17:05:34 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
17:05:34 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/06/13-social-irc
17:05:36 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
17:05:36 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #social
17:05:38 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SOCL
17:05:38 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
17:05:39 <tantek> present+
17:05:39 <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
17:05:39 <trackbot> Date: 13 June 2017
17:05:53 <ajordan> present+
17:06:09 <cwebber2> present+
17:06:18 <cwebber2> sorry to be late, got distracted by lunch prep :)
17:06:42 <aaronpk> present+
17:06:42 <cwebber2> yes
17:07:05 <tantek> tantek has changed the topic to: Next: SWWG telcon https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-06-13, SWICG telcon https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialcg/2017-06-14 logs: https://chat.indieweb.org/social
17:09:15 <jankusanagi_> jankusanagi_ has joined #social
17:09:31 <tantek> zakim, who is here?
17:09:31 <Zakim> Present: tantek, ajordan, cwebber, aaronpk
17:09:33 <Zakim> On IRC I see jankusanagi_, Zakim, RRSAgent, ajordan_, tantek, JanKusanagi, cwebber2, cristomc, albino, csarven, DenSchub, KjetilK, ben_thatmustbeme, ajordan, sknebel, sandro,
17:09:33 <Zakim> ... rhiaro, astronouth7303, dwhly, bitbear, jaywink, jet, mattl, bigbluehat, saper, aaronpk, tcit, wilkie, MMN-o, Loqi, puckipedia, bwn, nightpool, trackbot, lambadalambda, raucao,
17:09:33 <Zakim> ... saranix
17:10:02 <Loqi> Strugee made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2017-06-13]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=103209&oldid=103208
17:10:25 <tantek> scribenick: cwebber2
17:10:32 <tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-06-06-minutes
17:10:35 <rhiaro> present+
17:10:43 <cwebber2> tantek: first things first, let's look at the minutes to see if they can be approved or not
17:12:21 <cwebber2> PROPOSED: Approve https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-06-06-minutes as log of last week's meeting.
17:12:22 <cwebber2> +1
17:12:22 <ajordan> +1
17:12:59 <rhiaro> +1
17:13:14 <cwebber2> RESOLVED: Approve https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-06-06-minutes as log of last week's meeting.
17:14:10 <cwebber2> tantek: let's talk about ActivityPub first, go in agenda order
17:14:16 <cwebber2> scribenick: rhiaro
17:14:38 <rhiaro> cwebber: the update is short. Progress on test suite. Either next week or the week after I'll have something up publicly for c2s stuff
17:15:12 <rhiaro> ... the main blocker this week was that I thought I could get thing implemented without having to do the faux server receiver, but it was necessary because even though this was for c2s server only when you add addressing, the server on the other end might end up posting to the address you're giving and that could result in surprises for the server
17:15:19 <rhiaro> ... so in order to make sure the server doesn't freak out I had to add that
17:15:21 <rhiaro> ... but it's coming along
17:15:26 <rhiaro> ... we'll see something up and running in a couple of weeks
17:15:29 <rhiaro> tantek: sounds like a good approach
17:15:39 <rhiaro> ... I feel like aaronpk had to do something similar for micropub
17:15:54 <ben_thatmustbeme> present+
17:15:56 <rhiaro> aaronpk: I didn't quite follow all that but there were definitely some tricks I had to deal with for micropub
17:16:24 <rhiaro> tantek: are there any new issues on ap?
17:16:41 <rhiaro> cwebber: there is, but I haven't reviewed it yet
17:16:55 <cwebber2> scribenick: cwebber2
17:16:57 <ajordan> cwebber2: which issue was that?
17:17:16 <cwebber2> topic: websub
17:17:26 <cwebber2> aaronpk: nothing to do with the test-suite, we need more people to submit reports
17:17:30 <cwebber2> tantek: how many do we have?
17:17:37 <cwebber2> aaronpk: 2 hubs, 1 publisher, 1 subscriber
17:17:39 <cwebber2> tantek: ok
17:17:54 <cwebber2> aaronpk: newest one, wordpress plugin, added last week, which is a publisher
17:17:59 <aaronpk> https://github.com/w3c/websub/blob/master/implementation-reports/PUBLISHER-wordpress-pubsubhubbub.md
17:18:07 <cwebber2> aaronpk: here's a link to the report
17:18:11 <cwebber2> tantek: progress at least from last week
17:18:16 <aaronpk> https://w3c.github.io/websub/
17:18:17 <Loqi> [Julien Genestoux] WebSub
17:18:19 <cwebber2> aaronpk: yes, and I've staged a new ED here
17:18:34 <cwebber2> aaronpk: the current change is adding http 410 ???
