azaroth]
... Trust that the editors of the docs will work together to explain the relationships
18:28:22 [azaroth]
... an action on both?
18:28:32 [azaroth]
... That something that rhiaro_ and aaronpk can take on?
18:28:40 [azaroth]
Both: Yes happy to do that
18:28:48 [azaroth]
tantek: Lets make an action then
18:28:56 [tantek]
q?
18:28:58 [kevinmarks]
Amy's draft already does mention it
18:29:08 [rhiaro_]
melvster: since semantic pingback defines source and target, you could default to that namespace if you wanted to namespace received webmentions yourself
18:29:09 [azaroth]
ACTION rhiaro_ to explain relationship to aaronpk's document
18:29:09 [trackbot]
Error finding 'rhiaro_'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/Social/track/users>.
18:29:15 [azaroth]
ACTION rhiaro to explain relationship to aaronpk's document
18:29:15 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-74 - Explain relationship to aaronpk's document [on Amy Guy - due 2015-12-01].
18:29:27 [azaroth]
ACTION aaronpk to explain relationship to rhiaro's document
18:29:27 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-75 - Explain relationship to rhiaro's document [on Aaron Parecki - due 2015-12-01].
18:29:37 [tantek]
PROPOSED: Accept Micropub as an editor's draft for the Social Web WG as part of the Social API section of the charter
18:29:38 [azaroth]
tantek: Not seeing any questions ....
18:30:02 [Loqi]
Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-11-24]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86894&oldid=86881
18:30:03 [Loqi]
Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86895&oldid=86893
18:30:10 [azaroth]
Arnaud: I think it's premature before we understand how they relate
18:30:14 [azaroth]
... I'd like the decision to be deferred
18:30:22 [rhiaro_]
q+
18:30:27 [azaroth]
tantek: I think Amy and aaronpk answered that?
18:30:28 [tantek]
q?
18:30:42 [azaroth]
aaronpk: We accepted we'd clarify, but it hasn't yet been clarified
18:30:45 [azaroth]
Arnaud: Exactly :)
18:30:51 [kevinmarks]
it's already clear in Amy's draft, just needs backref in micropub
18:30:54 [azaroth]
tantek: Your preference is to wait for that
18:30:55 [bigbluehat]
+1 to clarity
18:30:57 [azaroth]
Arnaud: Indeed
18:31:03 [melvster]
+1 clarify
18:31:04 [azaroth]
tantek: aaronpk are you okay with that?
18:31:07 [sandro]
q+
18:31:11 [azaroth]
+1 to clarify first
18:31:12 [wilkie]
I agree with that
18:31:15 [azaroth]
tantek: Amy?
18:31:15 [tantek]
ack rhiaro
18:31:27 [azaroth]
rhiaro: A process question, can someone point me to ED definition?
18:31:27 [cwebber2]
yes please re: editor's draft
18:31:35 [azaroth]
... not even a commitment to publishing
18:31:39 [azaroth]
tantek: Your understanding is correct
18:31:45 [cwebber2]
okay, if that's true, then I think activitypump is ready for editor's draft
18:31:55 [azaroth]
... a new doc that has not been mentioned in the charter, so we need to explicitly accept it or not
18:32:16 [azaroth]
... my understanding from Arnaud is that before deciding he would need to know the relationship. I think that's a reasonable request
18:32:20 [bengo]
rhiaro "Working Groups and Interest Groups may make available "Editor's drafts". Editor's drafts have no official standing whatsoever, and do not necessarily imply consensus of a Working Group or Interest Group, nor are their contents endorsed in any way by W3C." http://www.w3.org/2015/Process-20150901/
18:32:21 [azaroth]
... so no argument regarding next steps
18:32:40 [tantek]
q?
18:32:42 [rhiaro_]
thanks bengo
18:32:57 [azaroth]
Arnaud: For the record, I don't vote in WGs that I chair, so feel free to ignore if you want. I'd answer Amy's question a little differently, when we accept it as ED it's the first step on putting it in REC track
18:33:08 [azaroth]
... no guarantee that any document gets there, but it's an important first step
18:33:15 [tantek]
ack sandro
18:33:34 [azaroth]
sandro: I think it makes sense for aaron to write a proposal in the syntax and style of a draft for what could go in creating content section
18:33:52 [azaroth]
... if the WG accepts the proposal, then that could go in to be a spec, but we haven't started looking at it at all
18:34:04 [azaroth]
... labeling it as ED would communicate that we had decided to go in that direction
18:34:10 [azaroth]
... so better to call it a proposal
18:34:21 [azaroth]
... no decision here, just communication issues
18:34:34 [azaroth]
tantek: I didn't hear from aaron or anyone an assertion of direction. Can raise for the WG?
