17:04:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
17:04:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/05/31-social-irc
17:04:25 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
17:04:25 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #social
17:04:27 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SOCL
17:04:27 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
17:04:28 <tantek> present+
17:04:28 <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
17:04:28 <trackbot> Date: 31 May 2016
17:04:30 <wilkie> present+
17:04:31 <dmitriz> dmitriz has joined #social
17:04:33 <rhiaro> present+
17:04:37 <dmitriz> present+
17:04:59 <ben_thatmustbeme> present+
17:05:21 <tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-31#Discussion_Items
17:05:25 <aaronpk> present+
17:05:37 <wilkie> I can scribe
17:05:43 <tantek> scribenick: wilkie
17:05:50 <ben_thatmustbeme> i can stay on a bit longer probably but i'll be in the car at that point
17:05:55 <eprodrom> uh
17:06:00 <wilkie> tantek: I don't hear eprodrom
17:06:06 <eprodrom> present+
17:06:37 <wilkie> tantek: one thing was ben_thatmustbeme asked for reordering the agenda to place jf2 first because he has to leave
17:06:42 <wilkie> eprodrom: are you chairing this meeting?
17:06:43 <tantek> chair: eprodrom
17:06:47 <wilkie> tantek: I was until you showed up
17:07:06 <wilkie> eprodrom: the idea is to have ben_thatmustbeme tell us what he proposes
17:07:19 <wilkie> ben_thatmustbeme: yes, I propose to have jf2 move to a working draft this week
17:07:21 <tantek> http://dissolve.github.io/jf2/
17:07:27 <wilkie> ben_thatmustbeme: I asked for people to have a look at it for this week
17:07:38 <tantek> this is a FPWD (first public working draft) AFAIK
17:07:42 <cwebber2> present+
17:07:42 <wilkie> eprodrom: just quickly, has everybody read the current editor's draft?
17:07:46 <KevinMarks> I have
17:07:49 <sandro> (haven't read this draft)
17:07:51 <ben_thatmustbeme> tantek, yes it would be
17:07:52 <tantek> I have
17:08:09 <wilkie> eprodrom: kevin, you are co-editor, so I would hope you've read it hah
17:08:17 <wilkie> tantek: has it been stable for a while or has there been changes?
17:08:32 <aaronpk> q+
17:08:38 <wilkie> ben_thatmustbeme: there have been minor changes. there is a note in the document to say it is meant as a note. no substantial changes.
17:08:42 <wilkie> eprodrom: aaronpk?
17:08:53 <wilkie> aaronpk: I remember that the changes made have been made based on implementations using it
17:08:53 <sandro> why not rec track?
17:09:09 <tantek> because we accepted it in December as Note-track
17:09:13 <wilkie> eprodrom: I haven't read the document yet. have you aaronpk?
17:09:20 <wilkie> aaronpk: yeah, skimmed it. and re-reading it.
17:09:28 <wilkie> eprodrom: so we are making this a note ben_thatmustbeme?
17:09:34 <wilkie> ben_thatmustbeme: yeah we agreed about this at the last f2f
17:09:41 <wilkie> sandro: anybody remember the reasoning for that?
17:09:53 <bengo> bengo has joined #social
17:09:59 <wilkie> ben_thatmustbeme: partly time constraints, and so it doesn't seem as a competitor for as2
17:10:11 <wilkie> sandro: that makes sense
17:10:24 <wilkie> sandro: the reason I ask is it is easier to start on the rec track than to switch later
17:10:25 <bengo> present+
17:10:28 <eprodrom> PROPOSED: publish current Editor's Draft of JF2 as First Public Working Draft in Note track
17:10:31 <wilkie> sandro: not wanting to mislead makes sense
17:10:31 <tantek> +1
17:10:51 <KevinMarks> +1
17:10:52 <wilkie> eprodrom: I put up a proposal to add this working draft to the note track. does that make sense, ben_thatmustbeme?
17:10:55 <wilkie> ben_thatmustbeme: yeah
17:11:05 <aaronpk> +1
17:11:05 <eprodrom> q?
17:11:08 <wilkie> eprodrom: unless there is any other discussion before we engage with this, please give your votes
17:11:09 <aaronpk> q-
17:11:11 <sandro> +1
17:11:13 <wilkie> +1
17:11:16 <eprodrom> +1
17:11:16 <bengo> +1
17:11:19 <rhiaro> +0
17:11:44 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1 (obviously since i proposed it)
17:11:49 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: publish current Editor's Draft of JF2 as First Public Working Draft in Note track
17:11:54 <wilkie> eprodrom: unless we have anyone else who feels strongly about this... going once, going twice...
17:12:03 <sandro> q+ name?
17:12:07 <wilkie> eprodrom: going to mark this resolved [reads resolution]
17:12:21 <wilkie> eprodrom: so I got 12 minutes after the hour. hopefully you can make it to your closing, ben_thatmustbeme
17:12:24 <wilkie> eprodrom: thanks
17:12:39 <wilkie> sandro: before publishing we need to know what the name is going to be
17:12:44 <eprodrom> q- name?
