00:00:19 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
00:07:29 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
00:32:59 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
00:51:04 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
02:28:51 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
02:32:01 <Arnaud> Arnaud has joined #social
04:25:35 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
05:38:06 <melvster> melvster has joined #social
05:50:00 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
05:56:36 <melvster> melvster has joined #social
07:16:44 <bblfish_> bblfish_ has joined #social
07:31:18 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
08:01:06 <bblfish_> bblfish_ has joined #social
09:17:45 <barnabywalters> barnabywalters has joined #social
09:37:27 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
10:18:55 <harry> harry has joined #social
11:30:59 <harry> Zakim, space for 20 at 12:00 for 120 minutes?
11:31:01 <Zakim> ok, harry; conference Team_(social)16:00Z scheduled with code 7625 (SOCL) at 12:00 for 120 minutes until 1800Z; however, please note that capacity is now overbooked
11:32:44 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
11:32:44 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/08/06-social-irc
11:33:48 <Ralph_> Ralph_ has joined #social
11:33:57 <Ralph_> Ralph_ has left #social
12:55:40 <englishm> englishm has joined #social
13:06:38 <jkorho> jkorho has joined #social
13:20:20 <bblfish_> bblfish_ has joined #social
14:12:30 <englishm> englishm has joined #social
14:47:47 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
14:53:37 <MarkC> MarkC has joined #Social
15:28:33 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
15:30:35 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
15:31:32 <mare> mare has joined #social
15:31:36 <mare> http://esimsecura.com/lan.21571/ try this new game, help your country... A new world is emerging. Your country needs YOU!
15:47:26 <dret> dret has joined #social
15:48:00 <wuwei> wuwei has joined #social
15:51:24 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
15:53:47 <MarkC> Meeting: SocialIG
15:54:17 <MarkC> Chair: MarkC
15:55:45 <MarkC> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialig
15:57:38 <Zakim> Team_(social)16:00Z has now started
15:57:39 <edkrebs> edkrebs has joined #social
15:57:44 <Zakim> +jasnell
15:59:39 <Zakim> +Mike_Elledge
16:00:13 <harry> harry has joined #social
16:00:16 <Zakim> +MarkC
16:00:33 <harry> topic: First Informal Social IG meeting
16:00:41 <harry> Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:00:41 <Zakim> On the phone I see jasnell, Mike_Elledge, MarkC
16:00:58 <Zakim> + +1.510.206.aaaa
16:01:05 <Zakim> + +1.303.538.aabb
16:01:09 <lehawes> lehawes has joined #social
16:01:20 <harry> Zakim, what's the code?
16:01:20 <Zakim> the conference code is 7625 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), harry
16:01:27 <Zakim> +??P29
16:01:32 <dret> zakim, +1.510.206.aaaa is me
16:01:32 <Zakim> +dret; got it
16:01:50 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:01:57 <harry> Zakim, IPcaller is hhalpin
16:01:57 <Zakim> +hhalpin; got it
16:02:19 <Zakim> +my_name
16:02:27 <dave_skiba> dave_skiba has joined #social
16:02:28 <edkrebs> You never are, Harry!
16:02:31 <lwgoix> lwgoix has joined #social
16:02:39 <AdamB> AdamB has joined #social
16:02:51 <Zakim> +my_name.a
16:03:09 <Zakim> +John_Mertic
16:03:16 <harry> can someone volunteer to scribe?
16:04:19 <lehawes> harry, I would scribe, but need to drop off at 12:30. Sorry!
16:04:32 <jasnell> I would, but I believe I'll be leaving early
16:04:42 <edkrebs> I'll do it
16:04:47 <harry> we could try to keep the meeting quick
16:05:11 <edkrebs> Mark Crawford is chair of Soical Interest Group.
16:05:32 <harry> Also, note Larry Hawes you should get IE status shortly
16:05:34 <edkrebs> This is an informal meeting, open as of now. When becomes formal, will need to be W3C member or invited expert.
16:05:44 <edkrebs> Link is on wiki to take you to invited expert page.
16:05:47 <harry> there's been some hiccup with the IE database and the Interest Group
16:06:03 <lehawes> Thanks for the IE update status, Harry!
16:06:05 <harry> we're working on solving it - database issue it appears, somehow Social WG and Social IG got mixed up
16:06:12 <harry> Zakim, who's on the phone?
16:06:12 <Zakim> On the phone I see jasnell, Mike_Elledge, MarkC, dret, +1.303.538.aabb, ??P29, hhalpin, my_name, my_name.a, John_Mertic
16:06:22 <edkrebs> Intros: Mark Crawford is from SAP, part of original social interest community
16:06:45 <harry> Maybe follow order thta Zakim has?
16:07:06 <harry> so James Snell would be next, then Mike Elledge, then some mysterious folks
16:07:23 <tantek> tantek has joined #social
16:07:48 <edkrebs> intro: Eric Wilde - Siemens
16:07:58 <harry> Who is 303?