18:34:36 [rhiaro_]
Good to maintain a coherant front as a WG :)
18:34:53 [azaroth]
sandro: Could be okay with ED if it's clearly labeled as not necessarily the direction of WG
18:34:57 [azaroth]
arnaud: what gain?
18:35:02 [azaroth]
tantek: WG is working on it
18:35:10 [azaroth]
... I think the direction concern is valid
18:35:23 [azaroth]
sandro: Important part is feedback from the group that we would like a solid proposal
18:35:24 [bengo]
Might as well wait until after F2F to dub new EDs
18:35:29 [azaroth]
... no pun intended :)
18:35:45 [tantek]
q?
18:35:53 [kevinmarks]
micropun
18:36:10 [bigbluehat]
micropun++
18:36:12 [aaronpk]
sandro: "It's good to have the activity pumping away at making a solid micropub proposal" #PUNINTENDED
18:36:12 [Loqi]
micropun has 1 karma
18:36:13 [rhiaro_]
"I think it's good to have the activity pumping away to have a solid micropub spec"
18:36:19 [azaroth]
tantek: Aaron you have a request for next steps. Arnaud's request reasonable. Clarity of direction from Sandro
18:36:21 [rhiaro_]
For the record.
18:36:36 [azaroth]
aaronpk: Should I label the page as a proposal?
18:36:51 [azaroth]
tantek: Its your draft, so long as you don't claim it from the WG.
18:37:07 [azaroth]
aaronpk: Can we clarify sandro's request?
18:37:32 [azaroth]
tantek: that the draft explicitly state it's not implying a direction, it's one approach but not claiming a specific direction
18:37:43 [azaroth]
sandro: So long as it doesn't go on WG list of EDs
18:37:56 [azaroth]
tantek: But to get it on the list, it shouldn't imply direction
18:38:08 [azaroth]
Arnaud: On the wiki page, we should have a section for proposals, not items the WG is working on
18:38:20 [melvster]
arnaud++
18:38:21 [azaroth]
tantek: We have a list of things the group is working on
18:38:23 [Loqi]
arnaud has 28 karma
18:38:28 [sandro]
+1 put it on a list of proposals, not as a list of drafts
18:38:29 [azaroth]
... will add that section to the home page
18:38:35 [azaroth]
+1 to list of proposals
18:38:46 [melvster]
+1 list of proposals
18:38:51 [azaroth]
Tantek: By that request, you're saying we should list micropub as a proposal
18:38:55 [azaroth]
Arnaud: I think that's reasonable to do
18:39:04 [azaroth]
... that seems the case, there's a proposal that we can acknowledge
18:39:06 [azaroth]
tantek: Sandro?
18:39:08 [azaroth]
sandro: Yep
18:39:16 [azaroth]
tantek: Okay, great.
18:39:35 [azaroth]
ACTION tantek to add proposal section to social web WG page, with micropub as first entry
18:39:35 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-76 - Add proposal section to social web wg page, with micropub as first entry [on Tantek Çelik - due 2015-12-01].
18:40:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
micropub.net
18:40:36 [azaroth]
Tantek: Can you put the URL? micropub.net?
18:40:46 [azaroth]
... Thank you
18:40:56 [tantek]
q?
18:41:13 [azaroth]
... No one on the queue ... any other questions?
18:41:26 [melvster]
please could additions to proposals list also be announced publicly?
18:41:29 [azaroth]
... We agreed to list as a proposal. Aaron, do you intend to discuss at the F2F?
18:41:34 [azaroth]
aaronpk: That'd be great if we have time for that
18:41:48 [azaroth]
tantek: Objections to adding micropub to required readings?
18:41:52 [azaroth]
sandro: How long to read?
18:42:01 [cwebber2]
everyone should be reading these specs anay
18:42:03 [cwebber2]
anyway
18:42:17 [azaroth]
aaronpk: I don't know 15 minutes? The syntax part is the important part
18:42:24 [azaroth]
sandro: Can we say that on the reading list?
