14:59:53 RRSAgent has joined #social 14:59:53 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/11-social-irc 14:59:55 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:59:55 Zakim has joined #social 14:59:57 Zakim, this will be SOCL 14:59:57 ok, trackbot 14:59:58 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 14:59:58 Date: 11 April 2017 15:00:03 present+ 15:01:05 present+ 15:01:24 present+ 15:01:57 present+ 15:02:41 eprodrom has joined #social 15:02:43 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-03-28-minutes 15:02:49 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-04-04-minutes 15:03:43 chair: tantek 15:04:23 present+ 15:04:46 zakim, pick a victim 15:04:46 Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose tantek 15:04:51 I can scribe for the non-AP parts 15:04:52 oh ok! 15:04:59 present+ 15:05:03 scribenick: eprodrom 15:05:15 present+ 15:05:42 TOPIC: approval of minutes 15:05:54 PROPOSED: approve minutes of https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-03-28-minutes and https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-04-04-minutes 15:06:07 +1 4th, +0 28th (wasn't there) 15:06:14 +1 15:06:22 +1 15:06:31 present+ 15:06:33 +1 15:06:57 +1 15:07:04 +0 15:07:08 RESOLVED: approve minutes of https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-03-28-minutes and https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-04-04-minutes 15:07:22 TOPIC: update on PRs 15:07:31 tantek: let's start with AS2 15:07:39 Yeah I did 15:07:50 tantek: we have two new issues 15:07:51 yes I can scribe 15:08:00 scribenick: cwebber 15:08:14 scribenick: cwebber 15:08:30 eprodrom: forgot I had actual speaking today. we have 2 new issues on AS2 15:08:44 eprodrom: one is geojson one, interesting but may be an extension / namespace thing rather than change to as2 15:09:02 eprodrom: also one on extending what the attribution mechanism is. I don't think either one is core 15:09:17 issue URLs? 15:09:25 https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/414 15:09:30 https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/413 15:09:38 eprodrom: geospatial stuff, we've all kind of gone with covering the top level of an object and then expect extensions to ... 15:09:57 eprodrom: first is around extensions around geojson one, second is around attribution/licensing 15:10:10 eprodrom: for second, Creative Commons already has a vocab, maybe show an example of using those 15:10:35 eprodrom: my feeling is these are outside of the scope of AS2... if not outside of scope, good fit for extension 15:10:39 q+ 15:10:47 ack cwebber 15:11:14 cwebber: +1 eprodrom. GeoJSON is a great example for an extension, ccREL has already done a lot of work handling licensing. 15:11:33 cwebber: if we've gone to the trouble of including extensions, these are good examples of using extensions. 15:11:42 scribenick: cwebber 15:11:45 Yea, good candidates for extensions. Not core. 15:11:56 tantek: ok, is there a place where we can have people look at a list of extensions we can encourage for reuse? 15:12:15 q+ 15:12:21 eprodrom: I don't think we have a single place like that, could be a good wiki page. Now that I've said it, I wonder if that's a link we should include in the document 15:12:26 ack rhiaro 15:12:58 rhiaro: is this the domain of the community group? we said extensions were part of CG's work 15:13:01 rhiaro: as incubation 15:13:03 eprodrom: I think so 15:13:12 tantek: I think that's another good answer we can add to the issue 15:13:24 tantek: encourage incubation of extensions to the CG 15:13:56 tantek: sounds like we have some good responses, one of which is "great suggestion, would be great as an extension", second is to create a place perhaps on wiki where we can informally have a list of extensions or things underway 15:14:09 tantek: and lastly to encourage list of folks to join the CG and incubate their extensions there 15:14:13 q+ 15:14:15 tantek: outside of the GH issues for this spec 15:14:22 ack rhiaro 15:14:40 q+ 15:14:42 rhiaro: I'd say that we don't need to maintain a list of ongoing extensions, because that would go stale, and just say "the CG will provide it" 15:14:46 ack eprodrom 15:15:09 eprodrom: what I wanted to ask is should we include that in the text of the document? maybe in the vocab document, say we have a community group that maintains extensions? 