18:10:49 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
18:10:49 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/13-social-irc
18:10:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
18:10:51 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #social
18:10:53 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SOCL
18:10:53 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
18:10:54 <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
18:10:54 <trackbot> Date: 13 December 2016
18:10:59 <ben_thatmustbeme> scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme
18:11:08 <ben_thatmustbeme> TOPIC: AS2
18:11:33 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: we made a small error last week, we decided to publish AS2 without realizing the vocab document had changed
18:12:01 <sandro> https://www.w3.org/People/Sandro/as2-vocab-cr1-cr2.html
18:12:01 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... it didn't have a change log, but i did a diff and it had a ton of changes, all the examples had changed
18:12:10 <Loqi> [James M Snell] Activity Vocabulary
18:12:22 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... as well as other clarifications, there is the diff i did last week (link in IRC)
18:12:38 <aaronpk> present+
18:12:48 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... since then Evan added a changelog
18:13:03 <KevinMarks> Present+
18:13:08 <ben_thatmustbeme> present+
18:13:08 <cwebber2> I can look
18:13:28 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: can people take a quick look and see if this seems right to you?
18:13:29 <csarven> present+
18:14:04 <cwebber2> sandro, so what's the question?  is the changelog right?
18:14:19 <timbl> timbl has joined #social
18:14:42 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: they are only examples
18:14:54 <ben_thatmustbeme> cwebber2: (beep beep beep)
18:15:09 <cwebber2> ok I'll just type then
18:15:09 <csarven> I think I've heard every possible sound that one can make through w3c telcos
18:15:18 <csarven> That wa sa nice one fo rme
18:15:21 <csarven> new
18:15:43 <annbass> present+
18:15:49 <sandro> present+
18:15:59 <sandro> PROPOSED: Confirm last week's decision to publish AS2 as a new Candidate Recommendation, now that we have a proper changelog for AS2 Vocabs http://w3c.github.io/activitystreams/vocabulary/#changelog
18:16:06 <Loqi> [James M Snell] Activity Vocabulary
18:16:07 <annbass> +1
18:16:09 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1
18:16:12 <sandro> +1
18:16:36 <ben_thatmustbeme> <ben_thatmustbeme> i looked over the examples, again not an expert, but looks good given a quick look through (while scribing)
18:16:36 <rhiaro> +1
18:16:41 <aaronpk> +1
18:16:48 <cwebber2> +1
18:16:49 <sandro> RESOLVED: Confirm last week's decision to publish AS2 as a new Candidate Recommendation, now that we have a proper changelog for AS2 Vocabs http://w3c.github.io/activitystreams/vocabulary/#changelog
18:16:50 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: any other votes, thoughts?
18:16:53 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
18:16:55 <Loqi> [James M Snell] Activity Vocabulary
18:17:14 <sandro> http://as2.amy.gy/reports.html
18:17:16 <tantek> tantek has joined #social
18:17:16 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: amy i see new implementation reports?
18:17:24 <ben_thatmustbeme> rhiaro: i didn't put anything on the agenda
18:17:31 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... maybe just copied from last week
18:17:50 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: i think we are good on AS2, that should be published on thursday
18:17:58 <ben_thatmustbeme> TOPIC: webmention
18:17:59 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
18:18:20 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: in theory we should be moving from CR to REC, but it looks like its not going to happen before the deadline for this year
18:19:25 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: the issues that are open right now are from external commenters, and every issue on there now has a PR for it and i'm waiting to hear back from the commentor about the issue
18:19:55 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... it looks like tantek has given some thumbs up on all of them, but i'm assuming thats just from him and not from the original commentor
18:20:04 <shepazu> shepazu has joined #social
18:20:05 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: some of these are from Mozilla?
18:20:31 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: yes.  They are all just clarifications, but I'd appreciate any review people want to do
18:20:58 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... these will be the last things to go in to the draft before going to REC
18:21:24 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: that sounds like a good reason not to go to REC before the break, give commenters time to review them and respond
18:21:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... it will be much harder to make any changes after this
18:21:49 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... does anyone want to go over any of these now?
