16:59:23 RRSAgent has joined #social 16:59:23 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/11-social-irc 16:59:25 RRSAgent, make logs public 16:59:25 Zakim has joined #social 16:59:27 Zakim, this will be SOCL 16:59:27 ok, trackbot 16:59:28 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 16:59:28 Date: 11 July 2017 16:59:30 present+ 17:00:15 present+ 17:01:04 is webex working? it's not asking me for my attendee id number or doing anything else after I put the code in 17:01:06 tantek has joined #social 17:01:22 oh wait I heard something 17:01:37 present+ 17:01:49 rhiaro++ for general enthusiasm 17:01:49 rhiaro has 151 karma in this channel (269 overall) 17:01:54 even after last week! 17:01:58 present+ 17:02:12 present+ 17:02:54 scribenick: rhiaro 17:03:38 present+ 17:03:48 present+ 17:04:17 sandro++ 17:04:17 sandro has 46 karma in this channel (53 overall) 17:04:47 Zakim, who is here? 17:04:47 Present: sandro, rhiaro, tsyesika, ajordan, cwebber, tantek, ben_thatmustbeme 17:04:50 On IRC I see tantek, Zakim, RRSAgent, xmpp-social, prtksxna, albino, cwebber2, wilkie, ajordan, JanKusanagi, trackbot, rhiaro, sandro, Loqi, MMN-o, nightpool, DenSchub, raucao, 17:04:50 ... saper, puckipedia, tsyesika, jet, bwn, lambadalambda, jaywink, tcit, aaronpk, saranix, astronouth7303, dwhly, bitbear, mattl, csarven, sknebel, ben_thatmustbeme, Gargron, 17:04:50 ... bigbluehat 17:05:31 thanks amy 17:06:14 yesss? 17:06:41 yeah I didn't move it I guess sorry 17:06:44 I'll do ti 17:06:51 Topic: Last week's minutes 17:06:57 tantek: we're doing it next week, theyr'e not on the wiki yet 17:07:03 Topic: Summer schedule 17:07:16 tantek: we discussed having telecons every other week. what are peoples' feelings? What works for august? 17:07:21 ... Telecon next week? 17:07:35 Unclear if I can make it next week 17:07:59 ... lack of enthusiasm says to me we don't need one 17:08:06 ... but if someone wants one we can do that 17:08:09 ... anyone? 17:08:25 present+ 17:08:50 ... unless something comes up or this meeting runs over, we skip next week 17:08:54 ... What dates work in august? 17:09:02 sandro: two weeks from now is still july? 17:09:31 tantek: We should do two weeks from now, at least every 2 weeks 17:09:37 ... No meeting on 18, yes meeting on 25 17:09:40 ... Any objections? 17:09:47 +1 17:09:51 ... some verbal +1s 17:09:57 ... August? 17:10:02 Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2017-07-11-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=103704&oldid=0 17:10:02 Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2017-07-11-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=103705&oldid=103704 17:10:02 Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2017-06-27-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=103706&oldid=0 17:10:16 ... August 1 opinions? 17:10:29 i will be regrets for the 25th actually, but thats ok 17:10:38 sandro: at risk, schedule wise 17:10:44 tantek: -0, less convenient 17:10:56 +1 17:11:03 sandro: compared to the 8th? 17:11:06 tantek: I'm on vacation 17:11:25 Should we find out if evan can chair on the 8th? 17:11:32 8th is fine for me 17:11:44 tantek: 15th? 17:12:01 For me 1=maybe, 8=good, 15=maybe, 22=bad, 29=maybe 17:12:46 for me 1=maybe, 8=bad, 15=good, 22=bad, 29=good 17:12:50 i'm good for all days afaik 17:12:52 sandro: doodle, we don't have to decide today 17:13:01 tantek: rough agreement for people here 17:13:18 august is pretty open for me 17:13:19 I'm good for all days except the 22nd(?) 17:13:31 probably all fine for me, maybe1st and 8th at risk 17:13:37 oh and the 15th 17:13:45 actually no 1st is fine 17:14:07 i'm good for whenever in august 17:14:12 Can we assume people who didn't express opinions are fine for all? 17:14:18 clarification: bad the 15th 17:14:22 sandro: sounds like we should do the 1st as well 17:14:26 tantek: I wouldn't want to chair on that date 17:14:32 ... So contingent evan can chair? 17:14:40 ... and then 15th and 29th? 17:14:42 +1 17:14:52 +1 17:15:12 sandro: Cancelling 22nd and 8th 17:15:13 I don't know what my day-to-day schedule will look like on the 29th 17:15:27 I think I'll have started classes then 17:15:36 CANCELING July 18, ug 8, Aug 22 17:16:29 for sure: 7/25, 8/15, 8/29. 