14:50:38 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #annotation
14:50:38 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-annotation-irc
14:50:40 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:50:40 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #annotation
14:50:42 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 2666
14:50:42 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
14:50:43 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
14:50:43 <trackbot> Date: 29 April 2016
14:50:53 <ivan> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/061301d1a15f$abff37d0$03fda770$@illinois.edu
14:51:06 <azaroth> azaroth has joined #annotation
14:51:07 <ivan> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2016Apr/0104.html
14:51:19 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: agenda call 2016-04-29: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2016Apr/0104.html
14:51:30 <ivan> chair: Tim
14:51:50 <azaroth> Present+ Rob_Sanderson
14:52:03 <azaroth> Chair: Tim_Cole, Rob_Sanderson
14:55:40 <TimCole> TimCole has joined #annotation
14:58:28 <TimCole> Present+ Tim_Cole
14:58:56 <fjh> fjh has joined #annotation
14:59:31 <tbdinesh> tbdinesh has joined #annotation
15:00:02 <ivan> present+ Ivan
15:00:24 <fjh> Present+ Frederick_Hirsch
15:01:04 <ShaneM> present+
15:01:05 <shepazu> present+ shepazu
15:01:12 <ShaneM> zakim, who is here?
15:01:12 <Zakim> Present: Rob_Sanderson, Tim_Cole, Ivan, Frederick_Hirsch, ShaneM, shepazu
15:01:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see tbdinesh, fjh, TimCole, azaroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, mete_pinar, ivan, shepazu, csarven, ShaneM, oshepherd, trackbot, stain, aaronpk, rhiaro, ben_thatmustbeme,
15:01:14 <Zakim> ... bigbluehat, nickstenn, timeless, Loqi, dwhly, tessierashpool_
15:01:15 <fjh> ScribeNick: fjh
15:01:34 <tbdinesh> Present+ TB_Dinesh
15:01:37 <fjh> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:01:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-annotation-minutes.html fjh
15:02:14 <dwhly> Present+ Dan_Whaley
15:02:44 <fjh> Topic: Scribe Selection, Agenda Review, Announcements
15:03:13 <bjdmeest> bjdmeest has joined #annotation
15:04:17 <fjh> azaroth: first 30 min for agenda followed by f2f and issue for 2nd half
15:04:41 <fjh> … had call with PING yesterday, will recap
15:04:57 <fjh> … no changes to agenda noted
15:05:18 <bjdmeest> Present+ Ben_De_Meester
15:05:23 <fjh> … no announcements, lets discuss iAnnotate under F2F topic
15:05:35 <azaroth> TOPIC: Minutes approval
15:05:45 <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Minutes of the previous call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/04/22-annotation-minutes.html
15:05:55 <ivan> +1
15:05:58 <fjh> RESOLUTION: Minutes of the previous call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/04/22-annotation-minutes.html
15:06:11 <azaroth> TOPIC: Testing
15:06:50 <fjh> azaroth: need to clarify time frames and tasks to be done
15:06:52 <shepazu> q+
15:06:56 <fjh> … and who can help
15:07:00 <ShaneM> q+
15:07:11 <ShaneM> zakim, who is here?
15:07:11 <Zakim> Present: Rob_Sanderson, Tim_Cole, Ivan, Frederick_Hirsch, ShaneM, shepazu, TB_Dinesh, Dan_Whaley, Ben_De_Meester
15:07:13 <Zakim> On IRC I see bjdmeest, tbdinesh, fjh, TimCole, azaroth, Zakim, RRSAgent, mete_pinar, ivan, shepazu, csarven, ShaneM, oshepherd, trackbot, stain, aaronpk, rhiaro, ben_thatmustbeme,
15:07:13 <Zakim> ... bigbluehat, nickstenn, timeless, Loqi, dwhly, tessierashpool_
15:07:33 <fjh> … how to break vocabulary into smaller tests, need proposal and recipie for implementers to participate and contribute new tests
15:07:52 <fjh> s/recipie/recipe/
15:08:17 <azaroth> q?
