17:02:14 RRSAgent has joined #social 17:02:14 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/09/05-social-irc 17:02:16 RRSAgent, make logs public 17:02:16 Zakim has joined #social 17:02:18 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 17:02:18 Date: 05 September 2017 17:02:32 hello 17:02:44 present+ 17:02:45 tantek: heya! 17:02:49 present+ 17:02:50 present+ 17:03:02 Zakim, who is here? 17:03:02 Present: tantek, ajordan, cwebber 17:03:04 On IRC I see RRSAgent, tantek, KevinMarks, timbl, cdchapman, csarven, xmpp-social, ben_thatmustbeme, dlongley, jankusanagi_, sandro, MMN-o, cwebber2, ajordan, wilkie, dwhly, Loqi, 17:03:04 ... bigbluehat, jet, rhiaro, Gargron, oshepherd, bwn, nightpool, trackbot, jaywink, sknebel, tsyesika, astronouth7303, puckipedia, raucao, mattl, DenSchub, saranix, aaronpk, 17:03:04 ... bitbear, albino 17:03:10 present+ sandro 17:03:17 present+ 17:03:23 present+ 17:03:24 scribe: cwebber 17:03:27 scribenick: cwebber 17:03:54 tantek: first thing to do is to review last week's minutes 17:04:08 topic: review last week's minutes 17:04:30 +1 17:04:35 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-08-29-minutes 17:06:27 +1 17:06:42 PROPOSED: approve minutes ttps://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-08-29-minutes 17:06:44 +1 17:06:45 +1 17:06:54 +1 17:07:25 RESOLVED: approve minutes https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-08-29-minutes 17:07:31 topic: websub 17:07:38 tantek: last week was issue #119 (?) 17:07:45 tantek: sandro was not convinced changes were not normative 17:07:50 tantek: julian commented since then 17:07:54 https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/119 17:07:55 [marten-de-vries] #119 'the hub terminates the subscription' 17:08:10 sandro: julian said some reassuring things, I guess we're in the land of "I need to ask Ralph" because it looks probably ok to me but it's not up to me 17:08:25 tantek: the best we can do is provide Ralph with enough background and information to make a judgement call 17:08:58 sandro: I wish we didn't have to, it doesn't fit in the process; if we say it doesn't need a new CR it doesn't involve ralph until we do another PR 17:09:35 sandro: if we say this is not a normative change and it turns out we're wrong, we won't know until we go back, kind of a rude way to find out 17:10:05 q+ 17:10:11 sandro: how we've been doing in the last year is to ask Ralph for advanced ruling but I've done that like 4 times.... I guess it's time for another one though. or we could make another normative draft but aaron and julian aren't here 17:10:22 sandro: and aaron hasn't weighed in on the normative aspect yet 17:10:31 tantek: aaron deferred to julian's comment when I asked him 17:10:46 tantek: julien hasn't answered the question of whether it's normative or not, just about whether it'd break 17:11:05 sandro: my interpretation is it is a change in behavior, but a change during failure, so it won't break things that are working 17:11:21 tantek: I guess that depends on how normative / well defined our error handling is 17:11:27 sandro: this makes it more defined 17:11:41 sandro: since it only comes up in an error condition that shouldn't break anything that was working before 17:11:52 sandro: where it hurts is if it says it was conformant 17:12:03 sandro: also we're only talking about hubs, a pretty small audience for now 17:12:15 tantek: yes and we're talking about the assertion that existing hubs are compatible with this change 17:12:16 sandro: right 17:12:31 sandro: that was my closing comment, make sure the hub-masters were all okay with it 17:12:49 tantek: I think you're right that it's a weakness in the w3c process about normative changes for error conditions... 17:13:04 tantek: there are 2 things going on. 1) I don't think it's affecting interop when things work, which is the point of interop 17:13:45 tantek: however, the handling of errors is where we often find security and privacy problems in computer systems in general. so if I were Ralph that's what I'd ask, how would it affect security and privacy if at all. I'd want the group to have an answer to that question before making a ruling. I don't know, I'm just asking it 17:13:47 sandro: yes 17:13:57 sandro: since it's limiting behavior it's changing a MAY to a MUST 17:14:12 tantek: it may close some holes, but we're not sure 17:14:32 sandro: actually it's changing a MAY to a SHOULD... no wait a MUST, the hub MUST keep the subscription alive till the end of the lease duration 17:14:38 tantek: which we believe hubs are already doing 17:14:47 sandro: we know some are, haven't heard confirmation if all are 17:15:00 tantek: this sounds like a normative change since we're tightening the requirements 17:15:08 sandro: def a normative change since we're adding a MUST 17:15:11 q- 17:15:19 sandro: but it's a normative change that doesn't restart the CR process? 