8/1 contingent on Evan chairing 17:16:37 Topic: ActivityPub 17:16:51 cwebber2: implementation report from puckipedia, who has implemented nearly everything if not everything 17:17:03 ... a bunch of PRs from aj that I haven't gone through yet 17:17:21 ... Test suite.. I've done all client to server tests, execept Block requires that I implement federation in the test suite 17:17:41 ... because there's no meaningful test of the block activity unless you are actually federating 17:17:50 ... so thats' where I stopped. When that's done, client to server test suite will be done 17:17:59 ... And got a bunch of issues to go through today 17:18:01 q+ 17:18:22 sandro: did puckipedia use your test suite? 17:18:41 cwebber2: they gave me access to their server and I haven't run it against the test suite yet, but we talkeda bout it. I tested with my client 17:18:48 ... Plan on doing that over the next week and a half 17:19:01 s/talkeda bout/talked about/ 17:19:03 ... As soon as I put the test suite up publicly that's that I'll do 17:19:17 sandro: When other people use the test suite that helps us get feedback on whether it's working 17:19:35 tantek: Anyone able to play with the test suite, or right now it's just in a place where only you can run stuff against it 17:19:46 cwebber2: I can expose it but haven't because I've been working on it 17:20:17 tantek: On ething I remember from webmention and micropub test suite development was that even while in development was having the tests incrementally added publicly helped people find problems in their implementations and in the test suite sooner rather than later 17:20:21 ... Woud highly advise doing the same 17:20:28 ... Even an incomplete test suite is is better than none 17:20:33 ... even if it's not testing the right things 17:20:43 cwebber2: By the next call in two weeks I will have it exposed and tested against puckipedia 17:21:12 sandro: you can say no.. but.. would you be willing to commit to definitely releasing it before the next meeting, whatever state it is in 17:21:20 ... to get over the hurdle of the release 17:21:33 cwebber2: I can do teh thing where I'm proxying to my home machine and people can see my tests locally 17:21:40 ... I will have it up and demonstrate it to the group by next call 17:21:47 sandro: If you need a server I think I can give that out 17:21:53 cwebber2: I have a server.. that's not the issue 17:22:05 ... Issues? 17:22:08 q? 17:22:24 ajordan: Questiona bout the Block thing 17:22:36 ... Why you can only meaningfully test it if it's federated? 17:22:44 ... Seems like you should be able to test someone on a local instance? 17:23:12 cwebber2: It would require that I have users put in two accounts rather than one, and I'm going to need to put in support so I can .. I would have to have people enter in two accounts even though that's not normally really necessary. Feels like a lot of extra input 17:23:18 ... Going to need to put the federation support up anyway 17:23:29 ... It would be extra/other work to add support for that 17:23:48 ... I need add federation anyway.. I don't think it would be a lot less work to do it that way and would be more irritating for the user of the test suite 17:24:03 ... Figured I might as well just get this in 17:24:08 ajordon: that makes sense 17:24:20 ack ajordan 17:24:22 tantek: Anyone else have test suite questions? 17:24:33 I have some stuff to run, needs some fixing up 17:25:02 (clients) 17:25:05 s/ajordon/ajordan/ 17:25:35 tantek: I would encourage everyone to implement some other pieces to implement and run against the test suite 17:25:52 ... Most normative issue first 17:25:54 https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/239 17:25:55 [puckipedia] #239 mediaUpload: only post to outbox if it's a Create activity? 17:26:18 cwebber2: This is a suggestion from puckipedia. Saying well they would like to attach multiple images to a post 17:26:36 ... attach multiple media items to one object, like how twitter has multiple images 17:27:23 ... So the idea is if you upload a video it uploads to the media endpoint it doesn't post to your outbox right away, so youc an attach them as attachment to posts later 17:27:24 q+ 17:27:29 ... I thought this was a good way to do it 17:27:44 ... I want to incorporate this, but wanted opinions 17:27:57 sandro: any problem with me uploading a few tens of thousnads of photos and never putting any of them in a stream? 17:28:19 cwebber2: Could be an issue that I imagine.. one thing tha toriginally I thought you could get around.. but I know that this would also be working with the way twitter and micropub does things 17:28:31 ... ?? if you were concerned about that 17:28:41 s/??