18:22:29 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: wasn't there something about 1mb hard-written in to the spec
18:22:56 <KevinMarks> Can we talk them through and commit the PRs, and wait for commenters in that state?
18:23:03 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: yes in the security considerations, should put limitations on fetching" "for example, 1 mb or 5 seconds"
18:23:25 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: i would have imagined we would say that clients have to read at least the first MB
18:23:51 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: i'm happy with the text on 86
18:25:12 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: if anyone is reviewing these now and we are happy with it, i'm happy to merge PRs in and then wait for commenter after the merge
18:26:35 <aaronpk> https://github.com/w3c/webmention/issues/76
18:26:41 <aaronpk> https://github.com/w3c/webmention/pull/85/files
18:27:00 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: this should be pretty easy, i basically added a background section at the top of the document
18:27:31 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... explaining how webmention was built from and on top of pingback
18:28:19 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: pingback never specified what to do for updates and deletes
18:28:39 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: correct, it actuallly could not be used for updates as it said to reject a pingback that was already registered
18:28:48 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: what about trackback?
18:29:08 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: trackback was just actually sending the comment snippet, there wasn't anything about URLs in the spec
18:29:46 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: whenever i explain webmention, i have to use the word trackback for them to understand it
18:30:08 <ben_thatmustbeme> annbass: would it be possible to add some little comment about trackback as well?
18:30:17 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... set the historical context
18:31:13 <KevinMarks> I suspect talking to people who haven't been on the web for a decade, trackback references will only confuse
18:32:46 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: i don't know, trackback is so old and overrun with spam it doesn't seem worth mentioning
18:33:23 <ben_thatmustbeme> annbass: i suppose but as sandro said when he explains it he has to reference trackback
18:33:46 <sandro> https://movabletype.org/documentation/trackback/specification.html
18:33:47 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: even just bringing up trackback spec confuses me, do we want to link people to it
18:34:10 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... the spec talks about installing cURL, thats not a spec
18:34:32 <ben_thatmustbeme> <ben_thatmustbeme> can we just say "and other linkback methods" or something?
18:34:54 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: maybe i can include a sentence about webmention being in this family of linkback mechanisms
18:35:10 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: and maybe link to wikipedia for those that don't know what linkback is?
18:35:42 <sandro> "Webmention provides a [[LinkBack]] mechanism.  It began as a simplified version of [[PingBack]].... "
18:35:44 <ben_thatmustbeme> csarven: i think thats a good way as there are other methods that may be coming up
18:35:59 <annbass> I like that suggestion .. shows there are some other 'link back' mechanisms, with a ref, but without having to delve into any history or details
18:36:09 <sandro> "Webmention provides a [[LinkBack]] mechanism, somewhat akin to TrackBack.  Webmention itself began as a simplified version of [[PingBack]].... "
18:37:40 <tantek> tantek has joined #social
18:37:41 <csarven> I don't know if anyone actually cares about this but AFAIK, Semantic Pingback (circa 2010) predates Webmention. Whether that needs to be said somewhere is something else.
18:38:04 <csarven> and both derive from Pingback.. or I don't know if WM derived/simplified from SP or not.
18:40:15 <KevinMarks> Right, there are lots of these, so referring to the general idea is better than an attempted genealogy.
18:41:14 <tantek> the specific request was for Pingback since that is what is widely known and deployed (and thus folks have some understanding of its security etc characteristics in practice)
18:41:23 <KevinMarks> Technorati was link back as a service, Blogger has had backlinks based on Google crawl for years,
18:41:25 <tantek> it wasn't about a full genealogy of all experiments
18:41:36 <tantek> to add clarity from the commenter's perspective (Mozilla)
18:41:40 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: i think what i want to do is just mention that webmention is a linkback and it links to the wikipedia page
18:41:44 <tantek> so no need to add anything beyond that
18:41:51 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... i'm doing that right now
18:42:43 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: looks good
18:42:51 <KevinMarks> Or we end up going back to Xanadu and Memex
18:42:53 <tantek> no
18:42:58 <sandro> :-)
18:43:07 <tantek> the linkback abstaraction is academic
18:43:24 <tantek> the specific request was for pingback and/or trackback
18:43:32 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: since tantek opened these issues, i'll wait for tantek to go back to the original commentor
18:43:33 <tantek> because of practical deployment experience reasons
18:43:35 <csarven> Then just say Pingback!
