Socialwg/2015-06-30-minutes

From W3C Wiki

Social Web Working Group Teleconference

30 Jun 2015

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
aaronpk, sandro, jasnell, cwebber2, Arnaud, csarven, elf-pavlik, ben_thatmustbeme, eprodrom, tantek, bigbluehat, wseltzer
Regrets
Chair
tantek
Scribe
elf-pavlik, eprodrom

Summary of Action Items

<tantek> ACTION everyone review https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/134 and /133 and /131 and /86 (in any order, independent of each other) by next week for in-call discussion.


Contents




<trackbot> Date: 30 June 2015

<cwebber2> presentbot? :)

<jasnell> parent+ jasnell

<elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/2006/tools/wiki/WebExBestPractices#Attendance

<eprodrom> ?

<eprodrom> They're kind of charming

<aaronpk> ah it's RRSAgent

<Arnaud> yes, you have to do it after rrsagent joined

<tantek> zakim?

<tantek> trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference

<trackbot> Date: 30 June 2015

<aaronpk> poor Zakim

<ben_thatmustbeme> what is left that we use from Zakim?

<aaronpk> just q+

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-06-30

<elf-pavlik> i can scribe

<tantek> scribe: elf-pavlik

<ben_thatmustbeme> scribeNick: elf-pavlik

<tantek> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-06-23-minutes

Approval of Minutes of 23 June 2015

<cwebber2> rhiaro++

<Loqi> rhiaro has 109 karma

<tantek> rhiaro++ for helping convert the minutes to the wiki

<cwebber2> (for putting up minutes)

<Loqi> rhiaro has 110 karma

<eprodrom> +1

<ben_thatmustbeme> +1

Charter_License_Update

we decided to use new W3C license for all the work from this group

tantek: sandro have accepted this action item and will take it through W3C process

<cwebber2> sandro++

<Loqi> sandro has 19 karma

tantek: sandro do you have any rough estimates how long it will take?

sandro: it should take 2-3 to take it to AC
... feel free to remind me next week

tantek: any questions on this point?

Activity Streams 2

tantek: we have two drafts prepared for publication
... thank you jasnell for preparing them! also ben_thatmustbeme thanks for PR with microformats examples

<ben_thatmustbeme> i have more MF2 updates to do

jasnell: eprodrom posted number of PRs with grammar and spelling corrections which will get included

<ben_thatmustbeme> but won't be ready for a little while

<Loqi> Tantekelik made 1 edit to Socialwg/2015-06-30 https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=84899&oldid=84870

tantek: you have purely editorial updates which you have included and which people might not read since they arrived this morning

jasnell: correct
... ben_thatmustbeme do you have batch of updates to examples ready?

ben_thatmustbeme: not for today

tantek: what precent have you gotten through ben_thatmustbeme?

ben_thatmustbeme: i belive over half, most from core spec but vocab spec has a lot of examples as well

<jasnell> my proposal then would be to publish as is currently and push the next round of mf example updates to the next WD

eprodrom, i've done a number of editorial PRs and have more through out rest of the day, i'll leave it to jasnell to decide which he wants to include before publishing new working drafts

scribe: i don't think anything that should hold publishing new WDs

<jasnell> eprodrom++

<Loqi> eprodrom has 17 karma

<tantek> PROPOSAL: Publish AS2 and AS2 vocab drafts as is currently with a few more purely editorial edits from eprodrom today, and push next round of mf examples updates to the next WD.

+1

<jasnell> +1

<tantek> +1

<cwebber2> +1

<aaronpk> +1

<sandro> +1

<ben_thatmustbeme> +1

<eprodrom> +1

<tsyesika> +1

<tantek> RESOLVED: Publish AS2 and AS2 vocab drafts as is currently with a few more purely editorial edits from eprodrom today, and push next round of mf examples updates to the next WD. jasnell to prepare documents and submit to pub process by tomorrow.

jasnell++

<Loqi> jasnell has 22 karma

Arnaud: i have question with regard to next step, jasnell do you have a sense what it will take to go from current drafts to Candidate Recomendation (CR)

jasnell: we need aditinal review on extended vocabulary e.g. possibly adding *Organization* back as Actor type also an *insturment* proeprty
... examples review as ben_thatmustbeme is doing
... editorial review as eprodrom is doing

Arnaud: it answers my question

eprodrom: i see it very likely that Social API which we will come up with will use in some ways AS2.0, i'm not sure if we should go to CR unless we have better idea how Social API will look like

<tantek> +1 to eprodrom's point.

eprodrom: we may see some aditional needs as we get further with specs of Social API

<rhiaro> +1 to eprodrom

<eprodrom> Agree

jasnell: the impact Social API may have the most would be the vocabulary
... we could push core to CR and hold on with vocab for little longer
... i would rather not wait for to long

Arnaud: from process point of view, we have 3 requirement - 1. resoved all the issue 2. test suite 3. broad review
... we should aim at closing all the issues, working on test suite and get broad review while we work on Social API

tantek: Arnaud is correct about the CR requirements from process perspective
... eprodrom can you open issue on AS2.0 which would address need to making it 'make sense' from Social API point of view

Arnaud: i worry that we define this issue very vague, how can we tell: we're done with it - resolved

<sandro> "Does AS2 Need to be different to support the API?"

tantek: how about defining exit conditions for that issue

eprodrom: even having FWPD could work as exit condition

sandro: "what changes does the spec need to support the API"

<Arnaud> do we know which way the dependency is?