17:12:47 <wilkie> sandro: we can do that later but it's easier to do it now
17:12:55 <wilkie> tantek: does a short name work?
17:12:57 <wilkie> sandro: yeah
17:12:58 <sandro> www.w3.org/TR/jf2
17:13:02 <wilkie> tantek: does jf2 work as is?
17:13:05 <wilkie> sandro: yeah
17:13:19 <wilkie> tantek: so should we say if anybody wants to propose alternatives, they can do so
17:13:39 <wilkie> sandro: this is kind of an odd name. it usually stands for something
17:13:54 <sandro> json-microformats2 ?
17:13:55 <wilkie> eprodrom: it is jf2 because it is mf2 with json right?
17:13:59 <tantek> "unify various simplified versions of the Microformats-2 representative JSON format"
17:14:18 <wilkie> sandro: I was thinking "json microformats 2"
17:14:30 <wilkie> sandro: that is, if I had never heard of jf2 before
17:14:45 <wilkie> eprodrom: once it has a URI it is kind of engraved in stone right?
17:14:45 <tantek> ok with that too
17:14:47 <wilkie> sandro: yeah, kind of
17:15:04 <wilkie> sandro: not impossible to change later, you can forward the URL
17:15:32 <wilkie> KevinMarks: this isn't too bad. we had some other acronyms that were much more adventurous.
17:15:39 <tantek> sandro does it help to allow for either? in case w3c management doesn't like our first choice?
17:15:47 <eprodrom> PROPOSED: publish JF2 FPWD with short name "jf2"
17:15:58 <sandro> +0 seems harmless
17:15:59 <wilkie> eprodrom: let me see if I can form a proposal... with what do you call it.. "short name"
17:16:00 <KevinMarks> +1
17:16:01 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1
17:16:04 <wilkie> eprodrom: alright that proposal is up
17:16:05 <tantek> +1 and also ok with sandro's proposal "json-microformats2"
17:16:06 <eprodrom> +1
17:16:06 <wilkie> +1
17:16:09 <aaronpk> +1
17:16:16 <bengo> +1
17:16:23 <cwebber2> +1
17:16:56 <wilkie> eprodrom: alright. unless there are any objections, I will mark this resolved.
17:16:58 <KevinMarks> we had proposed JFDI but that was not wholly serious
17:16:59 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: publish JF2 FPWD with short name "jf2"
17:17:03 <wilkie> eprodrom: [reads proposal]
17:17:14 <sandro> action: sandro get domain lead approval for JF2
17:17:14 <trackbot> Created ACTION-90 - Get domain lead approval for jf2 [on Sandro Hawke - due 2016-06-07].
17:17:42 <KevinMarks> ben_thatmustbeme++
17:17:44 <Loqi> ben_thatmustbeme has 147 karma
17:17:52 <wilkie> eprodrom: fantastic. thanks KevinMarks and ben. thanks for your work on the document. looking forward to seeing it live.
17:17:55 <wilkie> eprodrom: anything else on jf2?
17:18:18 <wilkie> eprodrom: alright. great. let's move on to next/first item: minutes from last week
17:18:27 <eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-24-minutes
17:18:32 <tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-31#Approval_of_Minutes_of_2016-05-24
17:18:36 <wilkie> TOPIC: Approval of Minutes of 05-24-2016
17:18:53 <tantek> yes
17:18:59 <tantek> +1
17:19:03 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
17:19:09 <rhiaro> +1
17:19:11 <eprodrom> PROPOSED: adopt https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-24-minutes as minutes for 24 May 2016 meeting
17:19:16 <wilkie> eprodrom: [reads proposal]
17:19:18 <eprodrom> +1
17:19:31 <aaronpk> +1
17:19:31 <tantek> +1
17:19:39 <wilkie> +1
17:19:55 <wilkie> eprodrom: given we have overwhelming support, we'll mark this as resolved
17:19:58 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: adopt https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-24-minutes as minutes for 24 May 2016 meeting
17:20:18 <wilkie> eprodrom: we're going through these quickly
17:20:23 <annbass>  present+
17:20:26 <wilkie> eprodrom: another item on the agenda is next week's f2f
17:20:34 <tantek> q+
17:20:42 <eprodrom> ack tantek
17:20:43 <wilkie> eprodrom: I don't think there is further discussion to have about the f2f. but this is a good time to bring those up
17:20:52 <wilkie> tantek: we are starting to put together the specific agenda for the f2f
17:21:07 <wilkie> tantek: one thing sandro and I noticed to cover is implementation updates and so we put that first for monday morning
17:21:24 <wilkie> tantek: for the most mature/advanced specs going toward the newer/less-implemented latter in the process
17:21:32 <wilkie> tantek: chairs are actively putting the agenda together
17:21:38 <tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-06-07#Topics
17:21:46 <wilkie> tantek: if anybody has things they want to discuss, add them
17:22:10 <tantek> next Monday
17:22:14 <wilkie> eprodrom: all right. great. any other issues we need to discuss for next tuesday
17:22:20 <wilkie> eprodrom: thank you... next monday.
