15:46:56 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #annotation
15:46:56 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/02/25-annotation-irc
15:46:58 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:46:58 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #annotation
15:47:00 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 2666
15:47:00 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see DPUB_(ANNO)11:00AM scheduled to start in 13 minutes
15:47:01 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
15:47:01 <trackbot> Date: 25 February 2015
15:47:04 <fjh> Agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Feb/0154.html
15:47:16 <fjh> fjh has changed the topic to: agenda https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Feb/0154.html code 2666
15:47:48 <fjh> Chair: Frederick Hirsch
15:48:24 <fjh> Present+ Frederick Hirsch
15:50:29 <fjh> Regrets+ Rob Sanderson, Ivan Herman, Raphaël_Troncy, Paolo_Ciccarese, Ben_De_Meester, Maxence_Guesdon
15:54:29 <fjh> fjh has joined #annotation
15:54:40 <fjh_> fjh_ has joined #annotation
15:56:48 <RayD> RayD has joined #annotation
15:57:50 <Zakim> DPUB_(ANNO)11:00AM has now started
15:57:53 <Zakim> +Doug_Schepers
15:57:53 <fjh> zakim, ipcaller is me
15:57:55 <Zakim> sorry, fjh, I do not recognize a party named 'ipcaller'
15:57:57 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:58:09 <fjh> zakim, ipcaller is me
15:58:09 <Zakim> +fjh; got it
15:58:56 <fjh> Topic: Agenda Review, Scribe Selection, Announcements
15:59:23 <Zakim> + +1.650.274.aaaa
15:59:33 <Kyrce> Kyrce has joined #annotation
15:59:35 <dwhly> zakim, aaaa is dwhly
15:59:35 <Zakim> +dwhly; got it
15:59:42 <tbdinesh> tbdinesh has joined #annotation
15:59:44 <fjh> zakim, where is 650
15:59:44 <Zakim> fjh, I do not see a party named 'where'.  If you meant to ask a question you need to add '?'
15:59:57 <Zakim> + +1.202.707.aabb
16:00:28 <Zakim> + +1.201.236.aacc
16:00:45 <Kyrce> zakim, aacc is Kyrce
16:00:45 <Zakim> +Kyrce; got it
16:00:53 <RayD> Present+ Ray_Denenberg
16:00:59 <fjh> Present+ Doug_Schepers, Dan_Whaley, Kyrce Swenson
16:01:06 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:01:08 <RayD> 202 is me
16:01:16 <fjh> zakim, who is here?
16:01:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see fjh, Doug_Schepers, dwhly, +1.202.707.aabb, Kyrce, [IPcaller]
16:01:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see tbdinesh, Kyrce, RayD, fjh_, fjh, Zakim, RRSAgent, csillag, KevinMarks, dauwhe, Mitar, shepazu, MarkS, JakeHart, dwhly, nickstenn, bigbluehat, rhiaro, oshepherd,
16:01:18 <Zakim> ... stain, trackbot
16:01:28 <fjh> zakim, aabb RayD
16:01:28 <Zakim> I don't understand 'aabb RayD', fjh
16:01:30 <tbdinesh> zakim, ipcaller is me
16:01:31 <Zakim> +tbdinesh; got it
16:01:34 <fjh> zakim, aabb is rayd
16:01:34 <Zakim> +rayd; got it
16:01:52 <csillag> zakim is giving me trouble. "Your pass code is not valaid"
16:01:52 <fjh> Present+ T.B._Dinesh
16:01:57 <Zakim> + +1.864.787.aadd
16:02:18 <Zakim> +dauwhe
16:02:31 <tbdinesh> Present+ T.B.Dinesh
16:02:32 <fjh> zakim, who is here?
16:02:33 <Zakim> On the phone I see fjh, Doug_Schepers, dwhly, rayd, Kyrce, tbdinesh, +1.864.787.aadd, dauwhe
16:02:33 <Zakim> On IRC I see tbdinesh, Kyrce, RayD, fjh_, fjh, Zakim, RRSAgent, csillag, KevinMarks, dauwhe, Mitar, shepazu, MarkS, JakeHart, dwhly, nickstenn, bigbluehat, rhiaro, oshepherd,
16:02:35 <Zakim> ... stain, trackbot
16:02:44 <Matt_Haas> Matt_Haas has joined #annotation
16:02:44 <Zakim> +??P22
16:02:45 <Jacob> Jacob has joined #annotation
16:02:53 <csillag> Zakim, P22 is me
16:02:53 <Zakim> sorry, csillag, I do not recognize a party named 'P22'
16:02:55 <dauwhe> Present+ Dave_Cramer
16:02:57 <Jacob> present+ Jacob_Jett
16:03:04 <csillag> zakim, ??P22 is me
16:03:05 <Zakim> +csillag; got it
16:03:32 <Zakim> +Matt_Haas
16:03:36 <fjh> zakim, who is making noise?