17:16:21 tantek: CR period is when you're supposed to be making changes based on implementations. We believe this tightening the CR requirements... we believe it's on what implementations do, that the tightening of the requirements will lead to more interop not less. not a new feature, just a tightening of requirements 17:16:30 sandro: right... not exactly how I'll phrase it but I think I can make the case 17:16:44 tantek: one of the reasons the process tries to make us restart like that is for IPR reasons 17:16:56 tantek: that's typically around the scope of a document, what's essential to implement 17:17:08 tantek: this is one of those things to implement that way 17:17:31 tantek: some random hubmaker could raise an issue though, that's the theoretical problem we have to give a heads up about and ask for a ruling at his level 17:17:49 sandro: I think the case simply has to be made that it's not invalidating reviews 17:18:04 tantek: I would even say it's a non-substitative normative change 17:18:12 sandro: that seems like a reasonable description 17:18:18 tantek: I believe this is one of the things CR is for 17:19:28 PROPOSED: The proposed resolution to websub 119 in https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/119#issuecomment-324484700 while normative, does not hurt any interop, does not break implementations, etc, and should not be considered substantive; CR clock should not be restarted 17:19:28 [aaronpk] Previous text: 17:19:28 > Hubs SHOULD retry notifications up to self-imposed limits on the number of times and the overall time period to retry. When the failing delivery exceeds the hub's limits, the hub terminates the subscription. 17:19:28 Proposed text: 17:19:28 ... 17:19:53 +1 17:20:05 +1 17:20:57 +1 17:21:02 sandro: maybe "current understanding of impls _known to the WG_"? 17:21:04 +1 17:21:31 ajordan, no it's more about in theory -- it shouldnt BE ABLE to break any impls 17:21:42 q? 17:22:24 RESOLVED: The proposed resolution to websub 119 in https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/119#issuecomment-324484700 while normative, does not hurt any interop, does not break implementations, etc, and should not be considered substantive; CR clock should not be restarted 17:22:25 [aaronpk] Previous text: 17:22:25 > Hubs SHOULD retry notifications up to self-imposed limits on the number of times and the overall time period to retry. When the failing delivery exceeds the hub's limits, the hub terminates the subscription. 17:22:25 Proposed text: 17:22:25 ... 17:22:41 RRSAgent, pointer? 17:22:41 See http://www.w3.org/2017/09/05-social-irc#T17-22-41 17:22:46 tantek: I'll let you capture this and take it to Ralph accordingly 17:24:15 rofl 17:24:28 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/WebSub_PR 17:25:16 sandro: maybe in this case we can discuss this in the context of the PR transition if we're otherwise ready to go 17:25:19 tantek: that was my hope 17:25:27 sandro: yes we did decide that 3 weeks ago didn't we 17:25:29 tantek: yes 17:25:48 tantek: we've been trying to resolve it as in terms of make transition to PR 17:25:55 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/WebSub_PR#Changes_since_CR needs to be updated 17:27:05 tantek: do you have everything you need to take this PR transition to ralph? 17:27:07 sandro: I think so 17:27:20 tantek: great 17:27:45 tantek: okay, next? I think that's it for websub 17:28:11 topic: PTD 17:28:13 tantek: nothing new 17:28:17 topic: JF2 17:28:21 tantek: I didn't see ben_thatmustbeme here 17:28:28 tantek: I don't know of anything new on JF2 17:28:35 tantek: I know he had some pending merges from AJ? 17:28:42 topic: ActivityPub 17:28:56 tantek: do we have a normative CR? 17:29:12 sandro: since it was a normative CR there was a one week hiatus, hopefully will go out thursday 17:29:17 sandro: hopefully will go out within next few hours 17:29:23 eep, just realized, holiday threw me off 17:29:33 no updates on JF2 17:29:46 1+ 17:29:49 q+ 17:30:02 Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/WebSub PR]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=104199&oldid=104085 17:30:06 tantek, ^^^ 17:30:12 cwebber2: no other news 17:30:14 ack ajordan 17:30:32 ajordan: chris