15:08:18 <fjh> … also who will test implementations when working with other groups
15:08:21 <shepazu> q- later
15:08:21 <azaroth> ack shepazu
15:08:25 <azaroth> ack shepazu
15:08:49 <PaoloCiccarese> PaoloCiccarese has joined #annotation
15:08:57 <azaroth> ack ShaneM
15:09:23 <fjh> ShaneM: purpose of w3c testing is to verify for each feature there are at least 2 implementations that support it
15:09:31 <fjh> actually it is up to group to set the bar
15:09:50 <fjh> ShaneM: not to certify implementations
15:10:05 <ivan> +1 to ShaneM
15:10:27 <fjh> fjh: +1 to ShaneM re not certifying
15:10:40 <fjh> shepazu: need to run tests on real implementations
15:11:07 <ivan> q+
15:11:08 <azaroth> q+ to ask about /other/ means?
15:11:13 <bigbluehat> in this case don't we test the output of the implementations? their JSON(-LD) serializations of whatever they're storing?
15:11:29 <PaoloCiccarese> Present+ Paolo_Ciccarese
15:11:59 <fjh> ShaneM: would like to test output of implementations but also need to test JSON schema, data model representation
15:12:20 <azaroth> +1 to "representation of the data model" :) that's a nice way to frame it (IMO)
15:12:20 <fjh> … not to make sure correct
15:12:53 <fjh> ShaneM: test JSON schema against canned input
15:12:57 <PaoloCiccarese> q+
15:12:59 <fjh> … 2 kinds of testing
15:13:14 <ivan> q-
15:13:28 <azaroth> q?
15:13:34 <fjh> ShaneM: testing against implementations - need to find them, need to get JSON schema completed
15:13:37 <shepazu> q+
15:13:45 <azaroth> ack azaroth
15:13:45 <Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to ask about /other/ means?
15:15:09 <fjh> azaroth: what if we create tool for testing but wouldn’t suffice to meet w3c requirements
15:15:29 <fjh> shepazu: could create annotation bot, e.g. one that finds typos and annotates them
15:15:41 <azaroth> ack PaoloCiccarese
15:15:51 <ivan> q+
15:16:07 <bigbluehat> PaoloCiccarese: yes. you can write it to allow extra properties
15:16:16 <fjh> PaoloCiccarese: how to we test JSON schema if  we have additional properties
15:16:29 <bigbluehat> it does that by default, in fact
15:16:46 <fjh> shepazu: can we test the JSON schema and ignore additional material
15:16:48 <TimCole> So, do we need samples of resources that are meant to be annotated a particular way, and then see if implementations create json-ld that describes the annotation?
15:16:53 <fjh> azaroth: answer is ye
15:16:56 <fjh> s/ye/yes
15:17:57 <fjh> ShaneM: JSON does not know about prefixes, so need to normalize input
15:18:24 <fjh> bigbluehat: using keynames in anything in profile, more constrained than JSON-LD, require context and ranges for values
15:18:39 <fjh> … so JSON schema validation should be ok
15:19:07 <fjh> azaroth: agree
15:19:10 <bigbluehat> https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#index-of-json-keys
15:19:31 <fjh> azaroth: if property constraints to false then anything not specified is ok
15:20:27 <bigbluehat> also: https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#model "MUST have 1 or more @context and  http://www.w3.org/ns/anno.jsonld MUST be one of them. If there is only one value, then it MUST be provided as a string."
15:20:40 <fjh> PaoloCiccarese: in general dealing with JSON-LD in JSON environments prefix is handled inconsistently , expanded or not, so what are we going to do
15:21:01 <fjh> bigbluehat: can use vocabulary how you see fit, for annotation model then have to use key names
15:21:18 <azaroth> q?
15:21:36 <ivan> ack shepazu
15:21:45 <PaoloCiccarese> q+
15:21:46 <fjh> shepazu: gkellog mentioned framing for normalization
15:21:53 <ShaneM> unfortunately framing is not mature enough for us to reply upon at this time
15:21:57 <azaroth> json schema validation with additionalProperties of false: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00#page-13
15:22:06 <ShaneM> at least that is my position
15:22:31 <fjh> shepazu: we might want to get him on a call
15:22:38 <azaroth> And the OA json-schema for IDPF:  http://www.idpf.org/epub/oa/#h.b2nk2onxjepf
15:22:39 <fjh> bigbluehat: doing AAA and BBB
15:22:46 <shepazu> q+
15:23:39 <uskudarli> uskudarli has joined #annotation
15:23:56 <fjh> bigbluehat: validate against vocabulary, if web annotation also validate against JSON schema
15:24:01 <fjh> s/doing AAA and BBB//
15:24:03 <azaroth> q?
