IRC log of social on 2016-07-05

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:03:44 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #social
17:03:44 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-social-irc
17:03:46 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
17:03:46 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #social
17:03:48 [annbass]
Present+
17:03:48 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SOCL
17:03:48 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
17:03:49 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
17:03:49 [trackbot]
Date: 05 July 2016
17:03:51 [rhiaro]
present+
17:03:53 [eprodrom]
eprodrom has joined #social
17:03:53 [sandro]
present+
17:03:55 [dmitriz]
present+
17:03:56 [csarven]
present+
17:03:59 [eprodrom]
present+
17:04:07 [aaronpk]
present+
17:04:11 [wilkie]
present+
17:04:12 [ben_thatmustbeme]
present+
17:04:20 [eprodrom]
chair: eprodrom
17:04:27 [eprodrom]
scribe: ben_thatmustbeme
17:04:29 [ben_thatmustbeme]
scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme
17:04:40 [annbass]
(Do I have to re-do my "present+", since I typed it before trackbot? (Just curious)
17:04:52 [annbass]
Okie dokie
17:04:56 [annbass]
Present+
17:05:18 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: okay, lets get started
17:05:44 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: welcome new IEs
17:05:59 [akuckartz]
present+
17:06:01 [bigbluehat]
present+ Benjamin_Young
17:06:18 [KevinMarks]
present+
17:06:18 [ben_thatmustbeme]
new person Julian (sp?)
17:06:28 [aaronpk]
Julien
17:06:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: he is in the process of moving this week
17:06:37 [tsyesika]
present+
17:06:40 [tantek]
present+
17:06:52 [wilkie]
I'm glad julien is finally here haha
17:06:52 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: we will defer the welcome to next week
17:06:57 [aaronpk]
https://twitter.com/julien51
17:07:05 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: approval of last week's minutes
17:07:16 [eprodrom]
PROPOSAL: approve https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-06-28-minutes as minutes for 2016 06 28 meeting
17:07:41 [tantek]
+1 I have reviewed
17:07:43 [eprodrom]
+1
17:07:46 [rhiaro]
+1
17:07:48 [wilkie]
+1
17:07:50 [tsyesika]
+1
17:07:51 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: please do a quick review
17:07:51 [annbass]
+1
17:07:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
17:08:14 [eprodrom]
RESOLVED: approve https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-06-28-minutes as minutes for 2016 06 28 meeting
17:08:26 [tantek]
(I'm particularly interested if the editorial change to AS2 was accepted)
17:08:39 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: closed issues for AS2
17:09:33 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: as we take as2 to CR, one of the things we have to show is that any comments on spec have been resolved to the commenter's satisfaction. Doesn't mean they have to be happy with the results, but at least they acknowledge the issue was dealt with
17:09:43 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... amy has been following up with everyone
17:10:02 [tantek]
q+ to ask about update on the editorial request from bengo
17:10:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: after last week we gave them another week. At this point everyone has had at least 2 weeks. in my messages I said that any silence we would just close them
17:10:23 [rhiaro]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Addressing_Issues#ActivityStreams_2.0
17:10:38 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... I would propose we finalize by close all the remaining as commentor timed out
17:11:01 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: amy, you said everyone had two weeks?
17:11:25 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: they had one week, and then we extended them more
17:11:33 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: do we need to agree to close them out?
17:11:42 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: I don't think so ... (couldn't hear)
17:11:50 [wilkie]
that sounds more than reasonable
17:11:57 [wilkie]
rhiaro does such good work
17:12:02 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: as editor i think we have the concensus to close them all out
17:12:15 [annbass]
Sandro -- can't hear you .. Or very barely (can others?)
17:12:21 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: lets talk about the PR from bengo
17:12:31 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/pull/329
17:12:38 [wilkie]
sandro is very quiet yeah
17:12:41 [tantek]
q-
17:12:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: here is the PR itself and the PR was merged but have not pushed a new version of the WD
17:13:09 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i will put those other changes on the agenda at the end
17:13:22 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... at least with repect to that PR, it has been closed
17:13:36 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: the most important part is there be a draft that is ready for CR
17:13:41 [rhiaro]
q+
17:13:46 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... then if we have approval it will go out
17:14:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: explain to me processwise, would that be a WD that says CR, or an ED that says CR
17:14:15 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: neither, its a document that says CR
17:14:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... its as if you were going to do a publication through echidna, but it doesn't handle CR
17:14:43 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i can do that this week.