18:42:24 [wilkie]
yeah, it should be expected to read these possible apis
18:42:31 [kevinmarks]
can we read AS2 in 15 minutes?
18:42:34 [tantek]
q?
18:42:39 [azaroth]
tantek: Other questions?
18:42:45 [melvster]
-1 there's dozens of specs to read
18:43:00 [azaroth]
ACTION tantek to add micropub to required reading list
18:43:00 [melvster]
add to proposals, not required reading
18:43:00 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-77 - Add micropub to required reading list [on Tantek Çelik - due 2015-12-01].
18:43:00 [cwebber2]
I think most of the problems in the group comes from people objecting to things without actually having read the spec they're objecting to
18:43:04 [melvster]
-1
18:43:10 [cwebber2]
+1
18:43:15 [cwebber2]
+1 to reading :P
18:43:20 [bengo]
+1 to reading
18:43:21 [melvster]
add to proposals not required reading, announce publically
18:43:34 [Arnaud]
I find this document (micropub) confusing
18:43:35 [kevinmarks]
the reason micropub is so long is that it has a list of implemntations in it
18:43:46 [tantek]
q
18:43:47 [tantek]
q?
18:43:48 [tantek]
q?
18:43:49 [Arnaud]
the structure isn't obvious
18:44:00 [azaroth]
tantek: No other questions, moving on
18:44:03 [bigbluehat]
aaronpk: kevinmarks: maybe the list of implementations could be moved to an appendix?
18:44:21 [azaroth]
Topic: Activity Pump for consideration at F2F
18:44:21 [tantek]
Activity Pump for consideration at F2f (cwebber)
18:44:24 [aaronpk]
yes, i still have lots of cleanup on the micropub one. webmention was in better shape :)
18:44:42 [Arnaud]
aaronpk, I think some section numbers would go a long way
18:44:48 [azaroth]
cwebber: Didn't mean to interupt earlier. Would like people to read the Acitivty Pump spec for the F2F
18:44:59 [aaronpk]
Arnaud, any examples of specs with section numbers in that format?
18:45:01 [azaroth]
... some areas that could do with review, but areas that we haven't come to consensus on
18:45:06 [azaroth]
... Structure is pretty well understood
18:45:23 [azaroth]
... Prior version has multiple implementations, could fulfil social and federation APIs
18:45:24 [Arnaud]
respec would take care of that for you automatically
18:45:24 [rhiaro_]
The prior version being pump.io?
18:45:32 [kevinmarks]
the wiki version has a toc and numbers http://indiewebcamp.com/micropub
18:45:38 [azaroth]
... So would like consideration towards both of those areas
18:45:54 [azaroth]
... Amy has been helping to reshape the docs to make them clearer
18:46:00 [azaroth]
... As is, I think it's readable enough for the F2F
18:46:03 [kevinmarks]
so that is easier to read that the moment, arnaud
18:46:04 [azaroth]
tantek: Link please?
18:46:11 [azaroth]
sandro: How long?
18:46:26 [azaroth]
cwebber: I don;t think it'll take that long. 15-20 minutes probably?
18:46:28 [rhiaro_]
It doesn't take logn to read, but it took me a couple of days of concentrating to really understand it
18:46:34 [cwebber2]
http://w3c-social.github.io/activitypump/
18:46:44 [kevinmarks]
if you start here http://indiewebcamp.com/micropub#Methodology
18:47:01 [azaroth]
tantek: Thank you Chris. Proposal is to discuss at F2F. And thus add to required reading.
18:47:26 [azaroth]
cwebber2: Yes adding to required. Would like to have it move forwards in the same way as micropub etc
18:47:49 [azaroth]
tantek: Not one of the documents in the charter, so would take the same route. Need to agree as a group to take it on as ED as the next step, after people have read and discussed
18:47:57 [azaroth]
... soonest would be at teh F2F.
18:48:01 [azaroth]
cwebber2: That sounds good
18:48:10 [azaroth]
tantek: WebMention is a bit different, as it's in the charter
18:48:22 [azaroth]
... F2F can hopefully discuss whether to publish as FPWD
18:48:29 [melvster]
no, webmention is mentioned as a *possible input* in the charter nothing more
18:48:30 [tantek]
q?