17:22:24 <tantek> we are expecting possibly 2-3 more attendees
17:22:38 <wilkie> eprodrom: I think our attendee list is stable. if you are on the fence or considering, get your name on there because we are planning.
17:22:58 <wilkie> eprodrom: if there is no other discussion on this, I'd like to move on to as2
17:23:09 <tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-31#Discussion_Items
17:23:15 <wilkie> TOPIC: Activity Streams 2.0
17:23:29 <eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/
17:23:30 <wilkie> eprodrom: two weeks ago we decided to publish new working drafts of AS2
17:23:31 <tantek> (and last week we agreed also)
17:23:40 <eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/
17:23:42 <wilkie> eprodrom: we have the core document (i've dropped the URL) and a vocabulary document
17:23:49 <wilkie> eprodrom: and they are up on the IRC channel
17:24:08 <wilkie> eprodrom: these are not materially different from the version we've had as an editor's draft for the past weeks
17:24:24 <wilkie> eprodrom: there were validation issues and small changes but nothing noticeable by anybody not a as2 validator
17:24:27 <tantek> (only editorial markup changes)
17:24:33 <wilkie> eprodrom: it has been reasonably stable
17:24:45 <wilkie> eprodrom: yes, editorial markup changes, thank you tantek
17:24:57 <wilkie> eprodrom: the question from last week was whether to move as2 to a candidate recommendation
17:25:23 <sandro> q+ to discuss normative references
17:25:29 <wilkie> eprodrom: in march in the last f2f we resolved to take it to CR following correction of some outstanding issues, which have been addressed along with additional ones since the f2f
17:25:38 <wilkie> eprodrom: the intention was to discuss taking it to CR today
17:25:41 <tantek> only one open isuse: https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues
17:25:42 <eprodrom> ack sandro
17:25:42 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to discuss normative references
17:25:57 <tantek> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/316
17:26:07 <wilkie> sandro: one small problem that is trivial to fix is when you go to CR you have to fix up the normative references
17:26:10 <tantek> (editorial non-blocking)
17:26:14 <wilkie> sandro: we saw this with webmention
17:26:28 <wilkie> sandro: basically w3c wants to make sure external specs are as stable as this spec
17:26:51 <wilkie> sandro: when I looked at the normative references... all the ones in vocab are fine, but core had 2 normative references that looked problematic
17:26:55 <sandro> http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-core/#normative-references
17:27:02 <wilkie> sandro: but I think they are easy to solve
17:27:44 <wilkie> sandro: all are w3c or ietf standards except for as1 and CURIE
17:27:53 <tantek> can we drop CURIE?
17:28:02 <tantek> that seems confusing to have it referenced separately than JSON-LD
17:28:14 <wilkie> sandro: but where as1 and curie are used are in non-normative references or, for CURIE, to note json-ld supports them
17:28:21 <wilkie> sandro: I think we can just take out the CURIE reference
17:28:24 <tantek> as1 as informative makes sense
17:28:39 <sandro> +1 tantek, take out "(or CURIE's for short) [curie]."
17:28:40 <wilkie> eprodrom: as what we can do is make as1 an informative reference, which I think I can do
17:28:49 <wilkie> eprodrom: and the second is to remove reference to CURIE
17:28:50 <wilkie> sandro: yep
17:29:02 <tantek> good catches sandro
17:29:04 <wilkie> eprodrom: it is mentioned as an aside, so we just remove the aside and the reference to it
17:29:08 <wilkie> sandro: yeah
17:29:09 <wilkie> eprodrom: great
17:29:25 <wilkie> eprodrom: so those are two important issues to handle right now
17:29:50 <wilkie> eprodrom: my question is if we decide to go to CR today can we do so conditionally that we resolve these two
17:29:58 <eprodrom> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/318
17:30:01 <wilkie> sandro: we can go to CR given we do the changes decided at this meeting
17:30:09 <wilkie> sandro: maybe there will be other issues today
17:30:10 <eprodrom> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/317
17:30:11 <wilkie> eprodrom: absolutely
17:30:18 <wilkie> eprodrom: just dropping the issue links into the channel
17:30:28 <wilkie> eprodrom: there was one more issue that rhiaro raised a few days ago
17:30:38 <eprodrom> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/316
17:30:50 <wilkie> eprodrom: I think it was about JSON-LD... well, rhiaro, if you are here, can you give us an overview?
17:31:00 <annbass> q+
17:31:08 <wilkie> rhiaro: the json-ld version on w3c is not up-to-date. we can easily fix that.
17:31:17 <wilkie> eprodrom: it is just an update process, but we should probably get that done.
