14:44:10 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #annotation
14:44:10 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/04/01-annotation-irc
14:44:24 <azaroth> trackbot, start meeting
14:44:26 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:44:26 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #annotation
14:44:28 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 2666
14:44:28 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
14:44:29 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
14:44:29 <trackbot> Date: 01 April 2016
14:44:42 <azaroth> Chair: Rob_Sanderson, Tim_Cole
14:44:48 <azaroth> Regrets+ Frederick_Hirsch
14:44:54 <azaroth> Present+ Rob_Sanderson
14:45:53 <ivan> Regrets+ DanW, nickstenn
14:54:05 <TimCole> TimCole has joined #annotation
14:56:40 <uskudarli> uskudarli has joined #annotation
14:58:20 <ShaneM> present+ ShaneM
14:59:26 <Emrah_Guder> Emrah_Guder has joined #annotation
14:59:59 <uskudarli> present+ Suzan_Uskudarli
15:01:05 <TimCole> Present+ Tim_Cole
15:02:05 <Tbdinesh> Tbdinesh has joined #Annotation
15:03:45 <bjdmeest> bjdmeest has joined #annotation
15:04:07 <Tbdinesh> Present+ TB_Dinesh
15:04:07 <bjdmeest> Present+ Ben_De_Meester
15:04:31 <takeshi> takeshi has joined #annotation
15:04:37 <TimCole> regrets Frederick
15:05:07 <Kyrce> Kyrce has joined #annotation
15:05:10 <ivan> Present+ Ivan
15:05:17 <Kyrce> Present+ Kyrce_Swenson
15:05:19 <takeshi> Present+ Takeshi_Kanai
15:06:02 <ivan> zakim, who is here?
15:06:02 <Zakim> Present: Rob_Sanderson, ShaneM, Suzan_Uskudarli, Tim_Cole, TB_Dinesh, Ben_De_Meester, Ivan, Kyrce_Swenson, Takeshi_Kanai
15:06:04 <Zakim> On IRC I see Kyrce, takeshi, bjdmeest, Tbdinesh, Emrah_Guder, uskudarli, TimCole, Zakim, RRSAgent, azaroth, ivan, shepazu, KevinMarks, ben_thatmustbeme, csarven, Loqi, ShaneM,
15:06:04 <Zakim> ... aaronpk, stain, bigbluehat, nickstenn__, oshepherd, rhiaro, dwhly, tessierashpool_, timeless, trackbot
15:06:36 <ivan> zakim, pick a victim
15:06:37 <Zakim> Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose Tim_Cole
15:07:13 <bjdmeest> scribenick bjdmeest
15:07:17 <azaroth> Thanks Ben!
15:07:21 <ivan> scribenick: bjdmeest
15:07:29 <bjdmeest> TimCole: Agenda for today
15:07:35 <bjdmeest> ... anyone wants to add something?
15:07:42 <shepazu> present+ shepazu
15:07:45 <TimCole> Topic: Announcements
15:07:53 <bigbluehat> present+ Benjamin_Young
15:08:00 <azaroth> bjdmeest: And continued thanks, as you're often the scribe!
15:08:16 <ivan> q+
15:08:21 <bjdmeest> TimCole: WD's are published
15:08:25 <azaroth> ack ivan
15:08:29 <bjdmeest> ... reviews are requested
15:08:54 <bjdmeest> ivan: a reference from the security review people is received
15:09:20 <bjdmeest> ... there is a questionnaire that helps identifying common pitfalls
15:09:25 <ivan> security questionnnaire: https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/
15:09:32 <bjdmeest> ... anyone willing to go through that offline?
15:09:49 <bjdmeest> ... something that should be done between now and next version of the WD
15:10:10 <bjdmeest> ... so if security people will check this, we need to check this asap
15:10:22 <bjdmeest> azaroth: I am happy to work with however would work on that
15:10:29 <bjdmeest> TimCole: I'll send a question around
15:10:41 <TimCole> http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/selector-note/index-respec.html
15:10:42 <azaroth> s/however/whoever/
15:10:54 <bjdmeest> ... other thing to mention: there is a first draft of a possible note on selectors and states
15:11:01 <bjdmeest> ... please take a look at this draft
15:11:11 <bjdmeest> ... we could add github issues as we need to
15:11:16 <bjdmeest> ivan: two things:
15:11:29 <bjdmeest> ... 90% of the text was cut'n paste
15:11:42 <bjdmeest> ... one good check would be to check I didn't forget anything
15:11:51 <bjdmeest> ... so to check whether the text remains consistent
15:11:57 <bjdmeest> ... someone else should do that
15:12:23 <bjdmeest> ... second: I came up with a simple way of putting things in a fragment, differently than the previous proposal
15:12:55 <bjdmeest> ... the last few days, I made a small javascript lib to parse the fragment url into a JSON object
15:13:07 <TimCole> q?