<tantek> Arnaud, it's bidirectional

sandro: regarding broad review, do we need it in terms of Social API ?

<Arnaud> is the protocol depending on AS or the other way around?

sandro, I didn't pay attention to AS2.0 since I didn't see it useful for any use cases we work with

sandro: but after meeting in Paris I realized that AS2.0 can come useful as integral part of Social API

<Arnaud> are you saying they both are going to be a normative ref to the other?

sandro: and we shouldn't go to CR without answering this answer

<sandro> No, I think it'll be a clean stack, Arnaud

<Arnaud> if that's the case, they will need to move on the REC track in sync

<Arnaud> so it's not bidirectional

tantek: as a chair I would like to propose to publish a montly heartbeat for AS2.0 documents
... hopefully it will help somehow with getting more broad review (required for exiting CR)

sandro: why monthly? what motivates such interval?

<cwebber2> +1 for heartbeat

<cwebber2> (-1 for heartbleed??)

<sandro> Arnaud, right, I expect *if* AS2 is designed properly, the API can just use it. But until we design the API, we wont know.

tantek: with number of significant edits happening in last months, I see it useful to publish new drafts once a month

jasnell: usually we haven't made major changes every month, if some requements come from Social API, most likely they will relate to vocabulary no so much to core
... i don't see why montly cycle would be benefitial for us

<Arnaud> I suggest we may ask ourselves the question of whether to publish every month

jasnell: definitely something shorter than 5-6 months but 1 month not really needed

<Arnaud> but not to commit to publishing

<jasnell> Arnaud: +1

Social API

<tantek> in particular, review of http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/protocol/wd/

<tantek> added by eprodrom

eprodrom: last week we've heard about work from Web Annotations WG, including publishing FPWD
... draft bases on LDP and uses some of its constraints
... earlier we looked at aligning our work on Social API with Annotations WG

<cwebber2> I read it

<KevinMarks> reading it now

<csarven> has very briefly

<cwebber2> o/

eprodrom: i have taken a look at this working draft, have anone else did?

<csarven> Moreso on the data model

<cwebber2> but I don't know LDP super well

<cwebber2> or solid :)

<jasnell> I've read it. Also had a good chat with Doug after the call last week

<jasnell> regarding positioning of AS2, annotations and the WG. I may be helping with authoring a Note that describes how AS2 and Annotations fit together.

eprodrom: ... explaining his understanding of Web Annotaions ...
... a lot of this workflow fits with what we talked about in context of social interactions

<cwebber2> eprodrom, was there following stuff on there? I didn't see that

eprodrom: annotations draft doesn't specify workflow for updating annotations etc.
... same for following, reporting annotations back to original publisher etc.

<csarven> CRUDish

eprodrom: if seems like very low level protocol which doesn't deal with high level stuff, feels in some ways similar to SoLiD proposal

tantek: chairs note - mentioned draft says W3C Editor's Draft 18 June 2014 http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/protocol/wd/

<jasnell> the date is confirmed to be a typo

<jasnell> confirmed that with doug last week

tantek: not public Working Draft but only Editor's draft!

<bigbluehat> it's about to be published. It's been approved by the WG last Wednesday

<cwebber2> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/commit/73934ad6b4c6d1ce9b69f7b08d5a6719859402e5

<cwebber2> date has been being updated lately

<cwebber2> in the git repo

eprodrom: date is a typo, Doug pointed it out last time

<csarven> +1

<csarven> +1 to trackin git

eprodrom: my question 1. does group wants to track this document?

<cwebber2> it's interesting to me, I'm not sure what we would do with tracking it

tantek: as chair i want to point out, there seams to be a lot of overlap in scope between this group and Web Annotations WG

<eprodrom> Great diagram on http://www.w3.org/annotation/

tantek: many annotations resemple interactions in activity streams model, replies comments etc.

<bigbluehat> "CfC: publish FPWD of Web Annotation Protocol; concluded with support" - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Jun/0293.html

<cwebber2> +q

<KevinMarks> it makes more sense with http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/ as well

jasnell: after call last week with Doug we had good conversation about this overlap
... we came up with a plan to make a note on describing this overlap and what we could work on together

<KevinMarks> the WAA diagram is good, not sue hwo it relates to that container spec as that is about a silo

<tantek> PROPOSAL: Jasnell and shepazu co-edit a joint working group NOTE between Annotations WG and Social Web WG describing the overlap & relationship between AS2 and Web Annotation Protocol drafts.

<ben_thatmustbeme> should we wait until they reach FPWD?