17:31:23 <wilkie> eprodrom: sandro, can you follow through on that?
17:31:26 <wilkie> sandro: I can definitely do that
17:31:39 <wilkie> eprodrom: sounds good
17:31:55 <wilkie> eprodrom: let me know if there is anything I can do for that process
17:32:07 <wilkie> eprodrom: that file has been updated so it is best to use the one on github right now
17:32:25 <wilkie> eprodrom: I feel funny being both chair and advocate for this, but hopefully we can handle that.
17:32:36 <wilkie> eprodrom: if tantek wants to chair for this we can do that
17:32:41 <tantek> chair: tantek
17:32:46 <wilkie> tantek: I think you are doing great but I can do that if you want
17:33:06 <wilkie> annbass: eprodrom, I sent you in snail-mail some english type edits. did you receive that?
17:33:15 <wilkie> annbass: I didn't have a chance to read through this version.
17:33:26 <wilkie> annbass: I'm just looking at misspellings and words being left out, etc.
17:33:42 <wilkie> eprodrom: I did receive those. sorry I didn't mention those. they were all editorial changes... super helpful.
17:33:58 <wilkie> eprodrom: some have been changed already, some have not. I want to get the ones that haven't into github issues.
17:34:22 <wilkie> annbass: I leave this to your judgment. I want to know if we need to do a re-read. any before CR?
17:34:30 <wilkie> sandro: no. editorial changes don't need that.
17:34:44 <wilkie> annbass: ok. I'll make an effort to go through this version.
17:34:46 <wilkie> eprodrom: fantastic.
17:35:05 <annbass> q-
17:35:08 <tantek> q?
17:35:27 <wilkie> eprodrom: so, if there is no further discussion, I would love to propose the current working draft as CR. I forget the exact phrasing for the options we have.
17:35:45 <wilkie> tantek: so, we are proposing to take the current working draft with the edits agreed in this meeting to CR.
17:35:55 <tantek> PROPOSED: Take current WD of AS2, with edits agreed in this telcon to CR
17:36:00 <wilkie> tantek: and those edits include the normative references: one being made informal and one being dropped.
17:36:00 <cwebber2> +1
17:36:03 <wilkie> eprodrom: yes
17:36:03 <annbass> +1
17:36:07 <tantek> PROPOSED: Take current WDs of AS2, with edits agreed in this telcon to CR
17:36:11 <cwebber2> +1
17:36:12 <wilkie> +1
17:36:17 <KevinMarks> +1
17:36:21 <rhiaro> +1
17:36:24 <wilkie> annbass: it is both documents, right?
17:36:26 <wilkie> tantek: correct
17:36:31 <sandro> +1 both core and vocab
17:36:33 <wilkie> tantek: that's why I wanted to update that proposal
17:36:42 <bengo> +1
17:36:45 <cwebber2> my second +1 was to updated proposal, not stuffing ballots ;)
17:36:50 <annbass> haha
17:36:58 <tantek> zakim, who is here?
17:36:58 <Zakim> Present: tantek, wilkie, rhiaro, dmitriz, ben_thatmustbeme, aaronpk, eprodrom, cwebber, bengo, annbass
17:37:00 <Zakim> On IRC I see jasnell, bengo, dmitriz, Zakim, RRSAgent, KevinMarks2, KevinMarks, annbass, tantek, cwebber2, eprodrom, manuel, shepazu, pdurbin, rhiaro, dwhly, ben_thatmustbeme,
17:37:00 <Zakim> ... Loqi, Arnaud, bigbluehat, strugee, aaronpk, raucao, wilkie, wseltzer, sandro, trackbot, jet, tsyesika, ElijahLynn, bitbear
17:37:01 <aaronpk> +1
17:37:30 <wilkie> tantek: looks we have the vast majority of people in the call which is awesome
17:37:37 <annbass> +1 and +1
17:37:50 <eprodrom> eprodrom has joined #social
17:37:51 <tantek> RESOLVED: Take current WDs of AS2, with edits agreed in this telcon to CR
17:37:59 <annbass> whoeee
17:37:59 <eprodrom> +1
17:38:07 <wilkie> tantek: I'm going to mark this resolved. thank you every one. congratulations to the editors.
17:38:18 <wilkie> sandro: we need to draft a transition request
17:38:27 <wilkie> tantek: right, like we did for webmention and make that call
17:38:42 <wilkie> tantek: I think that means, eprodrom, you can make those changes to the draft.
17:38:49 <wilkie> tantek: I don't think we need to republish with that
17:39:06 <wilkie> sandro: did you publish those changes
17:39:09 <wilkie> eprodrom: I did, they are lilve
17:39:15 <wilkie> s/lilve/live
17:39:42 <wilkie> eprodrom: unfortunately I have one more thing we need to discuss before we do that
17:40:05 <wilkie> eprodrom: at our last meeting, there was discussion about moving our github repos to the w3c organizational namespace
17:40:10 <wilkie> eprodrom: I'm not sure where we closed on that
17:40:20 <wilkie> eprodrom: as we move to CR, does that become more important?