15:24:18 <azaroth> ack ivan
15:24:37 <fjh> ShaneM: let’s get something working first, if too constraining reduce the constraints
15:25:27 <fjh> shepazu: need to make sure this works within W3C testing framework, however many if not most implementations cannot use web framework
15:25:35 <fjh> … so will need manual validation
15:25:55 <tbdinesh> q+ process for suggesting test cases and validating tests do what they say
15:26:00 <fjh> … should focus on that first
15:26:04 <PaoloCiccarese> FYI: In Annotopia I use Framing and then I do custom validation, which I assume can be swapped with JSON Schema pretty easily as long as the framing produces an agreed upon output
15:26:14 <fjh> … start with a validator
15:26:32 <fjh> ShaneM: disagree, doing assertion based tests
15:27:08 <fjh> shepazu: mean doing tests manually, possibly using a web form to enter inputs and get results
15:27:24 <fjh> ShaneM: web test environment supports that directly, so don’t need to reimplement
15:27:31 <fjh> shepazu: didn’t realize that, ok
15:27:37 <azaroth> q?
15:27:47 <fjh> … lets talk offline to be clear
15:27:48 <azaroth> q- process
15:27:54 <shepazu> q-
15:28:11 <azaroth> q+ re framing
15:28:12 <tbdinesh> q+ on process for suggesting test cases and validating tests do what they say
15:28:23 <fjh> ivan: JSON framing not implemented widely so not sure implementions can use, algorithm defined, but not a REC
15:28:45 <fjh> … JSON schema should not be normative
15:29:07 <ShaneM> +1 to not making it normative.
15:29:08 <fjh> … if normative, then need to make sure absolutely consistent with RDF ??
15:29:21 <bigbluehat> q+
15:29:35 <azaroth> +1 to Ivan
15:29:39 <fjh> … if inconsistency between schema and vocabulary, vocabulary wins
15:29:56 <fjh> s;??;U;
15:30:14 <fjh> … need someone to work with on schema
15:30:42 <azaroth> ack PaoloCiccarese
15:31:07 <ivan> s/RDF U/RDF Vocabulary/
15:31:07 <fjh> PaoloCiccarese: framing is essential if you do RDF, no way around it
15:31:47 <fjh> … but starting point is schema validation, can work on first step of pipeline, can create some RDF test case
15:31:57 <fjh> … happy to be involved
15:32:04 <azaroth> ack azaroth
15:32:04 <Zakim> azaroth, you wanted to discuss framing
15:32:05 <bigbluehat> 2 things you should be able to check: "my RDF uses the Annotation Vocabulary correctly" and "my output JSON format is valid Web Annotation Data Model JSON Serialization"
15:32:30 <bigbluehat> PaoloCiccarese: you may not need to do both (afaik) ^^
15:32:34 <fjh> azaroth: framing proposal is not that every implementation has to do it, but that test generator has option to use it
15:32:43 <fjh> ivan: ok with that, Gregg can do it
15:32:54 <fjh> azaroth: i can work on JSON schema side
15:32:55 <azaroth> q?