18:43:36 <tantek> not for definitional ones
18:43:40 <csarven> No need to talk about LInkback inf act
18:43:47 <tantek> csarven - right, just Pingback is enough
18:43:54 <tantek> that's what the issue said originally
18:43:59 <tantek> not sure what all this bikeshedding is about
18:44:22 <sandro> it's done, tantek
18:44:44 <tantek> I confirmed that just referencing Pingback is enough, the way the pull request did when I reviewed it earlier this morning
18:44:52 <tantek> (pull request on the issue)
18:45:00 <tantek> linkback--
18:45:00 <Loqi> linkback has -1 karma
18:45:57 <aaronpk> https://github.com/w3c/webmention/issues/84
18:46:16 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: this is a tricky one, it sounded like he misunderstood what the section was about
18:46:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... it was specifically about the POST request
18:47:18 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... that was the section, but the comment, was about republishing private comment, essentially a totally different issue which we hadn't talked about before
18:47:33 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... instead of changing that section, I added another section about his actual concern
18:48:05 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... since webmention doesn't specify anything about republishing, its an note under the verification section
18:48:19 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... it mentions that the receiver might be republishing that
18:48:44 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... i added a note below that about not unintentionally changing the privacy on that
18:49:05 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... just trying to make sure people are aware of it, without specifying what to do about it. thats a job for the next layer up
18:49:28 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: i'm happy with that change
18:50:00 <KevinMarks> That's a useful clarification.
18:51:15 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: closing 71 since tantek opened that and he thumbs upped it
18:51:30 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: do we know when the publishing moritorium is over?
18:51:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: we'll figure it out laster
18:51:41 <rhiaro> January 3, 2017: Publications resume
18:51:57 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: are we meeting on the 20th and/or 27th
18:52:22 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... i'd guess we are not meeting the 27th, we COULD meet the 20th, i'd prefer not to
18:52:36 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: i'd be up for dropping the 27th meeting
18:52:48 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... that means the next meeting would be the date publishing ends
18:52:56 <tantek> tantek has joined #social
18:53:22 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: if you want to go and prepare a draft for the third, assuming all the commenters are happy
18:54:11 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: rhiaro have you gone to sleep?
18:55:00 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: we'll try to move things along and get it published when the moritorium ends
18:55:16 <KevinMarks> http://epeus.blogspot.com/2004/02/technorati-xanadu-and-other-dreams.html historic info for csarven
18:55:46 <tantek> sandro, did you hear back re: REC publishing? is it already too late?
18:56:37 <sandro> no answer, tantek
18:57:00 <sandro> tantek, can you get a positive response from the commenter?
18:57:24 <csarven> KevinMarks: Do I have to read this? What was the inquiry?
18:58:08 <tantek> sandro, already preflighted that with the proposals in the issues
18:58:56 <tantek> also, to be clear, the Mozilla vote on the PR was to Yes to publish, with *suggested* changes, not required
18:59:24 <sandro> Sure, but since they're editorial improvements, it's not nice to ignore them.
18:59:46 <tantek> especially as these are all editorial / non-normative, I believe the changes being made reflect the intentions of the commenter
18:59:57 <tantek> (from having spoken with the commenter in-person last week)
19:00:05 <sandro> excellent, okay
19:00:08 <tantek> (we had a Mozilla All Hands last week)
19:01:21 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: i've been looking up on "linkback" and it looks like the term only exists on wikipedia
19:01:38 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... it looks like it was created there
19:01:45 <cwebber2> to linkback?
