12:52:49 RRSAgent has joined #social 12:52:49 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/03/17-social-irc 12:52:51 RRSAgent, make logs public 12:52:51 Zakim has joined #social 12:52:53 Zakim, this will be SOCL 12:52:53 ok, trackbot; I see T&S_SWWG()8:00AM scheduled to start 52 minutes ago 12:52:54 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 12:52:54 Date: 17 March 2015 12:53:05 zakim, who's on the phone? 12:53:06 T&S_SWWG()8:00AM has not yet started, Arnaud 12:53:07 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Arnaud, cwebber2, pfefferle, elf-pavlik, the_frey, wilkie_, SimonTennant, jaywink, tantek, danbri1, shepazu, KevinMarks, Tsyesika, sandro, Loqi, nickstenn, 12:53:08 Zakim has joined the room 12:53:10 ... aaronpk, oshepherd, wseltzer, ElijahLynn, ben_thatmustbeme, mattl, JakeHart, bret, dwhly, bigbluehat, rhiaro, rektide, trackbot 12:53:21 zakim, this is SOCL 12:53:21 ok, Arnaud; that matches T&S_SWWG()8:00AM 12:53:35 zakim, who's on the phone? 12:53:35 On the phone I see +1.617.715.aaaa 12:53:50 zakim, aaaa is confroom 12:53:50 +confroom; got it 12:53:59 AdamB has joined #social 12:54:53 +??P8 12:59:44 RRSAgent, pointer? 12:59:44 See http://www.w3.org/2015/03/17-social-irc#T12-59-44 13:01:33 scribe: AdamB 13:01:38 tilgovi has joined #social 13:01:54 Ann Bassetti (AnnB) - from Boeing, also chair social interest group 13:02:21 Randal Leads - From organization Hypothesis, from the Annotations WG 13:02:36 Aaron Parecki 13:02:41 yes, you should 13:02:50 Benjamin Young - from hypothesis as well 13:03:01 FJH - from annotations group 13:03:11 -elf-pavlik 13:03:17 ??? - from media goblin, implementing federation 13:03:32 Chris Webber - from media goblin 13:03:38 +??P8 13:03:48 s/???/Jessica Tallon 13:03:55 Matt Lee - creative commons, from gnu social projects 13:04:06 mattl is me :) 13:04:11 -??P8 13:04:24 Amy - phd student from ??? 13:04:25 tilgovi_ has joined #social 13:04:47 Arnaud - chair of social wg, part of the IBM Open Standards group 13:04:48 <-- Randall Leeds (Hypothesis) 13:04:53 Ben Roberts - from indie web group 13:05:29 ben_thatmust_ has joined #social 13:05:29 Sandro Hawke, W3C & MIT Crosscloud Projects 13:05:34 made it! 13:05:45 fjh has joined #social 13:05:52 rrsagent, generate minutes 13:05:52 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/17-social-minutes.html fjh 13:06:13 Arnaud: looking at the list we are still missing some people 13:06:29 Zakim, who is on the phone? 13:06:29 On the phone I see confroom 13:06:30 s/FJH/Frederick Hirsch (fjh)/ 13:06:46 anyone on the phone? 13:06:57 s/ from annotations group/co-chair of annotation wg and device api wg/ 13:07:00 anyone who can hear? 13:07:03 i keep reconnecting but Zakim bridge doesn't talk 13:07:13 s/co-chair/individual, co-chair/ 13:07:14 +??P8 13:07:22 rrsagent, generate mintues 13:07:22 I'm logging. I don't understand 'generate mintues', fjh. Try /msg RRSAgent help 13:07:26 +Sandro 13:07:28 rrsagent, generate minutes 13:07:28 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/17-social-minutes.html fjh 13:08:05 no sound at all, also no welcome message asking to dial code after connecting via SIP 13:08:06 we're testing the phone 13:08:12 AnnBassetti has joined #social 13:08:14 -Sandro 13:08:38 who's on the phone? 13:08:41 i could still enter the room 7025# 13:08:48 zakim, who's on the phone? 13:08:48 On the phone I see confroom, elf-pavlik 13:09:03 elf-pavlik: you mean 7625? 13:09:07 "SOCL" 13:09:12 yes :) 13:09:15 zakim, what is the code? 13:09:15 the conference code is 7625 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), sandro 13:09:34 sandro, did voice work for you? 13:09:37 yes 13:10:02 Mlee14 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=82919&oldid=82918 13:10:13 -elf-pavlik 13:11:28 we are working on technical difficulties in the room 13:11:48 maybe we can just try https://talky.io/socialwg ? 13:11:54 trying that now 13:11:59 getting a chromebook set up 13:12:35 mattl++ 13:12:37 mattl has 5 karma 13:13:01 tantek has joined #social 13:13:03 Arnaud: talking about the agenda ...setup a straw man to get us started ... can get started with AS this morning 13:13:23 ... tomorrow at the end left it open so we can fill it in with what we think would be good to do 13:13:28 https://talky.io/socialweb 13:13:33 ... people have been adding to the agenda which is good 13:13:47 ... there are no way we can address all the items that has been added to AS in the time allocated today 13:14:12 ... we can discuss which ones are more important to talk about than others, maybe things that are more ready to discuss and can take advantage of the f2f meeting 13:14:28 bblfish has joined #social 13:14:29 cool! can hear now something :) 13:14:35 tantek: probably want james for the AS conversation 13:14:35 +bblfish 13:14:40 rhiaro_ has joined #social 13:14:56 Arnaud: AS seems it is potentially our first victory 13:15:09 bblfish, can you hear on Zakim? Elf can't. We also are at talky.io/socialweb 13:15:29 ... so in terms of w3c process, we have AS is a spec that has been published for a while and we need to focus on getting it to CR 13:15:30 I can hear 13:15:40 .. for the others its not as clear 13:15:53 ... we need to take advantage of meeting to get far as possible 13:15:57 -bblfish 13:15:59 jaywink has joined #social 13:16:09 ... the ceo has been putting more pressure on the working groups delivering on time 13:16:10 fjh_ has joined #social 13:16:27 I heard better on zakim 13:16:37 ... so as chairs we are responsible for keeping the working group on track so when time starts slipping by we need to consider cutting features down 13:16:50 bblfish: can you mute? 13:16:58 ... just like any other software shipping 13:17:02 took time to hear the mute 13:17:20 zakim, who is here? 13:17:20 On the phone I see confroom 13:17:22 On IRC I see jaywink, rhiaro_, bblfish, tantek, AnnBassetti, fjh, tilgovi, AdamB, Zakim, RRSAgent, Arnaud, cwebber2, pfefferle, elf-pavlik, the_frey, wilkie_, SimonTennant, 13:17:22 ... danbri1, shepazu, KevinMarks, Tsyesika, sandro, Loqi, nickstenn, aaronpk, oshepherd, wseltzer, ElijahLynn, ben_thatmustbeme, mattl, JakeHart, bret, dwhly, bigbluehat, rhiaro, 13:17:22 ... rektide, trackbot 13:17:31 ... so we need to keep this in mind so we can do what we can to ship 13:17:45 ... it may not be what we want but it's still good 13:17:51 bblfish: zakim is still active so feel free to dial in and listen that way if you want 13:18:11 ... we need to seriously think about that. so i would really like we have a clear understanding of what is left to AS to ship it 13:18:21 ... would be good do then do that for the social api as well 13:18:28 harry has joined #social 13:18:53 harry: tantek left you a message on 3/15 at 10:42am: I've updated the agenda with explicit items to discuss proposed items, chair/staff topics, and clustered all other items as proposed to make their status mor7B��ear. Please review: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17 http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-03-15/line/1426441329803 13:18:54 hi, but I think sound may be better on zakim 13:19:01 ... we've been through a lot of work on it e.g. the user stories ... so we need to start narrowing down the things to work to get to a path that will get us somewhere 13:19:09 ... have to bite the bullet and do something 13:19:13 q+ 13:19:37 ack tantek 13:19:38 ... again, seems like AS is the lowest hanging fruit and if we can demonstrate some success will help with w3c management 13:19:46 q+ 13:19:48 +1 focus on AS2 13:19:57 tantaek: want to underscore what Arnaud said, especially shipping and cutting feature 13:20:03 Pelf made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=82920&oldid=82919 13:20:04 s/tantaek/tantek/ 13:20:21 ... we've tried to get things done but we've failed to make any date so far 13:20:34 q? 13:20:38 ... we need to ship something in order to keep our