15:32:57 <azaroth> ack tbdinesh
15:32:57 <Zakim> tbdinesh, you wanted to comment on process for suggesting test cases and validating tests do what they say
15:33:13 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/bigbluehat/testing-json-ld <-- this thing
15:33:18 <fjh> tbdinesh: can make more test cases, what is process for doing this
15:33:25 <fjh> … what if I want to test multiple targets
15:33:28 <bigbluehat> these https://github.com/BigBlueHat/testing-json-ld/tree/master/web-annotation/tests
15:33:37 <bigbluehat> happy to move these into the w3c space on GH
15:33:38 <fjh> … need wiki for tests, so we can look at them, know what they are doing
15:33:42 <fjh> ivan: agree
15:33:48 <bigbluehat> PRs welcome ^_^
15:33:54 <fjh> tbdinesh: need list of needed tests
15:33:54 <azaroth> ack bigbluehat
15:34:52 <fjh> bigbluehat: instead of one big JSON schema, use one per MUST, using defaults in JSON schema, see link above
15:35:12 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/BigBlueHat/testing-json-ld/blob/master/web-annotation/tests/verify-target-present.json
15:35:16 <fjh> … need to decide some types, string etc
15:35:24 <fjh> … deal with arrays and streams appropriately
15:35:37 <fjh> … different approach than giant schema
15:35:48 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/BigBlueHat/testing-json-ld#screenshot
15:35:48 <azaroth> In my experience, many small tests is better
15:36:09 <azaroth> as the mega schema will stop as soon as it hits the first error
15:36:18 <azaroth> Also there's no distinction between error and warning
15:36:21 <azaroth> (MUST vs SHOULD)
15:36:29 <azaroth> so you stop after the first warning even
15:36:37 <tbdinesh> for example, for motivation renarration i need to define new motivation and then its input validation for those uses
15:36:40 <fjh> bigbluehat: uses quads, relies on human involvement, but a starting point
15:36:53 <ShaneM> azaroth: yes.  that's how the WPT works
15:36:58 <ShaneM> atomic tests are key
15:37:05 <azaroth> TOPIC: Agenda for F2F
15:37:07 <azaroth> https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Meetings/F2F_Berlin_2016
15:37:09 <fjh> azaroth: contintue this on next call
15:37:22 <fjh> s/contintue/continue/
15:37:30 <fjh> azaroth: comments on agenda, proposals?
15:37:38 <ivan> q+
15:37:44 <TimCole> q+
15:37:55 <fjh> … how many observers do we have?
15:38:01 <azaroth> ack ivan
15:38:38 <fjh> ivan: suggest we change agenda, focus on topics related to going to CR
15:38:45 <fjh> … if time, include others
15:39:07 <fjh> … remove client-side APIs, search, robust anchoring etc
15:39:38 <fjh> … need to close all issues to go to CR, be clear on testing strategy, before going to CR
15:39:42 <azaroth> +1
15:39:44 <azaroth> q?
15:39:44 <fjh> … this is first priority
15:39:46 <azaroth> ack TimCole
15:40:29 <fjh> TimCole: agree with Ivan, however suggest meeting in 3rds, 1st afternoon on testing, morning on issues, put otther items we want to do before charter expires as last third
15:40:29 <ivan> q+
15:40:45 <fjh> … if we don’t have time then we can slip them to later calls
15:40:53 <fjh> +1 to TimCole
15:41:31 <azaroth> ack ivan
15:41:36 <fjh> … we should break down testing to sub-topics, schema, framing, implementations etc
15:41:58 <azaroth> and +1 from me too
15:42:03 <fjh> +1 to ivan’s sugestion to prioritize
15:42:21 <fjh> s/sugestion/suggestion/
15:42:36 <fjh> azaroth: will revise agenda, we can discuss next wweek
15:42:43 <fjh> s/wweek/week/
15:43:26 <TimCole> q+
15:43:41 <fjh> dwhly: not much new to report on iAnnotate, planning continues, please attend and remember to register
15:43:49 <azaroth> Can you drop a link to the registration page?
15:44:02 <fjh> … lots of participants, about 120, increasing daily, max will be 150
15:44:04 <tbdinesh> iannotate.org
15:44:28 <fjh> … remember Sat 1 day developers meeting, sign up for that separately
15:45:04 <fjh> … working on panel on harrassment and page owner consent over annotation, should be interesting
15:45:11 <fjh> … Genius will be there
15:46:08 <shepazu> +1
15:46:24 <fjh> … +1 to Ivan, however perhaps have some time in F2F to talk about consent, or on a call before, then input into panel discussion
15:46:46 <fjh> … at iAnnotate, not definitive statement, but suggestions or additional information
15:46:51 <azaroth> TOPIC: Issues
15:47:06 <TimCole> ack Ti
15:47:08 <fjh> issue-195
15:47:08 <trackbot> Sorry, but issue-195 does not exist.