15:13:15 <bjdmeest> ... also, there are 2 new issues on the model
15:13:40 <bjdmeest> TimCole: because the tight coupling between model and this note, we need to make sure everything remains consistent
15:13:47 <bjdmeest> ivan: that's my job :)
15:13:49 <TimCole> Topic: Minutes
15:14:17 <bjdmeest> shepazu: The next 3 months I will focus on testing, together with ShaneM
15:14:23 <bjdmeest> ... to get concrete work done on the testing
15:14:32 <bjdmeest> TimCole: other volunteers will be welcome
15:14:43 <bjdmeest> ... occasional updates from you guys are welcome
15:14:47 <bjdmeest> shepazu: of course
15:15:02 <bjdmeest> ... at this point, every week, we should have a testing update, during this telcon
15:15:10 <fjh> fjh has joined #annotation
15:15:14 <Tbdinesh> We will be pitching in too.
15:15:25 <bjdmeest> ShaneM: What's the target timeframe for CR?
15:15:51 <bjdmeest> ivan: we will have a F2F in Berlin in mid may
15:15:58 <bjdmeest> ... after that meeting, we should go to CR
15:16:02 <bjdmeest> ... issues will come up
15:16:11 <bjdmeest> ... but we virtually published a last call
15:16:14 <bjdmeest> ... that's the idea
15:16:19 <TimCole> https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Meetings/F2F_Berlin_2016
15:16:22 <bjdmeest> ... the charter ends the end of september
15:16:41 <bjdmeest> ... we will not make a recommendation by then, but we can report that we can to PR
15:16:54 <bjdmeest> ... so that we can extend the charter to go through PR and rec
15:16:57 <ShaneM> remember that charter extensions require AC review now
15:17:18 <bjdmeest> ... so we would like to start CR beginning of June, and our of CR at the beginning of September
15:17:35 <bjdmeest> ... W3M can - I think - extend the charter without changes to finnish the rec
15:17:46 <bjdmeest> TimCole: Hopefully we can get an extensions
15:17:52 <TimCole> PROPOSED RESOULTION: Minutes of the previous call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/03/25-annotation-minutes.html
15:17:55 <bjdmeest> s/extensions/extension/
15:18:07 <fjh> Present+ Frederick_Hirsch
15:18:14 <fjh> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:18:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/04/01-annotation-minutes.html fjh
15:18:20 <bjdmeest> TimCole: any comments on the previous minutes?
15:18:28 <azaroth> +1
15:18:36 <bjdmeest> RESOULTION: Minutes of the previous call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/03/25-annotation-minutes.html
15:18:48 <mete_pinar> mete_pinar has joined #annotation
15:18:49 <fjh> Regrets- Frederick_Hirsch
15:19:04 <ivan> RESOLUTION: Minutes of the previous call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/03/25-annotation-minutes.html
15:19:12 <TimCole> Topic: Meeting around time of Topic
15:19:26 <TimCole> Topic: Meeting Around the time of TPAC
15:19:59 <bjdmeest> TimCole: we had a F2F at TPAC, but for the next TPAC in September, it's not clear we need a full F2F
15:20:20 <bjdmeest> ... as we have Berlin F2F, and would go to PR and CR by September
15:20:30 <shepazu> q+
15:20:48 <TimCole> ack shepazu
15:20:49 <bjdmeest> ... proposal would be to have a full F2F, a virtual F2F of a couple of hours, or not a F2F at all
15:21:12 <bjdmeest> shepazu: if we don't have a F2F at TPAC, we shouldn't have a virtual F2F either
15:21:15 <fjh> +1 to doug re avoiding TPAC conflicts with virtual meeting
15:21:31 <bjdmeest> ... it's not viable wrt people traveling to and from TPAC
15:21:55 <bjdmeest> ... I think it's viable to have a F2F at TPAC, for communication with other WGs and CGs
15:22:05 <bjdmeest> TimCole: How quickly do we have to decide?
