14:30:19 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #annotation
14:30:19 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-annotation-irc
14:30:21 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:30:21 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #annotation
14:30:23 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 2666
14:30:23 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
14:30:24 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
14:30:25 <trackbot> Date: 10 June 2016
14:30:32 <ivan> Chair: Tim, Rob
14:30:55 <ivan> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/014301d1c25e$e2541290$a6fc37b0$@illinois.edu
14:31:12 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: Agenda, 2016-06-10: http://www.w3.org/mid/014301d1c25e$e2541290$a6fc37b0$@illinois.edu
14:31:57 <ivan> Regrets: Jacob
14:52:50 <azaroth> azaroth has joined #annotation
14:53:35 <azaroth> azaroth has joined #annotation
14:53:50 <azaroth> Present+ Rob_Sanderson
14:54:17 <TimCole> TimCole has joined #annotation
14:56:49 <csarven> Present+ Sarven Capadisli
14:57:10 <csarven> What's the difference between nickname and fullname for +present?
14:57:47 <tbdinesh> tbdinesh has joined #annotation
14:58:34 <azaroth> csarven: It just determines how it appears in the minutes
14:58:55 <azaroth> If you just want your IRC handle, then no need to add it ... Present+ is sufficient
14:59:02 <ivan> Present+ Ivan
14:59:13 <TimCole> present+ Tim_Cole
15:01:49 <dwhly> Present+ Dan_Whaley
15:01:57 <ShaneM> present+ ShaneM
15:03:25 <tbdinesh> Present+ TB_Dinesh
15:03:57 <takeshi> takeshi has joined #annotation
15:04:25 <bjdmeest> bjdmeest has joined #annotation
15:04:59 <bigbluehat> present+ Benjamin_Young
15:05:20 <azaroth> scribenick: azaroth
15:05:26 <bjdmeest> Present+ Ben_De_Meester
15:05:56 <takeshi> Present+ Takeshi_Kanai
15:06:09 <PaoloCiccarese> PaoloCiccarese has joined #annotation
15:06:09 <azaroth> TimCole: 9 people with +1 by email for the CFC to go forward with CR
15:06:13 <azaroth> ... Do we take a vote now?
15:06:25 <azaroth> ivan: Lets do that, as there are people who didn't vote on the list who are here
15:06:31 <azaroth> ... before we do that, lets agree on the publication date
15:06:39 <azaroth> TimCole: July 5th?
15:07:04 <azaroth> ivan: Even if we issue call for transition today, it takes a week before the transition call, which would be around the 20th
15:07:17 <azaroth> ... we can try for the 23rd, something might come up on the transition call
15:07:36 <azaroth> ... Week of the 27th is a moratorium week, which pushes out to the 5th of July
15:08:02 <azaroth> ... would like to be that week. 23rd is living dangerously
15:08:06 <TimCole> q?
15:08:29 <azaroth> TimCole: Don't want to live dangerously this morning
15:08:42 <azaroth> ... Will you put it in as a proposal
15:09:23 <ivan> Proposed RESOLUTION: The WG asks the Director to authorize the publication of the Protocol, Model, and Vocab documents as Candidate Recs, with a publication date on the 5th of July, 2016
15:09:41 <ivan> +1
15:09:41 <azaroth> +1
15:09:42 <csarven> +1
15:09:46 <PaoloCiccarese> +1
15:09:47 <takeshi> +1
15:09:47 <TimCole> +1
15:09:47 <tbdinesh> +1
15:09:50 <bjdmeest> +1
15:09:51 <bigbluehat> +1
15:09:55 <ShaneM> +1
15:10:21 <Janina_> Janina_ has joined #annotation
15:10:29 <azaroth> RESOLUTION: The WG asks the Director to authorize the publication of the Protocol, Model, and Vocab documents as Candidate Recs, with a publication date on the 5th of July, 2016
15:10:39 <azaroth> RRSAgent, pointer?
