Socialwg/2014-09-09-minutes

Based on scribe.pl minutes which is based on IRC log.

Attendees

Present

+1.503.567.aaaa, +26226234aabb, Tsyesika, Sandro, jasnell, Arnaud, evanpro, aaronpk, wilkie, jtauber, tiborKatelbach, hhalpin, tommorris, dromasca, Doug_Schepers, oshepherd_, +1.314.777.aacc, AdamB, oshepherd

Regrets

Chair

Evan

Scribe

sandro

Resolutions

  RESOLUTION: approve minutes from last week
  [12]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-02-minutes

  RESOLUTION: The schedule for the Social Data Syntax is as just
  discussed, closing out candidates & requirements next week,
  trying to for dececision in two weeks, and draft published
  after F2F

  RESOLUTION: resolutions will be highlighted in minutes, and
  people not at meeting can bring up their concerns within the
  following week

  RESOLUTION: Social API schedule: gather candidates and
  requirements by mid October, with confirmed direction shortly
  thereafter, but no draft approved at TPAC

Actions

  ACTION-1 - Create a scribe list [on Harry
  Halpin - due 2014-09-16].

  ACTION-2 - Describe how as2 diverges from
  json-ld and manages the compatibility [on James Snell - due
  2014-09-16].

  ACTION-3 - Work on comparison of as2 vocab
  and schema.org actions vocab [on Pavlik elf - due 2014-09-16].
  

Discussion

    __________________________________________________________

  <trackbot> Date: 09 September 2014

  <evanpro> Thanks, I didn't do that yet

  <evanpro> no, akuckartz wont be here today so we need a new
  scribe

  <tiborKatelbach> Zakim: +tiborKatelbach

  <Loqi> tiborKatelbach: tantek left you a message on 8/22 at
  1:56pm: yes, telecon dialing in etc. information is at
  [7]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Telecons and be sure to be
  on IRC as well for minutes, additional converstaion, queuing.

     [7] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Telecons

  <evanpro> Arnaud: you're next alphabetically, would you mind
  scribing?

  <deiu> Regrets on my part (busy with something)

  trackbot, start meeting

  <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference

  <trackbot> Date: 09 September 2014

  <evanpro> Uh, again?

  <evanpro> I thought it was already started.

  it was, evanpro -- my mistake

  <evanpro> NP

  <evanpro> One thing we need is a scribe

  it's just it didn't identify the telecon properly

  <evanpro> Actually, I'll just start

  <jasnell_> joining in a second

  <evanpro> I'm one of those IP callers

  <aaronpk> Zakim: aaaa is aaronpk

  <jtauber> i may be IPcaller.a

  <evanpro> Tada

  <evanpro> elf-pavlik: is that you?

  <tiborKatelbach> zakim +tiborKatelbach

  <tiborKatelbach> zakim aabb is me

  <Tsyesika> i'm not on the call btw :s not sure why it thinks i
  am :P

  <dromasca> ??P15 is me

  <harry> Sandro :)

  <evanpro> Perfect

  <evanpro> sandro: can you scribe for us?

  <harry> Tysesika did it last time

  <harry> Evan is chairing

  <harry> jasnell has to speak a lot this meeting I imagine

  <Tsyesika> i did what

  <Loqi> evanpro meant to say: sandro: can you scribe for us?

  <jasnell> I will volunteer to scribe next week

  <tommorris> Zakim: IPcaller is me

  <evanpro> Arnaud chaired twice in a row

  <scribe> scribe: sandro

  <harry> ACTION: harry to create a scribe list [recorded in
  [8]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action01]

  <trackbot> Created ACTION-1 - Create a scribe list [on Harry
  Halpin - due 2014-09-16].

  <evanpro> [9]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Scribes

     [9] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Scribes

  evanpro: working on scribes list, but it's not quite done yet

  <evanpro>
  [10]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-02-minutes

    [10] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-02-minutes

  evanpro: minutes from last week

  PROPOSED: approve minutes from last week
  [11]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-02-minutes

    [11] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-02-minutes

  RESOLUTION: approve minutes from last week
  [12]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-02-minutes

    [12] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-09-02-minutes

  evanpro: this is the 3rd official meeting. we're behind
  schedule, for various reasons
  ... I've revised the schedule. It's ambitious, but I think we
  can meet it.
  ... I'd like to run throught he schedule

  <evanpro> [13]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#sched

    [13] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#sched

  evanpro: For September, our big item is picking an initial
  social data syntax
  ... with the goal of having a draft for TPAC
  ... with the intention of by next week we'll have an agreed set
  of candidates and criteria
  ... and two weeks from now we'll have confirmed that direction
  ... and then can begin making a draft.

  evan: I'm an AS advocate, but I want us to consider other
  options

  <evanpro> Zakim: q?