17:40:28 <wilkie> eprodrom: just because the github repos are embedded in the document
17:40:37 <wilkie> eprodrom: if we were to do that, we should do that now before publishing a new WD
17:41:03 <wilkie> sandro: so. w3c has an organizational committment to preservation of info and data.
17:41:23 <wilkie> sandro: most w3c working groups use repos under the w3c organization and the team has set up an archiving system to archive those repos.
17:41:38 <wilkie> sandro: during the webmention transition call it was brought up that we aren't doing that for this group's work
17:41:58 <wilkie> sandro: I made an action item to look in if we can do that and the team said 'no, if you want to archive that you should move'
17:42:13 <wilkie> sandro: as a decentralization guy I'm inclined to say 'no!'
17:42:21 <wilkie> sandro: there are options but I haven't looked at them much
17:42:28 <rrika> rrika has joined #social
17:42:47 <wilkie> sandro: one of the tools I found written in a language that scares me and it puts the issues inside the repo which seems elegant
17:43:11 <wilkie> sandro: basically if one person wants to figure this out and run this either on a w3c machine or your own that you can curl when you need
17:43:13 <eprodrom> q+
17:43:16 <wilkie> sandro: anybody want to help me with that?
17:43:19 <tantek> ack eprodrom
17:43:24 <wilkie> eprodrom: tantek, you are still chairing?
17:43:25 <wilkie> tantek: yeah
17:43:59 <wilkie> eprodrom: ok great. I appreciate the concept of decentralization. keeping us decentralized on the same centralized code-hosting service, I'm not committed to it.
17:44:16 <wilkie> eprodrom: unless jasnell has a strong objection, I'd prefer to use the w3c namespace.
17:44:28 <wilkie> eprodrom: github has some mechanisms for redirects when you reassign the owner of a repository
17:44:41 <wilkie> eprodrom: I believe it will retain the issue history, etc. they do a pretty good job of it.
17:44:46 <wilkie> eprodrom: I'm not proposed to it for as2
17:45:07 <wilkie> sandro: that's true. the movement from one editor to another editor highlights why you may want to do that
17:45:19 <wilkie> sandro: I don't think we should twist aaronpk's arm to do the same thing
17:45:36 <wilkie> tantek: eprodrom, it sounds like you have a specific proposal to make
17:45:57 <wilkie> eprodrom: yes, I propose we move the official repo for as2 to the w3c [github] namespace
17:45:59 <eprodrom> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams
17:46:08 <eprodrom> https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams
17:46:11 <wilkie> tantek: can you give me a url for the proposal
17:46:37 <sandro> https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams
17:46:42 <wilkie> sandro: one slight glitch on that is that I see this already exists
17:46:47 <rhiaro> Don't we need to go to /swwg/activitystreams?
17:46:49 <wilkie> sandro: seems like harry made this a year ago
17:46:57 <rhiaro> the other WGs have all their drafts in one sub directory I think
17:47:04 <wilkie> sandro: it might be hard, but maybe we can just delete the existing one and then make a new one
17:47:12 <wilkie> aaronpk: yeah, you just need to delete the old one first
17:47:15 <wilkie> sandro: ok, yeah
17:47:34 <wilkie> sandro: oh, rhiaro is saying it goes under the workgroup name?
17:47:46 <wilkie> tantek: sounds like rhiaro has a counter-proposal. can we get that in IRC
17:47:51 <Lloyd_Fassett> Lloyd_Fassett has joined #social
17:47:57 <rhiaro> Yeah I agree with the things that are a bad idea about that
17:47:59 <rhiaro> Just saying
17:48:04 <wilkie> aaronpk: that sounds like a bad idea because it seems issues get merged into a single repo
17:48:12 <wilkie> sandro: no, we definitely want separate repos per spec
17:48:24 <wilkie> aaronpk: I see a bunch of seperate specs
17:48:25 <rhiaro> I was thinking of https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation
17:48:43 <wilkie> sandro: I see some repos for groups and some for specs and I think repos for working groups is a bad idea and they didn't realize it at the time
17:48:52 <wilkie> tantek: looks like annotations did exactly what you say is a bad idea
17:49:06 <wilkie> sandro: no, yeah. and I see people talking about this and they have to tag issues.. yeah
17:49:09 <wilkie> tantek: it's a pain
17:49:35 <wilkie> sandro: I think using short-names, and yeah for activity streams we merge two into one, but we can do that
17:49:55 <wilkie> tantek: do we use one URL for both of them... is it activitystreams or activitysteams dash vocab?
17:50:06 <wilkie> eprodrom: I can live with either. let's keep it under activitystreams then
17:50:08 <wilkie> tantek: one repo then?