15:10:39 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-annotation-irc#T15-10-39
15:10:48 <ivan> Remaining editorial issues: https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/milestones/V1%20CR
15:11:10 <shepazu> present+ ShaneM
15:11:14 <azaroth> ivan: All of the issues are minor, but must be done
15:11:21 <shepazu> present+ shepazu
15:11:27 <azaroth> ... most complicated is need URI with a mockup of the implementation report
15:11:39 <azaroth> ... Otherwise the rest Rob [and editors] can do
15:12:03 <azaroth> ShaneM: I'll see if Gregg can do the mockup of the implementation report
15:12:12 <azaroth> ivan: Great, as soon as the issues are closed I'll start the process for the call
15:12:21 <TimCole> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Minutes of the F2F are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/06/03-annotation-minutes.html
15:12:26 <azaroth> TimCole: Forgot to do the minutes...
15:12:37 <azaroth> +1 for minutes
15:12:40 <bigbluehat> +1
15:12:42 <bjdmeest> +1
15:12:45 <TimCole> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Minutes of the last week's call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/06/03-annotation-minutes.html
15:12:46 <ivan> +1
15:12:49 <azaroth> ivan: Shane, do you want to be on the call for the testing issues
15:12:50 <PaoloCiccarese> +1
15:13:01 <azaroth> ShaneM: I'll be there :|
15:13:15 <azaroth> ivan: That's it :)
15:13:20 <azaroth> RESOLUTION: Minutes of the last week's call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/06/03-annotation-minutes.html
15:13:36 <azaroth> TimCole: Neither Rob nor I are available next Friday 17th
15:13:47 <azaroth> ... proposal is to cancel the call unless there's someone who wants to lead it?
15:14:04 <azaroth> ivan: I can't do it either.
15:14:10 <azaroth> Shane: I'm also out
15:14:17 <azaroth> shepazu: I'm happy to have Friday off :)
15:14:26 <azaroth> TimCole: We'll pick up the calls on the 24th
15:14:43 <TimCole> Topic: Testing
15:14:51 <shepazu> (where "off" means working on the blockchain workshop :P)
15:15:20 <azaroth> ShaneM: Overview of where I'm at.... lots of pieces to the puzzle. Been focusing on the model testing infrastructure
15:15:23 <PaoloCiccarese> Present+ Paolo_Ciccarese
15:15:23 <azaroth> ... Largely complete
15:15:58 <azaroth> ... Thing I'm working on is an OR clause for a set of assertions. So long as one feature passes, then the overall test passes
15:16:21 <azaroth> ... The other piece of the puzzle is bugs in the WPT. Got those fixed and have been checked in.
15:16:40 <azaroth> ... Good because it has primed the pump of working with the maintainers of the framework. So future integration should go more smootly
15:16:47 <azaroth> ... Benjamin and Tim should talk about their stuff
15:17:00 <azaroth> bigbluehat: I had switched out to doing protocol testing
15:17:14 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/BigBlueHat/web-annotation-protocol-tester
15:17:14 <azaroth> ... Tim and friends seem to be doing a good job with the schemas
15:17:32 <azaroth> ... ^^ this link is a protocol client as javascript mocha tests
15:17:38 <azaroth> ... Mostly a toy but hopefully useful
15:17:54 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/Spec-Ops/web-platform-tests/pull/3
15:18:01 <azaroth> ... built WPT-serve, ^^, python based http client
15:18:22 <azaroth> ... so code in that PR that implements the core of the annotation protocol
15:18:41 <azaroth> ... such as the prefer headers and responses. Thus an implementation inside WPT to be integrated as part of the testing process
15:18:48 <azaroth> ... javascript code then exercises the server
15:18:57 <azaroth> ... easier than loading REST-client and running tests by hand
15:19:31 <TimCole> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation-tests
15:19:36 <azaroth> TimCole: A general question ... in the model testing we have web application tests on github ^^
15:19:54 <azaroth> ... is that where we're supposed to be working, or should we be in the spec-ops area
15:20:20 <azaroth> ShaneM: Infrastructure in spec-ops, annotation specific tests in web-annotation-tests
15:20:31 <azaroth> ... there's a webhook that pulls those in to the deployment
15:20:43 <azaroth> ... don't want to mess with the tests at the same time as the infrastructure as they're independent
15:21:04 <azaroth> TimCole: So an implementation that wants to test, like Europeana, where do they go?