15:22:22 <uskudarli_> uskudarli_ has joined #annotation
15:22:24 <bjdmeest> shepazu: It's better to say yes and possibly cancel instead of the other way around
15:22:41 <bjdmeest> ivan: making a final decision within max a month would be a good idea
15:22:55 <bjdmeest> ... we have to say something by +- 15th of April
15:23:01 <bjdmeest> ... registration will be closed by then
15:23:07 <bjdmeest> azaroth: 2 things to change our minds:
15:23:19 <bjdmeest> ... one is the F2F in berlin in half of May
15:23:23 <bjdmeest> ... is that too late?
15:23:33 <bjdmeest> shepazu: no, seems the natural tipping point
15:23:45 <TimCole> q?
15:23:59 <TimCole> q+
15:24:08 <bjdmeest> azaroth: given the time frame moving towards CR, I'm not convinced to meet at TPAC, if we do need to meet, something has gone wrong
15:24:21 <TimCole> ack Ti
15:24:37 <bjdmeest> ... my preference is to keep it open until May, with the expectation that we won't meet, except if something comes up
15:25:09 <ivan> q+
15:25:26 <bjdmeest> TimCole: I see value in F2F, partly to talk with other WGs about implementations etc.
15:25:35 <TimCole> ack iv
15:25:37 <bjdmeest> ... so wait until May seems good
15:25:48 <bjdmeest> ivan: one of the chairs needs to register
15:26:05 <bjdmeest> ... please try to register so that the meeting would be on Thursday and Friday
15:26:21 <bjdmeest> ... let's do that now, and decide on the F2F in Berlin
15:26:30 <bjdmeest> TimCole: any comments?
15:26:31 <TimCole> Proposed RESOLUTION: We will submit request to meet at TPAC, and decide if we want to back out at F2F in Berlin
15:27:12 <azaroth> +1
15:27:13 <bjdmeest> azaroth: I'm happy to register and filling the forms
15:27:15 <TimCole> +1
15:27:19 <bjdmeest> +1
15:27:24 <ivan> 0
15:27:33 <ShaneM> +0\
15:27:36 <Kyrce> +1
15:27:37 <bigbluehat> +0
15:27:43 <shepazu> +1
15:27:47 <takeshi> +1
15:28:10 <bjdmeest> shepazu: there may be stuff in digital publishing that may be happening at that time
15:28:16 <azaroth> q+
15:28:20 <azaroth> q-
15:28:21 <bjdmeest> ... so that might be useful to talk with them
15:28:29 <Tbdinesh_> Tbdinesh_ has joined #Annotation
15:28:47 <bjdmeest> RESOLUTION: We will submit request to meet at TPAC, and decide if we want to back out at F2F in Berlin
15:29:01 <TimCole> Topic: F2F topics
15:29:05 <bjdmeest> TimCole: we have 6 weeks until Berlin
15:29:28 <bjdmeest> ... we probably need to start thinking about topics and agenda
15:29:49 <ivan> q+
15:29:54 <TimCole> ack iv
15:30:20 <bjdmeest> ivan: if we keep to our current schema, then, it's difficult to plan in advance, because the goal is to close all technical issues
15:30:42 <bjdmeest> ... difficult to plan now, if we get a load of issues from, e.g., i18n, we have to take that into account
15:31:07 <bjdmeest> ... also, we need to have our CR criteria and testing etc. finalized, to have a credible plan to go into CR
15:31:25 <bjdmeest> ... for me, it's difficult to plan now
15:31:39 <bjdmeest> ... maybe we won't have any open issues, and spend 1,5 day on testing
15:31:46 <bjdmeest> ... everything else has a lower priority
15:31:47 <ShaneM> If the agenda is testing focused, and assuming I get my board's approval, then I could probably attend the meeting in Berlin
15:31:58 <bjdmeest> TimCole: do we need to check our charter?
15:32:16 <bjdmeest> ivan: yes, when we go to CR, but that's the kind of thing we can do offline as well, we don't need the F2F for this
15:32:34 <bjdmeest> ... getting the issues closed and CR verified are top priorities, everything else comes after that
15:33:09 <bjdmeest> ... to come up with the report of what we accomplished etc., is chair work, and can be done offline
15:33:14 <TimCole> https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Meetings/F2F_Berlin_2016
15:33:32 <bjdmeest> TimCole: let's not forget that, and plan some minutes for that
15:34:01 <bjdmeest> ... also, please register anyone who will come
15:34:40 <bjdmeest> ... The timeline for notes is not with a deadline, so we can postpone those (e.g., about HTML serialization)
15:34:45 <TimCole> Topic: Conformance
15:34:59 <TimCole>  https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/165
15:35:12 <bjdmeest> TimCole: issue about conformance, there is a proposal
15:36:03 <ivan> q+
15:36:09 <TimCole> q?