schedule that was committed too 13:20:43 q+ 13:21:22 ... while we are trying to get AS to CR we should try to propose as minimal steps as possible to get social api and federation out the door 13:21:22 Evan enters the room 13:21:44 anyway, nice to see people's face even if very far away 13:21:58 ack fjh 13:22:02 q+ 13:22:09 AnnBassetti: rhiaro left you a message on 1/15 at 2:03pm: Try pandoc.amy.gy - improvements/bug reports welcome 13:22:13 fjh: i think what you are saying makes sense 13:22:32 ... i'm assuming you could cycle vocabularies pretty quickly 13:22:51 ... annotation as an action 13:22:56 I understood, we can update Vocabulary much easier than change Core 13:23:00 tantek: there are active impl of AS 13:23:17 .... some are previous version of is, not clear how quickly they may move to the next version 13:23:55 ... at exiting CR things have to be marked as implemented 13:24:19 ... we haven't labeled anything out of scope yet 13:24:31 +bblfish 13:24:39 eprodrom has joined #social 13:24:49 there's some neat experimental electronic music happening in bblfish's room 13:25:23 trying to understand what channel one is hearing better on 13:25:41 q+ clarify entering vs. exiting CR 13:25:46 q+ to clarify entering vs. exiting CR 13:25:50 Harry: i would hold out to CR phase which would make some people really happy, but to me the goal of the wg is to maximize the conferment impl 13:25:50 q+ 13:25:51 ack harry 13:26:00 ... so i would say don't worry about testing right now 13:26:18 ... we could always re-edit and the w3c process is changing to simplify things 13:26:35 ... it is changing so you can go back and edit things 13:26:37 ack harry 13:26:40 ack AnnBassetti 13:26:51 AnnBassetti: in terms of choosing things to happen, is the intention to vote early and often 13:27:06 ... to establish an early set of things to do ? 13:27:13 See the great work done here for how we are simplifying W3C process: https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/ 13:27:21 tantek: that is one method we can chose to get things out the door, and i am in favor of doing that 13:27:30 ack tantek 13:27:30 tantek, you wanted to clarify entering vs. exiting CR 13:27:31 q+ 13:27:34 AnnBassetti: yeah thats what i'm asking, is that what the group would like to do? 13:27:44 s/saying makes sense/saying makes sense, question on whether we can still add to vocabulary, for example adding annotation action/ 13:27:45 I'd rather rush to see implementation experience :) 13:28:07 tantek: harry you mentioned rushing to CR. there is a diff between entering CR and exiting CR. we can enter whenever we want and that is when we think the spec is detail enough 13:28:20 my fear is, if we try to do it all, at the beginning, we'll never get there 13:28:33 ... exiting CR is different, where we as a group have more flexibility where we will have to make more judgement calls for the group 13:28:43 ... we can give it more CR time for tests etc 13:28:43 However, you can implement out of Working Drafts, that's common in many Working Groups - and we can start getting interop in Working Drafts, that's what most successful WGs do nowdays. 13:28:47 seems like it's better to commit to some initial stuff, get it done, then quickly jump on the next set 13:29:01 ... the risk of rushing it through we might have to drop features in order to get to exit 13:29:17 ... i'm in favor of an aggressive CR schedule 13:29:22 when success = number of interopable implementations (ideally with real users , real active open source implementations, and real products) 13:29:46 ack eprodrom 13:29:59 To be precise, once you exit CR you can't really change the spec easily, although we are working on changing that in terms of W3C process. 13:30:04 SimonTennant has joined #social 13:30:22 eprodom: my question is somewhat about the process, in terms of data serialization what are we looking for? parsers? 13:30:40 ... are there meaning test that we do or is it we say you can do this with a json-ld parser, ok then done 13:30:49 sandro: think we base it off the community 13:31:08 http://json-ld.org/#developers 13:31:23 See here: 13:31:24 http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#candidate-rec 13:31:28 tantek: there is some experience in w3c in this. references xml history 13:31:42 For exiting and revising candidate rec. 13:31:48 (which is why we got HTML5!) 13:31:48 XHTML 1.1 ? 13:31:57 .... there are lot of xml parsers out there so obvious these are compliant but turned out that wasn't true 13:32:20 I am for testing 13:32:24 ... we should not play that approach in this group. just because its based on an underlying technology doesn't mean it's compliant to the spec 13:32:52 ... implementors get to a point and say, well how do i know that i'm compliant to section 2.4.6 ? 13:32:59 ... needs to be a test to prove it out 13:33:45 eprodom: so would a way for us to satisfy this, the testing and implementation concepts, is a way for us to move forward this is n many documents and these are valid and these ones are not and your implemetnation can parse them and figure that out? 13:34:14 ... mock AS documents to drive the test? 13:34:25 q+ 13:34:31 sandro: probably need more, may not be enough 13:34:54 tantek: if you can't figure out a test to figure out the results of two different features then you must not need them both 13:34:56 q+ re: we need more AS2.0 examples and we could use them in our tests 13:35:07 People may want to look at this in terms of helping 'hand checking' if there is browser output that it can detect: http://www.seleniumhq.org/ 13:35:15 q? 13:35:31 Arnaud: guess we can say we have started the conversation about AS 13:35:58 Also, look at our testing initiative: http://testthewebforward.org/ 13:36:12 Arnaud: first evan, we have to figure that out, there are no hard and fast rules in the w3c 13:36:26 ... the w3c has moved to having test suite etc 13:36:30 http://testthewebforward.org/docs/writing-tests.html 13:36:50 ... one thing that is not up to us is the criteria to actually enter CR. there used to be a last call step which happened when all your issues have been closed. 13:36:52 q+ 13:36:57 q- harry 13:37:05 ... we are telling the world we think we are done 13:37:23 ... then had to go through the disposition of the comments from the public, then after that you could go to CR. 13:37:23 my notes about links to the 'current state of testing' is in IRC, and has been enabled to the list 13:37:33 ... the w3c has gotten rid of the last call step 13:37:45 ... we just did this with the LDP group 13:38:18 ... have to show the "director" yes we reached out to the world and published a spec that was stable and we've properly responded to comments 13:38:36 AnnB has joined #social 13:38:51 ... its good to have a test suite which is kind of expected now and typically have a link to the test suite from the draft so that people can find it easily 13:38:59 We now have a nice github process for testing, although many WGs don't know about it. 13:39:05 See above links 13:39:05 ... doesn't have to be final so that people can see it and "stuff" 13:39:25 ... and have some frameworks that can collect the results of the test 13:39:28 It will at least be relevant to the API, although some of the more behavioral testing may be tricky as its optimized for browser APIs 13:39:49 test -> implementation report per implementation -> see which features have 2+ implementations that pass all tests for that feature 13:39:49 ... we can raise the bar and ask the full implementation if we wanted 13:39:55 q+ 13:40:15 ... we need to meet all of that so for the exit we can go to w3c and have this proof 13:40:53 ... in the w3c process there is a feature called 'feature at risk' 13:41:03 jasnell has joined #social 13:41:25 ... we can mark some that way and if we are not meeting them we can simply remove them and procede 13:41:35 jasnell_ has joined #social 13:41:37 ... if we don't do that we have to go back and republish a spec in CR again 13:41:45 q+ to say why everything is at risk by default: absent evidence (test + implementation report), we don't know if anything is implemented. otherwise we have to do extra work of cutting later with CR cycle. 