15:21:21 <azaroth> ShaneM: Couple steps before we get there, but W3C has a test server
15:21:29 <azaroth> ... URI escapes me at the moment
15:21:52 <azaroth> ... that's the canonical place to run tests from. Can also bring up the framework themselves if they want
15:22:06 <bigbluehat> http://www.w3c-test.org/
15:22:08 <azaroth> ... framework doesn't record what they do, you record it and provide in the implementation report
15:22:29 <azaroth> bigbluehat: the protocol pieces so far are in the spec-ops repo as PRs
15:22:40 <azaroth> ... web annotation tester repo is under my GH account right now
15:22:52 <azaroth> ... didn't want it to seem more official :)
15:23:16 <azaroth> ... could be set up to run in a browser, but once it's more complete, along side the server, could be live where ever.
15:23:32 <azaroth> ... Will let the mailing list know when it's useful for more than just me
15:23:45 <azaroth> TimCole: Have you talked with Nick since Berlin
15:23:56 <azaroth> bigbluehat: I haven't since then no
15:24:26 <azaroth> TimCole: Rob created a spreadsheet before Berlin of the keys / features of the model
15:24:33 <azaroth> ... have used that as a starting point
15:24:38 <TimCole> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13LRf2-OCJlKplQE5MTV3breguuRhUyhQW8IZ_jQMBjw/edit?usp=sharing
15:25:03 <azaroth> ... and working with Shane to get schemas into folders. Revising the spreadsheet, which I sent to the list
15:25:20 <azaroth> ... will take a week or two to get it fully populated, but moving along okay
15:25:28 <azaroth> ... still using v0.4
15:25:37 <azaroth> ... others can edit and improve the schemas
15:25:50 <azaroth> ... one gap is a set of negative examples that should NOT validate
15:26:23 <azaroth> ... Getting the schemas to run with help from Shane
15:26:59 <azaroth> Shane: Have a core question - remembering that the tests are manual, we want to have the fewest number of tests that give the greatest coverage
15:27:17 <azaroth> ... You're keeping that in mind as you group the assertions together?
15:27:33 <azaroth> ... Sent a proposal to semi-automate lots of tests with the same input.
15:27:49 <azaroth> TimCole: We can write a script that will use all of the schemas as a single test
15:28:06 <azaroth> ... Can run a few then skip a bunch that aren't relevant
15:28:19 <azaroth> ... thought we might end up with one test per major folder, so 5-6 tests
15:28:44 <azaroth> ... maybe what you're suggesting will address it
15:28:54 <azaroth> ShaneM: single test per major feature area could make sense
15:29:10 <azaroth> ... but one test per way that a feature is used
15:29:23 <azaroth> ... if there's orthogonality in a feature it should be broken up into two tests
15:29:43 <azaroth> ... we have a way to automatically repopulate the manual test input window for the annotation when the next test loads
15:29:55 <azaroth> ... you paste in the annotation, and there's a checkbox to copy it to the next one.
15:30:08 <azaroth> ... so you don't paste it again, you just click go again
15:30:13 <azaroth> ... to reduce the clunkiness
15:30:25 <azaroth> ... if there's 6, I don't care, if there's 100, I care about clunkiness
15:30:30 <azaroth> TimCole: We might end up with about 10?