17:14:56 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: it would be great if we could have it before the meeting tomorrow
17:15:17 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: that sounds fine
17:15:23 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... since we are on AS2
17:15:38 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i wonder if we could stay on as2 for a moment
17:15:47 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: i have another thing on as2 issues
17:15:52 [rhiaro]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/53
17:16:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... dret raised an issue, we discussed last week, but you weren't here evan, just wanted to make sure you saw it
17:16:27 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... its editorial so we can deal with it later, but just wanted to call your attention to it
17:17:13 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i've just read this, let me just review the core doc very quickly
17:17:36 [sandro]
aaronpk, can you get me a July 12 CR doc, too ?
17:17:52 [aaronpk]
for micropub?
17:17:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: its more just a clarification point
17:17:57 [sandro]
yes
17:18:30 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: it makes sense as people trying to push arrays through AS2 validator, but it would need to be a collection
17:18:44 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i'm okay resolving this as some text calling that it
17:19:00 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: sandro, do we need all issues closed before CR call?
17:19:02 [aaronpk]
yes, i have some minor edits to publish so i will want to publish a new WD first
17:19:09 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: no, as long as its clear its editorial
17:19:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: do we need a resolution of any type on that?
17:19:41 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i'm going to reopen this and i'll resolve it after the meeting
17:19:50 [sandro]
not if the commenter is happy
17:19:51 [ben_thatmustbeme]
<ben_thatmustbeme> i don't think we need a resolution on it
17:20:10 [rhiaro]
q-
17:20:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i can just resolve this quickly after
17:20:34 [annbass]
Q+ not about AS2 .. Wonder if Melvin's micropub objection was adequately resolved?
17:20:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i'd like to talk about a couple of other items that were closed out
17:20:45 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/328
17:20:56 [annbass]
Q+
17:21:03 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... first is 328, which is test documents of known invalid documents
17:21:22 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/tree/master/test/fail
17:21:24 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i created about 20 documents that would be useful for testing failures, bad documents
17:21:40 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... they are in a subdirectory, specifically called out as failure ones
17:21:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... they are all valid json, but not valid as2 docs
17:22:12 [eprodrom]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/tree/master/test
17:22:18 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... the other issue i closed out this week was a link to the validator, its now in the readme for the test directory
17:22:38 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i think that closes those two out
17:22:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i just wanted to call those out here and see if they were satisfactory to aaronpk and sandro
17:23:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... if so thats all we needed to discuss for as2 today. i
17:23:20 [eprodrom]
https://rawgit.com/csarven/ldn/master/index.html
17:23:27 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: linked data notifications
17:23:33 [annbass]
Q-
17:24:09 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: over the laste fiew months we have been working on a LD notifications spec, it sends JSON-LD objects around
17:24:17 [eprodrom]
q?
17:24:17 [tantek]
q?
17:24:30 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... we'd like to bring it to the WG as an ED and see how far we can get with it
17:24:47 [aaronpk]
eprodrom++ for the AS2 failure examples. looks great
17:24:48 [Loqi]
eprodrom has 34 karma
17:24:59 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: this is a generalized notification protocol. Is it within our charter? is it something within our sphere of work to work on?
17:25:14 [tantek]
+1 on charter question
17:25:15 [sandro]
q+
17:25:16 [annbass]
s/laste fiew/last few/
17:25:23 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: would another group like LDP group or a community group more accurate?
17:26:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: its not LDP, we leverage it, and its similar, but its not. You don't need to be a full LDP implmentation to be a receiver
17:26:52 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i guess my question was more about, it seems to be a general notification protocol, is it right for the socialWG to do?
17:27:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i wanted to just hear from the authors what they think of that
17:27:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: i think it is, its compatible with activity pub, its also compatible with the annotations protocol, which is a social use-case
17:28:04 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... and any other kinds of social interactions. the actual content of the notification is really broad
17:28:09 [eprodrom]
q?
17:28:14 [eprodrom]
ack sandro
17:29:39 [melvster]
melvster has joined #social
17:30:20 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: there is a permathread between me and melvin about him wanting webmentions to be something it isn't. I think this is more of what he wants. People come to webmention saying 'can i use this' and they can, but have to do some things. Its a little more straight forward if you have an authentication method already. Also the other thing is that webmention doesn't have that is, that there is some way to fetch those messages after that fact
17:30:31 [tantek]
q+ to ask about permathread
17:30:39 [eprodrom]
q?
17:30:42 [eprodrom]
ack tantek
17:30:42 [Zakim]
tantek, you wanted to ask about permathread
17:31:17 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: question to the authors, does this proposal address melvin's concerns? would this resolve that permathread?
17:31:45 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: we've run it by melvin and yes
17:31:52 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... he has said it looks good
17:32:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: well thats a good way of resolving that issue
17:32:33 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: is there an issue on webmention's issue tracker that we can point to?