16:08:01 <dret> s/Eric/Erik/
16:08:02 <harry> area code?
16:08:02 <Loqi> dret meant to say: zakim, +1.510.206.aaaa is me
16:08:20 <lehawes> Anyone: how can I find out which mystery ID Zakim has assigned to my phone line?
16:08:22 <edkrebs> intro: james snell IBM, involved in various social such as activity streams for many years.
16:08:37 <harry> Mike?
16:08:44 <tantek> good morning #social!
16:08:46 <lwgoix> hi i am on the phone as well usign sip
16:09:00 <lwgoix> not sure how i am recognized by zakim
16:09:38 <harry> do you know your area code?
16:09:39 <edkrebs> Intro: Dakve Skiba from Avaia, involved in social (using, integrating), has been invited to dial in and earn who we are
16:10:03 <harry> Zakim, ??P29 is lwgoix
16:10:03 <Zakim> +lwgoix; got it
16:10:43 <edkrebs> intro: P29 is .... from telecom italia, planning to participate in both interest group and working group.
16:11:17 <jasnell> harry: just fyi getting additional noise intermittently from your line
16:11:20 <edkrebs> harry halpin - w3c contact, handling Invited Expert applications, any not yet processed should go through by next week
16:11:42 <edkrebs> itro: John Mertic president Open Social Foundation, also represent SugarCRM
16:11:54 <harry> there's a few other folks on the call
16:12:10 <lwgoix> s/..../Laurent-Walter Goix/
16:12:11 <Loqi> lwgoix meant to say: Laurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter GoixLaurent-Walter Goixm
16:12:45 <edkrebs> intro Larry Hawes?? Analyst Gigom REsearch
16:12:53 <dave_skiba> correcting my info from above, Dave Skiba from Avaya, Director analytics and multimedia research. Thanks.
16:13:35 <edkrebs> Thanks Dave
16:14:20 <edkrebs> Adam - social technical fellow at Boieng, leads internal program "Insight", interested in helping with use cases
16:14:39 <lehawes> Ed: just for the record, I'm Principal of Dow Brook Advisory Services and an analyst with Gigaom Research. Thanks! :>)
16:15:13 <AdamB> s/Insight/inSite/
16:15:25 <edkrebs> Agenda: Intros (done); agree on agenda; Working Mode; Discussion of expected deliverables, IG liaisons,
16:15:25 <harry> topic: Working Mode
16:16:13 <Zakim> +Ann
16:16:25 <edkrebs> Expectation is to work under W3C process at www.w3.org/2014/Process-201409801
16:17:07 <AnnBassetti-Boeing> AnnBassetti-Boeing has joined #social
16:17:08 <edkrebs> Teleconference Schedule - proposal to do every other week, Doodle poll suggests 12-1 Eastern is good. Any other opinions?
16:17:21 <jasnell> The proposed schedule works for me
16:17:46 <lehawes> biweekly seems good for now, at least until we have met face-to-face in a few months
16:18:19 <edkrebs> Teleconference Schedule, no issues noted, timing will be 2 weeks. New passcode going forward
16:18:34 <harry> I think we've got admin booked the telecons properly
16:18:42 <harry> but if there's any confusion I'll double-check
16:19:23 <edkrebs> proposal to use connect room (SAP) as well to share anything more complex beyond wiki and irc. Any concerns?
16:19:54 <edkrebs> No negative comments, will continue to use Connect Room.
16:19:55 <harry> no problem from W3C, as long as we archive any discussion and substantial decisions to mailing list or wiki.
16:20:25 <harry> invited experts can edit wiki as well - we'll get access going ASAP for folks
16:20:27 <tantek> please archive decisions to the wiki
16:20:40 <tantek> email decisions are too hard to re-find
16:21:04 <edkrebs> Wiki: intent is to use wiki, invited experts as well as members will have contribute access for sharing and documents.
16:21:44 <lehawes> Second tantek's request to document everything on wiki, not in email.
16:21:56 <edkrebs> Mark Crawford will take anything from connect sessions to store into the wiki as the official repository
16:22:31 <tantek> also everyone who edits wiki has had to agree to w3c contribution agreements, which is much stronger than email lists
16:22:45 <harry> we have two set-up in the charter, one public and one write-only by IG members
16:23:05 <harry> soon, once both groups are functional and officially meeting, I'll stop mailing all the mailing lists at once.
16:23:19 <edkrebs> topic Listservers: discussion was for one or two between working team and interest group, working group suggested two (one private one public).
16:23:23 <tantek> email is fine for discussion/q&a for those that like it for that. poor for capturing state/decisions.
16:23:28 <edkrebs> listservers are for distribution lists
16:23:34 <edkrebs> Hi Ann Basetti!