17:18:40 <cwebber2> aaronpk: making sure that satisfies the original commenter
17:18:54 <cwebber2> aaronpk: and other than that I can't remember where we were with publishing a new CR
17:19:09 <rhiaro> oh there's a thread on this, lemme check
17:19:41 <cwebber2> tantek: I believe we were waiting to see for Sandro to see if this... I think we decided it was a normative change but it didn't impact any existing implementations was more of a clarification?  I think Sandro was looking for guidance from Ralph to see if we could publish without resetting the clock
17:19:53 <rhiaro> We got a reply from Ralph which asked a question, then no follow up
17:20:02 <Loqi> Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2017-06-06-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=103210&oldid=103130
17:20:07 <rhiaro> Not quite
17:20:08 <rhiaro> Sandro replied
17:20:11 <rhiaro> no follow up from ralph
17:20:35 <rhiaro> Ralph: Is this a repeat of [#102][1] or a similar change in another place? - Sandro: "It's similar in feel & scope to #102, but it's different: https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/106"
17:20:36 <Loqi> [Alkarex] #106 Suggestion: Use HTTP 410 Gone
17:20:37 <cwebber2> tantek: so it's at back and forth, ok.  if anyone wants to... aaronpk do you have a changes link?
17:20:39 <aaronpk> https://w3c.github.io/websub/#changes-from-11-april-2017-cr-to-this-version
17:20:40 <cwebber2> aaronpk: of course
17:21:41 <cwebber2> tantek: ok so it became a suggestion based on experience
17:21:47 <cwebber2> aaronpk: yes, it technically wasn't allowed beffore
17:21:57 <cwebber2> tantek: ok so we're loosening conformance requirements?
17:22:23 <cwebber2> aaronpk: yes, and it's a MAY not a SHOULD
17:22:40 <cwebber2> tantek: ok I think that's what we concluded last week as well
17:23:08 <cwebber2> tantek: let's get that on the record that the group has reviewed it?
17:23:39 <cwebber2> aaronpk: yes last resolution was on May 23rd, move to adopt behavior if it didn't restart, but I believe there was no added text for that
17:24:29 <cwebber2> PROPOSED: publish updated websub CR with clarifications and changes based on implementations that we believe should not reset the clock
17:24:33 <cwebber2> +1
17:24:34 <rhiaro> +1
17:24:41 <aaronpk> +1
17:24:57 <ajordan> +1
17:25:06 <tantek> +1
17:25:15 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1
17:25:15 <cwebber2> RESOLVED: publish updated websub CR with clarifications and changes based on implementations that we believe should not reset the clock
17:26:01 <cwebber2> tantek: ok that moves us on to the next topic, unless there are new issues that are normative and you want to look at?
17:26:24 <cwebber2> aaronpk: there is an issue from Julian from last week... not sure I want to discuss it with the group, it's a huge change and I think there's no quick resolution to this
17:26:29 <aaronpk> https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/110
17:26:30 <Loqi> [julien51] #110 Topics
17:26:40 <cwebber2> aaronpk: I'm fine continuing disussion on github and postponing for future revision
17:27:25 <cwebber2> tantek: so you're suggesting this is a future version?  we've already punted lots of things we don't have implementations for
17:27:50 <cwebber2> tantek: from a quick read of this I don't see how this could work with anything that... it could be a reuse of an existing spec, but it could be a brand new feature and i can't tell
17:28:30 <cwebber2> aaronpk: yes I think there isn't necessarily a clear path forward on this yet.  i get what he's trying to do, and I think this specific suggestion isn't the only way to do it.  it's possible to do this using something that would make less of an impact on the spec, and that's what we should explore first
17:28:32 <cwebber2> tantek: ok
17:28:40 <cwebber2> tantek: anyone else have opinions to contribute?
17:28:52 <ben_thatmustbeme> I have begun work on another hub
17:29:32 <cwebber2> tantek: ok I won't suggest anything for the group to resolve, hopefully we can move forward next week then
17:29:36 <ben_thatmustbeme> will need to look at that issue closer
17:30:03 <cwebber2> aaronpk: ok I think this could be similar to something mastodon does, so I'll leave it for the discussion calls for tomorrow
17:30:12 <cwebber2> tantek: ok, if we can get feedback from the CG that would be great
17:30:25 <tantek> q?
17:30:34 <cwebber2> tantek: ok if there's nothing else on websub, then post type discovery is next
17:30:37 <cwebber2> topic: post type discovery
17:30:54 <rhiaro> I can IRC-chair
17:31:07 <rhiaro> if everyone is paying attention
17:31:13 <rhiaro> yay evan!
17:31:17 <ajordan> \o/
17:31:21 <cwebber2> present+ evan
17:31:30 <tantek> chair: evan
17:31:37 <eprodrom> eprodrom has joined #social
17:31:43 <cwebber2> chair: evan
17:32:41 <cwebber2> tantek: last week one of the things we talked about is one of the things we can do to help Mastodon and other emerging social sites adoptions of our specs is one of the examples people have discussed is webmention, and a key to that which would be useful for at least Mastodon is when you receive a webmention and detemine it's valid, how would you tell what kind of post it is?