19:01:48 <tantek> that sounds likea violation of Wikipedia's no original research rule
19:01:51 <cwebber2> https://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy-ab&site=&source=hp&q=linkback&=&=&oq=&gs_l=&pbx=1
19:01:54 <cwebber2> seems to be a lot of results
19:02:01 <tantek> nothing citable
19:02:04 <ben_thatmustbeme> annbass: do whatever you feel is right
19:02:13 <aaronpk> cwebber2, look at the results, they're not about the 4 methods
19:02:19 <tantek> cwebber2 - if there were, the linkback article itself would have a citation
19:02:20 <KevinMarks> No, you do t have to read anything, I thought you were be interested in the history of this
19:02:21 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: i find myself using the term 'backlinking'
19:02:30 <cwebber2> ah ok
19:02:33 <annbass>  the point is to help the uninitiated reader understand
19:02:37 <ben_thatmustbeme> <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro, but backlinking is really,r eally generic though in my mind
19:02:48 <cwebber2> I gotta go though
19:02:52 <cwebber2> later everyone!
19:02:58 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: a backlink is a name for the link itself
19:03:14 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... that is a kind of different thing
19:03:19 <tantek> cwebber2 - made-up stuff on wikipedia is bad for everyone
19:03:52 <ben_thatmustbeme> <ben_thatmustbeme> i'm not sure i like us linking to wikipedia in the spec anyway
19:04:08 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: yeah, lets go back to the pingback version then
19:04:17 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: i think i like that better
19:05:40 <ben_thatmustbeme> so there are 3 issues, 3 PRs, tantek believes they address all the issues raised
19:05:49 <ben_thatmustbeme> s/so/.../
19:06:14 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: so i will merge the PRs and leave the issues waiting for commenter so we don't lose track of them
19:06:21 <ben_thatmustbeme> ... i'll do that and I'll stage this
19:06:50 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: okay, it looks like we can probably go ahead for december 15th
19:06:56 <ben_thatmustbeme> <ben_thatmustbeme> \o/
19:07:57 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: any last minute things from anyone else?
19:08:19 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: do people want to meet next week?
19:08:27 <tantek> do we need to resolve to pubilsh anything?
19:08:35 <tantek> (today)
19:08:35 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk: i might have some trailing things still for other work items
19:08:45 <sandro> no resolution needed, really, but we did conmfirm AS2 with the changelog.
19:08:52 <KevinMarks> “As we all know, Ted Nelson meant hypertexts to have bidirectional links. But due to a laboratory accident in Switzerland, we ended up with this lame thing.”
19:08:53 <sandro> webmention REC should go out this week
19:09:14 <sandro> "That was NO accident"
19:09:24 <tantek> wow we'll actually deliver at least one charter deliverable within our original charter period!
19:09:27 <annbass> gotta go ..
19:09:29 <annbass> thanks Sandro
19:09:47 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: okay, tentatively there is a meeting for next week, might get cancelled if we end up with nothing on the agenda
19:09:50 <sandro> meeting as planned next week, unless nothing turns up for the agenda
19:09:54 <ben_thatmustbeme> Chair: Sandro
19:10:05 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: and we said no meeting on the 27th
19:10:07 <sandro> no meeting on Dec 27th.
19:10:09 <tantek> present+
19:10:17 <tantek> (just on IRC, sporadically :P)
19:10:24 <ben_thatmustbeme> regrets+ evan
19:10:54 <KevinMarks> You were present in github
19:11:29 <sandro> ADJOURNED
19:11:40 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: talk to you all either in 1 week or 3, and have a happy december
19:11:41 <tantek> sandro++ thanks for chairing!
19:11:41 <Loqi> sandro has 32 karma in this channel (37 overall)
19:11:49 <tantek> ben_thatmustbeme++ thanks for minuting!
19:11:49 <Loqi> ben_thatmustbeme has 60 karma in this channel (181 overall)
19:11:54 <ben_thatmustbeme> sandro: don't all say bye at once everyone
19:11:58 <ben_thatmustbeme> rhiaro: bye
19:12:10 <sandro> thank for scribing ben_thatmustbeme !
19:12:14 <tantek> so maybe meeting next week, but definitely canceled the 27th?
19:12:24 <aaronpk> yes
19:12:43 <ben_thatmustbeme> trackbot end meeting
19:12:43 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
19:12:43 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been aaronpk, KevinMarks, ben_thatmustbeme, csarven, annbass, sandro, tantek
19:12:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:12:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/13-social-minutes.html trackbot
19:12:52 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
19:12:52 <RRSAgent> I see no action items