17:50:11 <wilkie> eprodrom: yeah one repo
17:50:23 <aaronpk> https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams
17:50:29 <wilkie> tantek: activitystreams slash vocab?? sorry, I'm looking for specifics for the minutes
17:50:36 <sandro> rename https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams to https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams
17:50:55 <aaronpk> then merge activity-streams-core into there?
17:50:59 <wilkie> sandro: so I'm renaming the old repo to the new repo, right?
17:51:02 <aaronpk> s/-core/-vocab
17:51:22 <wilkie> eprodrom: and the directory structure would stay the same
17:51:36 <eprodrom> activitystreams-core -> core
17:51:45 <eprodrom> activitystreams-vocabulary -> vocabulary
17:51:52 <aaronpk> it looks like both specs are already in the same repo? https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams
17:52:12 <wilkie> eprodrom: yeah, they are both already in one repo right now
17:52:17 <wilkie> aaronpk: we are just renaming one repo then?
17:52:19 <wilkie> eprodrom: yeah
17:52:26 <tantek> PROPOSED: move AS2 WDs repo into the w3c namespace, to https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams with the directories activitystreams-core renamed to core and activitystreams-vocabulary to vocabulary
17:52:47 <cwebber2> +1
17:52:47 <wilkie> tantek: eprodrom, does that match your understanding?
17:52:52 <wilkie> eprodrom: perfect and very specific
17:52:54 <rhiaro> +1
17:52:56 <wilkie> +1
17:52:58 <sandro> +1
17:53:00 <eprodrom> +1
17:53:06 <annbass> +1
17:53:08 <bengo> +1
17:53:20 <tantek> RESOLVED: move AS2 WDs repo into the w3c namespace, to https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams with the directories activitystreams-core renamed to core and activitystreams-vocabulary to vocabulary
17:53:30 <wilkie> tantek: that looks good. I'm going to resolve that.
17:53:34 <wilkie> tantek: is that all, eprodrom?
17:53:39 <annbass> q+
17:53:43 <wilkie> eprodrom: we will need a proposal to publish a WD with those changes
17:53:48 <wilkie> tantek: from the new repo?
17:53:50 <wilkie> eprodrom: exactly
17:53:59 <tantek> ack annbass
17:54:19 <wilkie> annbass: small question for eprodrom... from the version I printed that was 40 pages... were there any significant changes to that?
17:54:23 <wilkie> eprodrom: no there were not
17:54:32 <annbass> May 17 version to May 31
17:54:45 <wilkie> sandro: I'm going to delete the repo harry made
17:54:55 <wilkie> sandro: should I talk to jasnell about the changes or what?
17:55:06 <wilkie> eprodrom: I'll talk to him
17:55:25 <tantek> PROPOSED: Publish updated AS2 WDs with the edits agreed in this telcon from its new repo https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams
17:55:30 <eprodrom> +1
17:55:31 <rhiaro> +1
17:55:34 <aaronpk> +1
17:55:39 <bengo> +1
17:55:39 <sandro> +1
17:55:40 <wilkie> tantek: ok. the proposal is to publish a new WD with the changes to the repo. when combined with earlier proposal, it is clear this is still what will become the CR.
17:55:42 <annbass> +1
17:55:43 <wilkie> +1
17:55:44 <cwebber2> +1
17:55:47 <sandro> github says:  Your repository "w3c/activitystreams" was successfully deleted.
17:55:55 <tantek> RESOLVED: Publish updated AS2 WDs with the edits agreed in this telcon from its new repo https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams
17:56:00 <aaronpk> only an owner of the w3c org will be able to move the repo to it, so you'll probably have to give sandro full permissions on james' repo
17:56:16 <wilkie> tantek: I think you have everything you need from the group
17:56:25 <eprodrom> chair: eprodrom
17:56:33 <wilkie> tantek: with the edits and changes, you will have the working draft the group wants to put to CR
17:56:45 <wilkie> eprodrom: I will take over as chair to get through the rest of the agenda
17:56:58 <wilkie> eprodrom: we have 2 items and I'm concerned that we don't have enough time
17:57:13 <wilkie> eprodrom: I would like to ask the 2 editors involved to ask if it would make sense to put these on the agenda of the f2f
17:57:17 <tantek> +1 to extend
17:57:23 <sandro> +1 to extend
17:57:26 <wilkie> eprodrom: or we could extend the meeting 15 minutes to address them
17:57:26 <tantek> (or see how quickly they can go)
17:57:33 <wilkie> eprodrom: so aaronpk and rhiaro?
17:57:38 <annbass> +1 to extend
17:57:40 <wilkie> aaronpk: I have a short update but I'm ok to extend
17:57:43 <wilkie> rhiaro: I would like to extend
17:57:58 <wilkie> eprodrom: barring any objections, I'm going to extend the meeting 15 minutes. continuing until 2:15
17:58:14 <wilkie> eprodrom: since aaronpk is giving only an update I'll put you at the end of the agenda
17:58:27 <wilkie> eprodrom: so, rhiaro. next up is Social Web Protocols. Could you give us an update?