/youd' have to garbage collect 17:28:52 sandro: you could garbage collect if something hasnt' been referenced by a post for some period of time 17:28:57 that is what twitter does as well 17:28:57 cwebber2: pump.io does that 17:29:00 tantek: and micrpub 17:29:11 cwebber2: are people fine with this? 17:29:15 tantek: normative change? 17:29:28 cwebber2: Specific condition about whether or not something is wrapped in ..?? 17:29:57 ... Whether or not somethig is wrapped ina create is whether or not it is posted to the outbox 17:30:06 ... if it's not wrapped in a create, it indicates it's meant to be attached to another object 17:30:14 ... if it is, it's a full fledged post 17:30:36 sandro: that seems like a bad thing to use an implicit action 17:30:43 ... making everything as explicit as possible usually plays well 17:30:57 cwebber2: the alternate that tsyesika suggested is that ?? 17:31:38 ... Two other routes are you can have a multipart form ??? outbox or maybe you could have one post with multiple file fields and refernecing that in the current object some way. The latter is trickier 17:32:51 q+ 17:32:56 ... The alternates are to have the multipart form that has a boolean field that says whether it's going to the outbox. Or to allow it to be all in one go and upload multiple file objects in one post but then you'd reference them some way inside the activitystream object, but trickier to slot in temporary names 17:32:59 q? 17:33:05 I like Boolean, but lets hear from q 17:33:29 i can scribe 17:33:33 scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme 17:34:13 rhiaro: not providing a solution, but how i do things right now, i upload images seperately, and i have a client that lets me choose the images i already have on the server and that creates the create object 17:34:46 ... i don't have a media-endpoint, but if i did, i would have it create the 'create' object 17:34:55 https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/239 17:34:56 [puckipedia] #239 mediaUpload: only post to outbox if it's a Create activity? 17:35:00 q? 17:35:02 ack rhiaro 17:35:28 cwebber2: i'm not completely sure how you would add to a note object 17:36:16 rhiaro: yeah, i reference the url in the body 17:36:25 scribenick: rhiaro 17:36:30 ack ben_thatmustbeme 17:36:58 ben_thatmustbeme: I was wondering more, rather than break anything for anyone, could you just do the micropub route of having a separate endpoint and what the problem would be there? 17:37:19 ... you can use the attachment for a single item, and if you want multiple you upload them to the media endpoint first and then you add them 17:37:31 ... and then could it be exactly the same as micropub and we only have to implement it once? 17:37:53 cwebber2: Unlike micropub, you give the shell activity. The uploading process, especially for video, might be adding extra data attached to the object. In micropub I think that's not the case 17:37:55 q+ 17:38:33 ... We could do it where it's exactly like micropub. Part of the motivation here was that you were explicitly making .. I don't know, a certain amount of going back on the issue to the drawing board. I feel like we need a clean description of how this would be done in this issue, and we need to thrash this out on the issue cos it's pretty different 17:38:36 ack aaronpk 17:38:48 aaronpk: I just want to clarify some of the goals around mediaendpoint in general 17:39:08 aaronpk: this is micropub's mediaendpoint? 17:39:25 ... THe idea is that it is just for the file itself, which is potentially very large and the rason it is separate is because of things like retrying failures, pausing and resuming, and to get the file up to the server so that it can be used in a post in the future 17:39:37 https://www.instagram.com/developer/endpoints/media/ 17:39:38 ... With micropub we looked at the twitter api, and saw the separate endpoint and based it off that design 17:39:56 ... twitter also have a chunked media endpoint where you can upload files in parts, which lets you do very large files in small pieces, which is way better for the client 17:40:05 ... We could extend the micropub media endpoint to use the chunking idea 17:40:21 ... What I'm getting at is that there's value in completely separating the file handling from the rest of the data 17:40:25 ... I think AP woudl benefit from that as well 17:40:49 +1 binary attachments going to a separate endpoint 17:40:54 ... I think handling media in a media specific way would benefit it 17:41:00 twitter has a media-metadata endpoint too i think doesn't it? 17:41:16 cwebber2: I'm open to reapproaching