17:32:48 <ben_thatmustbeme> they call it "Boosting" i believe
17:32:53 <cwebber2> tantek: so I took that as input for PTD, and I have an update for everyone
17:33:05 <tantek> https://tantek.github.io/post-type-discovery/index-src.html
17:33:18 <cwebber2> tantek: it's ready to be turned into a WD, that's all the WD-meta stuff to be changed.  that's the respec live versions of the document source
17:33:19 <tantek> https://github.com/tantek/post-type-discovery/issues/24
17:33:20 <Loqi> [tantek] #24 add a subset algorithm for Response Type Discovery
17:33:27 <cwebber2> tantek: the issue I added that it's solving is ^^^
17:33:42 <tantek> https://tantek.github.io/post-type-discovery/index-src.html#change-log
17:33:43 <cwebber2> tantek: I added the changelog ^^^
17:35:13 <cwebber2> tantek: my proposal is to publish this update to PTD with this use case of when you're trying to determine what kind of valid response it is, what's the easy steps you can take to do the valid PTD parts.  what's the valid PTD aspects that are trying to advance current implementations?
17:35:31 <cwebber2> eprodrom: is this a ???
17:35:45 <ben_thatmustbeme> s/???/working draft?/
17:36:04 <cwebber2> tantek: yes it's showing an updated, simpler algorithm that I believe reflects existing implementations rather than the current algorithm, so gives a lower barrier to entry.  let me link to the exact new section
17:36:04 <tantek> https://tantek.github.io/post-type-discovery/index-src.html#response-algorithm
17:36:15 <cwebber2> eprodrom: I def get the context, trying to understand where we are in the editorial cycle
17:36:19 <cwebber2> tantek: it's another WD
17:36:29 <cwebber2> eprodrom: with this addition, it's already up as another WD
17:36:41 <cwebber2> tantek: up with group's review
17:37:03 <eprodrom> PRIP
17:37:09 <cwebber2> eprodrom: we can do a few things, a proposal to publish a new WD, I don't think the group has had a lot of chance to review, but I don't think it's as high stakes since it's a WD
17:37:19 <cwebber2> tantek: I also made a minor addition basedd on that request
17:37:43 <cwebber2> tantek: one paragraph and five items, plus a subset of the existing algorithm rather than a bunch of new things.  deliberately tried to constrain changes
17:37:49 <eprodrom> PROPOSED: publish new working draft of Post Type Discovery based on new editors draft
17:37:49 <cwebber2> tantek: if people want a lot more time to review that's fine too
17:38:07 <eprodrom> +1
17:38:11 <cwebber2> eprodrom: here's the proposal, personally I think it sounds like a good candidate for a new WD
17:38:13 <aaronpk> +1
17:38:14 <ajordan> +1
17:38:14 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1
17:38:28 <cwebber2> cwebber2: +0.5 because I haven't been able to pay attention very well while scribing
17:38:33 <cwebber2> cwebber2: but sounds good
17:39:06 <ben_thatmustbeme> its a pretty small difference, so it should only take a moment to review it
17:39:14 <ben_thatmustbeme> or rather, a pretty quick read
17:39:57 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: publish new working draft of post type discovery
17:40:22 <cwebber2> eprodrom: will there be time in the CG meeting to discuss this update?
17:40:45 <cwebber2> tantek: sure I'm happy to raise it there, or to defer to other CG topics as well, since the CG has a lots on its plate
17:40:49 <cwebber2> eprodrom: anything else on PTD?
17:40:53 <eprodrom> q?
17:41:32 <cwebber2> tantek: I think that's it, there are currently 13 open issues, I think I resolved another one as well, if anyone has any new issues or would like to discuss, otherwise I'll try to keep cranking away and will try to resolve in the best way I can
17:41:39 <cwebber2> eprodrom: ok, handing back the gavel
17:41:43 <tantek> https://github.com/tantek/post-type-discovery/issues
17:41:48 <tantek> chair: tantek
17:42:02 <cwebber2> tantek: ok that gets us close to the end of our agenda
17:42:14 <ben_thatmustbeme> JF2 updated WD published
17:42:16 <cwebber2> tantek: anything else to discuss?
17:42:19 <ben_thatmustbeme> or rather went out
17:42:29 <cwebber2> tantek: oh right we got an update to JF2
17:42:33 <ben_thatmustbeme> published
17:42:42 <cwebber2> q+ to bring up another activitypub thing
17:43:01 <ben_thatmustbeme> https://www.w3.org/TR/jf2/
17:43:02 <Loqi> [Benjamin Roberts] JF2 Post Serialization Format
17:43:10 <cwebber2> tantek: ben_thatmustbeme are you on the telecon?