15:47:37 <fjh> TimCole: dan do you have material to share
15:47:43 <azaroth> proposal is: https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/195#issuecomment-213490285
15:47:46 <fjh> dwhly: in progress
15:48:13 <fjh> TimCole: CR make take precedence over privacy work (?)
15:49:02 <shepazu> s/CR make take precedence over privacy work (?)/Privacy in CR documents takes precedence over future privacy work/
15:49:07 <fjh> TimCole: lets look at issue 195
15:49:49 <fjh> azaroth: selectors and sub-selectors, merged using refined by to allow state or selector, so now question can have both, proposal is yes
15:50:14 <TimCole> Proposed Recommendation: Accept proposal and close issue #195
15:50:26 <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Allow a State to be refined by a Selector.
15:50:28 <fjh> … had support for proposal from Ivan and Jacob, no concerns from anyone
15:50:35 <TimCole> +1
15:50:38 <ivan> +1
15:50:38 <azaroth> +1
15:50:42 <fjh> +1
15:50:42 <PaoloCiccarese> +1
15:50:50 <ShaneM> +0
15:50:51 <bigbluehat> +1
15:51:00 <fjh> RESOLUTION: Allow a State to be refined by a Selector.
15:51:02 <tbdinesh> +1
15:51:10 <ivan> rrsagent, pointer?
15:51:10 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-annotation-irc#T15-51-10
15:51:17 <TimCole> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/205
15:51:46 <fjh> TimCole: should we close
15:51:57 <azaroth> Agree it's incomplete
15:52:10 <fjh> ivan: document incomplete now, allow two selectors or states on top level, spec silent on meaning
15:52:40 <fjh> … refinement covers various use cases
15:53:07 <fjh> … two means conjuction
15:53:24 <fjh> s/conjuction/conjunction/
15:53:35 <fjh> … don’t really like this, could disallow
15:53:44 <fjh> … my preference
15:53:51 <fjh> TimCole: take to github
15:54:03 <fjh> ivan: we had disagreement so we need to decide
15:54:05 <TimCole> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/206
15:54:11 <fjh> TimCole: let’s take it next week
15:54:35 <fjh> ivan: text position selector is under specfied as noted in the issue
15:54:57 <fjh> … should we say anything in model about encoding
15:55:16 <ivan> q+
15:55:20 <fjh> azaroth: we don’t, agree spec is incomplete, as Takeshi noted as well
15:55:23 <TimCole> ack iv
15:55:46 <fjh> ivan: if we use HTML5 then encoding is defined
15:56:02 <ShaneM> technically it is part of the wrapper
15:56:45 <fjh> ivan: cannot have our own definition that conflicts with HTML5
15:56:53 <fjh> … wrapper
15:56:53 <azaroth> q+
15:57:04 <TimCole> ack aza
15:57:14 <fjh> azaroth: Takeshi made web page of various languages and frameworks
15:57:29 <fjh> … on how dealing with characters
15:58:16 <ivan> q+
15:58:27 <fjh> TimCole: Rob, Benjamin, Paolo willing to help with schema issue
15:58:33 <fjh> … anybody else?
15:58:34 <ShaneM> me me me
15:58:50 <shepazu> ShaneM
15:58:51 <shepazu> shepazu
15:59:07 <fjh> … ask that group to get something started
15:59:19 <TimCole> ack iv
15:59:49 <fjh> ivan: to speed up if others could look at 205, 191 and give opinion
16:00:16 <fjh> … please work on the list, before call, so we can resolve them. its been 3 weeks
16:00:26 <fjh> … these are technical?
16:00:47 <fjh> s/191/206, 191/
16:01:36 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:01:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-annotation-minutes.html ivan
16:01:50 <ivan> trackbot, end telcon
16:01:50 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:01:50 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Rob_Sanderson, Tim_Cole, Ivan, Frederick_Hirsch, ShaneM, shepazu, TB_Dinesh, Dan_Whaley, Ben_De_Meester, Paolo_Ciccarese
16:01:58 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:01:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/04/29-annotation-minutes.html trackbot
16:01:59 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:01:59 <RRSAgent> I see no action items