  <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask about draft publication
  schedule

  <harry> either publication at TPAC or before TPAC is fine with
  me.

  <harry> It does tend to help focus discussion.

  sandro: goal is to have consensus to publish BEFORE of AFTER
  tpac?

  evanpro: probably after

  <jasnell> My proposal is currently documented in the AS2
  draft... specifically... JSON + AS2 Vocabulary + (JSON-LD
  alignment + recommended use of Vcard, Foaf, Org Ont, DC, and
  Prov ontologies). Other ontologies such as schema.org *could*
  be used, but would not be specifically recommended

  <jasnell> AS2 working draft is located here currently:
  [14]http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activ
  itystreams2.html

    [14] http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams2.html

  <evanpro> Thanks

  <jasnell> can snapshot that at any time to product FPWD

  elf-pavlik: Comparing AS and Schema.Org

  evanpro: Topic at the moment is the schedule itself.
  ... AS / schema discussion is later on the agenda
  ... Is the existing list of candidates and requirements
  reasonable?

  <Loqi> sandro meant to say: evanpro: Is the existing list of
  candidates and requirements reasonable?

  evan: And can we make the decision within two weeks

  evanpro: Hearing no comments, I'm going to take that as
  agreement

  shepazu: As a way of getting feedback, you might ask for a
  specific proposal

  <elf-pavlik> this one
  [15]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#sched ?

    [15] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#sched

  <wilkie> elf-pavlik: yes

  <evanpro> elf-pavlik: yes

  PROPOSED: The schedule for the Social Data Syntax is as just
  discussed, closing out candidates & requirements next week,
  trying to for dececision in two weeks, and draft published
  after F2F

  <shepazu> +1

  <harry> +1

  <wilkie> +1

  <evanpro> +1

  <tiborKatelbach> +1

  <dromasca> +1

  <elf-pavlik> +1

  <jtauber> +1

  <oshepherd_> +1

  <DaveSkiba> +1

  <jasnell> +1

  <Arnaud> +1

  +1

  RESOLUTION: The schedule for the Social Data Syntax is as just
  discussed, closing out candidates & requirements next week,
  trying to for dececision in two weeks, and draft published
  after F2F

  shepazu: Because this group has decided to work asynchronously,
  was there a call for consensus on this on the mailing list as
  well?

  evanpro: No, so there should be

  <elf-pavlik> do we have this workflow documented on our wiki?

  shepazu: How about: Report this proposal to the mailing list,
  showing consensus on mailing list, and please respond to let us
  know what you think (giving a deadline). This way you've
  checked all the boxes in terms of being async.

  <harry> How about RESOLVED = what shepazu just said

  <harry> +1

  Arnaud: This sounds like a heavy process. The minutes are
  published -- this should stick until/unless someone raises a
  concern on the mailing list.

  <oshepherd_> Perhaps a summary of resolutions in the minutes
  E-Mail?

  shepazu: When groups I've been in have said they want to work
  asynchronously, they've accepted the idea that people wont be
  on calls. If you want to say people have to read the minutes to
  participate, that's fine, too.

  <tiborKatelbach> The group could vote for Arnaud or dougs view

  <elf-pavlik> +1 doug

  Arnaud: Since we've decided to put the minutes in the wiki, we
  can highlight the resolutions at the top
  ... then they stick a week later, when minutes are approved

  <tiborKatelbach> +1 doug

  shepazu: There's a perl tool that pulls out the resolutions and
  writes them to a wiki page for the SVG wg

  <wilkie> whhaaa

  <wilkie> darn it all! nobody told me that last week haha

  <harry> we have no official tools

  shepazu: You can use whatever tools you want

  <harry> Resolutions can be objected within a week.

  evanpro: Sounds like -- bring resolutions to top of minutes,
  but don't send special email. And people have up to the week
  later.