15:15:33 sandro: you're certainly not imagining 15:15:40 tantek: I remember you filing an issue 15:15:55 "Some popular extensions are included in the Activity Streams 2.0 namespace document, and can be reviewed at https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#extensions." 15:15:57 q+ 15:15:59 sandro: looking at spec, see geojson used as an example extension 15:16:17 Some popular extensions are included in the Activity Streams 2.0 namespace document, and can be reviewed at https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#extensions. 15:16:23 ack eprodrom 15:16:55 eprodrom: if it's ok for our document process, I would love to add a sentence underneath there along the lines of "extensions for AS2 are done in CG" with a link 15:16:56 +1 what ean said 15:17:01 eprodrom: could be a good way to provide that continuity 15:17:02 s/ean/evan 15:17:26 hopefully if the CG changes its name it leaves a forwarding address 15:17:31 sandro: one problem is if we change name of CG maybe link becomes stale... 15:17:34 https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#extensions 15:17:37 sandro: currently it doesn't link to the CG 15:18:05 sandro: it says the same space may be used by extensions... [whole quote happens here] 15:18:17 tantek: that seems like a reasonable small edit, to link to the specific CG since we have it 15:18:32 tantek: seems reasonable based on previouss decisions 15:18:37 sandro: in spec or in ? 15:18:42 tantek: in the spec 15:18:50 sandro: it's in the namespace doc right now, not the spec 15:18:55 Some popular extensions are included in the Activity Streams 2.0 namespace document, and can be reviewed at https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#extensions. 15:18:57 sandro: but we can change the namespace doc whenever 15:19:15 sandro: here's the line in the line: ^^^ 15:19:30 tantek: ok, seems like a reasonable proposal, we can leave it to the CG 15:19:40 tantek: and if the CG terminates, we can say here's where to go from here 15:20:04 tantek: so you're proposing a small edit to the NS document and small edit to the spec itself in the same place that refers to extensions and the CG? 15:20:06 sandro: yes 15:20:12 eprodrom: does that set us back another 2 months 15:20:15 sandro: nope 15:20:25 tantek: is that something we can do and still hit our PR on thurs? 15:20:42 sandro: not sure if it will go in there, maybe if rhiaro has staged a version, but probably 15:20:51 yeah I haven't staged anything yet 15:21:19 sandro: another possible thing to do would be at the top of the document, with github link and etc, have a link to extensions that pointed to ns document on extensions 15:21:27 tantek: I'm going to suggest not doing that, and here's why 15:21:33 uhoh I disconnected 15:21:35 someone scribe 15:21:53 scribenick: eprodrom 15:22:05 tantek: sometimes people propose extensions without reading the spec 15:22:30 scribenick: cwebber 15:23:09 PROPOSED: Resolve AS2 issues 413 414 with sounds like good extensions, but not core spec. Suggest joining SWICG. Edit ns document to link to SWICG. Similar small "Note:" in AS2 in the same place it refers to extensions and the ns doc. 15:23:22 +1 15:23:23 +1 15:23:25 cwebber: +1 15:23:26 +1 15:23:35 +1 15:23:44 RESOLVED: Resolve AS2 issues 413 414 with sounds like good extensions, but not core spec. Suggest joining SWICG. Edit ns document to link to SWICG. Similar small "Note:" in AS2 in the same place it refers to extensions and the ns doc. 15:23:47 +1 15:24:14 tantek: ok so we have only a couple editorial changes to as2, not sure if it will block PR or not but 15:24:20 tantek: what are we waiting for PR on? 15:24:46 sandro: amy submitted transition request on friday so we're waiting for ralph, expecting them to make the decision tomorrow? so we may transition on (friday?) 