13:41:55 ... anything that changes conformance you have to republish 13:42:06 ack bblfish 13:42:09 ... it is a great way to provide some safety valves in the spec 13:42:14 can see you all but unable to hear anything 13:42:20 Henry: 13:42:30 we can hear bblfish on Zakim 13:42:35 henry: thank for that review, it was a good one. 13:42:55 ... on the implementations I think we need to make sure we have the archticture right so it can grow as the space grows 13:43:12 jasnell we're both on talky.io and zakim 13:43:28 ... at that point want to start with really basic thing because if we do it right can later do more complicated things 13:43:31 ack elf-pavlik 13:43:31 elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss we need more AS2.0 examples and we could use them in our tests 13:43:31 q? 13:43:43 we can hear elf-pavlik on Talky 13:43:48 elf: for testing i think we need come up with examples 13:44:01 ... and also use test to verify that the examples show usage of the spec 13:44:08 +1 13:44:11 ... to verify the expected functionality 13:44:28 eprodrom: agrees and there are some great examples in the stories 13:44:45 +jasnell 13:44:45 ... maybe something along, here is an example and show me the actor in that example 13:44:58 ack fjh 13:45:03 ... but we do have a large set of examples to start with but not a lot of counter examples 13:45:21 fjh: thinking about what tantek said, i'm wondering what the implications of that 13:45:23 should we make ACTION to write 'counter examples' ? 13:45:30 http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams2-vocabulary.html 13:45:30 http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/#object 13:45:45 ... so under object have all of these properties 13:46:04 ... assuming other apps will come up with new types of things you can anticipate everything 13:46:08 If a vocabulary item isn't used, I support removing it from spec 13:46:14 q+ 13:46:25 We can always put more experimental vocabulary stuff in an IG "Extended Vocabulary" note. 13:46:28 tantek: fundamental point is that if there is a feature in the spec then we as a group believe that implementors must implement it 13:46:43 ... unless it is marked optional 13:46:48 q+ 13:46:58 ... if so we are obligated to provide a test 13:47:07 However, this does not mean every implementation should test *every* feature, but that each feature should have at least two implementations 13:47:27 fjh: let me be concrete in a diff way, say for example the post action, do you need a full blog platform to do that 13:47:36 quick note: the spec doesn't say anything about what these various objects SHOULD *do*. It just says what those things *are*. There are no conformance requirements beyond syntax 13:47:37 tantek: so it depends on what the spec says 13:47:47 q+ 13:47:49 fjh: so for annotations we'd have to be very careful 13:48:02 tantek: if you can't verify the feature you are not done with the spec 13:48:17 Arnaud: we have to be careful when it comes to vocabulary 13:48:26 issue-16 13:48:26 issue-16 -- better separate grammar/vocabulary and improved spec structure -- open 13:48:26 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/16 13:48:38 ack eprodrom 13:48:58 eprodrom: i think writing blog software is too far us initially 13:49:11 .... my point of view somethign that could generate streams based on inputs 13:50:01 ... if you know X generated some content at this time and you generated that based on the AS 2.0 spec. that seems like enough and shoudl test the data serialization etc without worrying about other things like stuff required for blogging softtware 13:50:02 ack tantek 13:50:02 tantek, you wanted to say why everything is at risk by default: absent evidence (test + implementation report), we don't know if anything is implemented. otherwise we have to do 13:50:05 ... extra work of cutting later with CR cycle. 13:50:11 .. which is not important for us 13:50:26 tantek: this is why i mentioned everything should be marked at risk by default 13:51:05 I actually prefer to implement in Working Draft, but if people want to make these more painful in terms of rushing to CR, power to the people. 13:51:17 The key is to implement early and get feedback to the Working Group 13:51:18 ... if we don't mark feature as at risk we are expecting implementors to implement. but if we actually did that don't think it would be looked on as favorable 13:51:30 and not put features you don't actually want and plan to implement in the spec 13:51:57 ... if you want something to be required and not at risk it is your burden of proof for that 13:52:09 ... but that is the challenge that should be required then ship it 13:52:26 tantek: the sooner we have a test suite framework and the sooner people can start submitting tests 13:52:29 issue-8 13:52:29 issue-8 -- Test suite for activity streams 2.0 -- open 13:52:29 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/8 13:52:47 q+ 13:52:53 ... and issues are good candidate for tests 13:52:57 harry, I expect implementers to be attempting implementing ASAP to give feedback 13:53:05 ... and can tell you from his experience that when WGs don't do that it holds things up 13:53:18 ... so i really encourage that we do start on the test suite 13:53:31 tantek: the test needs to prove the test but the expected result as well 13:53:33 ack bblfish 13:53:55 bblfish: this is really interesting stuff, test suites don't test everything 13:53:56 issue-19 13:53:56 issue-19 -- WG communication channel explosion -- raised 13:53:56 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/19 13:54:04 actually, the test suite IS expected to test every feature in the spec 13:54:21 ... i propose we use issue-19 would be able to use this system to communicate within this group without using email 13:54:21 #selfdogfood :D 13:54:42 eprodom: is that one of our goals for this WG that AS should be used to replace email? 13:54:51 bblfish: i was just going little bit further 13:54:51 That email use-case was missing from the user-stories I think 13:55:12 action-45 13:55:12 action-45 -- Henry Story to Testing Activity Streams 2.0: explore ontology based testing -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN 13:55:12 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/45 13:55:19 q? 13:55:24 ack cwebber 13:55:52 cwebber: very first part of this conversation was about AS test, what would those test look like 13:56:10 ... AS don't really do anything until we start doing something with them ... like in the social api 13:56:13 rrsagent, pointer? 13:56:13 See http://www.w3.org/2015/03/17-social-irc#T13-56-13 13:56:27 ... what would the test be, is it just like changing an in memory db? 13:56:27 q? 13:56:40 q+ 13:56:40 ack harry 13:56:45 q+ to answer cwebber2's question about how do we test something in AS 13:56:49 arnaud: would like to prompt james to answer that 13:57:40 harry: there are diff ways to test functionality .. some of teh tradiditional test suites in the w3c may not apply but there are things like selinium etc 13:57:52 q+ to answer Chris: you just leave that bit agnostic 13:58:03 ... practical step might be to have a place to put tests 13:58:20 q+ re: issue-12 Action Types Structure and Processing Model 13:58:26 I disagree that AS requires API to test 13:58:31 s/student from ???/student from Univ Edinburgh/ 13:58:37 +1 tantek 13:58:59 ack eprodrom 13:59:11 I mean it's obvious just parsing JSON-LD is nonsense as a test 13:59:17 you actually have to *do* something 13:59:21 right 13:59:25 AS2 currently is JUST a vocabulary. It only describes events and does not specify any kind of conformance beyond syntax. So the key question is: do we need to specify conformance requirements beyond syntax? 