this, but doing so would mean we're going to have to take some time to work through what that would look like 17:41:18 ben_thatmustbeme, i think so, and in activitypub that would be done in an activitypub-specific way 17:41:37 ... One case where this would be tricky - you upload a half a terabyte video file, and you need to give it a title etc 17:41:49 twitter api docs: https://dev.twitter.com/rest/media/uploading-media 17:42:02 q? 17:42:04 ... You're not actually just attaching a single URL to the thing that's uploaded, youre' attaching 4 urls that get extracted and several bits of metadata extracted from the video itself 17:42:08 q+ 17:42:08 ... three different transcoded versions 17:42:12 ... that's where it gets tricky 17:42:35 ... I would like to see how that case where you have somehting that gets split up to multiple resolutiosn of the same file, and each of their metadata, incorporated into an object that you upload later 17:42:53 i think twitter does that as well, multiple version after upload 17:43:04 aaronpk: Worth looking at how twitter and flickr and places that handle transcoding do it 17:43:10 ... twitter transcodes gifs to mp4s 17:43:33 cwebber2: do they have a single canonical file that exists? or youtube style where there's multiple outputs with their own individual metadata 17:43:38 aaronpk: I haven't looked at that in enough detail to know 17:43:50 cwebber2: that's the quesiton because that's the motivation for having this shell object for the metadata 17:44:05 aaronpk: in any case, I think you can do that with AP, creating a shell/meta object, and still handle binary uploads separately 17:44:32 cwebber2: would require two separate uris at that point.. even if you're posting it to your outbox, you need some way of indicating that this ojbect needs to be completed in some way by this previous media that I uploaded 17:45:04 q? 17:45:06 ... One thing I liked about the design puckipedia suggested is that it permitted having multiple uploads of different objects is that it had ac lear way of having multiple attachments for even something as complicated as what we just discussed, which I'm not seeing in these other designs 17:45:16 ... If anyone has clear thoughts on how this alternate route would work I'd like to look at it 17:45:48 ... I'm hearing that there are reasons to have an endpoint just for files, that's potentially fine, if it can do the things we need. It doesn't seem like we have all the answers to show that it can yet. 17:46:21 ack sandro 17:46:29 q+ for a logistical issue re: this issue 17:47:05 sandro: Multimedia resource management is an orthogonal service and all the transcoding and multiple representations and potentially metadata and sometimes metadata about only a particular representation.. all of those are issues that have been around for a while, not necessarily a clean solution, but largely orthogonal to social networking 17:47:30 ... So to the extent that we can treat that as an orthogonal problem.. maybe there's nothing off the shelf, but somehow tryign to keep them separate and separate extensibility points and all that seems like a good idea 17:47:45 tantek: Chris, how many more issues? 17:47:49 cwebber2: 2 17:48:11 https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/236 17:48:12 [strugee] #236 Perhaps move Likes/Shares Collection to an AS2 extension 17:48:22 ... This was raised by strugee at the end of last weekend 17:48:38 q- but if someone can summarize the different proposals for the mediaendpoint thing that would be nice 17:48:38 ... We agreed that vocab extensions are unrelated to the protocol and shouldn't be handled by the protocol 17:48:49 ... So why not move likes/shares collections out of the spec? 17:48:54 since I'm having a bit of trouble keeping them straight 17:48:54 q? 17:49:02 q- 17:49:13 ... The reason why I don't want to do that is that they are referenced by the protocol 17:49:22 https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/#like-activity-inbox 17:49:40 ... the like activity here in the server-to-server specifically says you increment the likes collection counter as a side effect 17:49:46 ... so it's relevant to the protocol and thus we shouldn't remove it 17:49:50 +1 what chris said 17:49:52 q+ 17:49:59 ack ben_thatmustbeme 17:50:21 speaker died again? 17:50:47 q+ 17:50:59 tantek: if we accept your proposal chris, the outcome is no change? 