17:58:31 <wilkie> TOPIC: Social Web Protocols
17:59:04 <wilkie> rhiaro: I rewrote the document. I would like to publish a new working draft. I closed many issues and I was hoping to address the rest.
17:59:33 <eprodrom> q?
17:59:37 <wilkie> rhiaro: annbass gave great editorial changes. I think everybody read it and had time to raise issues.
17:59:51 <tantek> I only skimmed it - seems like a big update
18:00:00 <wilkie> eprodrom: I have not had a chance to read through it fully but have skimmed it and it seems like an improvement in terms of readability.
18:00:20 <eprodrom> q?
18:00:25 <wilkie> eprodrom: from my point of view, it seems like there is a strong argument to going to a next working draft unless significant problems with this version.
18:00:32 <aaronpk> it looks like a big update, i haven't read the whole thing, but I trust amy's judgment on it
18:00:53 <wilkie> eprodrom: another option is to make it required reading for the f2f and propose at the f2f
18:01:04 <wilkie> eprodrom: I think it is a significant enough improvement to share this with the world as a WD
18:01:15 <tantek> I think publishing is also a good way to get more people in the group read it for the f2f :)
18:01:17 <wilkie> sandro: is there anything in this draft you feel would give people the wrong impression?
18:01:32 <wilkie> rhiaro: there are a few gaps but I have called them out and I think they're fine
18:01:53 <eprodrom> q?
18:01:54 <wilkie> tantek: a lot has changed since we published a draft of this. I feel there is more confusion leaving the old one there.
18:01:57 <wilkie> rhiaro: exactly
18:02:12 <wilkie> eprodrom: my question, is there any work that needs to be done before pushing this to working draft?
18:02:20 <wilkie> eprodrom: so it is ready, this version, for a WD?
18:02:21 <wilkie> rhiaro: yes
18:02:44 <wilkie> eprodrom: what I would like to do propose we publish the editor's draft of 31 May 2016 of Social Web Protocols as a Working Draft?
18:02:51 <wilkie> eprodrom: this is the 2nd WD?
18:02:53 <wilkie> rhiaro: yeah
18:02:54 <rhiaro> https://w3c-social.github.io/social-web-protocols
18:02:58 <eprodrom> PROPOSAL: publish Editor's Draft 31 May 2016 of Social Web Protocols as a Working Draft
18:03:00 <wilkie> eprodrom: good
18:03:00 <tantek> +1
18:03:02 <wilkie> +1
18:03:03 <aaronpk> +1
18:03:06 <KevinMarks> +1
18:03:11 <wilkie> eprodrom: is that right, rhiaro?
18:03:13 <eprodrom> +1
18:03:16 <wilkie> rhiaro: yep sounds good
18:03:23 <rhiaro> +1
18:03:24 <sandro> +1
18:03:32 <annbass> +1
18:03:34 <cwebber2> +1
18:04:02 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: publish Editor's Draft 31 May 2016 of Social Web Protocols as a Working Draft
18:04:04 <wilkie> eprodrom: unless there are any objections, I'll mark this as resolved
18:04:10 <wilkie> eprodrom: [reads proposal]
18:04:12 <annbass> BTW, I thought this doc was really good, and will be really helpful as a partner to the other documents
18:04:26 <wilkie> eprodrom: thank you rhiaro for all the hard work. looks like a lot of effort went into it and I appreciate it.
18:04:51 <wilkie> eprodrom: that went a lot quicker than I thought which is good news. I'd like to move on to webmention test suite.
18:04:58 <wilkie> TOPIC: Webmention Test Suite
18:05:16 <wilkie> aaronpk: what I did was go through the implementation checklist into todo items for code to write for each
18:05:24 <wilkie> aaronpk: those are all open issues on the test suite itself
18:05:37 <wilkie> aaronpk: this process turned up editorial issues in the spec which are issues opened on the spec itself
18:05:49 <wilkie> aaronpk: I would appreciate anyone to chime in about those issues
18:06:02 <wilkie> aaronpk: on webmention.rocks right now there are two tests receiving webmentions so you can try those out
18:06:23 <eprodrom> q?
18:06:23 <wilkie> aaronpk: it will actually post comments on your site
18:06:27 <wilkie> eprodrom: great
18:06:32 <tantek> q+
18:06:37 <wilkie> eprodrom: any additional comments on webmention test suite?
18:06:55 <wilkie> tantek: this isn't about the test suite it is about the f2f
18:07:07 <wilkie> eprodrom: oh cool. there is one more item on the agenda and that is document status
18:07:17 <rhiaro> q+ to say could we make SWP required reading for the face to face as well by the way
18:07:23 <wilkie> TOPIC: Document Status
18:07:34 <wilkie> eprodrom: I want to touch base with cwebber2 and rhiaro about document status
18:07:45 <wilkie> eprodrom: I want to ask the editors of documents we haven't addressed already the meeting for a status update
18:07:57 <wilkie> eprodrom: this is an excellent time to do new versions before the f2f
18:08:01 <wilkie> eprodrom: cwebber2, update?