13:59:36 this is the processing model question that Erik keeps raising 13:59:44 Evan, from this spec? http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams2.html 13:59:49 The issue is that the output isn't uniform likely (i.e. it will change the state of some JS somewhere else) 13:59:53 in terms of success 13:59:54 zakim, who's on the phone? 13:59:54 On the phone I see confroom, bblfish, jasnell 13:59:57 jasnell_: yes we need more for conformance 14:00:12 tantek: I'd be happy to see that AS *doesn't* need the API to do tests 14:00:17 purely sloshing terms / syntax around is not really interesting, nor does it justify the diversity/complexity of the current specs 14:00:30 tantek: I was just trying to figure out what it would look like without it :) 14:00:35 q? 14:00:45 AdamB_ has joined #social 14:00:46 rhiaro has joined #social 14:00:49 I am personally having trouble imagining how we will test this as just a data format, but I imagine it might be possible. 14:00:50 cwebber2, there's a lot of history here with feeds publishing/consuming 14:01:00 Arnaud++ 14:01:02 Arnaud has 6 karma 14:01:07 I think there are three level of tests: one for each spec, and one integration test suite 14:01:10 we can hear jasnell_ on Zakim 14:01:15 I am against 'ontology'-based testing as the *only* tests although I'm happy for people to do that. 14:01:30 I've never seen reasoners been used in real-world applications 14:01:32 jasnell: up to this point the format has always been about describing the event and not specififying what you should do with it 14:01:39 ... even back in AS 1.0 14:01:50 issue-12 14:01:50 issue-12 -- Action Types Structure and Processing Model -- open 14:01:50 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/12 14:01:53 ... i know this is a point that erik has raised a number of times 14:01:57 s/specififying /specifying/ 14:02:14 I think if you go up to an ordinary web developer and say 'Hey, run this RDF-based reasoner to see if you are compliant' you are going to get blank stares 14:02:14 ... in order for us to have meaning test, or even a like activity, we are going to have to define what you are to do with it 14:02:25 ... in order for us to take that additional step with that 14:02:33 q+ 14:02:37 I think for people that can run a reasoner, they should and that should be specified, but that should not be the only tests. 14:02:46 This is what the API should do 14:02:51 ... but do we want to assign actual behaviors to those then we probably need to simplify 14:03:11 ack tantek 14:03:11 tantek, you wanted to answer cwebber2's question about how do we test something in AS 14:03:18 "When a user posts a LikeAction, the object goes into their 'liked things' collection, and the user goes into the collection of 'people who like this' for the object" 14:03:22 ACTION: harry to set-up a github for AS2.0 testing (whatever that ends up being, we'll need a github!) 14:03:23 Created ACTION-48 - Set-up a github for as2.0 testing (whatever that ends up being, we'll need a github!) [on Harry Halpin - due 2015-03-24]. 14:03:43 tantek: james i think you identified some pretty core issues that i think we need to record, which is every key action in AS needs to provide ???? 14:04:14 harry: ++ re: RDF-based resoner blank stares :) 14:04:24 ... second issue is there is a lot in the spec and it's not clear we have implementor interest in doing something with everything in the spec so we need to gather that in some way 14:04:52 .. is that a reasonable characteristic of the two concerns? 14:04:56 james: yes 14:05:19 jasnell: i documented uses case but we have no real data on actual usages of them 14:06:03 The API was just GET 14:06:10 which is an API 14:06:26 The Atom Feed Validator (which focused on syntax only) was critical to ensuring interop among feeds 14:06:49 q? 14:06:50 ISSUE: need to get data on implementor interest on specific features of the AS spec 14:06:51 Created ISSUE-22 - Need to get data on implementor interest on specific features of the as spec. Please complete additional details at . 14:06:51 +1 a validator, but I would like to make sure also that things 'happen' in terms of actual activities 14:07:01 Mhh, there may be one simple test: that links link to resources that match the type that the link says they should have 14:07:22 stevenroose has joined #social 14:07:26 q+ 14:07:56 tantek: are the readers processing the information as we would expect 14:08:03 I guess I don't have a concept of what "processing model" as a test here means :) 14:08:06 ... if we need to put more language in the spec then lets do that 14:08:10 are they "processing" it in terms of the 'processing model of the spec' and then 'does it do something' after the processing 14:08:16 I think the tricky bit is the 'does it do something' 14:08:18 q- 14:08:48 cwebber and tantek discussing question about testing 14:09:02 I think the RDF(S) reasoning is useful in terms of possible 'processing model' but we need to be explicit about this in the spec due to earlier 'blank stares' comment. An implementer should read the spec and write an implementation. 14:09:04 q? 14:09:05 cwebber: i'm not clear on what it means in the processing model 14:09:10 ... what is it checking for 14:09:19 tantek: it is good to start with a use case 14:09:19 Without really knowing or caring about RDF. 14:09:33 (although if they end up using RDF power, power to the people!) 14:09:40 ... the spec needs to say if you consume one of "these" then you need to do "this" 14:10:01 eprodom: the tough part of of AS 2.0 is there are 2 usages, one use is the logging format 14:10:19 ... the other use is as a command language. where evan wants to tell his system 'evan posts a note' 14:10:26 ... those are 2 different things 14:10:37 Zakim, mute bblfish 14:10:37 bblfish should now be muted 14:10:45 tantek: it is great to specify both of those in the spec 14:10:49 oops sorry 14:11:12 tantek: if you look at other specs like html, they have different classes of user agents 14:11:25 just people walking around 14:11:36 cwebber: didn't realize until eprodrom mentioned the logging vs the command of AS 14:12:02 yes re: the logging format is one use, the other thing as a command language, I think the thing is that testing the command language is that it *does* things, and it look, that brings a lot of clarity to my confusion :) 14:12:03 tantek: could be argued there is a little mini api in the AS spec 14:12:10 ... here is how it works as a command api 14:12:20 .. the social api goes far beyond the command language 14:12:21 q? 14:12:33 ... maybe the social api has a crud 14:12:48 Yes the API might end up being pretty simple GET/POST (CRUD) with some "URL template" structure that maps to the vocabulary in some sensible manner. 14:13:09 I think that's on the table for this afternoon. 14:13:16 tantek: the key is to document the multiple possibilities .. we don't leave it open ended 14:13:17 ack sandro 14:13:17 sandro, you wanted to answer Chris: you just leave that bit agnostic 14:13:31 q- 14:13:46 sandro: re: how do we test this without having that. the answer is we don't care about that, we are agnostic about that 14:13:59 .... you can scaffold it together how ever you want 14:14:00 q+ 14:14:05 ack elf-pavlik 14:14:05 elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss issue-12 Action Types Structure and Processing Model 14:14:12 well we can assume a minimal API already: HTTP no? 14:14:19 elf-pavlik: would like to note issue-12 14:14:20 issue-12 14:14:20 issue-12 -- Action Types Structure and Processing Model -- open 14:14:20 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/12 14:14:24 issue-4 14:14:24 issue-4 -- Do we rely on explicit typing or support implicit typing based on explicit property names? -- open 14:14:24 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/4 14:14:48 ... would also like to bring up querying the data 14:14:59 ... to query for AS data 14:15:02 danbri has joined #social 14:15:12 ack eprodrom 14:15:18 topic: ActivityStreams 2.0 14:15:20 q? 14:15:25 since that is where we obviously are 14:15:42 eprodom: i would propose that for AS 2.0 we only test it in it's logging capacity. in understanding as what has already happened 14:16:00 +1 to evan's point. 