15:25:00 tantek: I think that's all for as2 15:25:06 s/(friday?)/thursday 15:25:13 tantek: let's move on to LDN 15:25:26 scribenick: eprodrom 15:25:29 TOPIC: LDN 15:25:48 rhiaro: we are getting reviews, no formal objections, some implementations 15:26:04 TOPIC: Micropub 15:26:16 tantek: Ralph filed a security issue 15:26:18 https://github.com/w3c/Micropub/issues/89 15:26:27 tantek: aaronpk provided text 15:27:01 PROPOSED Resolution of issue 89: https://github.com/w3c/Micropub/issues/89#issuecomment-292315067 15:27:58 +1 15:28:31 Addition of https://micropub.net/draft/#external-content 15:28:32 6.1 https://micropub.net/draft/#external-content 15:28:46 +1 15:28:46 +1 15:28:50 +1 15:28:59 q+ 15:29:05 ack 15:29:08 ack eprodrom 15:29:48 +1 but i think that was implied because i wrote the text ;-) 15:30:43 I'm still here 15:30:56 eprodrom: is there a document that we could refer to for security issues in sharing URLs? 15:31:00 tantek: none comes to mind 15:31:07 give me one more minute 15:31:11 sorry, brain kicking in 15:31:41 it seems fine to me 15:31:50 TOPIC: WebSub CR 15:31:54 https://www.w3.org/TR/websub 15:31:56 [Julien Genestoux] WebSub 15:31:59 sandro: it's out this morning 15:32:09 yay! 15:32:13 🎉 15:32:13 tantek: congrats to aaronpk and jullien 15:32:15 😄 15:32:30 sandro: can you link the tweet 15:32:37 RESOLVED: Resolution of issue 89: https://github.com/w3c/Micropub/issues/89#issuecomment-292315067 15:32:42 https://twitter.com/sandhawke/status/851799399172800514 15:32:42 [@sandhawke] WebSub, the http Pub/Sub protocol formerly known as PubSubHubbub (PuSH) finally makes it to @W3C Candidate Rec! https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/ 15:34:04 tantek: aaronpk has to stage new pr draft, ralph has to review the edit for micropub 15:34:53 scribenick: eprodrom 15:35:03 TOPIC: activitypub 15:35:10 tantek: how are we doing? 15:35:22 cwebber: changes to the spec are imminent 15:35:36 http://w3c.github.io/activitypub/#changes-17-nov-11-apr 15:36:23 cwebber: we had an extra # char at the end of the profile, inconsistent with AS2 15:36:31 cwebber: OK since AS2 is authoritative 15:36:46 cwebber: issues filed since last night 15:36:57 https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/180 15:37:02 https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/182 15:37:27 cwebber: did not document side effects for the ignore verb; would be normative 15:37:39 cwebber: document Ignore as a MAY 15:37:55 q+ 15:38:21 ack eprodrom 15:40:29 eprodrom: Mute and Block are important functions 15:40:47 cwebber: could we include it as a MAY? 15:41:31 It might be something that implementations decide to do anyway 15:41:37 hopefully in a consistent way 15:41:41 tantek: that would be more conservative, include as an extension 15:42:29 cwebber: the commenter understands they're minor and last-minute 15:42:44 cwebber: https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/180 is more difficult 15:43:02 https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#icon 15:44:04 cwebber: we have some leftovers from pump.io 15:44:15 cwebber: icon is either a link or an URL 15:44:32 cwebber: what to do? 15:44:42 cwebber: we have suggested change text 15:45:06 cwebber: we could drop properties that are in AS2 15:45:35 q+ 15:45:50 tantek: it looks like sandro is in favor of dropping dupes 15:46:02 tantek: my understanding is that's not a functional change 15:46:43 rhiaro: I think it's fine 15:46:48 q- 15:46:59 cwebber: this will shorten the doc anyway 15:47:07 q+ 15:48:10 q- 15:48:22 cwebber: "name" is called out as nickname or full name 15:48:46 that seems fine to me 15:48:48 cwebber: I don't see any properties that are restricted or more explicit 15:49:27 strugee has joined #social 15:49:58 cwebber: should I keep the name one? 15:49:59 https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#actors 15:50:03 It would be kind of conspicuously absent if it wasn't there 15:51:39 KevinMarks has joined #social 15:52:23 cwebber: should we keep the one "name" property definition? 