15:36:13 <TimCole> ack iv
15:36:17 <tantek> tantek has joined #annotation
15:36:20 <bjdmeest> ... this also was related to 'levels' of conformance, but we rejected that
15:36:37 <bjdmeest> ivan: there should be a way for an implementation to say that it does not deal with a specific media type
15:36:52 <bjdmeest> ... so selection on those media types cannot be done by those implementations
15:37:01 <azaroth> q+
15:37:39 <bjdmeest> ... It can be as 'simple' as having a table of media types with their selectors
15:38:09 <bjdmeest> ... and an extra table per implementation to show which media types it can be handle
15:38:11 <ShaneM> That makes sense to me
15:38:13 <shepazu> q+
15:38:15 <TimCole> ack aza
15:38:23 <bjdmeest> ... it's only the selector that created problems, not the rest of the model
15:38:35 <bjdmeest> ... the model must me implemented fully by every implementation
15:38:48 <bjdmeest> azaroth: one thing I thought about is about the fragment selector
15:39:09 <bjdmeest> ... the table of fragment selectors is not a normative requirement, bu maybe we should make it a bit more normative somehow
15:39:21 <TimCole> ack shep
15:39:37 <bjdmeest> ... so a client that can work with image/* Must implement the XXX-syntax
15:39:47 <azaroth> s/XXX/media fragment/
15:40:26 <TimCole> q+
15:40:29 <bjdmeest> shepazu: we could say that a Text class needs to do these selectors
15:40:34 <bjdmeest> ... and these are not exclusive
15:40:42 <azaroth> +1 to shepazu
15:40:55 <bjdmeest> ... it's just acknowledging the extension model
15:40:55 <TimCole> ack ti
15:41:20 <bjdmeest> TimCole: first: do we have a template of an existing rec
15:42:12 <bjdmeest> ... second: we talked about clients that create annotations, annotation repository, annotation consumers, annotation servers, agents that republish annotations
15:42:16 <shepazu> q+
15:42:27 <bjdmeest> ... it seems to me that will also be a factor in how conformance is described
15:42:31 <TimCole> ack shep
15:42:44 <bjdmeest> shepazu: I agree, an ecosystem should consider all these things
15:42:53 <takeshi> q+
15:42:55 <bjdmeest> ... but I don't want us to get too ambitious with the testing
15:42:55 <ivan> q+
15:43:08 <bjdmeest> ... I want to scope it to specifics that are called out in the existing specs
15:43:29 <bjdmeest> ... e.g., we want to test the protocol (cfr. LDP)
15:43:38 <bjdmeest> ... we could certain elements of the data model
15:43:44 <bjdmeest> ... we could test the structure
15:44:02 <bjdmeest> ... that the right objects have the properties of the right type, etc.
15:44:14 <bjdmeest> ... we could also test to make sure selectors are interoperable
15:44:23 <bjdmeest> ... I propose to leave that last one out of scope
15:44:45 <TimCole> ack take
15:44:49 <bjdmeest> ... because we don't explicitly talk that any given UA will return exactly the same output for any selection
15:45:02 <azaroth> q+ to discuss priorities, protocol
15:45:11 <bjdmeest> takeshi: about fragments selector conformance testing
15:45:14 <bjdmeest> ... about plain text
15:45:34 <bjdmeest> ... e.g., text would be encoded in an encoding system
15:45:48 <bjdmeest> ... we haven't specified which encodings should be used
15:45:55 <bjdmeest> ... I think it's important for conformance testing
15:45:57 <TimCole> ack iv
15:46:02 <ShaneM> I dont think that encoding is a real problem.   It is part of the headers (accept-encoding)
15:46:34 <bjdmeest> ivan: encodings is a very specific issue to be taken into account for text selector
15:46:50 <bjdmeest> ... question is about specification about specific selector
15:46:57 <bjdmeest> ... a specific issue is important
15:46:59 <azaroth> +1 to raising encoding issue, thanks Takeshi!