16:03:43 <Matt_Haas> Present+ Matt_Haas
16:03:47 <Zakim> fjh, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: fjh (49%), Doug_Schepers (32%), dwhly (39%)
16:04:08 <fjh> zakim, who is here?
16:04:08 <Zakim> On the phone I see fjh, Doug_Schepers, dwhly, rayd, Kyrce, tbdinesh, +1.864.787.aadd, dauwhe, csillag, Matt_Haas
16:04:10 <Zakim> On IRC I see Jacob, Matt_Haas, tbdinesh, Kyrce, RayD, fjh_, fjh, Zakim, RRSAgent, csillag, KevinMarks, dauwhe, Mitar, shepazu, MarkS, JakeHart, dwhly, nickstenn, bigbluehat,
16:04:10 <Zakim> ... rhiaro, oshepherd, stain, trackbot
16:04:17 <fjh> zakim, where is +1-864?
16:04:17 <Zakim> North American dialing code 1.864 is South Carolina
16:05:10 <csillag> that would be bigbluehat
16:05:13 <fjh> zakim, aadd is bigbluehat
16:05:13 <Zakim> +bigbluehat; got it
16:05:19 <bigbluehat> tnx fjh
16:05:32 <fjh> Present+ Benjamin_Young
16:05:37 <dwhly> i can scribe
16:05:46 <fjh> ScribeNick: dwhly
16:06:14 <dwhly> main topic is rangefinder api
16:06:18 <dwhly> implementations
16:06:40 <fjh> JSON-LD Introductory videos https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Feb/0094.html
16:07:02 <fjh> LDP F2F likely to be 21st April
16:07:02 <dwhly> fjh: not sure what's going on w/ JDP f2f
16:08:04 <dwhly> shepazu: doesn't seem like there were a lot of LDP folks that could attend
16:08:16 <Zakim> +deirdrelee
16:08:55 <dwhly> shepazu: what's azaroth's role?
16:08:56 <takeshi> takeshi has joined #annotation
16:09:09 <fjh> Topic: Minutes Approval
16:09:24 <fjh> proposed RESOLUTION: 18 February 2015 minutes approved adding Rob as co-chair to minutes
16:09:29 <dwhly> s/JDP/LDP
16:09:31 <fjh> http://www.w3.org/2015/02/18-annotation-minutes.html
16:10:09 <fjh> RESOLUTION: 18 February 2015 minutes approved adding Rob as co-chair to minutes
16:10:19 <fjh> Topic: RangeFinder API
16:10:32 <fjh> http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/rangefinder-api/
16:10:54 <dwhly> shepzau: discussions w/ tilgovi influenced approach
16:11:06 <dwhly> ... at TPAC introd findtext API
16:11:18 <dwhly> ... struggled w 2 architectures
16:11:30 <dwhly> ... 1) treating this as a method on the element
16:11:50 <dwhly> ... 2) having it as its own object, can execute it multiple times
16:12:02 <dwhly> ... went with option 2
16:12:53 <dwhly> ... went with attributes vs setters
16:13:11 <dwhly> ... each selector is an attribute
16:13:24 <dwhly> ... poorly described at this point, wanted to get something out.
16:13:47 <dwhly> ... given all the selectors you'd kick off the search.
16:14:58 <dwhly> ... (technical description complicated to transcribe)
16:15:32 <fjh> shepazu: hope you don’t have to use multiple incremental searches, with appropriate selectors can return result in one pass
16:15:35 <dwhly> ... a main design feature is that it has to meet the use cases and simple searches
16:15:36 <fjh> q+ to ask about finding best match
16:15:52 <dwhly> ... right now the find dialogs in browsers aren't exposed to developers
16:16:07 <dwhly> ... a goal is to unify the search capabilities and expose these to browsers
16:16:24 <dwhly> ... do we want to have strict case matches, fwd backwards, etc.
16:16:52 <dwhly> ... do we want to have unicode mapping from o to o umlaut....
16:16:57 <fjh> http://w3c.github.io/web-annotation/api/rangefinder/
16:18:01 <dwhly> ... these are the kinds of things that can allow browsers to implement this.
16:18:05 <fjh> q?