17:50:59 cwebber2: right 17:51:14 tantek: unless there are objections to that I'd like to move forward with that. if there's new information we can reopen the issue 17:51:21 ack ajordan 17:51:26 ajordan: my point is on the issue 17:51:28 i was going to say that, the idea is the LIkes and Shares are useful outside of AP 17:51:43 which was sort of the reasoning to moving it out of the spec 17:52:08 ben, there's no reason nodoby else can use them just because they're in AP... 17:52:16 q? 17:52:26 cwebber2: my point is that if you take this resolution you're saying it's within scope because its part of the protocol 17:52:37 tantek: I can see it argued either way, looking forward to seeing comments on the issue 17:52:58 ben_thatmustbeme: likes and shares are useful outside of AP, which was the point of moving it to an extension 17:53:07 async++ 17:53:07 async has 1 karma in this channel (2 overall) 17:53:09 tantek: let's discuss this written down on the issue 17:53:19 async++ 17:53:19 async has 2 karma in this channel (3 overall) 17:53:26 Topic: Websub 17:53:45 aaronpk: Two new implementationr eports this week. One is from a system that implements all thre epieces. One is from a hub 17:53:48 \o/ whoooo! 17:53:59 ... the other news is that I can't merge the PR because I no longer have write access to the repository.. 17:54:14 tantek: do we have 2 of each publisher, hub and subscriber? 17:54:19 aaronpk: we do now 17:54:33 sandro: any comments or feedback or issues? 17:54:46 aaronpk: they just went through the test suite and checked off the ones that they supported. I don't see any specific notes in here 17:55:02 sandro: are these new? 17:55:08 aaronpk: One I recognise from a couple of years ago 17:55:12 ... the other one I haven't seen before 17:55:36 tantek: good.. we should start discussing PR transition at some point 17:55:54 ... that takes a little while anyway 17:56:05 aaronpk: I still have to correlate the individual features 17:56:08 tantek: coverage is important 17:56:40 sandro: do we have implementation reports from any of the ostatus type folks? GNU Social or Mastodon? 17:56:40 aaronpk: does not look like it 17:56:41 sandro: that would be nice.. we should make some effort there 17:57:22 tantek: aaron, could you reach out to the implementations that sandro mentioned and ask for an implementation report? 17:57:26 ... Or at the CG 17:57:46 ... They're outside the WG? 17:57:50 aaronpk: correct 17:58:02 tantek: we need a summary for the PR transition 17:58:06 q? 17:58:11 sandro: there was that private email.. 17:58:17 tantek: I wasn't going to bring that up 17:58:21 sandro: I'd like to wait for them 17:58:37 tantek: we can ping them again and say we're about to transition and ask for ETA 17:58:40 sandro: I'll do that 17:58:55 Topic: JF2 17:59:16 ben_thatmustbeme: there is a validator up and some sample test files that need expanding 17:59:28 ... I have feedback on potential implementations, but no template yet. Not sure what that will look like 17:59:48 ... I know AS2 went through all the vocabulary, but jf2 doesn't use its own vocab it uses microformats 17:59:52 ... I could list the stable microformats 17:59:59 ... But i'm not quite sure if that's really enough of a report 18:00:05 ... or exactly what that should look like 18:00:26 tantek: if you can show multiple implementations doing the same thing, demonstrating interop for publishing and consuming, think about that as the objective of the reports 18:00:31 q? 18:00:52 jf2.rocks for the validator 18:01:10 I can extend 18:01:13 I have to go also, but folks can continue 18:01:14 i'm okay 18:01:34 q? 18:01:51 ajordan: does this mean we should schedule for next week? 18:01:53 tantek: potentially 18:02:30 I'm fine with a meeting next week 18:02:33 +1 18:02:35 ... Meet next week?? 18:02:35 +1 18:02:40 +1 18:02:47 +0 not sure if I'll make it 18:03:01 my promise to have the test suite up "by next meeting" applies to the 25th though :) 18:03:21 tantek: telecon next week, hoepfully evan can chair 18:03:26 ajordan++ 18:03:26 ajordan has 12 karma 18:03:30 :-) 18:03:58 ben_thatmustbeme: section about ?? needs adding 18:04:14 s/??/conformance classes 18:04:21 ... to say that they actually are consuming or producing 18:04:44 ... the rest is just what do you publish and do you validate 18:04:49 ... I don't know what else there is to say 18:04:54 q? 18:04:57 tantek: okay 18:05:02 ... any other input? 