  <harry> That sounds rather reaosnable

  <elf-pavlik> 0

  <wilkie> +1

  <tiborKatelbach> +1

  <harry> +1

  <evanpro> +1

  <Arnaud> +1

  <jtauber> +1

  +0 wishing for better tools, but yeah

  <shepazu> +1

  <jasnell> +1

  RESOLUTION: resolutions will be highlighted in minutes, and
  people not at meeting can bring up their concerns within the
  following week

  evanpro: social client api -- collecting candidates and
  requirements
  ... decision by mid to late october

  <harry> sounds reasonable

  PROPOSED: Social API schedule: gather candidates and
  requirements by mid October

  <elf-pavlik> +1

  <oshepherd> +1

  <tiborKatelbach> +1

  <wilkie> +1

  <harry> I'd like to see what other AS 2.0 work besides
  OpenSocial is in this space

  <harry> _

  <harry> +1

  <jasnell> candidates and requirement *proposals* right?

  <harry> yes

  <dromasca> +1

  PROPOSED: Social API schedule: gather candidates and
  requirements by mid October, with confirmed direction shortly
  thereafter, but no draft approved at TPAC

  <Arnaud> +1

  <DaveSkiba> +1

  <jtauber> +1

  <evanpro> +1

  <jasnell> +1 then...

  +0

  <elf-pavlik> +1

  RESOLUTION: Social API schedule: gather candidates and
  requirements by mid October, with confirmed direction shortly
  thereafter, but no draft approved at TPAC

  <harry> I think re federation that's pretty hard - we can
  modify schedule later.

  <harry> Focus on API and syntax first.

  <elf-pavlik> +1 harry

  evanpro: Server-to-Server / Federation protocol, I'd like to
  put that off a bit, until we have some bandwidth to look at
  them, then look at schedule.

  <tiborKatelbach> :)

  <harry> Anyways, just don't worry - we can modify agenda in
  charter

  <harry> no big deal

  <harry> We can move that back

  <evanpro>
  [16]http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html

    [16] http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html

  <harry> to later in 2015

  <oshepherd> A point I've raised in the past: I think that any
  comprehensive social API and federation protocol are
  fundamentally intertwined concepts

  evanpro: I think federation in the charter is Q1 or Q2 2015

  oshepherd, do you want to voice that?

  <oshepherd> Sorry, my mic is still out of commission

  evanpro reads oshepherd's line

  <jasnell> a properly designed API will also handle the
  federation requirement

  <jasnell> I don't view those as separate items

  evanpro: For example ostatus and pump.io many of the rest
  endpoints are used for both, so it probably makes sense to
  consider social api

  <elf-pavlik> sandro: federation protocols first and client api
  just special case (elf-pavlik tries help scribing)

  evanpro: There are many social APIs in use across the web, and
  we can provide value by standardizing that, without addressing
  federation. I wouldn't want to delay that in the name of
  thinking about federation.

  <shepazu> I'm curious how the different options for Social Data
  Syntax and Social API are going to be evaluated… are there use
  cases and requirements for these?

  evanpro: we do have a submission (embedded experiences), and ??
  from open social, which could work very well for social API

  <evanpro>
  [17]http://www.w3.org/Submission/2014/SUBM-osapi-20140314/

    [17] http://www.w3.org/Submission/2014/SUBM-osapi-20140314/

  <elf-pavlik> shepazu, i poposed use case
  [18]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Check-In_Use_Case

    [18] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Check-In_Use_Case

  <evanpro>
  [19]https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_syntax_requirements

    [19] https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_syntax_requirements

  evanpro: Answering shepazu -- I think we're talking about
  collecting them for discussion. We do have a social data syntax
  requirements page on the wiki, but they are very loose and
  informal.
  ... We could get pretty far down the hole in use case analysis

  elf-pavlik: it's hard to evaluate without use cases.

  <harry> I find use-cases tend to blackhole in this space, look
  for running code people use instead.

  elf-pavlik: this came up in considering Hydra

  <harry> For example, the Social XG made a 50 use-case document
  that was basically infinite and never finished.

  evanpro: 95% of use case analysis is in the activity streams
  already

  <harry>
  [20]http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/wiki/FinalUseCas
  es

    [20] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/wiki/FinalUseCases

  <harry> use-cases in this space are very large

  <harry> I'd recommend looking for *running code* with *real
  users*

  <harry> And see what they are *actually doing* - and include
  both open-source and proprietary systems in this codebase
  analysis.

  evanpro: current wiki list is very loose; if we did use case
  justification, it would go on and on.