16:18:12 <csillag> q+
16:19:17 <dwhly> shepazu: one thing i didn't add was wraparound
16:19:38 <dwhly> ... to the top of the search tree.  it's the dom subtree in which we are searching
16:19:44 <fjh> ack fjh
16:19:44 <Zakim> fjh, you wanted to ask about finding best match
16:20:05 <dwhly> ... there are two ways of determining if we have all the results
16:20:26 <dwhly> ... if you have wraparound you can do a detect if the result is same as previous
16:20:35 <dwhly> ... doesn't handle changing documents
16:21:16 <dwhly> ... and also doesn't handle realtime
16:21:21 <dwhly> ... changes
16:21:36 <Zakim> + +1.434.971.aaee
16:21:57 <dwhly> ... particularly realtime insertions that could affect the search term
16:22:10 <davis_salisbury> davis_salisbury has joined #annotation
16:22:15 <dwhly> ... propose that he adds how you can tell that you've finished a search
16:22:21 <fjh> q+ to ask about need for html canonicalization for whitespace or selector canonicalization
16:22:27 <fjh> ack csillag
16:22:50 <fjh>  /me if you recently joined please Present+ first_last
16:22:59 <dwhly> csillag: in your intro you mention that there might be an application with content that coud be searches and not searchable.
16:23:14 <dwhly> ... text could be bigger than the DOM tree for instance
16:23:19 <dwhly> ... with PDFjs
16:23:29 <dwhly> ... do we want to support this use case?
16:23:45 <fjh> s/coud/could/
16:24:17 <dwhly> shepazu: my impression is that the API should not address this use case.  obviously this deals with specifying an element to search.
16:25:05 <dwhly> ... the application itself could be aware that the entire document has not been presented, and could create multiple rangefinder instances.
16:25:20 <dwhly> ... could try to look ahead to find things that hadn't been searched
16:25:37 <fjh> s/main/fjh: main/
16:25:38 <dwhly> ... there are a number of techniques you could use to work around.
16:26:00 <dwhly> csillag: do we want to support several applications working together?
16:26:06 <fjh> s/implementations/… implementations/
16:26:19 <fjh> what is the use case for applications working together?
16:26:38 <dwhly> shepazu: if they're both in the same document then the rangefinder would work as you would expect.
16:26:50 <dwhly> ... if they're in two separate frames....
16:26:56 <dwhly> csillag: not asking about that
16:27:06 <fjh> q?
16:27:28 <dwhly> shepazu: if they're both in the same document. they could instantiate multiple rangefinders to target the specific areas.
16:27:59 <dwhly> ... and display the results the as needed
16:28:11 <dwhly> fjh: i don't understand the multiple application use case.
16:28:40 <dwhly> csillag: let me restate.  do we want to make it possible for applications to implement the native search capability.
16:28:55 <dwhly> shepazu: that's a browser UI question.  up to individual browsers.  not for us.
16:30:02 <dwhly> csillag: do we want to provide capability that could augment the browser's native search.  we might want the browser to search inside the document.  we'd need another api that could inform the browser where the actual searchable content lies.
16:30:38 <dwhly> ... this is the same as the two application situation.
16:31:08 <dwhly> shepazu: i want to split out the discussion.  you're talking about a couple different things.
16:31:16 <dwhly> ... common knowledge in W3 circles.
16:31:35 <dwhly> ... there is a separation between chrome features and UI features and DOM features.
16:32:01 <fjh> s; and UI;/UI;
16:32:01 <dwhly> ... in the past browsers have been insistent that we not try to describe things that are UI features.
16:32:16 <dwhly> ... i think there would be a lot of resistance to that.
16:32:28 <dwhly> ... that's a non-starter.  there are two paths forward
16:33:07 <dwhly> ... 1) you can do what they do today, which is to override the native search capability.  if I use ctrl-F in google docs, then gdocs grabs the keys and does it itself.
16:33:38 <dwhly> ... what i propose is a compromise, we expose the functionality, but that we override the native search functionality.
16:33:48 <dwhly> ... if that's successful, then possibly we come to
16:34:10 <dwhly> ... 2) browsers decide on their own to expose this functionality and expose an API for developres
16:34:38 <dwhly> ... for example, not every browsers UI let you do case matching, wrap around, etc.
16:34:52 <dwhly> ... it could be that if they implement this, they add those elements
16:35:13 <dwhly> ... it would be a very different API if we had a different way to push results into the browsers native API
16:35:28 <fjh> q?
16:35:28 <dwhly> csillag: ok, forget that, lets focus on the other.