15:30:50 <azaroth> ... 5 kinds of bodies: bodyValue, embedded text, external resource, specific resource, choice/set
15:31:06 <azaroth> ... some of them then follow on to other tests, like for specific resource or choice
15:31:20 <azaroth> ... would have the same (almost) 5 things for targets
15:31:35 <azaroth> ... so the major features are about a dozen
15:31:58 <azaroth> ShaneM: convenience feature might not make sense?
15:32:04 <azaroth> TimCole: I think it would
15:32:17 <azaroth> ShaneM: Oh not because it's a small number, but because the input would be different
15:32:30 <azaroth> TimCole: I might have multiple bodies that a single annotation implements multiple features
15:32:38 <azaroth> ... dont' think people should break up their annotations
15:32:45 <azaroth> ... not sure I have a good use case in mind
15:33:11 <azaroth> ... if what you're saying is not hard to do, it would be nice
15:33:41 <azaroth> ... multiple bodies that demonstrate different features seem useful
15:33:45 <azaroth> ... any questions at this point?
15:34:06 <azaroth> ... In terms of documenting the test process, have a good readme file
15:34:22 <azaroth> ... is that the kind of docs we need. Need the report from Gregg. What else do we need?
15:34:36 <azaroth> ShaneM: Definitely need docs. Readme is guidance for test authors, not testers
15:34:39 <ivan> q+
15:34:47 <azaroth> ... need a thing to say how to run the tests and capture the results
15:34:56 <azaroth> ... some is just part of WPT
15:35:08 <azaroth> ... Have a couple mechanisms to get from tests to implementation reports
15:35:11 <TimCole> ack ivan
15:35:14 <azaroth> ... both are fine, just need to pick one
15:35:22 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/blob/gh-pages/admin/CRTransitionRequest.md
15:35:31 <azaroth> ivan: One of the things I forgot. Have created CR transition request text
15:35:50 <azaroth> ... supposed to present about testing and implementation on the call
15:35:57 <azaroth> ... don't have to have a detailed presentation
15:36:16 <ShaneM> q+ to ask about how we expect to test an implementation of an annotation server
15:36:17 <azaroth> ... but a draft description would be good to make the request smooth
15:36:32 <azaroth> ... want to send request monday or so
15:36:36 <ShaneM> ACTION: ShaneM to write up drafty test process document for model, server, and clients
15:36:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-33 - Write up drafty test process document for model, server, and clients [on Shane McCarron - due 2016-06-17].
15:36:44 <azaroth> TimCole: a little worried about richness?
15:36:57 <azaroth> ivan: doesn't need to be rich, just have to have it in writing that we have the main testing blocks
15:37:10 <azaroth> ... this is what they are, and that's maybe all we need, but I don't know where they are now
15:37:22 <azaroth> TimCole: Shane has volunteered to help
15:37:28 <azaroth> ... both Rob and I are travelling tomorrow
15:37:42 <azaroth> q?
15:38:04 <TimCole> ack aza
15:38:22 <TimCole> ack Shan
15:38:22 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about how we expect to test an implementation of an annotation server
15:38:42 <azaroth> ShaneM: I know how to test an annotaiton client ... wondering about testing an annotaiton server
15:38:58 <azaroth> ... is the work you've been doing so far Benjamin something we can use to exercise a real server
15:39:03 <azaroth> bigbluehat: That's the hope :)
15:39:08 <bigbluehat> https://github.com/BigBlueHat/web-annotation-protocol-tester/blob/master/test/musts.js
15:39:28 <azaroth> ... Actual javascript ^^ it uses Chai and structures tests in MUST and SHOULD and refs lines from the spec
15:39:48 <azaroth> ... copy and pasted. Then tries to write a test for the specific MUST/SHOULD. Focusing on specific stuff
15:39:56 <azaroth> ... good if Rob could test against MangoServer
15:40:04 <azaroth> ... and anyone else with an implementation
15:40:22 <azaroth> ... how close the testing and protocol code are.  Unit tests for the server I'm writing.