18:08:07 <tantek> rhiaro, I'm going to make an executive action, could you add a "Required Reading" to the https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-06-06 similar to previous f2f Required Reading section?
18:08:15 <rhiaro> tantek: sure
18:08:31 <wilkie> cwebber2: I just finished moving and I have not had time. and tsyesika has just started moving. so no updates.
18:08:36 <wilkie> eprodrom: good to know
18:08:42 <wilkie> eprodrom: aaronpk, any other updates on micropub?
18:08:45 <annbass> it's a moving plague! cwebber, tsyesika and ben_thatmustbeme ... sheesh
18:08:49 <KevinMarks> writing specs and moving house is a theme
18:08:57 <tantek> rhiaro, feel free to add latest editor's drafts of Webmention, AS2, Micropub, Activitypub to that list
18:08:57 <wilkie> aaronpk: I don't think anything has changed since last call. I was working on webmention stuff.
18:09:09 <wilkie> eprodrom: tantek, has there been any activity on post-type-discovery
18:09:31 <wilkie> tantek: yes, I got help from ben roberts on doing a github version of the spec and want to have a version of that for FPWD for the f2f
18:09:41 <rhiaro> q-
18:09:43 <wilkie> eprodrom: do you think there will be a version before the f2f to make it required reading
18:10:01 <tantek> https://indiewebcamp.com/post-type-discovery
18:10:03 <wilkie> tantek: what I can do is to point you to the wiki. I don't think there will be any non-editorial changes.
18:10:05 <cwebber2> I have to go
18:10:07 <cwebber2> later, everyone
18:10:11 <tantek> https://indiewebcamp.com/post-type-discovery#Algorithm
18:10:12 <eprodrom> Thanks cwebber2
18:10:25 <wilkie> tantek: in particular the only piece that will be important to discuss is the algorithm so I'll point directly to that
18:10:34 <wilkie> eprodrom: I'm going to add this as required reading for the f2f next week
18:10:56 <wilkie> eprodrom: rhiaro, you took yourself off the queue, but I would like to add the latest version of Social Web Protocols to required reading too
18:11:09 <rhiaro> yeah I'll do it
18:11:13 <wilkie> tantek: I asked rhiaro to go ahead and make that section
18:11:19 <eprodrom> Thanks!
18:11:26 <wilkie> eprodrom: thank you! one less task for me!
18:11:40 <wilkie> eprodrom: if there is nothing else, then I would like to call on tantek.
18:11:49 <tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-06-06#Participants
18:12:12 <wilkie> tantek: the last point is for the f2f, many will be here earlier. I want to encourage you all to add arrival dates.
18:12:25 <wilkie> tantek: there will be opportunities to meet up before the meeting
18:12:52 <wilkie> eprodrom: any other business before the end of the meeting?
18:13:01 <tantek> thanks for chairing eprodrom
18:13:06 <tantek> wilkie++ for minuting!
18:13:07 <Loqi> wilkie has 31 karma
18:13:17 <wilkie> eprodrom: if not, I'd like to say thanks everyone for giving more of your time. I think we used it well. I'd like to call the meeting to a close. thanks everyone.
18:13:17 <eprodrom> wilkie++
18:13:19 <Loqi> wilkie has 32 karma
18:13:20 <annbass> thanks eprodrom and wilkie!
18:13:31 <wilkie> eprodrom++
18:13:33 <Loqi> eprodrom has 33 karma
18:14:00 <tantek> zakim, who is here?
18:14:00 <Zakim> Present: tantek, wilkie, rhiaro, dmitriz, ben_thatmustbeme, aaronpk, eprodrom, cwebber, bengo, annbass
18:14:03 <Zakim> On IRC I see Lloyd_Fassett, rrika, jasnell, dmitriz, Zakim, RRSAgent, KevinMarks2, KevinMarks, annbass, tantek, cwebber2, manuel, shepazu, pdurbin, rhiaro, dwhly, ben_thatmustbeme,
18:14:03 <Zakim> ... Loqi, Arnaud, bigbluehat, strugee, aaronpk, raucao, wilkie, wseltzer, sandro, trackbot, jet, tsyesika, ElijahLynn, bitbear
18:14:41 <tantek> trackbot, end meeting
18:14:41 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
18:14:41 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been tantek, wilkie, rhiaro, dmitriz, ben_thatmustbeme, aaronpk, eprodrom, cwebber, bengo, annbass
18:14:49 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:14:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/31-social-minutes.html trackbot
18:14:50 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
18:14:50 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/31-social-actions.rdf :
18:14:50 <RRSAgent> ACTION: sandro get domain lead approval for JF2 [1]
18:14:50 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/31-social-irc#T17-17-14