I was going to mention that didn't we change the website so the test suite was more prominently advertised 17:30:47 https://activitypub.rocks/ 17:31:38 KevinMarks has joined #social 17:31:42 cwebber2: yes 17:31:48 ajordan: turn your computer off and on again 17:31:53 cwebber2: sounds good will do it while scribing 17:32:00 s/ajordan/sandro/ 17:32:11 https://activitypub.rocks/implementation-report/ 17:32:22 tantek: we have a couple of implementation reports and the spec links here ^^ and that only links to teh template 17:32:33 tantek: I was requesting we actually directly list existing implementation reports there 17:33:06 cwebber2: I can do it today 17:33:15 cwebber2, I can file an issue on GitLab if it'll help you 17:33:57 cwebber2: oh yeah and mastodon started rolling out in their CR this week 17:34:12 tantek: ben_thatmustbeme said no updates on JF2 17:34:17 ajordan: I still have changes to send in 17:34:20 tantek: ok 17:34:39 topic: SocialCG update 17:35:15 scribe: sandro 17:35:20 scribenick: ajordan 17:35:27 scribe: ajordan 17:35:31 cwebber2: we talked a lot about the extensions and the tag type 17:35:46 I think we talked about the context as well and LDS as well 17:35:48 https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams 17:35:49 [Amy Guy] ActivityStreams 2.0 Terms 17:35:57 the problem is if you ended up linking to the context, like it was this 17:36:18 ... and it didn't have sensitive in the terms and an old instance of Mastodon was running 17:36:45 ... if that old instance cached the context signatures would invalidate because e.g. sensitive would be dropped 17:36:52 ... after that sandro ended up posting a solution 17:37:03 https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams-history/ 17:37:14 re https://github.com/w3c-dvcg/ld-signatures/issues/9 17:37:15 [cwebber] #9 LD Signatures and json-ld contexts which grow 17:37:49 cwebber2: so we're not talking about versioning vocabs, that could be a disaster 17:37:51 terms are the same 17:38:01 it's just the JSON-LD context which gets thrown in every time we add something new to it 17:38:29 so e.g. when Mastodon ships a version with the 1.7 version, if a new version comes out with the 1.8 context then the old version will pull down the 1.8 context and cache it 17:38:39 ... major topic of discussion, ended up having a good solution 17:38:49 ... I think that was the big thing, that resolution actually happened afterwards 17:38:58 sandro: there was another aspect that we didn't resolve 17:39:07 ... we still haven't figured out basically the governance question 17:39:16 ... how do we decide which terms get added to the AS2 namespace and when? 17:39:26 ... in general terms we get it but now we need specific 17:39:32 ... criteria, resolution process, etc. 17:39:50 ... we left that undecided in part because we don't have aaronpk and we think he'd want to be involved 17:39:59 tantek: isn't there a SWICG repo for this? 17:40:02 Sandro made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/WebSub PR]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=104201&oldid=104199 17:40:18 sandro: there is a "general" SocialCG repo with a bunch of high-level technical issues 17:40:29 https://github.com/swicg/general/issues/ 17:40:29 cwebber2: but we should probably add a new one for the extension process, is that what you're saying tantek? 17:40:45 tantek: yeah that seems like a good idea, I'd like to see these captured somewhere where we can have a threaded discussion 17:40:56 cwebber2: do we want to do a resolution? 17:41:11 tantek: if it's been scribed we can just do it after the meeting 17:41:17 cwebber2: sounds good 17:41:20 q? 17:41:28 tantek: sounds good, any other items for today's SocialWG meeting? 17:41:45 sandro: just to follow that up a bit I know Gargron was pushing for this to get in the namespace before they do a release 17:41:58 ... but I think cwebber2 ended up convincing them to do an embedded context? 