15:40:24 <ShaneM> q+ to ask how difficult it would be to put this in a browser
15:40:28 <azaroth> ... could rewrite in python
15:40:34 <TimCole> ack Shane
15:40:34 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask how difficult it would be to put this in a browser
15:40:44 <azaroth> https://github.com/azaroth42/MangoServer
15:41:13 <azaroth> ShaneM: Your tests are in JS, can we wrap it to run in a browser with an HTML file to give it the endpoint and just click go
15:41:22 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Should be fine to do that
15:41:48 <azaroth> ... can be incorporated with other testing frameworks. Could import to WPT. Distance is unknown
15:41:56 <azaroth> ShaneM: that makes our story consistent, which is important
15:42:15 <azaroth> TimCole: Any questions?
15:42:58 <azaroth> ... Interop question about client A sends annotation to a server and then client B reads it in some fashion
15:43:03 <azaroth> ... do we understand how that's going to work?
15:43:26 <azaroth> ShaneM: Don't need to do it, so don't put it in the plan
15:43:37 <azaroth> ivan: Yes, lets not require it in the official documents
15:43:44 <azaroth> ... but the director would love to see it
15:43:55 <azaroth> ... if we can do it, even as partially a mock up, that would be great
15:44:01 <shepazu> +1
15:44:15 <azaroth> ... We know Europeana have a server. Need clients.
15:44:44 <azaroth> TimCole: Server seems easier than getting clients that annotate the same content
15:45:07 <azaroth> ivan: Yes. Europeana have annotations on images. Maybe Rob can pick up one of their annotations
15:45:23 <azaroth> ... to display and reuse the annotation. That would be already great. Clearly independent
15:45:29 <ShaneM> note that bigbluehat is implementing a server right now in WPT
15:45:34 <azaroth> ... Not sure how much work it would require
15:45:54 <azaroth> TimCole: Have some content here that might be shared with Europeana
15:46:39 <ivan> Topic: extra admin
15:47:17 <azaroth> ivan: One thing we need to resolve is to set a date for ??? can't be end of September as the charter runs out
15:47:32 <azaroth> s/???/end of CR period/
15:47:48 <azaroth> ... I propose the end of September but maybe there are other dates in mind?
15:48:01 <azaroth> TimCole: Availability of implementations to test
15:48:10 <azaroth> ... schedule in July/August is hard
15:48:15 <azaroth> ivan: Can't set the date earlier
15:48:19 <azaroth> ... and can't make it later
15:48:24 <azaroth> TimCole: So 3 month CR
15:48:32 <azaroth> ivan: which is quite reasonable
15:48:41 <azaroth> ... sometimes it's longer, but it's reasonable
15:48:51 <azaroth> TimCole: A little optimistic, but that's what we've got to do
15:49:29 <azaroth> ivan: If we can't close CR in terms of proving all the features, then it stays open until we get it. The end date is just that implementers don't have to rush
15:49:38 <azaroth> TimCole: What happens in september if we're not there?
15:49:45 <azaroth> ivan: We ask for an extension, and leave the CR open
15:49:53 <ShaneM> q+ to ask about dropping features
15:49:54 <azaroth> ... horror stories about groups with CR open for 2 years
15:50:27 <azaroth> shepazu: if it gets to be 6 months and we haven't exited CR, can re-examine the criteria and drop features or postpone them
15:50:39 <azaroth> ... would be more important to have a REC than a perfect one
15:50:47 <TimCole> ack Shane
15:50:47 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about dropping features
15:50:50 <azaroth> ivan: Yes, that's fine. If we need another month, that's easuy
15:51:06 <azaroth> ShaneM: Curious about process in the W3C for dropping features
15:51:11 <azaroth> ivan: We reissue a CR
15:51:17 <azaroth> ShaneM: That's too bad
15:51:37 <azaroth> shepazu: We're very close to completing some of its deliverables, if we request a bit more time that won't be controversial
15:51:50 <azaroth> ... 99% odds that they'll keep it open while we try to finish
15:52:23 <azaroth> ShaneM: don't disagree. Let's say there's 20 features, and 1 doesn't demonstrate interop, was hoping to say you could just drop the feature without going back to the beginning
15:52:30 <azaroth> shepazu: Can do if we mark the feature at risk
15:52:47 <azaroth> ... if we mark something as at risk, and when we transition we remove the feature
15:53:28 <azaroth> ivan: We have two features at risk -- one is the social web work on activitystreams, the one from us is Composite/List/Independents
15:53:47 <azaroth> ... so date is fine, for my planning, when do we think it will be done?