18:05:36 ... Informally in irc .. chair hat off.. there was a whole discussion about social embedding widgets and the charter, but I promised I'd have something working by this week that uses jf2 to do social embedding 18:05:55 http://tantek.com/2017/193/e1/homebrew-website-club 18:05:56 Homebrew Website Club SF 18:05:59 ... with federated RSVPs via an embed of a series of services that are processing things including jf2 18:06:03 ... scroll down 18:06:35 ... the rsvps are originating on the facebook copy of the event. Bridgy is picking them up, sending a webmention 18:06:59 ... and then I'm using webmention.io receiving service, and that service provides an API that returns jf2 of all the received rsvps 18:07:18 ... and I'm pumping that jf2 result through another service, the stream that turns jf2 into html+mf2 18:07:22 ... including an optional stylesheet 18:07:36 ... and I was able to with some CSS style the rsvps that you're seeing, with peoples' faces and checkmarks 18:07:41 tantek++ 18:07:41 tantek has 64 karma in this channel (365 overall) 18:07:50 q+ 18:08:03 ... it's a social embed in an iframe 18:08:04 ack cwebber2 18:08:32 cwebber2: it's great to see the functionality, but it seems to me that the syntax and vocab are not really the discussion of embedding right? We can do it via jf2, and we can do it via AS2, doesn't matter which we end up using 18:08:37 ... The challenging thing is the API and workflow 18:08:43 ... like the whole workflow of using the iframe and stuff 18:08:59 ... It's great to see the implementation, but ti doesn't seem like the syntax and vocabulary is the big challenge of this 18:09:08 tantek: mostly I just wanted to see if I could get it working, and then I was surprised I was 18:09:14 ... I agree, those are the more important issues 18:09:19 ... The cool thing here is there is no js involved 18:09:27 ... just iframes, services, declarative markup, which is super powerful 18:09:41 ... the specific APIs are something that needs to be figured out. more of a tech demo than any kind of design 18:09:45 cwebber2: cool 18:10:28 q? 18:10:30 tantek: anything else? 18:10:31 ack cwebber2 18:10:36 ack cwebber 18:11:01 tantek: I dno't have any PTD updates. Any others? 18:11:20 ... Update from SWCG? 18:11:32 it met, informally 18:11:38 cwebber2: if I can remember what we did.. 18:12:26 ... We ended up talking about how you do embedding 18:12:57 ... Not far off what you did tantek.. via iframe, and general agreement that having either a browser extension or reader would be best, but for embedding things on a page using the iframe route makes a lot of sense 18:13:01 thats sort of out of context 18:13:16 context being for like/reply/etc 18:13:21 ... one of the big challenges was should you pu tthe widgets at the top of a page or should you have a bar that lets you do like and reply for the entire page.. or buttons on each sub item on a page.. 18:13:23 buttons/actions 18:13:26 ... Deicded it was an implementation detail 18:13:32 https://www.w3.org/2017/07/05-social-minutes.html 18:14:20 sandro: after the meeting I tracked down the implementation of this that google did for web intents, and that Digital Bazaar did for identity credentials and web payments, all of which use the trusted domain iframe technquie 18:14:35 ... viewing that as a polyfill until the browsers have support 18:14:39 ... probably the way forward 18:14:52 ... don't think this is chartered for this WG, CG problem from my perspective 18:15:01 tantek: that discussion helped inspire me 18:15:19 ... glad to see cross pollination 18:15:45 ... Last topic is about bridging indieweb and AP.. you want a general discussion or something specific? 18:16:03 ajordan: Last call Evan requested that we talka bout it in depth on a call, that's why it's on the agenda 18:16:08 ... Fine to move to next week 18:16:13 tantek: probably should have evan here for that 18:16:23 ajordan: nothing urgent 18:16:25 kick it down the road again 18:16:28 :) 18:16:29 tantek: postponing that 18:17:20 ... VICTORY 18:17:34 rhiaro 18:17:40 :/ 18:17:45 rhiaro++ 18:17:45 rhiaro has 152 karma in this channel (270 overall) 18:18:56 rhiaro++ 18:18:56 rhiaro has 153 karma in this channel (271 overall) 18:19:22 tantek++ for chairing too! 18:19:22 tantek has 65 karma in this channel (366 overall) 18:19:50 trackbot, end meeting 18:19:50 Zakim, list attendees 18:19:50 As of this point the attendees have been sandro, rhiaro, tsyesika, ajordan, cwebber, tantek, ben_thatmustbeme, aaronpk 18:19:58 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 18:19:58 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/07/11-social-minutes.html trackbot 18:19:59 RRSAgent, bye 18:19:59 I see no action items