17:32:38 [aaronpk]
https://github.com/aaronpk/webmention/issues/51
17:32:40 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... something we could resolve there
17:32:41 [melvster]
my suggestion was to write out an example of what webmention would look like in JSON-LD
17:33:00 [melvster]
to that extend I have written out two proposals
17:33:02 [eprodrom]
q?
17:33:09 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: maybe we could just explicitly note it in that issue
17:33:17 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: but this isn't webmention right?
17:33:34 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: yes, but i think this is what melvin wanted to turn webmention in to, but it isn't
17:34:01 [eprodrom]
q?
17:34:05 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: the question is from the process perspective, does this satisfy the commenter?
17:34:12 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: i don't htink he has said yet
17:34:18 [tantek]
q+
17:34:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: at our last f2f, we discussed the difficulty we will have to close out the existing documents. does it make sense to take on a new document this late in the game?
17:35:18 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i'm not objecting to this particular doc. I am saying in general for any new documents
17:35:31 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... is it ok for us to take on a new document at this time in our lifecycle
17:36:02 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: i would say, we are bringing more resources in from the solid end in to work on this, so its adding new resources not just more workload
17:36:16 [melvster]
rhiaro++
17:36:17 [Loqi]
rhiaro has 210 karma
17:36:42 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: i think when i made that argument was when Arnaud pointed out that we don't have time to deal with lots of different documents in the group, but we are at least trying to spread around the authorship
17:36:57 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: this is something i would be working on anyway
17:37:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: the only real resource this takes up then may be just telcon and f2f time
17:37:33 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... if we can resolve that, we can resolve the resource issue
17:38:04 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i think we need the editors to at least recognize its possible we don't finish the document as we only have 6 months left
17:38:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: we are certainly prepared to publish as a note if all else fails
17:38:26 [eprodrom]
q?
17:38:33 [eprodrom]
ack tantek
17:38:38 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: that poses a good follow up then, do you have an intended date for CR?
17:39:18 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i think we had said that anything this late we would push toward note track to make sure to set expectations inside and outside of the group
17:39:21 [annbass]
can we let them TRY for CR-track, and then back up to Note?
17:39:42 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... do you think this is simple enough to get to CR that quickly?
17:39:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: we are pretty sure we can get our specs to CR by lisbon right?
17:40:31 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... we are aiming for that, but if we have to drop to note track thats fine
17:40:50 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... its easier to go from rec to note than note to rec right?
17:41:10 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: it depends on implementations flocking to it or not
17:41:50 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: i think that makes sense. and we continue to focus on any new docs we bring to the group, we let them know its more to keep it to note track
17:42:07 [annbass_]
annbass_ has joined #social
17:42:15 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... with PuSH its very well known and has been implmented so the process is very different
17:42:49 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: we have implemented a lot of it and we have leaned on LDP for a lot of the work, and its just discovery of endpoints and such
17:43:16 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: for LDN we wrote it around the implementations we have had for some time
17:43:45 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: i think that just leaves the question evan raised about, is it in our charter?
17:43:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... what section does this fall under
17:44:00 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: federation
17:44:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... possibly social depending on how you use it
17:45:02 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: you said this is compatible with activity pub, the way you just described it could be client to server or server to server. what does this add beyond activity pub?
17:45:55 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: activitypub specifically uses json format, thats just a specialized form of LDN. we do content-type negotiation so you can send in other formats
17:46:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: so its more general then AP?
17:46:22 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: yes, AP would be a more specialized case of this
17:46:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: thats one of the concerns thats been raised to date, is that we need to have some kind of story of when we want one or the other
17:47:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
.. this seems like its even more confusing of when to use one or the other
17:47:53 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: my hope with this is take some of the work away from the AP side. We don't want it to be reliant on this spec
17:48:17 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... AP has the additional info on what to do after you receive the notification. thats out of scope of this spec
17:48:53 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: i think i get what you are saying, i'm in favor of modularizatino in general but i would like to hear from cwebber2
17:49:06 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... and how does this impact getting AP to CR
17:49:21 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... if this is going to slow AP at risk, i'm a bit more concerned
17:49:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i accept that you are working on fitting this all together
17:49:55 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: is he worried or not?
17:50:03 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: i don't know
17:50:12 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... he's not on the call today
17:50:24 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: i'd like to hear from him before we accept this as an ED
17:50:44 [eprodrom]
tsyesika: are you on the call?