17:43:15 <cwebber2> ben_thatmustbeme: hi
17:43:30 <cwebber2> tantek: are there changes in the updated JF2 you feel would indicate a need to update SWP
17:43:45 <rhiaro> I will try to catch up SWP this weekend. Feel free to open issues. Been busy moving to Sarajevo and starting a new job today \o/
17:43:49 <cwebber2> ben_thatmustbeme: not from last time I read it, but may be worth adding some info?  I should look, not sure it's worth an update?
17:44:09 <ajordan> rhiaro: \o/ good luck!
17:44:15 <cwebber2> tantek: ben_thatmustbeme could you file an update with the info you just mentioned?
17:44:28 <cwebber2> s/an update/an issue
17:44:41 <rhiaro> I'll aim to
17:44:46 <cwebber2> tantek: hopefully we can do a new SWP next week?
17:44:52 <cwebber2> tantek: great
17:44:54 <tantek> q?
17:45:08 <tantek> ack cwebber2
17:45:11 <rhiaro> scribenick: rhiaro
17:45:59 <rhiaro> cwebber: *probably something insightful and intelligent but nobody knows because muted*
17:46:10 <ben_thatmustbeme> rhiaro++
17:46:11 <Loqi> rhiaro has 144 karma in this channel (260 overall)
17:46:22 <ajordan> rhiaro++ for scribing too
17:46:22 <Loqi> rhiaro has 145 karma in this channel (261 overall)
17:46:26 <ajordan> cwebber2++
17:46:26 <Loqi> cwebber2 has 89 karma
17:46:59 <rhiaro> yes
17:47:27 <rhiaro> cwebber: there are two sections in AP while writing the test suite written with shoulds but seem to belong in security considerations. very difficult to write tests for because they're very suggestive
17:47:35 <rhiaro> ... the first one is SHOULD on server does not client submitted content
17:47:52 <rhiaro> ... about making sure you don't just trust that you get this message just because it came along to you and that depends on what mechanism you're using for auth
17:47:58 <rhiaro> ... I can kind of write a test for that but it's a bit goofy
17:48:18 <rhiaro> ... The otehr is more significant, a SHOULD on taking care not to overload other servers with delivery submissions
17:48:29 <rhiaro> ... that one is very hard to write tests for
17:48:47 <rhiaro> ... asking the server 'are you blasting with a bunch of information', probably never goign to capture that in tests
17:48:57 <rhiaro> ... wonder if people are okay with moving that to security considerations? Would be inline with what'st here already
17:49:05 <rhiaro> ... Can file issues for next week
17:49:15 <rhiaro> tantek: we should be diligent about having issues for normative changes
17:49:25 <rhiaro> ... That way it'll hopefully solicit additional input
17:49:46 <rhiaro> ... and input from CG tomorrow as well
17:49:50 <rhiaro> cwebber: sounds good
17:49:53 <tantek> q?
17:49:55 <cwebber2> scribenick: cwebber2
17:50:02 <ajordan> https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder146/500x/78178146/success-kid-just-punt-it-to-the-cg.jpg
17:50:09 <cwebber2> tantek: ok we're done with document status afaik
17:50:14 <tantek> ack cwebber
17:50:14 <Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to bring up another activitypub thing
17:50:32 <cwebber2> topic: SocialCG update
17:51:13 <cwebber2> aaronpk: I don't remember anythign we should bring back here
17:51:29 <cwebber2> tantek: ok any other business for today's meeting?
17:51:41 <cwebber2> tantek: going once going twice, sold to the relinquishment of time
17:52:06 <cwebber2> tantek: evan will be chair, I will be traveling, hope to chat tomorrow at the CG
17:52:22 <tantek> cwebber++ for minuting!
17:52:22 <Loqi> cwebber has 22 karma
17:52:27 <tantek> rhiaro++ for minuting
17:52:27 <Loqi> rhiaro has 146 karma in this channel (262 overall)
17:52:33 <ajordan> thanks Chris and Amy \o/
17:52:40 <cwebber2> tantek++ for chairing
17:52:40 <Loqi> tantek has 61 karma in this channel (351 overall)
17:52:49 <ajordan> tantek++
17:52:49 <cwebber2> eprodrom++ for interstitial chairing
17:52:49 <Loqi> slow down!
17:52:51 <cwebber2> and
17:52:55 <ajordan> lol
17:52:56 <cwebber2> rhiaro++ for minuting
17:53:03 <cwebber2> trackbot, end meeting
17:53:03 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:53:03 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been tantek, ajordan, cwebber, aaronpk, rhiaro, ben_thatmustbeme, evan
17:53:11 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:53:11 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/06/13-social-minutes.html trackbot
17:53:12 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
17:53:12 <RRSAgent> I see no action items