14:16:10 ... it might make some of the problem easier to test. can defer to the social api testing for the semantics of using AS as a command language or just leave it out entirely 14:16:12 I hope I didn't drag that out, but clarifying this has been really helpful to me 14:16:18 +1 AS as feeds / consuming for tests first, command language later 14:16:24 ... seems to me that the process of testing as command language is too much to bite off 14:17:02 q? 14:17:07 ... guessing low 100s for test cases. take the examples, parse out the properties etc 14:17:15 tantek: it also makes it easy for the spec 14:17:16 One could for example test things: a client follows links, and should get doing this what it expects to get 14:17:47 so it seems that doing the activitystreams as logging, then transitioning towards activitystreams as a command language could be helping us moving towards the api test 14:17:56 anyway :) 14:18:05 btw anyone that thinks testing is "easy" is requested to provide URLs to tests :) 14:18:11 :) 14:18:13 Arnaud: lets try to close the topic for now. we have plenty of other things to cover 14:18:34 q- harry 14:18:45 ... the question is, who is going to take the lead on getting some sort of framework for getting test suite setup etc 14:18:53 ... how do we make progress on this 14:19:01 ... we need volunteers 14:19:03 I can help with the ontology testing part. 14:19:27 tantek: is anybody producing an AS accordance to the spec 14:19:35 it's a customer implementation 14:19:47 So we need some open-source, open web implementations :) 14:19:50 jasnell: they have one customer that is doing this but can't provide a public URL 14:19:57 unmute bblfish 14:19:59 tantek: is anybody doing this on the web 14:20:06 Sounds like a job for IndieWeb Camp :) 14:20:15 tantek++ 14:20:16 http://asgh.mybluemix.net/ 14:20:17 q+ 14:20:17 tantek has 165 karma 14:20:18 tantek: even seeing an example on the web 14:20:27 ... would be a great start 14:20:46 http://testanything.org/ 14:21:00 ... so before we jump ahead to 'how do we create a test framework' i say we get 1 example of the AS 2.0 spec 14:21:27 ack bblfish 14:21:35 jasnell: it parses the activity stream from github, its rudimentary 14:22:03 +1 for HTTP GET as minimal API! 14:22:32 ACTION: pelf to Publish AS2.0 data on one's own website 14:22:32 Created ACTION-49 - Publish as2.0 data on one's own website [on Pavlik elf - due 2015-03-24]. 14:22:49 o/ 14:22:52 \me raises hand 14:22:53 Arnaud: let me ask who is actually planning to implement AS? 14:23:10 ... so a lot of people are going to do it, so how are you guys going to test it ? 14:23:14 sigh.. didn't mean to add myself to the queue 14:23:32 q- 14:23:42 +1 I need to implement my blog 14:23:49 queue= 14:23:49 q? 14:24:12 q+ 14:24:19 ack bblfish 14:24:20 q+ re: publishing my data using schema.org or AS2.0 dilema 14:24:22 fjh: it's a simple node app. it receives hook notifications from github and converts the events into AS2 objects stored in a cloudant db 14:24:33 speaking of work, let's try to solve the rest of the AS2 issues 14:24:38 jasnell++ for providing a live AS2 stream for viewing! 14:24:41 jasnell has 7 karma 14:24:51 q+ to discuss my experience in "testing" microformats publishing/consuming 14:24:53 bblfish: if you are publishing AS 2 and there is no client that is reading it out there, it would be extremely useful to have translators for previous versions 14:25:01 GRDDL is a dead spec no one in their right mind should use 14:25:03 BTW 14:25:06 indeed 14:25:08 ack elf-pavlik 14:25:08 elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss publishing my data using schema.org or AS2.0 dilema 14:25:09 q? 14:25:15 it depends on @profile which was rightfully deprecated by HTML5 14:25:16 me said: something like GRDDL 14:25:25 and depends on your web-page being valid XML 14:25:35 good luck with reviving XHTML. 14:25:42 elf-pavlik: i just wanted to mention that i started to publishing my information on my website and using AS 14:25:43 the main point is that there is a lot of RSS out there and Atom 14:25:52 q+ 14:25:52 However, yes, more power to shims to move older formats to AS2 14:26:00 so that means that any blog engine has to publish these other formats too 14:26:01 would actually be useful to have an AS1->AS2 converter 14:26:17 or from other widespread vocabularies - there are probably things in RDF space as well that could be converted over 14:26:20 ack eprodrom 14:26:21 because we're not coming out of the blue here 14:26:28 eprodom: i will volunteer to extract the examples from the main documents, pick properties and put together a test for those exmaples 14:26:28 testanything.org 14:26:30 this has a 15 year history 14:26:34 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_Anything_Protocol 14:26:37 bblfish: not at all - indieweb sites work peer to peer without any RSS or Atom 14:26:40 ... probably use testanything to do so 14:26:49 harry, e.g. http://online-presence.net/ontology.php 14:26:54 is there only IndieWeb on the web? 14:26:55 I also think a microformat->AS2 converter would be quite cool 14:26:55 ... so could task js vs ruby library to test 14:26:57 ack aaronpk 14:26:57 aaronpk, you wanted to discuss my experience in "testing" microformats publishing/consuming 14:27:13 harry++ microformat-> AS2 convereter 14:27:15 harry has 4 karma 14:27:16 it's up to individual sites, if you have a use-case for supporting legacy feed formats, you can do so on your site. it's just not required for interop 14:27:19 Or if there are any RDFa/microdata compatibile sites, converting them over automagically to AS2.0 would be great 14:27:34 aaronpk: was going to say back on the how do we test, problem i'm having with microformats ... until machines start consuming i don't know if it's corret 14:27:41 s/corret/correct/ 14:27:43 I don't think those would count as 'tests' per se, but would be excellent work to increase adoption and will end up being critical infrastructure 14:27:45 well the html5 group did a lot of work on making sure that the extensions they did did not break existing web pages 14:28:00 q+ to also share microformats experience of big difference in "verifying" parsed output, and seeing what specific consuming uses do with it (showing comments, readers etc.) 14:28:01 .. now that there are readers its been very helpful to have people looking at machine readable markup 14:28:01 so harry are you going off the idea that we should ignore the past? 14:28:14 ack tantek 14:28:14 tantek, you wanted to also share microformats experience of big difference in "verifying" parsed output, and seeing what specific consuming uses do with it (showing comments, 14:28:16 bblfish, failed technologies should be forgotten. 14:28:18 ... readers etc.) 14:28:24 those are failed? 14:28:25 I mean, no-one uses GRDDL 14:28:30 Why would you ask someone to use it? 14:28:38 I wonder if a better question is then who is consuming AS2? 14:28:41 It's actually incompatible with existing web technologies and had no uptake 14:28:52 We counted users, it was like 6 people 14:28:58 tantek: i think the experience aaronpk is important. there is a huge difference in UI vs reader etc 14:29:08 ... very different level of testing for finding flaws in specs etc 14:29:16 i mean currently consuming 14:29:20 so, Tsyesika and I are planning on doing a proof of implementation 14:29:20 I had a good time learning W3C process by chairing that WG and met some great people, but in terms of a standard it was an epic fail. 14:29:21 Suggestion: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17/VocabularyChecklist 14:29:26 q? 14:29:32 ... would caution that just verifying looking at the output will be enough. it is a good first step 14:29:37 Arnaud: but the reason I'm not saying "we are doing this" is because I think we want to prove to ourselves that it's happening :) 14:29:43 It is probably not a good idea to interpret W3C standards as religious documents. 