<KevinMarks> the API does not show how to notify of an external annotation

+1

<jasnell> +1

<melvster> +1

<tantek> +1

<ben_thatmustbeme> +1

<sandro> +1

<cwebber2> +1 but

<cwebber2> I do have a comment / question

<eprodrom> -1

<csarven> *notes*

<cwebber2> elf-pavlik, sure

tantek: can you elaborate your -1

<eprodrom> http://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/

<csarven> Makes more sense with SoLiD, no?

<cwebber2> cwebber2: I see similarities and it's interesting but I'm not sure how this extends to the full social API, would be good to map to user stories

eprodrom: i feel like AS2.0 and Web Annotation model are more equivalent and better to dicsuss them rather than possibly paralell Social API and Web Annotations protocol

jasnell: in the note we will focus on relation between data model and fundamental use cases

<cwebber2> dang colon vs comma

<cwebber2> :)

<KevinMarks> franjkly, http://www.w3.org/annotation/diagrams/annotation-architecture.svg is much better than either the data model or API doc

<eprodrom> +1

<cwebber2> ben_thatmustbeme, good to know, though I seem to get consistent flak for making that mistake so :)

jasnell: focus on compatibility of AS2.0 model and Web Annotations model

tantek: do you want to clarify the proposal? i think we need clarification from you for the end scope

jasnell: note will focus on relation of AS2.0 and work of Web Annotations WG

<eprodrom> I can do it

<eprodrom> scribenick: eprodrom

<scribe> scribe: eprodrom

<tantek> PROPOSAL: Jasnell and shepazu co-edit a joint working group NOTE between Annotations WG and Social Web WG describing the overlap & relationship between AS2 and both Web Annotation Data Model and what they're trying to accomplish with Web Annotation Protocol.

<jasnell> +1

+1

<ben_thatmustbeme> before that, why don't you clear the q

KevinMarks: It's doesn't seem to conform to the architecture that we all liked
... Only shows ways to post annotations onto a particular site, while the architecture shows doing it across multiple sites
... All the examples are on the same domain
... Which for us, we're looking at interactions across multiple sites
... So, that's an important issue to discuss with Annotations WG

tantek: Is that a blocking issue for this note?

KevinMarks: It's something worth review. It's fairly key to our model of how we think about this.

tantek: In our microformats examples we try to use different domains.
... this sounds like something we need to discuss in this note.

KevinMarks: Will write a note to put up and point to.

<tantek> +1

<ben_thatmustbeme> +1

<cwebber2> +1

<KevinMarks> +1

+1

<tantek> RESOLVED: Jasnell and shepazu co-edit a joint working group NOTE between Annotations WG and Social Web WG describing the overlap & relationship between AS2 and both Web Annotation Data Model and what they're trying to accomplish with Web Annotation Protocol.

<Loqi> aww, cheer up

elf-pavlik, will do

Tracking of Actions and Issues

<elf-pavlik> eprodrom++

<Loqi> eprodrom has 18 karma

<tantek> no raised: http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/raised

tantek: In our chairs discussion, we decided to move handling of issues and actions to the end of the meeting.

<tantek> no pending either: http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/pendingreview

tantek: No raised issues
... no pending issues.

<jasnell> there are four change proposals in github

tantek: There are no pending action items.

<tantek> no pending actions either: http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/pendingreview

<cwebber2> nope

tantek: any reports on actions and issues that the group should know about?

jasnell: Looking at Github issue tracker, there are 9 open issues

<jasnell> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/134

<jasnell> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/133

<jasnell> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/131

<jasnell> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/86

<cwebber2> I have to go, sorry

<cwebber2> will follow the logs when I get back

<tantek> ACTION everyone review https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/134 and /133 and /131 and /86 (in any order, independent of each other) by next week for in-call discussion.

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

tantek: any outstanding business?

unmuting 1s

<tantek> note, next week's telcon will be on schedule, Tuesday July 7th, and Arnaud will be chairing

<ben_thatmustbeme> rhiaro is not on the call

eprodrom: Upcoming milestones in Social API brainstorming?

<elf-pavlik> sandro, i mentioned you originally in issue 134, i thought you may have some feedback on "@vocab": "_:" hackhttps://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/134

aaronpk: Can't speak for Amy and Tsyesika, have had other priorities in last couple of weeks, will have time in next couple of weeks

aaronpk++

<Loqi> aaronpk has 866 karma

<rhiaro> What aaronpk said!

<tantek> https://indiewebcamp.com/2015

tantek: Indiewebcamp 2015 event happening July 12 in Brighton, Portland, and possibly NYC

<rhiaro> 26-7 in Edinburgh :)

tantek: Open to anyone who has or wants to have their own site
... Signup links are on shared URL

Cool!

tantek: Ending the call

elf-pavlik, will you edit the minutes?

<elf-pavlik> eprodrom, yes!

<tantek> elf-pavlik++ for minuting

<Loqi> elf-pavlik has 29 karma

<tantek> eprodrom++ for minuting when elf-pavlik's phone connection dropped!

<Loqi> eprodrom has 19 karma

<elf-pavlik> eprodrom++

<Loqi> eprodrom has 20 karma

<tantek> trackbot, end meeting

Retrieved from "https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?title=Socialwg/2015-06-30-minutes&oldid=84923"