15:53:45 +1 simply listing AS2 ones that are expected 15:53:55 expected/recommended 15:54:19 cwebber: no other properties have been changed in AP 15:54:35 cwebber: with those edits done we should not have any normative changes 15:54:53 Keeping this text then? "Implementations SHOULD, in addition, provide the following properties:" ? 15:55:58 tantek: any other comments 15:56:47 in here: http://w3c.github.io/activitypub/#changes-17-nov-11-apr 15:57:08 cwebber: we reviewed with Ralph in email, he said it was OK 15:57:40 PROPOSED: Resolve AP issues 180 182 per consensus as discussed above. 15:57:49 +1 15:57:52 +1 15:57:57 +1 15:57:58 +1 15:58:00 +1 15:58:14 RESOLVED: Resolve AP issues 180 182 per consensus as discussed above. 15:59:04 PROPOSED: Publish updated AP CR draft with editorial fixes http://w3c.github.io/activitypub/#changes-17-nov-11-apr 15:59:08 +1 15:59:13 +1 15:59:24 +1 15:59:24 +1 15:59:46 RESOLUTION: Publish updated AP CR draft with editorial fixes http://w3c.github.io/activitypub/#changes-17-nov-11-apr 15:59:47 yeah needs publishing by hand, but no director approval, will take care of it 15:59:48 +1 15:59:50 RESOLVED: Publish updated AP CR draft with editorial fixes http://w3c.github.io/activitypub/#changes-17-nov-11-apr 16:00:23 tantek: any other updates on AP 16:00:34 cwebber: we have an implementation report template 16:00:41 cwebber: working on the test suite 16:01:06 cwebber: at worst 2 weeks 16:01:40 cwebber: may end up an interactive text adventure 16:01:54 cwebber: testing client-to-server (both sides), server-to-server 16:02:11 cwebber: might be really hard 16:02:28 q+ 16:02:53 Same for LDN.. we just did a web form that people fill in after running their client, cwebber 16:02:56 ack eprodrom 16:04:16 cwebber: implementations have been moving along 16:04:30 cwebber: mastodon has a couple of commits that AP will be coming 16:05:22 cwebber: AP might be a good next step because it has a test suite 16:05:26 q+ 16:05:47 ack aaronpk 16:06:06 aaronpk: i released the report before the test suite, so any reports had to be reverified 16:06:26 aaronpk: which was a hassle. So finish the test suite before getting implementation reports. 16:06:42 aaronpk: take a look at micropub.rocks 16:07:23 cwebber: strugee said they are hoping to get AP implementation in pump.io this month 16:07:51 tantek: before we close, apologies that we are over 16:08:37 tantek: next telcon date 4/25 16:08:40 strugee, \o/ 16:08:44 PROPOSED: Next telcon 2017-04-25 16:08:45 tantek: any objections? 16:08:47 +1 16:08:49 +1 16:08:50 +1 16:08:52 +1 16:09:08 +1 16:09:26 +1 16:09:31 RESOLVED: Next telcon 2017-04-25 16:09:57 tantek: hopefully we'll have more PRs then 16:10:00 thanks! 16:10:04 q? 16:10:15 tantek++ 16:10:16 tantek has 50 karma in this channel (329 overall) 16:10:48 cwebber, so, what I was going to ask is, once we get test suite and implementation report template up 16:11:14 ...we make a page on the wiki linking to issues for each fedsocweb app asking for implementation 16:11:36 eprodrom: ah yeah 16:11:46 Diaspora, Elgg, GNU Social, Mastodon, pump.io, rstatus, GNU MediaGoblin, Owncloud maybe? 16:11:49 sandro, go for it! 16:11:54 eprodrom: yes sounds good 16:11:57 trackbot, end meeting 16:11:57 Zakim, list attendees 16:11:57 As of this point the attendees have been tantek, aaronpk, rhiaro, cwebber, ben_thatmustbeme, sandro, csarven, eprodrom 16:12:02 Friendica or whatever it's called now 16:12:05 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 16:12:05 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/11-social-minutes.html trackbot 16:12:06 RRSAgent, bye 16:12:06 I see no action items