14:29:44 ... but just not enough. based on experience with microformats 14:29:45 ACTION: eprodom to extract the examples from the main documents, pick properties and put together a test for those exmaples 14:29:45 Error finding 'eprodom'. You can review and register nicknames at . 14:29:47 q+ 14:30:02 Jsnell made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17/VocabularyChecklist]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=82922&oldid=0 14:30:05 ... all these other issues come up 14:30:05 Its a good idea to make standards that get actual interop and solve problems 14:30:20 The decentralized social networking problem is a hard problem. 14:30:21 ack bblfish 14:30:23 q- 14:30:34 abstract conformance criteria ("parsing") is insufficient, we need to take the use-cases that drove these features and get them added to the spec 14:31:14 bblfish: history of rss is 15 years old, there is really important part of formats to support previous versions 14:31:19 q? 14:31:22 q+ 14:31:48 ... where backward compatibility is an important part of the work 14:32:03 ISSUE: look at backward compatibility for AS 2.0 14:32:03 Created ISSUE-23 - Look at backward compatibility for as 2.0. Please complete additional details at . 14:32:17 backwards compatibility with AS1 is already covered by the core spec doc 14:32:20 AdamB++ 14:32:22 eprodrom 14:32:22 AdamB has 5 karma 14:33:12 ACTION: eprodrom to extract the examples from the main documents, pick properties and put together a test for those examples 14:33:12 Created ACTION-50 - Extract the examples from the main documents, pick properties and put together a test for those examples [on Evan Prodromou - due 2015-03-24]. 14:33:30 q? 14:33:54 ack fjh 14:34:01 fjh: when will we talk about json-ld 14:34:05 issue-21 14:34:06 issue-21 -- Role of JSON-LD and RDF -- raised 14:34:06 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/21 14:34:25 fjh++ 14:34:26 fjh has 1 karma 14:34:50 Arnaud: there are bunch of issues open, bunch of new issues that we need to look at what to do with 14:35:05 i *clustered* ISSUEs and ACTIONs on https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17#Day_1_-_Tuesday_17_March_2015 14:35:22 ... we have limited amount of time so we should discuss prioritizing what we should be talking about 14:35:44 But given interop in previous Social Web efforts has generally failed so its a good start to have a shared goal/understanding there 14:36:12 ... discussing the agenda and what to do next 14:37:31 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17#Day_1_-_Tuesday_17_March_2015 14:38:30 -jasnell 14:38:33 [20 min break] 14:39:22 tantek, please try not to change nesting in items i proposed! 14:40:42 elf-pavlik: trying! 14:41:03 elf-pavlik: saved - check it. 14:44:36 -bblfish 14:50:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=82923&oldid=82920 14:50:29 +jasnell 14:51:40 tantek, looks good! since we discussed testing in depth i removed copy of it from proposed list 15:00:02 Pelf made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=82924&oldid=82923 15:00:03 Jsnell made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17/VocabularyChecklist]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=82925&oldid=82922 15:01:22 rhiaro, you could aks AnnB about changing IG telecon times ... 15:04:03 somehow I think I seem to hear better now on talky 15:04:17 I see that note, elf-pavlik and rhiaro 15:04:31 sounds like the IG time is not good for you? 15:04:39 scribe: AnnB 15:05:12 scribenick: AnnB 15:05:37 hopes everyone will help fill in the scribing .. 15:06:01 Agenda Bashing commences ... 15:06:08 fjh has joined #social 15:06:12 AdamB has joined #social 15:06:17 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17#Day_1_-_Tuesday_17_March_2015 15:06:20 etherpad.mozilla.org/socialwg 15:06:54 elf's link is the static one; tantek's link is the "live" one 15:06:54 zakim, who is here? 15:06:54 On the phone I see confroom, jasnell 15:06:56 On IRC I see AdamB, fjh, danbri, stevenroose, rhiaro, jasnell_, AnnB, SimonTennant, harry, jaywink, bblfish, tantek, tilgovi, Zakim, RRSAgent, Arnaud, cwebber2, pfefferle, 15:06:56 ... elf-pavlik, the_frey, wilkie_, shepazu, KevinMarks, Tsyesika, sandro, Loqi, nickstenn, aaronpk, oshepherd, wseltzer, ElijahLynn, ben_thatmustbeme, mattl, JakeHart, bret, dwhly, 15:06:56 ... bigbluehat, rektide, trackbot 15:07:23 maybe worth looking at 15:07:25 issue-15 15:07:25 issue-15 -- AS2.0 Vocabulary in many ways duplicates microformats.org and schema.org efforts -- open 15:07:25 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/15 15:07:37 Considering the test suite: One possible approach forward... Define test cases as Stories. Each Story is about a series of Events that have occurred. An implementation ought to have a limited number of ways of encoding that information as output. The output ought to be able to be fed into a test tool. The tester then asks a specific set of questions against each input for the test. For example: Story: "James posted a blog post at 1:23pm pacifi 15:07:37 c. Arnaud liked the blog post and shared it with Tantek". The types of questions the test tool can ask include, "Who posted a blog post?" "Who liked it?" "Who was it shared with?". If the tool is able to extract the correct answer given the input, then the input can be considered to pass the test. To test consumption, an implementation would be expected to transcribe specific inputs into either HTML or Turtle in such a way that the test tool w 15:07:37 ould be able to ask the same set of questions and extract the appropriate answers. 15:07:56 W3C team at MIT has lunch together every Tuesday ... and invited us to join them ... we need to get there @noon 15:08:19 +1 ISSUE-21 15:09:01 fjh = Frederick Hirsch 15:09:30 fjh: wants to understand json-ld topics, relationship to Annotations WG work 15:10:08 Arnaud to Tantek: there are ++ on agenda list; we only have time for ~1-2 topics 15:10:30 pfefferle has joined #social 15:10:42 topic? 15:11:05 tantek is updating the agenda 15:11:50 pretty silent here. Are you meditating? 15:12:02 meditating on the agenda 15:12:02 kind of ;) 15:12:11 I just said: tantek is updating the agenda 15:12:21 maybe some group hummming ? ;) 15:13:28 action-26 15:13:28 action-26 -- Tantek Çelik to Review microformats examples in AS2.0 specs -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN 15:13:28 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/26 15:13:47 Topic: Microformats 15:14:14 jeff has joined #social 15:14:34 what are the URL you are looking at? 15:14:46 bblfish, action-26 15:14:59 -> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/83 Github Issue 83 15:14:59 it should have all needed info 15:15:02 tantek: I've captured the changes that need to be made in spec, re: Github issue 83 15:15:05 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/83 15:15:09 dret has joined #social 15:15:14 pull request 84 15:15:18 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/pull/84 15:15:32 trying to focus on key items to fix 15:15:41 patterns of changes are the interesting bit 15:15:50 q+ re: mapping *vocabularies* mf <-> AS2.0 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping 15:16:08 tantek: in our publishing to date, we're using URLs not URNs 15:16:21 ... for authors 15:16:39 ... I propose we use URLs, because that's the common practice 15:16:50 q+ 15:16:53 +1 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/79 15:16:54 I am kinda waiting for httpRange-14 to make an appearance 15:17:07 PR please :) "Use URLs not URNs as examples" 15:17:28 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/83 15:17:46 q? 15:17:53 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/79 15:18:33 Instead of urn:example:person:martin we should use http://martin.example.org/ because that reflects current social web publishing and identity practices, e.g. indie sites and sites like Tumblr 15:18:45 twitter, github 15:18:58 +1 on urls intead of urns 15:19:00 Does anyone want to support URN usage in the spec? 15:19:00 +1 15:19:03 ack elf-pavlik 15:19:03 elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss mapping *vocabularies* mf <-> AS2.0 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping 15:19:04 URL 15:19:06 URL 15:19:10 +1 on URL 15:19:16 Arnaud: I suggest we accept this proposal .. but let's have discussion 15:19:17 +1 but I note there's semantic confusion possible (differentiating between a person and their site) 15:19:23 +1 for URLs except that the URL is badly chosen 15:19:27 so -1 15:19:28 ... reminder, we're talking about best practices 15:19:40 I was waiting for httpRange-14 to rear its ugly and confusing head :) 15:19:42 elf-pavlik: can't hear you 15:19:55 Sandro, what's your take? example.org/me#? 15:20:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=82926&oldid=82924 15:20:04 I have lost track of best practice 15:20:26 -1 of whatever that noise was 15:20:37 note that I specifically used username.example.org per modern practices 15:20:40 http://indiewebcamp.com/livejournal#2006_switch_to_subdomains 15:20:41 q? 15:20:46 like username.tumblr.com 15:20:46 ack bblfish 15:20:50 mattl: that's the federation borg's assimilation noise 15:21:13 I thought it was the ghost of httpRange-14 15:21:21 I see 2 *distinct* topics 1) microformats html serialization 15:21:28 a spectre is haunting the social web, the spectre of httpRange-14 15:21:34 action-34 15:21:34 action-34 -- Pavlik elf to add explaination to the spec about multiple serializations used in examples -- due 2015-02-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW 15:21:34 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/34 15:21:36 +bblfish 15:21:52 I am back 15:22:09 2) microformats *vocabulary* (which one could use with JSON-LD) https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping 15:22:54 3) formal mapping microformats vocabulary to as2.0 vocabulary e.g. owl:equivalentProperty owl:equivalentClass 15:22:58 bblfish: in ontology .. doesn't matter if it's URL or URN 15:23:08 http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/identity/ 15:23:09 action-43 15:23:09 action-43 -- Pavlik elf to propose *lightweight* inference based on RDFa Vocabulary Expansion -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN 15:23:09 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/43 15:23:15 I'm glad the baby in the background is having the proper reaction. 15:23:45 bblfish: recommends FOAF to identify "person" in various ways 15:24:05 ... already ~10 years of history w FOAF ontology 15:24:14 eprodrom has joined #social 15:24:24 q? 15:24:25 ... I'm against pattern of specifically how the URL should look 15:24:30 I am fine with having http://username.foo.example/ in the spec, but explicitly us making the call of deprecating http://foo.example/user/username/, I am -1 on 15:24:49 this is just for the example also though right? 15:24:56 sounds like it's being answered :) 15:24:57 After deep analysis on this issue, I determined it didn't matter: http://www.ibiblio.org/hhalpin/homepage/publications/indefenseofambiguity.html 15:24:58 evan: clarifies this is only for the examples on AS2.0 document 15:24:58 thanks cwebber2 that's exactly my intent 15:25:03 q+ to perhaps summarize the debate very tersely 15:25:13 tantek: great :) 15:25:19 fine by me then :) 15:25:37 bblfish: still suggests distinguish between XXX and YYY 15:25:44 ack sandro 15:25:44 sandro, you wanted to perhaps summarize the debate very tersely 15:26:12 Sandro: trying to help explain bblfish's point 15:26:22 ... long history in SemWeb community 15:26:37 .... this is called HTTP range 14 15:27:01 PROPOSED: change examples to have URLs a la http://username.foo.example/ instead of URNs 15:27:08 ... I'm personally OK with this example .. but there is a long history with this, and there are people who will complain 15:27:09 q+ 15:27:11 q+ 15:27:31 tantek reminds this he's only suggesting this for a specific example 15:27:47 username.example.org but yes 15:27:50 I think there is a confusion 15:27:53 q? 15:28:02 http://username.foo.example/#me 15:28:02 q- 15:28:09 Tumblr, Blogger, LiveJournal all support just plain URLs 15:28:26 +1 to URLS 15:28:26 +1 for Arnaud's url 15:28:28 I object to /#me - no commercial social web site does that 15:28:31 it is purely academic 15:28:32 I use /foo -- HTTP 303 --> /foo/ 15:28:37 q? 15:28:41 timbl *is* planning to join us this afternoon 15:28:44 ack bigbluehat 15:28:49 bigbluehat = Benjamin Young 15:28:55 tantek is mistaken, a huge number of foaf files do that 15:28:57 ack harry 15:29:24 AnnB has joined #social 15:29:44 can we maybe keep httpRange-14 for tomorrow? (dessert) 15:29:44 q+ 15:29:47 bblfish: no company or popular social website does anything with FOAF in their UI 15:29:55 so you're mistaken about it being relevant 15:30:11 harry: I suggest we use best practice for the informative test, examples, ... if people want to use hash-URIs in an appendix... in a spec we should cater to the 99% ... cater to the no-experience web developer 15:30:18 ack bigbluehat 15:30:20 It is pretty widely deployed, and commercial web site of course don't do anything with distributed this 15:30:41 I think URNs are in general bad practice for anything on the Web 15:30:43 Bigbluehat: switching from URN to URL actually accommodates the HTTP Range 14 issue 15:30:51 bigbluehat: using URLs is okay with httpRange-14 15:31:14 sandro: it requires a redirect to be ok 15:31:23 that is a waste of bandwidth 15:31:25 +1 agreed, URLs are okay with httpRange-14 BUT Henry's point was about the specific URLs to use 15:31:33 So my proposal is that if people want to use RDF with hash-URLs, they can do so in an appendix or WG note on other syntax 15:31:37 bblfish, I didn't say that. I think you mean "sandro, " 15:31:40 PROPOSED: change examples to have URLs a la http://username.foo.example/ instead of URNs 15:31:43 +1 Arnaud's proposal 15:31:44 +1 15:31:46 +1 15:31:47 +1 15:31:47 +1 15:31:48 +1 15:31:49 +1 15:31:49 +1 on proposal 15:31:50 +1 15:31:50 +1 15:31:51 +1 15:31:53 +0 15:32:07 -1 15:32:11 In fact, an appendix with hash-URLs in Turtle *could* be useful. 15:32:13 +1 15:32:17 Augier has joined #social 15:32:21 s/+1// 15:32:23 it's a copy/replace, not that much work, I just don't see it as a big deal 15:32:29 PROPOSED: change examples to have URLs a la http://username.foo.example/#me instead of URNs 15:32:37 Arnaud -- we're trying to figure out what we can live with 15:32:44 -1 to any /#me or anything not popular on the existing social web 15:32:46 ,... as chair 15:32:51 -0 that's not what successful sites do 15:32:55 -1 those are not used anywhere 15:32:58 -1 15:32:59 bblfish: question is, what do these URLs refer to? 15:32:59 -1 15:33:07 -1 even twitter dropped # in URLs 15:33:40 fjh: ;) 15:33:56 RESOLVED: change examples to have URLs a la http://username.foo.example/ instead of URNs 15:34:07 Arnaud++ 15:34:08 Yes, feel empowered to file an formal objection 15:34:08 Arnaud has 7 karma 15:34:09 bblfish tries to clarify more about Semantic Web / RDF stuff 15:34:11 Arnaud: my proposal was to use username.example.org 15:34:31 Arnaud reins the discussion back in 15:34:40 Arnaud: I'm sorry Henry, we're going to go forward over your -1. You can file a formal objection if you want. 15:34:59 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/83 15:35:18 replacing all use of urn:example:person:martin with http://martin.example.org/ 15:35:20 tantek responds to bblfish that this is documented in Issue 83 15:35:24 the color of the example url bikeshed is perfectly fine as decided. let's move on 15:36:01 FOAF is not a standard 15:36:02 Sandro: to clarify, none of this goes against RDF .. this will all work.... I can explain that later with bblfish, if that'd help 15:36:07 there is no normative reference to microformats in the spec 15:36:09 how about using microformats *vocab* with JSON-LD ? 15:36:15 q? 15:36:19 the microformats stuff is in non-normative examples only 15:37:06 bblfish, please have mercy on us 15:37:16 For record, I think we should mute off topic speakes 15:37:20 Is there any problem with using a URL structure that pleases harry et al more? 15:37:21 The W3M is looking at Microformats 15:37:29 fjh, ask me at lunch/break if you want 15:37:30 There is an open issue and it's been discussed 15:37:35 bblfish: points out that part of confusion is stuff that aren't standards 15:37:40 It seems to me like this room doesn't particularly care, just that we'd prefer not a URN 15:37:46 we have 20 minutes left, let's move on. 15:38:01 harry: the issue of non-standards is being looked at by W3C management 15:38:07 For future reference, we should mute off topic speakers 15:38:22 tantek: we need to restrain the discussion to the topics on the agenda 15:38:52 who is yelling? I doubt yelling is warranted. 15:38:58 Zakim, mute bblfish 15:38:58 bblfish should now be muted 15:38:59 Harry: it's off topic, can we please continue 15:39:19 please avoid personal comments 15:39:31 bblfish, when you are willing to talk on topic, please unmute yourself. 15:39:42 please harry stop being rude 15:39:56 I actually think people who are chronically off-topic should not time to dominate the conversation. 15:39:56 tantek: there are examples inside links and metatags 15:40:02 we're still speaking about microformats! 15:40:11 We were discussing domain name examples 15:40:17 q+ re: microformat HTML serialization (less important) vs. microformats *vocabulary* (more relevant) 15:40:34 Zakim, unmute bblfish 15:40:34 bblfish should no longer be muted 15:40:40 ... instead of using link tag, use "a HREF" 15:40:56 do we need to go into microformats html best practices now? 15:40:59 .. instead of metatag use best option 15:41:04 q+ 15:41:10 ack elf-pavlik 15:41:10 elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss microformat HTML serialization (less important) vs. microformats *vocabulary* (more relevant) 15:41:25 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping 15:41:25 wseltzer: there were a number of discussions regarding all kinds of things that were cut of because a proposal was made that we cannot discuss non published standards 15:41:33 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/83 15:41:38 ... if you see a metatag it's probably a mistake, and I've offered alternatives 15:41:46 bblfish: that's not how the chairs are running the meeting 15:41:48 s/non published/non w3c acknolwedged/ 15:41:58 they're not taking "blocking" procedures 15:42:00 tantek: if you see a or tag inside a div, it's probably a mistake and does not reflect current publishing practices, and i've offered alternatives instead 15:42:06 van we focus on *vocabulary* microformats? 15:42:07 well some chairs keep flouting all rules 15:42:08 Zakim, unmute elf-pavlik 15:42:08 sorry, harry, I do not know which phone connection belongs to elf-pavlik 15:42:09 see issue-19 15:42:11 and possibly use it in JSON-LD 15:42:14 related: RDFa Primer examples recommend within divs, etc: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-primer/#patterns 15:42:17 elf? 15:42:20 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping 15:42:25 elf can you type it in IRC? 15:42:26 q? 15:42:27 q? 15:42:29 ack harry 15:42:31 the microformats *examples* are non-normative. the changes to those are purely editorial. I doubt we need to spend much time on them 15:42:45 just submit a PR to change those. 15:42:53 action-34 15:42:53 action-34 -- Pavlik elf to add explaination to the spec about multiple serializations used in examples -- due 2015-02-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW 15:42:53 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/34 15:43:56 harry: everyone has their favorites syntax .. for the spec, I suggest the foundation should be JSON-LD, with the other syntaxes in "communities" 15:44:02 Sandro: you can already see that in the tabs 15:44:24 is there even a microformats to rdf mapping? ( there may be but I don't know ) 15:44:28 I am pro-those-tabs 15:44:32 might be good to consider Drupal's RDFa implementation and their use (or not use) of and/or https://groups.drupal.org/node/22716 15:44:33 Anyways, I'm not 100% happy with the tab approach, but if people want to keep it, go for it. 15:44:34 what about: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Microformats_Mapping 15:44:37 tantek: I'm concerned about that, to make the meanings consistent 15:44:43 vocab not serialization 15:44:54 sandro: will we have machine translatability between these formats? 15:45:04 tantek: I think that's why jasnell did all that hard work 15:45:09 if the doc needs to be clarified to make clear that the other ones are there for clarity, that's fine 15:45:13 jasnell = James Snell, IBM 15:45:18 q+ 15:45:18 but making it easy to come in and understad mapping, super great 15:45:33 tantek: microformats are the concrete example I can use to move this forward 15:45:41 ... I'm concerned about 15:45:49 tantek is making a good case for clear semantics +1 15:45:54 ... about "drift" if we did what Harry proposed 15:45:58 q+ 15:46:09 annotation wg is currently using tabs, for same reasons Tantek mentions, to broaden community and allow clarity 15:46:13 ack bigbluehat 15:46:20 Harry: given that these communities are all active, I can agree 15:46:31 zakim, mute bblfish 15:46:31 bblfish should now be muted 15:46:34 If the communities become inactive, I would recommend removing them. 15:46:41 oops sorry 15:46:42 Zakim, mute baby 15:46:42 sorry, eprodrom, I do not know which phone connection belongs to baby 15:46:51 Zakim, baby is bblfish 15:46:51 sorry, aaronpk, I do not recognize a party named 'baby' 15:46:52 :-) 15:46:55 darn 15:47:11 ack jasnell_ 15:47:21 shepazu, see examles in http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/ 15:47:31 bigbluehat: cites drupal 7 and RDF 15:47:38 s/and RDF/and RDFa/ 15:47:55 s/and RDFa/and RDFa Primer/ 15:48:08 My opinion in general is 'alternative syntaxes' are a standardization failure 15:48:18 jasnell_: side by side examples will also help with testing 15:48:19 but that's where we are in this space and all communities are all active 15:48:24 I am for alternative syntaxes 15:48:30 jasnell: in showing multiple formats I'm trying to help people compare side-by-side 15:48:42 accomodoating alternative syntaxes seems to be a path forward so let's stick with it 15:48:42 harry, it's a "suboptimal solution", not a "failure" :) 15:48:51 OK, it's a 'suboptimal' solution :) 15:49:12 jasnell: we don't need to spend a bunch of time on non-normative examples 15:49:26 q? 15:49:28 q+ 15:49:35 ack tantek 15:49:42 wseltzer-mobile has joined #social 15:49:50 in fact, they cut and paste non-normative examples 15:49:53 we still didn't asnwer what do we do about microformats *vocabulary* (not the HTML serialization) 15:49:57 people sometimes look at the examples first 15:49:58 is the primary way of following specs :) 15:50:23 jasnell_++ 15:50:25 jasnell_ has 8 karma 15:50:31 +1 lets go to other issues 15:50:47 tantek, maybe just do a git 15:50:50 we got stuck on serialization instead discussing vocab (which one can also use in JSON-LD) 15:50:53 pull request and change the examples 15:51:00 PROPOSAL: inside
s in the examples, use instead of , and do not use but use proper visible markup instead such as ,