18:48:47 [azaroth]
tantek: Propose to accept Pump as required reading?
18:48:51 [wilkie]
+1
18:48:58 [azaroth]
... Objections?
18:49:00 [cwebber2]
+1 unsurprisingly :)
18:49:05 [aaronpk]
+1
18:49:07 [sandro]
+1 assuming 20 minutes
18:49:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
18:49:07 [tsyesika]
+1 (also unsuprisingly)
18:49:17 [azaroth]
+1
18:49:18 [Arnaud]
kevinmarks, thanks
18:49:36 [azaroth]
ACTION tantek to add Activity Pump to the list of required reading for F2F
18:49:37 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-78 - Add activity pump to the list of required reading for f2f [on Tantek Çelik - due 2015-12-01].
18:49:37 [Arnaud]
(ref micropub wiki)
18:49:56 [tantek]
q?
18:50:02 [Loqi]
Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86896&oldid=86858
18:50:03 [Loqi]
Tantekelik made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86899&oldid=86897
18:50:04 [Loqi]
Kmarks2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-01]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=86897&oldid=86895
18:50:18 [cwebber2]
yeah I think that's right
18:50:20 [azaroth]
tantek: Should add it to the proposals section too
18:50:32 [azaroth]
ACTION tantek to add activity pump to proposals section of the home page
18:50:32 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-79 - Add activity pump to proposals section of the home page [on Tantek Çelik - due 2015-12-01].
18:50:37 [sandro]
sorry, have to step away. see you all in SF
18:51:13 [tantek]
q?
18:51:13 [azaroth]
tantek: Okay, that brings us to open issues catch all section
18:51:31 [azaroth]
... Looking at the tracker ... separation of concerns issue?
18:51:33 [tantek]
issue 45
18:51:37 [tantek]
issue-46
18:51:37 [trackbot]
issue-46 -- AS2.0 tries to address some Social API responsibilities -- raised
18:51:37 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/46
18:51:51 [azaroth]
... Raised by Elf, are you on the call?
18:52:03 [azaroth]
... Not on the call, so moving on.
18:52:14 [tantek]
issue-40
18:52:14 [trackbot]
issue-40 -- Deprecate the "Post" activity -- pending review
18:52:14 [trackbot]
http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/40
18:52:17 [azaroth]
... Next is pending review, #40
18:52:36 [azaroth]
... Item we think is completed. WG to accept that it has been completed. Raised by james
18:52:48 [azaroth]
... Don't think he needs to be here
18:53:13 [azaroth]
... Already resolved it. Any objections to closing?
18:53:21 [cwebber2]
wait
18:53:31 [azaroth]
... Chris?
18:53:32 [cwebber2]
okay
18:53:34 [cwebber2]
no objections
18:53:36 [cwebber2]
was verifying
18:53:41 [cwebber2]
+1
18:53:45 [tantek]
trackbot, close issue-40
18:53:50 [tantek]
q?
18:54:15 [azaroth]
... Closing. Pending review actions, we have none. So end of the tracking issues section.
18:54:27 [azaroth]
Topic: Next Telco
18:54:37 [azaroth]
Tantek: Next telco is the 8th, with Arnaud as the chair
18:54:46 [azaroth]
... Next meeting is next week, the F2F.
18:55:03 [azaroth]
... Everyone remember to do your required reading, which we added a bunch of things to
18:55:11 [azaroth]
... See you all next week
18:55:13 [tantek]
q?
18:55:14 [cwebber2]
bye!
18:55:17 [tantek]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-01#Required_Reading
18:55:22 [wilkie]
cool. thanks!
18:55:23 [azaroth]
Topic: Adjourned
18:55:27 [tantek]
trackbot, end meeting
18:55:27 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
18:55:27 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been Arnaud, csarven, rhiaro, aaronpk, shanehudson, sandro, elf-pavlik, kevinmarks, wilkie, eprodrom, jasnell, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber,
18:55:30 [Zakim]
... tantek, hhalpin, james, tsyesika, wseltzer, akuckartz, shepazu, Rob_Sanderson, Shane_, rene, cwebber2, Benjamin_Young, bengo
18:55:35 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:55:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/24-social-minutes.html trackbot
18:55:36 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
18:55:36 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items