15:53:58 <azaroth> ... meaning there's actions on shane, gregg and a few editorial things
15:54:27 <azaroth> bigbluehat: Moving to CR ... still
15:55:17 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/milestones/V1%20CR
15:55:25 <azaroth> ivan: all of them are minor
15:55:32 <ivan> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/251
15:55:41 <bigbluehat> s/Moving to CR/AS2.0 is moving to CR/
15:56:14 <ShaneM> q+ to ask about moving them to non TR space
15:57:03 <TimCole> ack Shane
15:57:03 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about moving them to non TR space
15:57:26 <azaroth> ShaneM: For 251, I wouldn't put them in TR/ but anywhere else
15:57:33 <azaroth> ... might want to update them in the future
15:57:42 <azaroth> ivan: Shane when do you think you can get yours done
15:57:46 <shepazu> ShaneM++
15:57:46 <azaroth> ShaneM: Before the end of the day
15:57:47 <Loqi> ShaneM has 4 karma
15:58:00 <azaroth> ivan: So can go to the direction on Tuesday
15:58:01 <Loqi> I added a countdown for 6/14 12:00am (#5849)
15:58:11 <azaroth> TimCole: Discussion around vocab for ???
15:58:37 <azaroth> ... what do we do to validate the vocab document
15:58:43 <azaroth> s/???//
15:58:57 <azaroth> ivan: Not really testing of it, it's abstract that's serialized at least into JSON-LD as per the model
15:59:03 <azaroth> ... not sure what we'd test
15:59:07 <azaroth> q+
15:59:29 <azaroth> ... we could test that the json-ld context against a processor produces turtle
15:59:33 <TimCole> ack aza
16:00:34 <ShaneM> q+ to say that technically the implementation of the vocab is the context
16:00:41 <TimCole> ack Sha
16:00:41 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to say that technically the implementation of the vocab is the context
16:00:49 <azaroth> ShaneM: Implementation is the context
16:01:15 <azaroth> ... way you demonstrate interop could be feeding it to three JSON-LD processors and make sure that they accept it
16:01:21 <azaroth> ... we did that for HTML5 modularization
16:01:28 <azaroth> ivan: Know of two processors
16:01:40 <azaroth> TimCole: Lets put that in
16:01:58 <azaroth> ShaneM: Will put that in to the document
16:02:11 <azaroth> TimCole: Let's adjourn and talk in 2 weeks
16:02:13 <azaroth> bye all!@
16:03:55 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:03:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-annotation-minutes.html ivan
16:04:09 <ivan> trackbot, end telcon
16:04:09 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:04:09 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Rob_Sanderson, Sarven, Capadisli, Ivan, Tim_Cole, Dan_Whaley, ShaneM, TB_Dinesh, Benjamin_Young, Ben_De_Meester, Takeshi_Kanai, shepazu,
16:04:12 <Zakim> ... Paolo_Ciccarese
16:04:17 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:04:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-annotation-minutes.html trackbot
16:04:18 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:04:18 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-annotation-actions.rdf :
16:04:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ShaneM to write up drafty test process document for model, server, and clients [1]
16:04:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2016/06/10-annotation-irc#T15-36-36