  <harry> For example, IBM has Connections, Evan has pump.io,
  SugarCRM, SAP Jam, IndieWeb sites

  <harry> I'd like to see a list of products and software rather
  than use-cases, and then look maybe at the problems that real
  running software is trying to solve.

  <elf-pavlik> harry, also Crosscloud :) [21]http://cimba.co/ |
  [22]http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html

    [21] http://cimba.co/
    [22] http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html

  <harry> Since 90% of the software in the "decentralized" social
  space is essentially vapourware

  tommorris: Looking at use cases for federation protocol, and
  wondering how it relates to charter requirements. Are we
  talking about an individual social network (eg facebook or
  twitter), or .... what are the servers we're federating?

  <harry> Federation = HTTP REST-based protocol for federating
  data, including obvious things like blog posts but possibly
  also personal data.

  evanpro: I think the intention is to have multoiple servers
  under the control of different entities, including consumer
  oriented social networks and enterprises, able to share data
  between servers, hetergeneous, like SMTP

  <jasnell> Part of the challenge here is that we are not working
  off a common definition of what a "Social API" means... or what
  "Social Federation" means... we need proposed definitions

  <harry> I think definitions will rathole just as bad as
  use-cases. Instead, look at working software that claims they
  have federation or want it.

  evanpro: It would be less interesting and not worth our energy
  to look at how folks should do these things internally.

  <harry> Ditto API.

  dromasca: (from Avaya) This definition of federation you just
  described, this is much beyond social API. it brings up data
  ownership. not sure that's in current charter.

  <harry> Data ownership is probably a separate topic but we
  should help enable that.

  <oshepherd> dromasca: Data ownership will probably be similar
  to SMTP

  elf-pavlik: I think it would help to discuss things more on the
  mailing list

  <oshepherd> dromasca: I.E. if you send it to somebody, you
  probably can't get it back

  <elf-pavlik> discuss things *before* teleconf

  evanpro: We're putting Federation until after TPAC; concentrate
  on client api and social data standard now.
  ... can we table this Federation talk for now?

  <evanpro> +1

  <elf-pavlik> +1

  <harry> +1

  <wilkie> +1

  <jtauber> +1

  <dromasca> +1

  <shepazu> +1

  evanpro: (except where it might require things of the Social
  API)

  +1

  <jasnell> +1

  <DaveSkiba> +1

  <tiborKatelbach> +1

Social Data Syntax

  evanpro: We have some candidates on the wiki, as well as some
  loose requirements
  ... Hydra, Schema.org, AS2 are all strong candidates
  ... We also included some not-submitted structures, like OGP
  and Tweets
  ... Facebook is not interested in submitting OGP
  ... or licencing it for our use
  ... There are some others on here

  <harry> Twitter is discussing us with Friday

  <harry> will send email after that!

  <harry> Twitter is new to open standards space

  evanpro: Unlikely they'll submit that, but it's possible

  <jasnell> The syntax ought to be: JSON + JSON-JD + minimal set
  of vocabularies including AS2 and the others documented in the
  AS2 draft. It should be possible to use schema.org, but it
  should not be a recommendation of the WG to use schema.org
  unless schema.org governance is opened up.

  elf-pavlik: Hydra may start using the schema.org vocabulary

  <jasnell> it's great that schema.org updated terms of service,
  but governance is still a challenge

  <tiborKatelbach> +1

  <Arnaud> schema.org is not a syntax though

  <harry> The previous good argument was that schema.org did not
  conform with RFF patent policy

  jasnell: There's the syntax and the vocabs. For the syntax, if
  we focus on JSON and JSON-LD, that covers that. For Schema.Org,
  it's fantastic they changed the terms to be compatible with
  W3C, but governances is still an issue.