17:42:07 cwebber2: yeah they ended up doing something like this 17:42:11 {"sensitive": "as:sensitive"} 17:42:24 ... so you just add an embedded context like so 17:42:28 sandro: but is he waiting this? 17:42:31 cwebber2: I don't think he's waiting 17:42:42 ... that question happened so fast and we were kinda on a deadline 17:42:57 ... we said "I guess just use terms that aren't in the AS2 namespace" 17:43:04 ... in the future we should find a more organized way for this 17:43:23 ... e.g. giving people permission to temporarily "lease out" a name that hasn't been specified yet 17:43:30 ... just do a temporary hand-wave kinda thing 17:43:38 sandro: it's interesting how much you can't change it later 17:44:01 ... I want to say "oh we can just change this later" but actually Gargron is shipping this to many admins who might not upgrade away from this relase for a year 17:44:14 tantek: definitely good real-world experience on some of the constraints that might shape your process 17:44:29 ... some of the ??? problems you might encounter 17:44:35 ... how do you deal with deployed implementations 17:44:58 ... I think these are important questions that whatever process you come up with should answer 17:45:20 sandro: one interesting thing is that historically we said we'd delegate to the CG after the WG shut down 17:45:32 ... it might not hurt to have a resolution on the record saying we definitely delegate 17:45:38 tantek: I think I did that resolution a week ago? 17:45:44 cwebber2: I don't think so 17:46:31 scribe: cwebber2 17:46:45 q? 17:47:01 cwebber2: oh right, okay 17:47:37 cwebber2++ for chairing 17:47:38 cwebber2 has 101 karma 17:47:42 tantek++ for chairing 17:47:42 tantek has 72 karma in this channel (385 overall) 17:47:48 uhh for scribing oops 17:48:05 tantek: we're waiting on updated websub CR/PR but I think we don't need to meet next week 17:48:25 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2017-09-19 17:48:34 cwebber2: I think it'll take 2 weeks for me to get enough on the test suite for the next meeting 17:48:41 tantek: ok next meeting is two weeks out 17:48:46 tantek: great work everyone, talk next time 17:49:06 trackbot, end meeting 17:49:06 Zakim, list attendees 17:49:06 As of this point the attendees have been tantek, ajordan, cwebber, sandro, jaywink 17:49:08 cwebber++ thanks for scribing 17:49:08 cwebber has 25 karma 17:49:14 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 17:49:14 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/05-social-minutes.html trackbot 17:49:15 RRSAgent, bye 17:49:15 I see no action items 17:54:22 RRSAgent has joined #social 17:54:22 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/09/05-social-irc 17:54:27 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 17:54:27 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/09/05-social-minutes.html cwebber2 17:54:37 no luck though RRSAgent 17:54:57 looks fine to me 17:55:30 sandro, a-ha so restarting your computer *did* fix it then (clearing some swap presumably) 17:57:17 psh yeah NOW it's fine 18:00:01 Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2017-09-05-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=104202&oldid=0 18:00:09 https://github.com/swicg/general/issues/19 issue added re: extensions process 18:00:10 [cwebber] #19 ActivityStreams extensions process 18:00:37 geez, not github's not working right for me - layout is all messed up 18:00:47 in multiple browsers, logged in and lot 18:04:42 sandro: have you tried turning github off and on 18:04:56 the whole thing 18:05:02 just press the restart button 18:08:33 I cant find the power switch. someone, get me a toddler. 18:11:41 apparently they broke their CORS policy 18:11:45 blocking their own CSS 18:14:20 Nice 18:14:37 or just a missing file from the CDN, not sure. anyhow, it works again for me 18:19:36 Captain, we've got to eject the warp CORS 19:11:23 KevinMarks_ has joined #social 19:15:24 KevinMarks has joined #social 19:58:39 Zakim has left #social 19:58:50 good riddance 20:08:32 KevinMarks has joined #social 20:10:25 timbl has joined #social 21:15:06 i started dabbling in my youtube project (codename "kobold" for now), it's ridiculous how unsure i am about the storage schema now, lol. either i approach it like in mastodon, or i do something different. no clue what's best. afraid to commit same mistakes. 21:15:45 eprodrom has joined #social 21:29:49 Gargron: the great thing about that phase is you can make massive experiments and switch things out and you've got no users yet to be upset about the upchurn by a big ol' refactoring 21:29:58 Gargron: I look forward to seeing more about MediaKobold ;) 21:32:22 Gargron: btw I do think you'll have a lot of fun with postgres + jsonb 21:37:52 [ajordan] sandro: the SocialCG org homepage layout used to be borked too; I reported it but I've no idea if it got fixed 21:38:21 [ajordan] Gagron: have fun :-) 21:38:32 [ajordan] Second systems are great 21:40:26 [ajordan] Also sandro 21:40:29 [ajordan] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi#h=dupes%7CThunderbird 21:58:11 cdchapman has joined #social 22:20:29 KevinMarks has joined #social 22:52:28 KevinMarks has joined #social