17:50:46 [tsyesika]
Whilst chris is handling the splitting of the documentation, I don't think it'd put us at risk
17:50:52 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: that puts us in a little of a bind time wize, but i would like ot hear from cwebber2 or tsyesika on this before we accept it
17:51:12 [tsyesika]
I'd support this document
17:51:30 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: if we have a thumbs up from editors there from AP, i think its time for a proposal
17:51:40 [akuckartz]
tsyesika++
17:51:42 [Loqi]
tsyesika has 16 karma
17:51:49 [eprodrom]
PROPOSE: accept https://rawgit.com/csarven/ldn/master/index.html as new Editor's Draft for federation protocol
17:51:56 [melvster]
+1
17:52:01 [akuckartz]
+1
17:52:02 [tsyesika]
+1
17:52:02 [annbass_]
+1
17:52:03 [csarven]
+1
17:52:04 [dmitriz]
+1
17:52:06 [rhiaro]
+1
17:52:06 [bigbluehat]
+1
17:52:08 [wilkie]
+1
17:52:10 [rhiaro]
s/PROPOSE/PROPOSAL
17:52:11 [tantek]
thanks rhiaro for answering all the questions - no objections
17:52:12 [sandro]
(I don't think it's a question of taking on an additional risk so much as splitting the risk along multiple paths, which might decease the overall risk)
17:52:14 [sandro]
+1
17:52:23 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: if there are any objections to that working please say so now before the immediate+1s
17:52:32 [eprodrom]
PROPOSAL: accept https://rawgit.com/csarven/ldn/master/index.html as new Editor's Draft for federation protocol
17:52:37 [melvster]
+1
17:52:44 [eprodrom]
+0
17:52:51 [ben_thatmustbeme]
0, i haven't read the document
17:52:51 [rhiaro]
+1
17:52:53 [csarven]
+1
17:52:53 [akuckartz]
+1
17:53:08 [annbass_]
+1
17:53:11 [aaronpk]
+0
17:53:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: don't need to vote again, minor change there
17:53:56 [eprodrom]
RESOLVED: accept https://rawgit.com/csarven/ldn/master/index.html as new Editor's Draft for federation protocol
17:53:58 [aaronpk]
melvster, does accepting this document close webmention #51 for you then?
17:54:01 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: we have mostly +1s and some +0s. I'm a bit concerned about the timeline, but accepting we may not take this to CR
17:54:38 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: i think aaronpk had a good quesiton on IRC, does this resolve melvster's concerns on webmention
17:54:47 [melvster]
aaronpk: if there is a way to map a webmention to a linked data notification, yes
17:55:16 [tsyesika]
I read the LDN document, it looks good, similar to what we'd be doing and if it can get that to CR I'd be happy for AP to point to it as the general mechanism that we'd specify how to do it (as amy explained)
17:55:21 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: i think this does close this out unless there is something else to discuss about it
17:55:27 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... it looks like its a yes
17:55:34 [sandro]
s/aaronpk:/aaronpk,/
17:55:45 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: document status
17:55:55 [annbass_]
Thanks a lot rhiaro (and sarven and whoever else)
17:56:01 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: do we have any updates on document status
17:56:36 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: we were about to publish PTD FPWD and JF2 FPWD but we ran in to apublication holiday we didn't know about
17:57:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: maybe plan for doing them at the same time on the others, the 12th?
17:57:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: thats fine with me
17:57:21 [ben_thatmustbeme]
ben_thatmustbeme: thats fine with me too
17:57:30 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: tsyesika any updates on AP?
17:57:42 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... she's on IRC actually, so i'll give her a pass
17:57:48 [tsyesika]
I've been busy with a family situation this week sorry
17:57:49 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: is there any other business?
17:57:56 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: other business
17:58:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: upcoming F2F in lisbon
17:58:15 [annbass_]
How many think they'll be in Lisbon? (Curious)
17:58:16 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i think we have a wiki page for that, i hope so
17:58:26 [annbass_]
I plan to go
17:58:27 [tantek]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-09-22
17:58:57 [tsyesika]
I'm going to try to go but I've unfortunately not booked anything yet
17:58:59 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: we should start collecting, 'going', 'interested in going' etc
17:59:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... so we know what size room to ask for
17:59:36 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: during the f2f amy and i committed but we had a budget issue and hopefully we will know in the next day or two
17:59:55 [ben_thatmustbeme]
tantek: hopefully people can add themselves to that wiki page
18:00:01 [ben_thatmustbeme]
eprodrom: thanks everyone for coming
18:00:04 [wilkie]
thanks all
18:00:14 [eprodrom]
trackbot, end meeting
18:00:14 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
18:00:14 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been annbass, rhiaro, sandro, dmitriz, csarven, eprodrom, aaronpk, wilkie, ben_thatmustbeme, akuckartz, Benjamin_Young, KevinMarks, tsyesika,
18:00:17 [Zakim]
... tantek
18:00:22 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:00:22 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/07/05-social-minutes.html trackbot
18:00:23 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
18:00:23 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items
18:00:25 [annbass_]
Thanks a lot Evan and Ben