  <harry> I think the main argument is how to harmonize so we can
  use schema.org nicely with something like AS 2.0.

  jasnell: While that's still the case, I don't think W3C should
  be recommending people to go use it.
  ... It's possible for individual developers to use from
  multiple vocabs

  <oshepherd> There should also be concern over Schema.org's
  quality control

  jasnell: so it's possible to use schema. org but util we work
  something out, we shouldnt recommend

  <evanpro> sandro: although schema.org will not turn over the
  vocabulary entirely it could be dual-homed

  <dromasca> +q

  sandro: maybe we can align terms between the two

  <Arnaud> +q

  evanpro: if schema.org meets our basic requirements, I'd like
  to at least consider it on technical grounds. I'm not sure if
  it does. I'd like to analyse it from those grounds, before we
  put a lot of effort into dual-homing

  <harry> For schema.org we'd also need Google in WG to make any
  parts of it move forward on Rec track BTW

  dromasca: It's probably too early, since you're right about
  technical issue need to be addressed first.

  <jasnell> we need to separate the syntax and vocabulary
  discussions a bit. The syntax is the JSON, JSON-LD and basic
  encoding guidelines (much of what AS2 defines)... the
  vocabulary is the data model, the set of property names, the
  semantics, etc

  <jasnell> we can decide on the syntax separately from ironing
  out all the vocab issues

  sandro: No promises on governance, but I think it's probably
  possible, based on talks with DanBri, etc.

  Arnaud: So we could copy schema.org and put it under our own
  control? And if everyone plays nicely, things keep working.
  ... Also, it seems like this wiki page is a good start. We need
  to separate syntax from vocabularies.
  ... Can we separate candidates, apples from oranges

  <oshepherd> +1 evanpro

  evanpro: From my point of view -- we're not talking about all
  of schema.org, just the Action section. Separating syntax from
  vocabs could really confuse users, so I'm wary about separating
  them.
  ... We've hit the top of the hour. Can we continue another 15
  minutes?

  +1

  <elf-pavlik> +1

  <wilkie> +1

  <tiborKatelbach> +1

  <harry> +1 (but without me)

  <evanpro> +1

  <jtauber> +1

  <AdamB> +1

  <oshepherd> +1

  <Arnaud> +1

  <oshepherd> I think there is a need for a *simple*, *concise*
  vocabulary with a tight relation to the syntax

  evanpro: any more discussion

  <oshepherd> Schema.org vs JSON-LD are orthogonal matters

  strawpoll: json-ld plays a part here for us

  <tiborKatelbach> +1

  <evanpro> +1

  <oshepherd> +1

  <wilkie> +1

  <elf-pavlik> +1

  +1

  <jasnell> +0.5 ... we need to be clear... AS2 is JSON that is
  compatible with JSON-LD

  <elf-pavlik> jasnell, can you write to mailing list about
  difference?

  (I see that as json-ld playing a part)

  <tommorris> +0 - if RDFish Linked Data matches the use cases,
  JSON-LD seems a natural technology to use.

  <jasnell> elf: yes

  <oshepherd> (I'll note that jasnell's point is the entire
  purpose of JSON-LD)

  <tiborKatelbach> schema.org ontolgies can also be written in
  json-ld

  jasnell: JSON-LD implies both the JSON syntax and a particular
  processing model, and the @id kind of stuff. For backward
  compatibility, AS2 did not go there.
  ... AS2 does not say that it is JSON-LD, but here is a set of
  guidelines for how to process it as JSON-LD.
  ... Important distinction

  <elf-pavlik> i understand backward compatibility to AS1

  evanpro: My hope is that we understand that well before the F2F

  <oshepherd> I'd like to see the vocab and processing model
  properly separated from the syntax portions of the AS2 spec

  evanpro: jasnell would you take an action to describe that
  structure?

  <scribe> ACTION: jasnell to describe how AS2 diverges from
  JSON-LD and manages the compatibility [recorded in
  [23]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action02]

  <trackbot> Error finding 'jasnell'. You can review and register
  nicknames at <[24]http://www.w3.org/Social/track/users>.

    [24] http://www.w3.org/Social/track/users%3E.

  <oshepherd> (A lot of the issues I've raised with AS2 are
  because the mapping is not at all clear)

  <jasnell> jsnell

  <scribe> ACTION: jsnell to describe how AS2 diverges from
  JSON-LD and manages the compatibility [recorded in
  [25]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action03]

  <trackbot> Created ACTION-2 - Describe how as2 diverges from
  json-ld and manages the compatibility [on James Snell - due
  2014-09-16].

  evanpro: Furthur discussion?
  ... continue this on the mailing list, please

  <elf-pavlik> i can take action with help of others: pelf

  sandro: Anyone willing to compare AS2 and schema.org, so we
  don't have to all do it for ourselves??