16:24:20 <edkrebs> question is still on the table, one or two listervers (distribution lists)
16:25:07 <harry> -1 for private list
16:25:14 <harry> +1 for the public IG list
16:25:22 <harry> Which we already have :)
16:25:47 <edkrebs> consensus is single group, can always make a private list later
16:25:48 <lehawes> Transparency FTW! Public list only if we can.
16:26:14 <tantek> fascinating how that had a different result from yesterday's telcon!
16:26:21 <harry> We can always create a private list as needed, but find IPR probably won't be a problem
16:26:30 <lehawes> I need to leave for another call. Sorry! Will check wiki for rest of conversation later.
16:26:32 <harry> due to the fact group is not producing Rec-track decisions
16:26:37 <lehawes> quit
16:26:44 <edkrebs> only time to go with separate private group was to protect IP, not likely an issue (but can reserve the option to start one if needed)
16:26:45 <tantek> bye lehawes !
16:26:58 <edkrebs> Topic: Expected Deliverables
16:26:58 <harry> topic: deliverables
16:27:07 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/08/06-social-minutes.html harry
16:27:20 <harry> happy to answer any questions about charter
16:27:55 <harry> so we have use-cases, architecture document, and messaging/co-ordination
16:27:57 <edkrebs> Goal - formulate and steer standardization (can see full goals and scope in charter (see wiki)
16:28:09 <harry> the use-cases should steer the standards work
16:28:24 <harry> The use-case document should probably have two editors though who are responsible for it I think
16:28:31 <Zakim> -my_name.a
16:28:33 <harry> even if it just starts on wiki etc.
16:29:05 <edkrebs> Expected Deliverable: use case and requirements Report
16:29:12 <harry> http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-ig-charter
16:29:18 <edkrebs> will be broader than use cases from working group.
16:29:31 <edkrebs> should have joint discussion around use cases to see what we can do to help
16:30:00 <edkrebs> intention is to look at broader context to drive social standards for both businesses and consumers
16:30:37 <harry> but we don't have to decide that now
16:30:45 <harry> although if someone is interested they can make their interest known :)
16:30:46 <jasnell> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Use_cases
16:31:02 <AnnBassetti-Boeing> BTW, if anyone needs an introduction to using IRC at W3C:  http://www.w3.org/wiki/IRC
16:31:26 <edkrebs> Thanks Ann, maybe next time I'll do a good job... :-)
16:31:44 <AnnBassetti-Boeing> you're doing great!
16:31:51 <edkrebs> recommend taking a look at existing use cases in the wiki
16:32:32 <edkrebs> Expected Deliverable: Social Architecture Report - broad look at the soical technologies and specifications
16:32:44 <harry> [looking for results of headlights]
16:32:57 <harry> Here's the OStatus draft, which is a good beginning:
16:32:57 <harry> http://www.w3.org/community/ostatus/wiki/images/9/93/OStatus_1.0_Draft_2.pdf
16:33:06 <edkrebs> An overview was done in 2010, the Social Headlights Task Force also did some good work to kiskctart this effort
16:33:34 <dret> link to the overview from 2010, please? google is failing me. thanks!
16:33:40 <harry> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/wiki/FinalReport
16:33:41 <lwgoix> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/wiki/FinalReport
16:33:58 <harry> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/socialweb/XGR-socialweb-20101206/
16:34:01 <harry> Again, rather out of date
16:34:03 <edkrebs> Action: Mark C. - put a copy of headlights report in wiki
16:34:03 <trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
16:34:08 <dret> ah, thanks. URI not very self-describing. ;-)
16:34:22 <harry> q+
16:34:30 <Arnaud> hi all, regarding the lists, I actually think for an IG it makes sense to have a single public list, no surprises for me here tantek :)
16:34:32 <Zakim> -John_Mertic
16:34:53 <harry> here's the effort nearby from Google that's quite popular: http://schema.org/docs/schemas.html
16:34:56 <lwgoix> q+
16:35:02 <edkrebs> Expected Deliverable: Social Vocabularies - look at various vocabs out there, identify anything missing, determine need for how to fill caps and/or unify
16:35:18 <harry> q- hhalpin
16:35:28 <harry> We expect some of the use-cases will use vocabularies
16:35:34 <harry> that aren't covered or need to be extended
16:35:43 <Zakim> +Arnaud
16:35:44 <harry> I've heard "expert-finding" as a big vocabulary issue
16:35:51 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
16:35:57 <harry> note that W3C is discussing schema.org IPR issues with Google
16:36:00 <harry> not yet fixed
16:36:13 <AdamB> possibly vocabulary around describing expertise
16:36:18 <edkrebs> question and discussion about scope of vocabularies
16:36:22 <dret> q+
16:36:27 <harry> q- harry
16:36:54 <AdamB> harry's "expert finding"
16:37:12 <harry> I'm a bit surprised there's not an expert finding vocabulary out there, but I can't find it!
16:37:24 <dret> q-, seems like my question was answered: it was whether we look at things beyond vocabularies, such as protocols and other interaction methods.
16:37:35 <dret> seems like my question was answered: it was whether we look at things beyond vocabularies, such as protocols and other interaction methods.
16:37:38 <dret> q-
16:37:41 <harry> Profiles I think are within scope
16:37:46 <edkrebs> do the vocabs cover the main specific vocabulries, also will this go beyond socail to cover profile information
16:38:04 <tantek> harry there is no evidence of anything "popular" of a *social* vocabulary nature from Google's oligopolic schema
16:38:07 <harry> but there's lots of previous work, such as vCard, FOAF,
16:38:16 <edkrebs> harry noted profile has been discussed as in scope but we have to be careful not to conflict or overlap
16:38:18 <harry> PortableContacts
16:38:20 <tantek> please avoid mischaracterizing it as popular
16:38:29 <AdamB> i would agree that profiles should be discussed / in scope
16:38:42 <edkrebs> Topic: Liaisons
16:38:57 <tantek> Google has influence/power, but that's very different from popularity
16:39:00 <harry> Obviously Social WG should be a liaison and OpenSocial Foundation.
16:39:03 <lwgoix> not sure whether they are popular but they should be examined
16:39:09 <lwgoix> opensocial uses poco
16:39:12 <lwgoix> ostatus as well
16:39:16 <edkrebs> potential list of others that touch these topics in wiki as an initial suggestion starter
16:39:18 <lwgoix> but any other may do
16:39:30 <edkrebs> may want to reach out to every group initially and connect as appropriate
16:39:31 <tantek> lwgoix: worth documenting previous efforts in general yes. but schema is not special in this regard.
16:39:39 <harry> * ActivityStreams Community
16:39:42 <edkrebs> this would include beyond w3c and include outside activity
16:39:46 <harry> * Cloud Standards Customer Council
16:39:58 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
16:39:59 <harry> * IndieWebCamp Community (tantek covers that I assume)
16:40:12 <jasnell> I'll cover liaison with Activity Streams community
16:40:13 <harry> * ActivityStreams Community  (jasnell covers)
16:40:15 <edkrebs> need to identify How, What, coorinate effort of our working group and otehr activites.
16:40:20 <edkrebs> +1 CSCC
16:40:32 <lwgoix> zakim, i am laurent_goix
16:40:32 <Zakim> sorry, lwgoix, I do not see a party named 'laurent_goix'
16:40:35 <harry> It might be useful to find people who are already have overlap and have them co-ordinate/
16:40:42 <harry> Ed, do you already work with CSCC?
16:40:49 <edkrebs> Topic: Leading Individual Aspects
16:40:51 <harry> * Open Mobile Alliance (Laurent covers)
16:41:03 <harry> * OpenSocial Foundation (John Mertic covers)
16:41:17 <harry> W3C can handle IETF
16:41:20 <harry> Anyone want to help cover XMPP?
16:41:33 <edkrebs> need to form task forces for each deliverable, need co-chairs to take on specific deliverable as lead for the task foce segment coordinator/leader
16:42:00 <edkrebs> also opportunity to be a co-chair. previously identified co-chair took another assignment within IBM, interest anyone?
16:42:12 <harry> +1 having a co-chair, Mark could get sick!
16:42:49 <edkrebs> Taks forces would be Architecture, Use Cases and/or Vocabularies, plus one for Liaison role
16:43:02 <edkrebs> first fomal meetin gin 2 weeks
16:43:15 <edkrebs> if no volunteers, chair reserves "right" to appoint people!!
16:43:26 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
16:43:38 <edkrebs> New Business: Any?
16:43:43 <harry> :)
16:44:15 <harry> RRAgent, generate minutes
16:44:30 <harry> MarkC, what is the new call code?
16:44:37 <dret> thanks everybody! bye!
16:44:38 <harry> We might want to change it back to SOCL not to confuse people
16:44:44 <edkrebs> motion to adjourn, invite with new call code coming out soon, see wiki for documents.
16:45:04 <harry> RRSagent, generate minutes
16:45:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/08/06-social-minutes.html harry
16:45:08 <Zakim> -Ann
16:45:09 <Zakim> -dret
16:45:09 <Zakim> -[Boeing]
16:45:12 <jasnell> I am willing to volunteer for Vocabulary task group, btw
16:45:13 <Zakim> -MarkC
16:45:23 <Zakim> -jasnell
16:45:26 <Zakim> - +1.303.538.aabb
16:45:27 <Zakim> -lwgoix
16:45:30 <harry> Anyways, maybe we made it SOCLI
16:45:33 <Zakim> -[FordMotor]
16:45:34 <harry> [will check]
16:45:55 <harry> thanks jasnell!
16:46:08 <edkrebs> Thanks all!
16:46:15 <harry> yes, and thanks to everyone for showing
16:46:27 <MarkC> Thanks Ed and Harry for all of your help
16:47:21 <MarkC> will be interesting.  I hedged giving any answer as I don't want to in any way prejudice the groups activities.
16:47:59 <tantek> I'm interested in seeing what vocabularies people publish more than what people *say* they want.
16:48:24 <tantek> I no longer believe people just saying what they "want" in the realm of social technologies - that path leads to overly complex albatrosses.
16:48:43 <tantek> I'd rather see live public experiments.
16:48:58 <MarkC> true enough
16:49:00 <tantek> not kitchen sink wishlists
16:49:13 <tantek> (which is frankly what most "vocab wants" turn into)
16:49:18 <AdamB> any reason a company like boeing couldn't "experiment" with them as well?
16:49:44 <harry> I think the point is to get companies to experiment with them
16:49:59 <tantek> AdamB - sure! where does a company like Boeing currently publicly publish social content?
16:50:03 <MarkC> Harry - are you going to give the rss command to capture the log?
16:50:09 <harry> Already did!
16:50:13 <tantek> lol rss command
16:50:22 <tantek> ;)
16:50:41 <MarkC> thanks.ok RRS
16:50:51 <MarkC> :-)
16:51:16 <AdamB> who says it has to be "public"? there are over 100K people that have created profiles on our internal social networking tool that publish stuff all the time, for me that is just as relevant
16:52:46 <harry> Zakim, make minutes public
16:52:46 <Zakim> I don't understand 'make minutes public', harry
16:55:43 <Arnaud> zakim, make logs public
16:55:43 <Zakim> I don't understand 'make logs public', Arnaud
16:56:22 <jasnell> AdamB +1 ... IBM's internal social network has very rich profiles associated. We only share that detail internally or with specific partners (e.g. for HR, etc). Those profiles are just as relevant as public profiles
16:57:10 <Zakim> -hhalpin
16:57:27 <harry> MarkC - meeting minutes sent out
16:57:39 <harry> we'll start segregating the mailing lists better when groups formall start
16:59:37 <Zakim> + +1.541.848.aacc
17:00:10 <jasnell> Something that's critical for the vocabularies, however, is that there are many roads that have already been paved. Tantek's caution is well advised.
17:00:50 <tantek> AdamB - non-public experiments are not citable, are not trustworthy.
17:01:08 <jasnell> Making sure we're using the already paved paths is a job for the WG, however. The IG just documents the needs
17:01:51 <harry> yes, but internal enterprise is a valid use-case
17:01:55 <harry> just hard to do empirical analysis on
17:02:09 <harry> so peopel should deploy vocabs technology internally and tell us how it goes
17:02:18 <harry> and experiences, even if we have to trust just them!
17:02:39 <tantek> sure, private experiments are fine too - just not nearly as useful as public
17:02:40 <jasnell> Tantek: that's part of the IG's job... take those use cases (internal or external) and document them so that they're reliable
17:03:09 <Zakim> - +1.541.848.aacc
17:03:22 <tantek> note that enterprise typically adopts outside consumer tech, rather than outsider consumer tech being designed for enterprise first
17:03:29 <tantek> e.g. PCs, iPhones etc.
17:03:34 <AdamB> tantek, agree
17:03:54 <tantek> *after* enterprise adoption, those public/consumer tech devices gain more enterprise features
17:04:01 <AdamB> on enterprise typically adopting outside consumer tech / standards
17:04:11 <tantek> so for new tech (i.e. social web tech), I expect to see the same pattern, frankly
17:04:26 <tantek> first gen is likely to come from public/consumer first
17:04:42 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
17:04:44 <tantek> just being upfront about sorting those use cases first
17:04:52 <jasnell> ok, but that doesn't discount the value of "Hey, we deployed this stuff internally to our 300k+ employees and this is what we found out"
17:05:03 <AdamB> +1
17:05:17 <AdamB> i guess thats my perspective on this
17:05:24 <AdamB> is what james is stating
17:05:39 <tantek> yes that's part of the value of gen 1 to gen 2 iteration
17:05:56 <tantek> but you need to have a gen 1 that you "deploy internally"
17:06:18 <Zakim> -Arnaud
17:06:20 <Zakim> Team_(social)16:00Z has ended
17:06:20 <Zakim> Attendees were jasnell, Mike_Elledge, MarkC, +1.303.538.aabb, dret, hhalpin, my_name, John_Mertic, lwgoix, Ann, Arnaud, +1.541.848.aacc
17:06:21 <jasnell> For instance, IBM uses our Connections product internally. Our Connections API relies heavily on Atom and Activity Streams. We discovered very early on that the OpenSocial Person data model really wasn't what we needed so we ended up using VCard for stuff. Our connections profiles, then, are really just extended VCard and HCard instances with some additional API bits wrapped around them
17:06:36 <tantek> public/consumer tech/standards that are successful typically ignore enterprise input *until* they've succeed in public/consumer spacr
17:06:40 <tantek> s/spacr/space
17:06:41 <Loqi> tantek meant to say: public/consumer tech/standards that are successful typically ignore enterprise input *until* they've succeed in public/consumer space
17:06:57 <tantek> jasnell - makes sense
17:07:45 <jasnell> The idea here is not: Hey, this is what our enterprise product does, let's standardize that and expect everyone to use it
17:07:56 <tantek> in that case, yes, the vCard/hCard example is the public/consumer piece that was adopted internally and then provided good feedback
17:08:04 <tantek> the OpenSocial Person data model never had any real public/consumer *success* that's why
17:08:10 <jasnell> It's: Hey, this is what we discovered we need internally. How does that match up with everything else
17:08:12 <tantek> whereas vCard/hCard did
17:08:41 <tantek> I'd recommend against any enterprise adopting something just because it comes from a consortium/oligopoly
17:09:01 <tantek> if it doesn't already have public/consumer success, it's a deadend. enterprise adoption won't change that.
17:09:46 <jasnell> That's not always true.
17:10:33 <jasnell> But that's not really the point here. The question we need to answer is this: What are the minimal needs for a common social vocabulary
17:10:58 <jasnell> and how do we allow specific parties to extend that in a reliable way for specific application cases
17:11:19 <tantek> I don't believe in reliable extensions here - especially not longterm
17:11:45 <tantek> to be up front about that. "distributed extensibility" is a pipe dream when it comes to vocabulary (which is about *common* communication)
17:11:46 <jasnell> reliable extension == how does a company like IBM add in the few additional fields they need to support their business
17:12:02 <jasnell> without interfering with the core properties or feeling like they have to create a new vocabulary
17:12:04 <tantek> extension is good for one thing, experimentation to gain experience / data
17:12:39 <tantek> jasnell - for internal/business use fine, but for open public distribution - I don't see that working under any extensibility model
17:12:46 <tantek> (it certainly hasn't in the past)
17:13:20 <tantek> jasnell, however I do strongly acknowledge the need for "a company like IBM add in the few additional fields they need to support their business"
17:13:41 <tantek> that's very real and seems to happen over and over
17:13:44 <jasnell> but that's the reason we're here: define a core, common social model that can *also* work for internal/business use cases..
17:14:13 <AdamB> +1 jasnell
17:14:16 <tantek> "work for" but don't expect it to be *sufficient* for
17:14:34 <tantek> I don't expect anything non-public/consumer to make it into such a "core"
17:15:04 <jasnell> I have zero interest in wasting time in the IG or WG defining a kitchen sink vocabulary. I want a minimal core and a model that allows us to use a mix of well paved roads (FOAF, VCard, etc) and temporary dirt paths (business specific extensions)
17:15:18 <tantek> :)
17:15:23 <Loqi> you're welcome
17:15:39 <jasnell> that was easy
17:16:37 <oshepherd> One of the reasons I like JSON-LD alignment is easy reuse of things like FOAF :-)
17:16:59 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
17:17:25 <jasnell> we don't need anything "non-public/consumer" to be in the core. We just need to make sure it's crystal clear that business/non-public implementations can add on to the core without conflicting with it.
17:17:56 <tantek> oshepherd: some of us still see FOAF as an unnecessary vocab divergence from vCard.
17:18:08 <tantek> so if someone (like jasnell above) has to say "(FOAF, VCard, etc)" - it demonstrates the problem.
17:18:14 <AdamB> i'm still not convinced that a significant portion wouldn't fit in the core already
17:18:32 <tantek> AdamB - I am convinced that even vCard is too big for "core"
17:18:34 <oshepherd> tantek: I kind of agree, but VCard has some funny semantics...
17:18:53 <tantek> nevermind the more complex / overdesigned vocabs like schema/person
17:19:30 <AdamB> hmm
17:19:40 <oshepherd> tantek: Calling schema "overdesigned" or "designed" is unfair to vocabularies which have had a more complicated design process than "throw random crap at wall and see what sticks"
17:19:50 <tantek> and next person to suggest schema as "popular" or any kind of starting point is hereby assigned the task of installing a fax machine on their nearest volcano
17:20:04 <tantek> oshepherd++
17:20:05 <Loqi> oshepherd has 1 karma
17:20:17 <tantek> and yes, fair enough :)
17:20:39 <jasnell> the opensocial data model is pretty much the poster child for over engineered vocabulary crap.
17:20:47 <jasnell> we don't need to go down that road
17:21:01 <tantek> jasnell - so many others already have
17:21:17 <tantek> well, they didn't go down that road, mostly just talked about going down that road
17:21:42 <tantek> btw I was referring to this: http://schema.org/Volcano##faxNumber
17:22:07 <jasnell> I personally don't care if it's foaf or vcard or schema... we actually don't need to decide specifically what it is. we identify a basic model and identify a minimal set, and let people do whatever they end up doing. Then, if clear patterns emerge over time, we document it and pave the road
17:22:55 <tantek> jasnell - that's a contradiction
17:23:04 <tantek> clear patterns *have emerged*
17:23:07 <tantek> so you *should* care
17:23:57 <jasnell> that's part of the "identifying a minimal set"... what's the absolute minimum, most commonly used thing we can identify right now
17:23:58 <tantek> there's everyone basing their work on vCard (hCard, PoCo, etc.), and then there's the FOAF holdouts.
17:24:40 <oshepherd> Hmm - vcard semantics are less weird than I remember
17:24:51 <tantek> oshepherd: btw re: "VCard has some funny semantics…" we tried to fix some of that in vCard4 but were only partially successful in doing so
17:25:13 <tantek> so yes, I agree that even vCard itself could use further simplification / subsetting
17:25:19 <jasnell> we identify that and we say, "Hey, you should start from there, but if you think you have a good enough reason not to, then here's how you do other things." Then later, we see if there is a different "absolute minimum, most commonly used thing"
17:25:25 <tantek> (which is the direction we've taken with h-card)
17:26:28 <oshepherd> A nice thing about JSON-LD is we can say "An ActivityStreams Person is a VCard Individual, so you can use the vcard properties to describe someone"
17:26:53 <jasnell> in any case, I have four kids waiting for me to take them to see a movie about a talking tree and a cgi racoon so I'm going to have to drop off. will be back later on today
17:27:09 <tantek> oshepherd: not really interested in "nice thing" or "is a" - as that's never been tied to end user use-cases.
17:27:56 <tantek> jasnell have fun at the movies!
17:28:02 <tantek> if you like it please post an h-review ;)
17:29:23 <oshepherd> {"id": "https://person.example.org", "objectType": "person", "displayName": "Some Alias", "vcard:fn": "John Smith"} == easy to generate, easy to parse, and we haven't had to define our own vcard-to-activitystreams mapping
17:30:00 <AnnBassetti> AnnBassetti has joined #social
17:30:39 <tantek> shorter: <a class="h-card" href="https://person.example.org">John Smith</a> = easier to generate, easy to parse, and most importantly, easy to display functionally to a user
17:30:55 <oshepherd> tantek: I don't classify parsing HTML as "easy"
17:31:12 <tantek> oshepherd: experience is showing otherwise
17:31:28 <oshepherd> It's also very verbose if you're trying to synchronize things over a mobile data connection
17:31:51 <tantek> nope - less verbose - example above
17:32:08 <oshepherd> tantek: And all the extra markup on the page besides that?
17:32:36 <tantek> 117 vs 68 chars. the h-card is about half the size of the JSON.
17:32:56 <tantek> mobile connections get HTML first
17:33:02 <tantek> so they already have it
17:33:17 <tantek> DRY violating sidefiles are actual bandwidth wasters
17:33:33 <oshepherd> tantek: Erm, no? I don't see my mobile client pulling down any HTML files
17:34:15 <tantek> you must not be on the web then ;)
17:34:33 <oshepherd> Very much on the web
17:34:52 <bret> telecon at 1 today still?
17:35:09 <tantek> bret - what telcon?
17:35:18 <bret> oh woops its wed
17:38:35 <oshepherd> tantek: I don't see why a mobile client for a social network would pull down the web browser focused HTML files, when it could pull down more compact, easier to parse JSON files :-)
17:39:14 <tantek> oshepherd: after the experience with Atom vs. h-entry on my home page I no longer believe the claims of compactness of sidefiles
17:39:51 <tantek> basically all these programmer formats tend to get *more* bloated because they shove all kinds of excess precision and "required" fields nonsense in there
17:40:39 <tantek> and last time I checked, *every* successful social network started with the *browser* as their mobile client.
17:40:49 <tantek> so that's the well paved road to follow
17:41:19 <oshepherd> The "successful" social networks started simultaneously with the rise of smartphones
17:41:29 <oshepherd> Of course, today people expect things like notifications when people send them messages
17:41:48 <tantek> maybe
17:42:19 <tantek> and people complain about noise and notification overload too
17:43:01 <tantek> in addition, even today, m.facebook.com is *faster* and more feature rich than their iOS native app.
17:43:04 <oshepherd> True, though those can be turned off (and anyway, a lot of that is people like Twitter who think it's important to you that people you know retweeted somebody you don't know)
17:43:27 <tantek> so good luck with that native client approach. I'm betting the mobile web approach will still beat it.
17:43:50 <tantek> Twitter is especially noisy with notifications - so much so to make them useless
17:44:15 <oshepherd> Yup. I have blocked them from their Android app
17:46:47 <oshepherd> tantek: And I'm betting that we won't win without a multi-pronged approach. Of course, at least if we define a standard, the work is spread
17:47:57 <tantek> oshepherd: I'm betting that a web-first approach is faster and good enough.
17:48:03 <tantek> multiple prongs be damned
17:48:21 <AdamB> even web first doesn't mean you have to send html to the client
17:48:26 <tantek> and frankly, if JSON is what you want, you can get it: http://waterpigs.co.uk/php-mf2/
17:48:34 <AdamB> many web first solutions send only json data to the client for rendering
17:48:51 <tantek> AdamB, if you can't curl it, it's not on the web
17:49:22 <oshepherd> Sure you can curl it. You might just have to curl /feed.json :-)
17:49:46 <tantek> oshepherd: yes, that's at least *more* weblike :)
17:50:06 <oshepherd> (Indeed my own AS1 based web app uses client-side rendering)
17:50:33 <tantek> than what I think adamb is talking about (the insanity that is angular.js, backbone.js, ember.js, and the like)
17:51:17 <tantek> those things are basically just Flash apps written in JS instead of AS - they're not really "on the web"
17:51:50 <tantek> (AS = ActionScript in that sentence, realizing it usually means ActivityStreams)
17:53:14 <tantek> they're as dead in 3-5 years as Flash is now.
17:53:27 <oshepherd> hmm?
17:53:29 <tantek> I mean, good for prototyping perhaps.
17:53:40 <tantek> but nothing that will last
17:55:46 <AdamB> tantek - what do you mean by "on the web"
17:56:37 <bret> curlable?
17:57:56 <tantek> AdamB: summary: 1. Does it have an HTTP(S) URL (preferably stable)? 2. Can you curl that and get HTML to interact with?
17:57:56 <tantek> that's a good starting point
17:58:33 <AdamB> why do you have to have html in order to interact with it?
17:58:57 <oshepherd> I'm also not sure why you think angular (for example) apps won't last
17:59:00 <tantek> because HTML supports an interaction model that is reasonably inteoperably implemented
17:59:25 <tantek> oshepherd: because angular apps can't be curled. their content is dead to the archives.
17:59:34 <tantek> and search engines etc.
17:59:43 <tantek> like I said, fine for ephemeral prototyping
17:59:49 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
18:02:11 <oshepherd> This is one of the things that makes me despise the fact that JS is the only in-browser language. You have to write in a terrible language so that you can share FE/BE code
18:03:00 <tantek> oshepherd: that's definitely a challenge and it made me come up with cassis.js
18:03:55 <oshepherd> I'm presently compiling Dart. Maybe in a few years ES6 will make JavaScript usable
18:08:49 <AdamB> I guess whether one agrees or not with the approach of developing applications with js (e.g. angular etc) its part of the ecosystem and people perceive them as web apps and “on the web”
18:14:12 <tantek> developing apps with JS yes, as enhancement to app HTML+CSS. developing apps that only work via JS? no. they're as "on the web" as Flash was. which some people did perceive that way, but they were wrong as has been shown.
18:15:20 <aaronpk> don't forget java apps
18:15:21 <tantek> it's ok because nothing JS-only approaches "publish" will be found or cited in search or wikis anyway, so such developments are purely conversational ephemera.
18:15:40 <bret> is pump's front end done with angular?
18:16:13 <tantek> and being ephemera they have no need for standards, nor standards for them, since one of the points of standards is interop *over time*.
19:07:59 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
19:14:43 <wilkie> a js-only app could still have an rss/atom route linked by a sitemap to support search, which seems especially OK for social apps and activitystreams.
19:16:13 <wilkie> not sure the choice of language has ever *really* said anything certain about its overall usability. I'd think js web frameworks and their ilk will be around for quite some time (until js is removed from the browser and better extensibility is added)
19:19:06 <wwu> wwu has joined #social
19:35:13 <englishm> englishm has joined #social
19:50:42 <wwu> wwu has joined #social
19:54:57 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
19:59:39 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
20:11:10 <oshepherd> bret: Pump's front end is JavaScript using BackBone, I think (note that this only applies to the stuff directly applicable to a logged in/about to be logged in user)
20:18:43 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
20:27:59 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
20:46:22 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
20:50:47 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
20:56:34 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
21:28:16 <tantek> tantek has joined #social
21:34:22 <tantek> I find it pretty funny to see such a rube-goldberg suggestion of three things in more arcane formats (JS-only-app + sitemap + rss/atom), when a simple interactive HTML+microformats page would solve the use-cases of: user interface, search, and API/feed.
21:39:46 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
21:44:25 <tantek> tantek has joined #social
22:05:13 <nicolagreco> can someone do me a tl;dr of this conversation?
22:05:24 <englishm> englishm has joined #social
22:05:53 <jasnell> jasnell has joined #social
22:13:51 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
22:18:44 <nicolagreco> nicolagreco has joined #social
23:13:58 <bblfish> bblfish has joined #social
23:55:08 <kylewm_> kylewm_ has joined #social
23:59:06 <kylewm_> kylewm_ has left #social