15:47:15 <bjdmeest> ... now, about the categories of the implementations:
15:47:24 <bjdmeest> ... let's not over-formalize ourselves
15:47:42 <bjdmeest> ... we had in the past implementations that implemented certain parts, but not the other parts
15:47:46 <bjdmeest> ... and that's fine
15:47:57 <bjdmeest> ... it's not up to us to decide on that
15:48:17 <bjdmeest> ... what we really have to be careful about, is that each feature needs to be implemented by 2 different implementations
15:48:37 <bjdmeest> ... having all these very formal categories, would drive us to a very formal way of conformance testing
15:48:45 <bjdmeest> ... that may become very complicated
15:48:54 <bjdmeest> TimCole: there has to be some recognition
15:49:27 <bjdmeest> ivan: the issue about media types may be - where we have to stop - is to have a very clear description in the text
15:49:33 <shepazu> +1
15:49:40 <bjdmeest> ... These are the selectors that are relevant to these media types
15:50:02 <bjdmeest> ... to make clear that text/* media types are handled by selector A and B, and are thus relevant to me
15:50:19 <TimCole> ack aza
15:50:19 <Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to discuss priorities, protocol
15:50:26 <bjdmeest> ... that as and addendum will guide us to have test suites on all those categories
15:50:55 <shepazu> q+
15:50:58 <bjdmeest> azaroth: so, we start with syntactic testing, conformance with JSON, correct properties, etc. (cfr JSON schema)
15:51:06 <bjdmeest> ... seems low-hanging fruit
15:51:27 <bjdmeest> ... less than a day of work
15:51:37 <bjdmeest> ... then, we can start with protocol
15:51:43 <bjdmeest> ... LDP had some good patterns
15:52:07 <fjh> fjh has joined #annotation
15:52:15 <bjdmeest> ... also, sending all possible annotation forms to a server, and a server that sends all possible annotations to a client
15:52:24 <TimCole> ack shep
15:52:25 <bjdmeest> ... at that point, we can see what else we can do
15:52:35 <azaroth> q?
15:52:50 <bjdmeest> shepazu: we agree about semantic vs syntactic testing
15:53:01 <bjdmeest> ... I like the framing
15:53:15 <bjdmeest> ... what about the OA CG testing?
15:53:37 <bjdmeest> azaroth: in the IDPF work, we created a JSON schema for the CG open annotation model
15:53:55 <azaroth> http://www.idpf.org/epub/oa/#h.b2nk2onxjepf
15:53:57 <bjdmeest> ... at the bottom of the spec, there is the JSON schema
15:54:36 <bjdmeest> ivan: IDPF people will want to take the new model, so that's important
15:55:01 <bjdmeest> shepazu: good that we can start from the schema, thanks rob!
15:55:10 <ivan> http://www.idpf.org/epub/oa/schema/oa-epub-schema.json : the real schema
15:55:11 <bjdmeest> azaroth: It's on my list
15:55:21 <bjdmeest> ... by the end of next week, I hope to have done that
15:55:30 <ShaneM> We have some JSON-LD testing code sitting around that needs polishing, but hoping it will work well for syntactic testing in the web platform test framework.
15:55:36 <bjdmeest> TimCole: that's a good consensus about an approach for the conformance
15:55:48 <bjdmeest> ... it would be nice to have some more examples
15:56:06 <azaroth> Regrets for next week, yes
15:56:20 <bjdmeest> ... for next Friday, both Rob and Ivan aren't here
15:56:42 <bjdmeest> ... I have on the list: HTML serialization (which would be a note)
15:56:58 <shepazu> q+
15:57:02 <bjdmeest> ... without some guidance, there won't be much uptake
15:57:06 <TimCole> ack shep
15:57:12 <bjdmeest> shepazu: I'm interested, I'll be on the call next week
15:57:20 <bjdmeest> ... I think we can also talk about testing
15:57:33 <azaroth> Sorry, need to disappear. Bye all!
15:57:36 <bjdmeest> TimCole: ok, so the call of next week will be about testing and HTML
15:57:45 <bjdmeest> ... other ideas of examples are welcome
15:57:55 <bjdmeest> s/of/or/
15:58:03 <bjdmeest> TimCole: [adjourn]
15:58:05 <bigbluehat> +1
15:58:10 <bigbluehat> bye all!
15:58:43 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
15:58:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/04/01-annotation-minutes.html ivan
15:58:52 <ivan> trackbot, end telcon
15:58:52 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:58:52 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Rob_Sanderson, ShaneM, Suzan_Uskudarli, Tim_Cole, TB_Dinesh, Ben_De_Meester, Ivan, Kyrce_Swenson, Takeshi_Kanai, shepazu, Benjamin_Young,
15:58:55 <Zakim> ... Frederick_Hirsch
15:59:00 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:59:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/04/01-annotation-minutes.html trackbot
15:59:01 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:59:01 <RRSAgent> I see no action items