16:35:42 <dwhly> ... (missed the question)
16:36:04 <dwhly> shepazu: we can either have multiple rangefinders, or we can have one whose parent contains both.
16:36:17 <dwhly> ... i don't know what you mean by multiple applications
16:36:41 <dwhly> ... either they're friendly and they expose their APIs.  it's up to the applications expose their search capability.
16:36:59 <dwhly> fjh: good questions, but can you write these downs and submit to the mailing list.
16:37:40 <dwhly> shepazu: can i add one thing to the minutes...
16:38:14 <dwhly> ... kristof reminded me that we assume that everything we're searching for is in the DOM, but we could have a big body of text that hasn't been inserted yet.
16:38:30 <dwhly> ... we might want to search that instead.
16:39:20 <csillag> We are doing lots of fun things with pdfjs
16:39:24 <csillag> not sure what you are asking
16:39:26 <dwhly> ... one of the optimizations that pdfjs makes is that it doesn't render the DOM all at one things
16:39:43 <dwhly> ... but it already has all the content in memory
16:40:21 <dwhly> ... so, it searches within the bytestream as a look ahead... and then informs PDFjs this is the part they want to navigate to.
16:40:37 <dwhly> fjh: 1) yeah makes sense, 2) is this a v2 feature?
16:40:55 <dwhly> ... it's complicated already, can we simplify.
16:41:19 <dwhly> csillag: we can keep it simple if we define the extension points.
16:41:31 <dwhly> ... could provide the text we want to search on.
16:41:47 <dwhly> ... extension point would allow overriding the text we want to search on.
16:41:58 <dwhly> ... pdfjs could provide the whole text for instance.
16:42:20 <dwhly> shepazu: two possible extension points 1) here's a block of text you want to search on
16:42:53 <dwhly> ... 2) not an extension point actually.  this app is not designed to be the sole search capability.  it's designed to be an instance.
16:43:21 <fjh> q?
16:43:22 <dwhly> ... the extension point is actually not in the application itself but in the way it was designed.
16:43:38 <csillag> is hear doug breaking up
16:43:42 <csillag> is it my line of his?
16:44:05 <dwhly> fjh: send email
16:44:08 <fjh> q?
16:44:13 <fjh> ack fjh
16:44:13 <Zakim> fjh, you wanted to ask about need for html canonicalization for whitespace or selector canonicalization
16:44:40 <dwhly> fjh: i was looking at examples at end of doc.  will these work in various cases, whitespace, line breaks, parsing, etc.
16:45:09 <dwhly> shepazu: two ways to answer: 1) yes, the DOM4 or HTML5 spec has a normalize capability
16:45:28 <dwhly> ... i need to make this more explicit.  there's a big part of the spec that's missing.
16:45:37 <dwhly> ... the algorithms are missing.
16:45:58 <dwhly> ... 2) you might want to search in a white space sensitive way.
16:46:18 <dwhly> ... search for two spaces separated by another word.  not sure how difficult that would be.
16:46:25 <dwhly> ... not sure the use cases justify it.
16:47:07 <dwhly> fjh: as a developer i don't need to worry about normalization.
16:47:15 <dwhly> shepazu: i need to explain it in the docs.
16:47:17 <fjh> q?
16:48:32 <dwhly> shepazu: honestly, I could walk through the issues. it's more important to work through issues i know are unaddressed.
16:48:58 <dwhly> fjh: matter of using algorithms that already exist
16:49:07 <dwhly> shepazu: there is a lot of prior art on this.
16:49:18 <dwhly> ... i'm not qualified to read all the literature.
16:49:34 <dwhly> ... more efficient to get this to the state where it's credible and then ask folks.
16:49:41 <dwhly> ... levenstein is still alive!
16:50:28 <dwhly> ... more than most other W3C specs this is in a space with a lot of literature.
16:50:47 <dwhly> dwhly: there's a list at the bottom of our fuzzy anchoring blog post
16:51:00 <dwhly> shepazu: this isn't done there are huge gaps.
16:51:35 <dwhly> ... i'd much rather receive annotations than emails
16:51:45 <dwhly> fjh: topic feeds
16:51:46 <fjh> Topic: Annotation Feeds
16:51:55 <fjh> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Feb/0144.html
16:51:58 <dwhly> ... benjamin?
16:52:14 <tantek> tantek has joined #annotation
16:52:22 <dwhly> bigbluehat: i've added some wiki pages one for annotations feeds, one for [ ]...