  <tommorris> Wiki-page?

  <jasnell> I've documented a few comparisons on my personal blog
  in the past, will provide links in the wiki

  <scribe> ACTION: elf to work on comparison of AS2 vocab and
  schema.org actions vocab [recorded in
  [26]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action04]

  <trackbot> Created ACTION-3 - Work on comparison of as2 vocab
  and schema.org actions vocab [on Pavlik elf - due 2014-09-16].

  tiborKatelbach, I'll help: too!

  <jasnell> and will post a few of my own comments to the mailing
  list as time allows

  <Loqi> sandro meant to say: tiborKatelbach: I'll help: too!

  elf-pavlik: On social syntax vs vocab, the way collections
  work, Hydra and LDP do that differently. Itemlist on schema.

  +1 collections in LDP are interesting

  <elf-pavlik>
  [27]https://www.w3.org/community/hydra/wiki/Collection_Design

    [27] https://www.w3.org/community/hydra/wiki/Collection_Design

  sandro: LDP containers *can* impact your vocabulary desing

  <oshepherd> sandro: I'm not quite sure how collections in Hydra
  are any different from OWL

  <elf-pavlik> +1 mailing list

  <jasnell> +1 to documented proposals on the mailing list

  sandro: Let's take that to the mailin glist.

  <jasnell> who is beeping...?

Organizational Topics

  evanpro: trying to get agenda out before the weekend --- I'll
  try

  Arnaud: Yeah, I think I can do that, too.

  <elf-pavlik> thanks :)

  <evanpro> +1

  <elf-pavlik> +1

  evanpro: folks like this?

  <wilkie> +1

  evanpro: might miss current conversation

  Arnaud: Friday before should be fine.

  evanpro: Presenting social efforts during other events

  elf-pavlik: I'm going to some events; I'll work on a slide
  deck. Anyone have slides, or want to help?

  <elf-pavlik> yes

  elf-pavlik: I'll send email

  evanpro: We're out of time. Any other business?

  ADJOURN

  thanks Evan!

  <oshepherd> :-)

  <elf-pavlik> thanks Evan & sandro!

  <evanpro> trackbot, end meeting

  <elf-pavlik> i think P19 was me

  trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

  [NEW] ACTION: elf to work on comparison of AS2 vocab and
  schema.org actions vocab [recorded in
  [28]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action04]
  [NEW] ACTION: harry to create a scribe list [recorded in
  [29]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action01]
  [NEW] ACTION: jasnell to describe how AS2 diverges from JSON-LD
  and manages the compatibility [recorded in
  [30]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action02]
  [NEW] ACTION: jsnell to describe how AS2 diverges from JSON-LD
  and manages the compatibility [recorded in
  [31]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html#action03]

  [End of minutes]
    __________________________________________________________

   Minutes formatted by David Booth's [32]scribe.perl version
   1.138 ([33]CVS log)
   $Date: 2014-09-09 18:17:40 $
    __________________________________________________________

    [32] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
    [33] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

  [Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at [34]http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/ scribe/

    [34] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/scribing/chairing/ Succeeded: s/As/Is/ Succeeded: s/,/:/ Found Scribe: sandro Inferring ScribeNick: sandro Default Present: +1.503.567.aaaa, +26226234aabb, Tsyesika, Sandro, jasne ll, Arnaud, evanpro, aaronpk, wilkie, jtauber, tiborKatelbach, hhalpin, tommorris, dromasca, Doug_Schepers, oshepherd_, +1.314.777.aacc, AdamB, oshepherd Present: +1.503.567.aaaa +26226234aabb Tsyesika Sandro jasnell Arnaud ev anpro aaronpk wilkie jtauber tiborKatelbach hhalpin tommorris dromasca D oug_Schepers oshepherd_ +1.314.777.aacc AdamB oshepherd

WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 09 Sep 2014 Guessing minutes URL: [35]http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.ht ml People with action items: elf harry jasnell jsnell

    [35] http://www.w3.org/2014/09/09-social-minutes.html

  [End of [36]scribe.perl diagnostic output]

    [36] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm