17:05:32 RRSAgent has joined #social 17:05:32 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/03/24-social-irc 17:05:34 RRSAgent, make logs public 17:05:36 Zakim, this will be SOCL 17:05:36 ok, trackbot; I see T&S_SOCWG()1:00PM scheduled to start 5 minutes ago 17:05:37 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 17:05:37 Date: 24 March 2015 17:05:43 I can scribe 17:05:47 since I can't talk anyway 17:05:48 Zakim, who's on the call? 17:05:48 I notice T&S_SOCWG()1:00PM has restarted 17:05:49 On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell 17:05:53 scribenick cwebber2 17:05:56 woo 17:05:57 okay 17:06:26 eprodrom: first order of business for today is to approve the minutes from 10th of march, unfortunately those minutes seem to not be prepared 17:06:35 eprodrom: tantek, do you remember who scribed? 17:06:41 tantek: let's see if I took notes 17:06:56 ... looks like it was aaronpk 17:07:05 eprodrom: great, I am going to open up an action 17:07:12 ACTION aaronpk upload the 2015-03-10 minutes to the wiki 17:07:12 Created ACTION-55 - Upload the 2015-03-10 minutes to the wiki [on Aaron Parecki - due 2015-03-31]. 17:07:37 eprodrom: okay unfortunately we can't confirm those 17:07:41 ... hopefully we can move on 17:07:53 ... next item is approval for minutes for face to face 17:08:02 ... harry was putting those together but is not on the call 17:08:14 ... I will do another action on harry to assemble the minutes from the face to face 17:08:21 ACTION harry Assemble the minutes from March F2F 17:08:21 Created ACTION-56 - Assemble the minutes from march f2f [on Harry Halpin - due 2015-03-31]. 17:08:22 AnnB: the minutes from the 10th of may are messed up 17:08:33 AnnB: minutes from the 17th, sorry, not 10th 17:08:38 cwebber2: probably my bad 17:08:38 +Sandro 17:08:58 AnnB: the irc log is correct, but the w3c has a bot that makes the minutes, this is the part that's screwed up 17:09:02 ... something seems wacky 17:09:09 ... sandro, do you know more? 17:09:18 +??P11 17:09:24 sandro: don't know, sorry, I think harry said he will clean them up manually 17:09:43 ... there's a problem where if a group meeting goes past midnight 17:09:46 rhiaro: can you mute please? I think you're getting some feedback 17:09:48 AnnB: oh no the midnight problem 17:09:56 sandro: harry claimed that problem 17:10:02 Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-24]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83096&oldid=83050 17:10:03 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-10]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83097&oldid=82751 17:10:04 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-24]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83098&oldid=83096 17:10:13 eprodrom: I think harry's on minutes from the march f2f, harry's on march 10th, so hopefully that can be done 17:10:18 past midnight .. can't remember .. (we certainly did not meet past midnight in real life) 17:10:24 ... minute approving is everyone's favorite part but we gotta skip it 17:10:34 ... next meeting I think we have no conflicts, arnaud will chair 17:10:46 ... that brings us to the next issue on the agenda which is the next f2f 17:11:04 I've added links to our IRC logs for the f2f and redlinked where the minutes will go here: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-17#Social_Web_WG_Face_to_Face_Meeting_at_MIT_.28F2F2.29 17:11:13 ... we had an idea come up in the f2f where we definitely will do a f2f at the next tpac in september, but would like to another between now and then 17:11:37 ... there are a couple of candidates for times that would work, one is the upcoming meeting in paris, another is indiewebcamp in edinborough at the end of july 17:11:48 http://doodle.com/8fa27m9ryx6d26rb 17:11:52 ... we have an open doodle poll with unfortunately the wrong dates, if you responded before you may need to do it again 17:11:55 +q 17:12:05 ... I'm not sure, do we want to close this poll at this point? 17:12:21 q? 17:12:24 ... the big issue is we need to make a decision soon, if people make travel plans to paris in may, they need to do it in a week or two if not this week 17:12:29 ack Arnaud 17:12:32 ... would like to close this by the end of the week 17:12:48 Arnaud: I'd like to move faster on it, I'm one of the people who have to make travel plans, it's hard to keep waiting 17:12:59 ... there's not much debate, the main option seems to be the july one 17:13:09 ... I'd be inclined to propose that we settle on the main dates in paris 17:13:15 ... but do we have a host in paris? 17:13:23 no, cwebber2 .. the main option is MAY 17:13:31 harry said he could book Centre Pompidou 17:13:35 ... (correction: the main option is in may) 17:13:41 cwebber2: thanks annb 17:13:46 np 17:13:52 Arnaud: harry said there was a place we can go to 17:13:57 ... we can confirm later 17:14:03 ... I encourage others to respond right now 17:14:26 ... it seems to be a pretty clear cut to me (based on yes/nos) 17:14:33 AnnB: even if there was an informal gathering, seems worth it 17:14:40 Zakim, who is on the call 17:14:41 I don't understand 'who is on the call', ben_thatmustbeme 17:14:46 Arnaud: maybe we can give a few minutes, but then we can do 5 minutes then we can close on this? 17:14:52 Zakim, who's on the call? 17:14:52 On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell, Sandro, rhiaro (muted) 17:14:53 Arnaud: but I would like to have a decision 17:15:01 tantek: I think you need a confirmation from the host 17:15:14 Arnaud: we can close on that pending confirmation from harry 17:15:18 tantek: yes we can do that 17:16:01 eprodrom: yeah, so we'll put this off to the end of the call so all of you can open your airline of choice in another browser window and see if you can make it oo the meeting. Let's see what we can do. I will push it off to the end of the hour, ok harry? 17:16:03 er, 17:16:08 ... (okay arnaud) 17:16:28 eprodrom: we have some perpetual issues 17:16:38 ... any activity on open issues/actions that we can close today? 17:16:47 ... take a moment please to look at them and see what need to be closed 17:17:04 *click clack* 17:17:12 q? 17:17:16 ... okay if we have nothing 17:17:25 tantek: looks like on 26(?) that I think that's been merged 17:17:38 tantek++ for PR 17:17:40 ... so now it's back to see about more pull requests, thanks james for that merge 17:17:40 tantek has 170 karma 17:17:44 +??P1 17:17:50 ... will keep going to see how far I can get with the examples 17:17:52 action-26 17:17:52 action-26 -- Tantek Çelik to Review microformats examples in AS2.0 specs -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN 17:17:52 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/26 17:17:59 eprodrom: harry's got an action open, 37 for testing 17:18:05 action-37 17:18:06 action-37 -- Harry Halpin to Put forth the test suite plan using standard js tools -- due 2015-02-10 -- OPEN 17:18:06 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/37 17:18:12 ... i've kind of taken this on myself, I'd like to edit this action and have it defer 17:18:18 ... I think there's no easy way to say it's closed 17:18:23 action-50 17:18:23 action-50 -- Evan Prodromou to Extract the examples from the main documents, pick properties and put together a test for those examples -- due 2015-03-24 -- OPEN 17:18:23 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/50 17:18:26 ... because action 50 supercedes it 17:18:31 ... but i will write it in the notes 17:18:40 cwebber2: hopefully me too :) 17:18:41 supersedes 17:18:59 eprodrom: any other actions we need to get moving? 17:19:04 ... is henry on? 17:19:05 Zakim, who is on the call? 17:19:05 On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell, Sandro, rhiaro (muted), elf-pavlik (muted) 17:19:08 no 17:19:09 bblfish: Are you on the call? 17:19:32 ... henry / bblfish mentioned doing ontology examples for the activitystreams testing 17:19:39 ah I am on another call too 17:19:42 ... it would be great to see what tools we could use 17:19:47 pretty complex 17:19:49 ... oh okay sorry about that bblfish 17:20:01 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-03-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83099&oldid=83035 17:20:08 ... given that I'd like to close up the open actions, we have a pretty big pile of issues on the agenda for today 17:20:20 are we looking at http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/raised ? 17:20:23 ... I am going to try to get these, these are all on the f2f agenda, a few came over 17:20:27 to decided whether to accept / open them or not? 17:20:27 ... we have a number for AS 2.0 17:20:38 eprodrom, Raised issues? 17:20:39 ... I'd like to review our strategy for next steps for social api by end of the call 17:20:42 I recall Arnaud saying we should review raised issues 17:21:00 ... I count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 top level items here on AS 2.0 17:21:09 ... jasnell brought up an issue around profiles 17:21:18 ... maybe we should address it, let's throw it at the end 17:21:32 ... let's start with the top one and move down 17:21:47 ... we have a linked issue in actions, the issue is about as-link 17:22:00 ... there's an action to gather options about media objects 17:22:02 elf-pavlik: yes 17:22:04 ... elf-pavlik, are you on the call? 17:22:10 ... okay elf-pavlik is on the call 17:22:16 ... how are we doing on action 42 17:22:23 who reviewed https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/MediaObject ? 17:22:36 FWIW I don't know what use-case / user-story is used to justify as:link so I'm in favor of dropping it. 17:22:37 ... this is the issue on media object 17:23:06 cwebber2: btw, Tsyesika and I added info for mediagoblin 17:23:14 cwebber2: eprodrom, fyi 17:23:15 though I'm really confused by the examples in issue-14 17:23:18 q? 17:23:29 eprodrom: is the question that we're going to change the activitystreams 2.0 object 17:23:46 ... and what specifically will get changed? 17:23:49 ... that's my main question 17:23:57 ... if this work is started I'd like to close this 17:24:02 tantek: I think it's related but not the same 17:24:02 issue-14 17:24:02 issue-14 -- as:Link adds a lot of complexity, if we keep it we need to clarify consequences of using it instead of as:Object -- open 17:24:02 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/14 17:24:12 ... issue 42 is related to issue 14 but not the same thing 17:24:28 action 42 was to give us background on issue-14 i believe 17:24:28 Error finding '42'. You can review and register nicknames at . 17:24:32 eprodrom: right, 14 is about links and 42 is about objects related to AS 2.0 vocab, I'm wondering why we clumped them together 17:24:36 tantek: I have a hypothesis 17:24:52 Arnaud: no good to speculate, elf-pavlik put it for the f2f, let's let him explain himself 17:24:57 currently as:Link mostly serves as pattern for MediaObjects 17:25:19 tantek++ 17:25:20 tantek: let me quote from elf-pavlik in the related notes: the as2 spec only contains as:link or related info about media objects(?) so for other thing as-link not needed 17:25:22 tantek has 171 karma 17:25:36 tantek: so if we can remove as:link from media objects, then no need for as:link 17:25:51 http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml 17:26:01 me sorry guys, i made sure to have good audio for today but then couldn't dial code on pad of this softphone :( 17:26:06 eprodrom: excellent point, but as:link particularly useful for link relationships, so the various link relationships defined for a number of items, so they're used in html as in on a tags and on link tags 17:26:09 ... also used in atom 17:26:15 ... a number of them used 17:26:20 ... in activitystreams 1.0 used quite a bit 17:26:39 +1 for keeping 17:26:40 ... so the link element is pretty useful even if only in the as 2.0 system for media objects, I think they're important to keep in the system 17:26:44 tantek: that would help a lot 17:26:46 i'll provide more examples where it makes processing much more convoluted 17:26:50 ... because for now we don't have that information 17:27:07 eprodrom: more convoluted than..... what is the alternative, not having it? 17:27:12 imagine as:Link as member of Collection for example 17:27:18 ... any time we convey info in a system it's more convoluted than not having it in the system 17:27:23 ... but then we don't have that info 17:27:40 tantek: I think elf was trying to provide examples of conveying info without as:link, but that's in related examples 17:27:43 please review issue and wiki page and i'll get proper audo for next week! 17:27:52 eprodrom: okay, I'd like to ask jasnell, please take the floor and address this 17:28:03 jasnell: not totally sure I understand what elf-pavlik's argument is 17:28:16 ... if we have as-link in there or not, we have to convey the same info 17:28:21 ... so I don't see the argument. 17:28:28 ... I guess I need more examples to work with 17:28:45 eprodrom: seems unlikely to close this issue today, I suggest we leave it open and move on 17:28:50 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/MediaObject 17:28:56 ... next item is also media object, it's a related issue 17:29:10 ... if the issue has been updated I'm going to close this action since it's specifically about the wiki page 17:29:13 ... would like to keep moving on 17:29:21 ... we have action 44 which is about collections 17:29:25 ... collection comparison 17:29:35 action-44 17:29:35 ... there's different ways to represent collections in as 2.0 17:29:35 action-44 -- Pavlik elf to Collection - compare AS2 design with LDP, Hydra, Schema.org etc. -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN 17:29:35 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/44 17:29:43 ... and it looks like the question is........... 17:29:47 someone offered adding LDP example to the wiki but never happended 17:29:50 ... there's a collection comparison 17:29:56 ... and with quite a few different collections 17:30:02 Eprodrom made 3 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-03-24]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83102&oldid=83098 17:30:09 ... I think the idea is we'll change the collection structure in as 2.0 17:30:12 no 17:30:15 ... since the comparison is done I'll close this 17:30:24 tantek: elf-pavlik says no 17:30:27 eprodrom: oh 17:30:29 i would like if someone adds LDP examples 17:30:30 tantek: I htink 17:30:46 eprodrom: ok, can someone familiar enough with ldp examples to put it in the wiki page? 17:30:55 also we can discuss using ldp:Container instead of as:Collection if we use LDP as part of API 17:31:07 ... ok, so... great. 17:31:24 ... so can we or should we defer this? 17:31:47 ... I'm going to close this option then we can move on with the rest of the call 17:32:02 ... sorry, trying to balance out all the stuff we have here 17:32:04 is erik here? 17:32:15 ... we're moving through issues but without actually resolving htem 17:32:20 ... that may not be in our best interest 17:32:31 tantek: perhaps we should skip issues if person assigned/raised is not present 17:32:43 ... we can't seem to be effective without their presence 17:32:48 we CAN'T work only 1h a week during the call ... 17:33:00 eprodrom: and some of these have been raised for a long time. I'm not sure we're closer to closing them than when we raised them. 17:33:06 ... perhaps part of the effort is to get them closed 17:33:06 do we need to get all the data in one place in order to close them ? 17:33:14 to have the right conversation about it 17:33:14 tantek: we can worry about that when closer to last call 17:33:35 eprodrom: yes but some of them are fundamental, the core vocab around activitystreams, it will be hard to close these without examples 17:33:45 eprodrom: it will be hard to do an implementation without these stabilizing 17:33:57 ... we should stabalize these if moving towards implementations and testing them 17:34:10 ... I'll pass on these, maybe we can move on 17:34:19 Zakim, who is on the call? 17:34:19 On the phone I see AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), Ann, eprodrom, tantek, Arnaud, cwebber2, jasnell, Sandro, rhiaro (muted), elf-pavlik (muted) 17:34:22 ... question of separating grammar/vocab, I believe erik brought it 17:34:31 ... question on identity/agent/persona/account 17:34:34 issue-17 17:34:34 issue-17 -- Identity, Agent, Person, Persona, Account etc. need clarifications -- open 17:34:34 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/17 17:34:35 we can discuss that one briefly 17:34:35 also actor/author 17:34:46 the identity, agent, account, persona, profile bit 17:34:49 ... uhhh, previous conversations on... agent persona account profile? 17:35:04 ... I'm not sure. Are these part of our vocabulary for activitystreams? 17:35:10 we have objects in the vocabulary that deal with these 17:35:13 ... I'm not sure we must address these if we aren't encoding them. 17:35:18 ... we need clarification 17:35:24 Actor, Person, Identity, Role, etc 17:35:30 ... it would be nice if when we have items on the agenda, we have more stuff ready 17:35:42 i proposed in reply to agenda email to move inference to next week 17:35:44 ... I'm sorry, unless anyone has something to say one of these, I have nothing to move us forward 17:35:48 ... they are all complex issues 17:36:04 ... maybe since we do have one person with voice on the call since it's this last one 17:36:08 ... maybe we should discuss it 17:36:15 ... jasnell discussed issue of structured profiles 17:36:16 https://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/26 17:36:22 issue-26 17:36:22 issue-26 -- Representing profiles in Activity Streams 2.0 -- raised 17:36:22 http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/26 17:36:40 jasnell: it's pretty simple, in many of our examples, social platforms we look at, the profile is pretty prominent 17:36:47 ... but we lack profile in our vocabulary 17:36:53 ... and it's not clear how to model that 17:36:59 ... so taking a stand on user stories as example 17:37:09 ... so maybe model profile as type of collection 17:37:20 ... so tim added a profile, added items to it 17:37:28 ... so maybe it makes sense to manage it as a collection 17:37:38 ... so we could have a profile object 17:37:44 ... we have an existing object, person 17:37:49 ... is this sufficient as a profile 17:38:07 jasnell, in your email "@type": "foaf:name" doesn't make sense to me in terms of use rdf:type with rdfs:Property / rdfs:Class 17:38:09 ... recognizing that anyone can have multiple profiles, and profiles can represent community 17:38:18 eprodrom: I would strongly say that profile is a person 17:38:42 ... maybe a person object, or maybe something more abstract like a product is a type of thing that maps very closely to a person, but with brands taking that organization role 17:38:52 ... I think getting really abstract with profiles would be a bad thing 17:39:04 q? 17:39:06 ... just treating a profile as a collection of name/value pairs might be worse than a profile object 17:39:12 tantek: yes I'm curious what's driving this 17:39:27 jasnell: the user stories, I'm mapping the vocab to the user stories, to make sure those are coinciding 17:39:35 q? 17:39:39 ... so we have many objects in the vocab based on a number of use cases 17:39:46 ... those are not mapped to the use cases themselves 17:39:53 ... we have a distinct version of profile 17:39:57 ... with no idea what a profile is 17:40:06 tantek: good point, I see sandro on the queue fyi 17:40:07 ack Sandro 17:40:20 sandro: sure, so I think the profile as a container is kind of a problem 17:40:35 ... I can't figure out the logic of what it would be the container of other than a reified object of (?) 17:40:40 ... I mean, we could make it work but 17:40:53 ... I think of a profile as a web page that has some info about the person or the object 17:41:01 ... as long as we have ideas about the person or the profiles 17:41:04 q+ 17:41:14 ... as long as we have different access control 17:41:18 q+ 17:41:22 ... eg internal company profile and public profile 17:41:27 I remember sandro discussing it on WebID list while ago 17:41:36 ... and whether it's json or h-entries or rdf triples, we can do any by a web page 17:41:42 ... plus I have a problem with a profile being a person 17:41:45 ... it's not 17:41:56 ... it manifests in the case of a person having multiple distinct profiles 17:42:13 +1 profiles != persons 17:42:13 ... it follows logically that there's different profiles, you have to distinguish between profiles and the person raising htem 17:42:53 multipleprofiles++ 17:42:53 eprodrom: multiple profile per user seems awesome, we have no user stories that manage that, but it's a big pain to manage 17:42:54 ack eprodrom 17:42:55 multipleprofiles has 1 karma 17:43:10 q+ 17:43:15 eprodrom: so you have multiple profiles on facebook? 17:43:19 disussion from public-webid https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webid/2014May/0103.html 17:43:25 cwebber2: (who's speaking aside from eprodrom ?) 17:43:44 q? 17:43:47 sandro: there's a page that's stuff about yourself, and there's a page that others see 17:43:47 multiple profiles is against facebook's TOS, but people do it because it's necessary for managing their social interactions 17:43:54 eprodrom: so you see that as multiple profiles? 17:43:55 q+ 17:44:05 tantek: no it's the same profile, but different acl's 17:44:12 i know people who have multiple accounts on both facebook and twitter 17:44:16 q? 17:44:21 eprodrom: it's complicated, I can see doing it, but it didn't come up in our user stories 17:44:31 ... tbh I'd rather get something done than do something complicated 17:44:38 sandro: hr has a different profile than the person 17:45:00 q+ 17:45:00 eprodrom: I could see having multiple proifles as the general case, but it's def the most complicated case 17:45:07 rhiaro, could you document how it worked in BBC with named graphs? 17:45:10 ... would be interesting to see if any apis we have can do it 17:45:20 q? 17:45:24 ... obviously it would be a reparesentation of the person in json 17:45:25 q- i think its been covered 17:45:30 person class in as 1.0 17:45:30 ... there's a person classin AS 1.0 17:45:35 q- 17:45:37 ... that's what I'm referring to 17:45:38 q? 17:45:47 sandro: I might need two distinct profiles 17:45:53 ... one for personal stuff one for work 17:45:57 ... those are logically the same 17:46:02 q? 17:46:04 ack jasnell 17:46:05 eprodrom: that's possible, will go to the queue 17:46:19 jasnell: so I would note that google plus as an example, as a system for multiple profiles 17:46:26 ... every google employee has an internal profile 17:46:33 ... as well as public 17:46:36 sandro, maybe worth adding it to https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories 17:46:38 ... every user can have multiple profiles 17:46:42 ... one person with multiple identities 17:46:52 ... kind of going back to it 17:46:57 Also G+ stuff ties into youtube, with multiple channels connected to one user account 17:47:08 ... in every one of these examples, a profile is kind of a container 17:47:19 ... a variety of things which are sub-categories of the profile 17:47:24 s/back to it/back to original question, "how to model profile?"/ 17:47:33 ... managed independently, who i give htese with 17:47:35 can someone take ACTION to provide alternative to container based strategy proposed by jasnell ? 17:47:43 ... same as g+, twitter, each of these has a container-like model which is there 17:47:57 ... so it might not make sense to model it as a *collection*, but model it as a *container* 17:48:13 ... the question is: if I'm going to model an activity as a container, what's the right way to model that in the syntax 17:48:17 NOTE very relevant to work happening in Credentials CG http://opencreds.org/specs/source/identity-credentials/ 17:48:26 ... as for how the api is concerned, how will we use the profile in the ?? 17:48:37 q? 17:48:37 ... as for whether someone has more than one of not, it's a basic modeling problem 17:48:40 ack AdamB 17:49:04 AdamB: we don't see that as a ?? we see that as a something with a different ??? 17:49:16 This seems to overlap with profile and implies access controls on parts of profile Socialwg/Social_API/User_stories#Contact_Info 17:49:20 s/as a ??/as a web page/ 17:49:26 we have different profiles on multiple systems, one additional profile with multiple systems, the example is a main profile with multiple systems 17:49:33 ... so we can figure out how to move that between things 17:49:36 tantek, any comments based on rel="me" experience? 17:49:56 ... we provide a bit of background on that, users can't change their hr data, but they can change other things 17:50:00 ... so that's where it comes from 17:50:00 ack AnnB 17:50:02 Abasset made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/Social API/Sorting user stories]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83103&oldid=82669 17:50:32 AnnB: I would give those same examples, in addition we have multiple tools inside the company with people wanting to set up profiles, eg people setting up profiles in sharepoint and ? 17:50:37 ... as well as hr data 17:50:45 ... and our challenge is to pull them together in a cohesive manner 17:50:57 q? 17:50:59 ... and establish their profile in one place, to handle it, how to represent it 17:51:04 I would also note that systems that allow me to use third party authentication to create an account generally use a multiple profile model 17:51:06 ... and not recretate it over and over 17:51:12 ... that's our issue about federation 17:51:18 q? 17:51:19 for instance, I use facebook to log into spotify but my spotify profile is separate from my facebook profile 17:51:24 even tho they represent the same person 17:51:50 eprodrom: james, I just want to ask, assuming we have a class something like as1.0 person, why not just do CRUD on that 17:51:50 s/recretate /recreate/ 17:51:51 CRUD on an AS 1.0 person 17:51:58 ... eg, setters/getters on json document 17:52:04 ... put it, get it, delete it, etc 17:52:12 ... why isn't that about what we want to do? 17:52:33 jasnell: if you look at first user story, you see that *foo* creates distinct profile adding hometown, blah blah 17:52:47 ... how much to do actor kim updated actor kim, or does she update profile 17:52:57 q+ 17:53:02 jasnell, can you please explain 17:53:02 ... and how to update granularity of adding profile, phone number, occupation 17:53:04 { 17:53:04 "@type": "foaf:name", 17:53:04 "displayName": "Kim Smith" 17:53:04 } 17:53:08 ... we want to add ? to the profile 17:53:15 ... in whihc case we want profile as a unique thing 17:53:23 ... eg adding profile to the object 17:53:29 sandro: and how to update those parts 17:53:34 http://opencreds.org/specs/source/identity-credentials/ proposes PATCH 17:53:37 jasnell: and how to update spotify vs facebook profile 17:53:43 ... same ID to log into multiple services 17:53:49 ... each ID may have multiple services 17:53:53 bengo has joined #social 17:54:01 ... kim may be on both identi.ca/facebook, but they're distinct profiles 17:54:11 sandro: I've noticed on facebook change, people can like the avatar change 17:54:11 tilgovi has joined #social 17:54:24 jasnell: so yes, how much granularity to represent? the actions in the activitystream 17:54:34 rel="me" and http://schema.org/sameAs take same approach IMO 17:54:37 eprodrom: how to manage the person updates one profile properties 17:54:41 jasnell: I'm asking do we need to 17:54:51 eprodrom: okay, a good question, can we capture that particular issue? 17:55:08 ... I'd probably be... that's a finer point than the "how do we represent changes to the profile" not just how to represent it 17:55:13 q- 17:55:14 ... would like to raise it as an issue 17:55:17 ISSUE how do we represent changes to a profile in an Activity 17:55:23 dog is going nuts, you wouldn't be able to hear me 17:55:32 jasnell: both issues are important, how to represent profile vs profile changes 17:55:39 q? 17:55:41 eprodrom: we are closing up on top of the hour and I want to represent changes 17:55:44 q? 17:55:53 ... okay to close this and have multiple changes on it 17:55:59 I think profile is an area that can get ridiculous complex / deep end. 17:56:07 it's an area that needs simplification, not more options 17:56:14 ... where we left social API at end of our F2F, we have a # of different approaches to APIs that we are coming at from different directions 17:56:25 micropub, AS 2.0-based JSON-y system, LDP adaptation 17:56:35 ... one is micropub, another is an activitystreams 2.0 JSON'y system, another is an LDP implementation 17:56:37 I thought the three were micropub, pump.io, LDP ? 17:56:47 this is the first I've heard of "AS 2.0-based JSON-y system" 17:56:49 ok oh 17:56:49 ... our interest was to solicit drafts 17:57:05 ... json'y activitystreams 2.0 thing is probably pump.io updated to AS 2.0 17:57:06 I'd expect all the API candidates to be somewhat compatible with AS2 17:57:19 so I'm not sure how it's helpful to frame one in particular as "AS2.0-based" 17:57:30 ... we want to solicit drafts, I don't think the other chairs will disagree with me in that we will probably not persue if we don't get drafts in for other candidates 17:57:37 micropub, pump.io API, LDP 17:57:39 I've implemented an example server that derived from an LDP implementation but uses a AS 2.0 interface. I'll be open sourcing it soon and will have an example endpoint public hopefully later this week 17:57:40 maybe I'm being optimistic :) 17:57:48 ... okay, sorry tantek, I will frame it as pump api as 2.0 17:57:55 ... appreciate the correction 17:58:05 ... we are seeking documentation on one or more proposals 17:58:12 ... in everyone's interest to persue on our own 17:58:27 ... tantek, Arnaud feel free to correct me, but if we don't get a proposal, we will not persue 17:58:29 btw drafts may simple normatively reference an existing *open* spec (license etc.) and provide examples 17:58:33 ... tantek, Arnaud, is this fair? 17:58:39 someone: yes, beep 17:58:53 tantek: yes that's what we discussed at the f2f as something to consider 17:59:02 ... an easier way for people to consider 17:59:07 ... than just w3c submission style 17:59:11 ... that's nice but not required 17:59:19 the someone was me but I have nothing to do with the beep :) 17:59:22 ... as long as you have openly referenced doc 17:59:43 ... as long as ??? convinces submit early, submit often 17:59:49 eprodrom: haha, agree that makes sense 18:00:06 ... I encourage others look at oshepherd's activitypump 2.0 submission 18:00:14 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/Candidates#ActivityPump 18:00:16 ... would love to encourage pump people to look at that 18:00:27 ... for those who would like to look at that, talk to oshepherd, persue further 18:00:35 ... my point on social api: make proposals sooner than later 18:00:38 I'd like to see submission that cite an existing working API proposal, and provide examples of how one or more user stories are done with the API 18:00:42 ... talk amongst yourself about getting htem working 18:00:44 s/submission/submissions 18:00:49 ... the other issue is talking about f2f in paris 18:00:55 ... check ??? 18:01:02 s/working API proposal/implemented API proposal 18:01:06 ... we could do it as a proposed, with +1 voting, sound reasonable Arnaud ? 18:01:17 PROPOSED We have a meeting of the SocialWG in Paris May 4-5 18:01:19 Arnaud: yeah sounds so, let's either doodle poll, or +1 18:01:27 +1 18:01:28 I think the doodle poll is fine 18:01:29 +1 18:01:29 +1 18:01:29 eprodrom: sound about right? 18:01:30 +1 18:01:30 +1 18:01:31 +1 18:01:31 Arnaud: yes 18:01:32 +0 18:01:32 +1 18:01:46 +0 (i cannot make it) 18:01:46 bengo has joined #social 18:01:47 eprodrom: okay, so I think that carries 18:01:52 (also cannot make it) 18:01:54 ... looks like we have a resolution 18:02:01 sandro: let's make sure eveyrone understands ???? 18:02:09 ... that they're waiving their rights to 8 weeks notice 18:02:14 =1 18:02:15 ... because we haven't had 8 weeks notice 18:02:15 RESOLVED We have a meeting of the SocialWG in Paris May 4-5 18:02:16 +1 18:02:19 ... any objections please note 18:02:25 ... otherwise will mark as resolved 18:02:30 pending host! 18:02:31 ... and I will look for potential flights to paris 18:02:35 (just a heads up folks ) 18:02:40 eprodrom++ cwebber2++ 18:02:42 eprodrom has 9 karma 18:02:51 AnnB: let me just say that the advisory committee there is a discount at novotel for w3c 18:02:57 ... and this discount qulaifies 18:03:01 ... about $180/room 18:03:05 yes, we need to get confirmation from Harry that he can host ASAP 18:03:07 ... I'll figure out how to sen dlink 18:03:11 please ask me for help with finding couchsurfing in Paris if interested! 18:03:12 ... you have to send in a form 18:03:16 a fax? 18:03:18 ... you get breakfast and wifi with the price 18:03:21 -Sandro 18:03:23 ... non-refundable 18:03:25 ... fax works also 18:03:34 ... it's south of the whatever, the eifel tower 18:03:40 sandro: very central to paris 18:03:41 AnnB: yes 18:03:48 sandro: we have to figure out where it takes place 18:03:55 AnnB: and it's only good until 18:03:57 sandro: soon 18:04:01 ahhhhhhhh 18:04:04 s/sandro/Arnaud/ 18:04:10 cwebber2: this was a crazy call 18:04:15 cwebber2++ 18:04:17 cwebber2 has 22 karma 18:04:18 cwebber2: ++ 18:04:19 eprodrom: call to close, thanks for handling 18:04:21 cwebber2++ 18:04:22 trackbot, end meeting 18:04:22 Zakim, list attendees 18:04:22 As of this point the attendees have been AdamB, ben_thatmustbeme, Ann, +1.514.554.aaaa, tantek, eprodrom, Arnaud, jasnell, cwebber2, Sandro, rhiaro, elf-pavlik 18:04:23 cwebber2 has 23 karma 18:04:28 For more information about the hotel, please see: 18:04:29 https://www.w3.org/Member/Meeting/2015ac/May/#Accommodation 18:04:29 -eprodrom 18:04:30 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 18:04:30 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/24-social-minutes.html trackbot 18:04:31 -Ann 18:04:31 RRSAgent, bye 18:04:31 I see no action items 18:04:31 how do we merge karma of cwebber2 and cwebber? ;) 18:04:32 -jasnell