16:52:32 <dwhly> ... i'd love to find other prior art for atom feeds
16:52:43 <dwhly> ... right now I'd just like to collect and gather them
16:53:00 <dwhly> ... i'll drop the links in the chat
16:53:09 <dwhly> ... not prior art / prior implementations
16:53:16 <bigbluehat> Annotation Feeds wiki https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Annotation_Feeds
16:53:34 <dwhly> fjh: the search related to feeds looks like it can get complicated. do we want to delve into this?
16:53:54 <dwhly> bigbluehat: sure, lorestore included their own search endpoints
16:54:45 <fjh> so we can keep this simple with focus on annotation feed format and possibly simple discovery
16:54:52 <bigbluehat> Existing Protocol Implementations wikihttps://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Existing_Protocol_Implementations
16:54:59 <dwhly> fjh: when we say discover what are we saying?
16:55:18 <dwhly> bigbluehat: that needs discussion... there are a lot of places to provide the discovery
16:55:35 <fjh> q?
16:55:37 <dwhly> ... it's helpful if we can separate that.
16:55:49 <dwhly> ... they could all be shipped as separate thngs.
16:56:00 <dwhly> ... if you have your own CMS that implements it, etc.
16:56:51 <dwhly> ... we can expect that people will ship their own annotations as a feed.... etc.
16:57:00 <fjh> q?
16:57:06 <bigbluehat> s/wikihttps://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Existing_Protocol_Implementations/https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Existing_Protocol_Implementations
16:57:07 <dwhly> fjh: don't want to ask questions... oh i do have one more
16:57:43 <fjh> fjh: do you think topic maps might be relevant to organizing annotations
16:58:03 <dwhly> shepazu: i think the idea of topic maps has become superceded by hashtags and other things
16:58:04 <fjh> shepazu: superseded by tagging
16:58:22 <dwhly> ... the advantage of a topic map it's a defined vocab.
16:58:30 <dwhly> ... but not sure it's common practice
16:58:43 <fjh> Topic:  Protocol Implementations
16:58:52 <fjh> Lorestore, https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Feb/0141.html
16:59:03 <dwhly> fjh: we're out of time, we've covered agenda...
16:59:11 <Zakim> -dauwhe
16:59:46 <Zakim> -rayd
16:59:48 <Zakim> -tbdinesh
16:59:54 <Zakim> -bigbluehat
17:00:06 <Zakim> -Doug_Schepers
17:00:08 <Zakim> -dwhly
17:00:09 <Zakim> -Kyrce
17:00:10 <Zakim> - +1.434.971.aaee
17:00:12 <Zakim> -deirdrelee
17:00:16 <Zakim> -csillag
17:00:18 <Zakim> -Matt_Haas
17:00:25 <Zakim> -fjh
17:00:26 <Zakim> DPUB_(ANNO)11:00AM has ended
17:00:26 <Zakim> Attendees were Doug_Schepers, fjh, +1.650.274.aaaa, dwhly, +1.202.707.aabb, +1.201.236.aacc, Kyrce, tbdinesh, rayd, +1.864.787.aadd, dauwhe, csillag, Matt_Haas, bigbluehat,
17:00:27 <Zakim> ... deirdrelee, +1.434.971.aaee
17:01:49 <fjh> Protocol Reference Work: Annotopia https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2015Feb/0156.html
17:01:55 <fjh> Topic: Adjourn
17:27:18 <fjh> rrsagent, generate minutes
17:27:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/25-annotation-minutes.html fjh
17:28:34 <fjh> Present+ deirdrelee
17:28:38 <fjh> rrsagent, generate minutes
17:28:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/25-annotation-minutes.html fjh
17:28:54 <fjh> s/202 is me//
17:29:02 <fjh> s/ zakim is giving me trouble. "Your pass code is not valaid"//
17:29:11 <fjh> s/that would be bigbluehat//
17:29:19 <fjh> s/tnx fjh//
17:29:28 <fjh> s/i can scribe//
17:29:47 <fjh> s/main topic/fjh: main topic/
17:31:16 <fjh> s/we're out of time, we've covered agenda…//
17:31:20 <fjh> rrsagent, generate minutes
17:31:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/25-annotation-minutes.html fjh
17:32:18 <fjh> s/.*out of time.*//
17:33:36 <fjh_> fjh_ has joined #annotation
17:34:15 <fjh_> rrsagent, generate minutes
17:34:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/02/25-annotation-minutes.html fjh_
18:19:43 <tilgovi> tilgovi has joined #annotation
19:00:03 <Kyrce> Kyrce has joined #annotation
19:00:26 <Zakim> Zakim has left #annotation
19:02:03 <Kyrce> Kyrce has joined #annotation
19:11:39 <fjh> fjh has joined #annotation