14:07:04 RRSAgent has joined #social 14:07:04 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/03/16-social-irc 14:07:06 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:07:06 Zakim has joined #social 14:07:08 Zakim, this will be SOCL 14:07:08 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 14:07:09 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 14:07:09 Date: 16 March 2016 14:07:18 trackbot, this meeting spans midnight 14:07:18 Sorry, tantek, I don't understand 'trackbot, this meeting spans midnight'. Please refer to for help. 14:07:27 scribe: ben_thatmustbeme 14:07:36 good morning! 14:07:43 scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme 14:07:52 agenda: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-03-16#Agenda 14:07:55 scribe: Ben Roberts 14:08:04 present+ 14:08:07 present+ 14:08:09 present+ 14:08:57 tsyesika+ 14:09:08 dmitriz has joined #social 14:09:14 present+ 14:10:08 present+ 14:11:44 tantek: lets do introductions 14:12:52 ben_thatmustbeme (I won't scribe intros) 14:13:54 present+ 14:13:56 Karli has joined #social 14:14:18 AnnBass has joined #social 14:14:27 present + 14:14:28 present+ 14:14:38 present+ 14:14:47 present+ 14:15:20 tantek: the first thing we're going to be doing is editing the agenda 14:15:47 present+ 14:16:38 ok 14:16:42 present+ 14:18:21 tantek: we have demos and soem admin items to schedule 14:19:59 scribenick: aaronpk 14:20:30 shevski has joined #social 14:21:20 hello 14:21:25 i can't find you guyes 14:21:41 the room? 14:21:50 yep, the room for the f2f 14:21:59 stata center, 4th floor common 14:22:16 i did a fair amount of wandering around the 4th floor.. 14:22:18 ben_thatmust has joined #social 14:22:28 G449 14:22:33 shevski 14:22:38 okay, on the 5th floor now. will come and have another look 14:23:14 sandro: i took an action item to propose a list of labels for organizing issues, i have that to present now 14:23:23 ben_thatmust_ has joined #social 14:23:23 sandro: probably before we go through issues lists 14:25:32 eprodrom has joined #social 14:25:40 scribenick: ben_thatmust 14:26:00 shevski has joined #social 14:26:05 tantek: the next goals after that will be to taking drafts to CR 14:26:40 s/taking/looking at what is needed next for taking/ 14:26:59 tantek: lets move work on publish updated working drafts to tomorrow 14:27:29 eprodrom: lets move demo of validator to before taking AS2 to CR discussion 14:28:17 tantek: this fully schedules what we had for goals and items to schedule thus far. 14:28:36 ... do we have any other items we'd like to add? 14:29:07 shevski: what about reviewing implementations? 14:30:13 tantek: (schedules it) NOW i think we are done 14:30:18 ... anything else? 14:31:34 AnnBass: do we have anyone on talky? 14:31:41 tantek: no, not yet 14:31:41 Arnaud: are you joining by Talky? 14:31:45 present+ 14:31:50 present+ 14:31:59 tantek: the next telcon is the 29th, no telcon next week 14:32:08 ben_thatmust++ 14:32:09 ... mostly because most of us are busy here next week 14:32:10 ben_thatmust has 8 karma 14:32:31 tantek: the next F2F is already scheduled for portland 14:33:28 ... the weekend before the meeting is the IndieWebCamp summit too 14:33:43 ... right now we have 5 RSVPs to the next F2F 14:33:49 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-06-07#Participation 14:33:54 ... please add yourself one way or another if you can go or not 14:34:08 ... that will help aaronpk with venue planning etc 14:34:37 q? 14:34:40 ... the next F2F after that is in september in Lisbon Portugal as part of TPAC 14:35:22 tantek: by a quick show of hands how many can make it to that? 14:35:38 tantek: that was about 50% so it should be enough of a critical mass 14:35:44 ... we need to submit for space 14:35:58 ... i proposed thursday - friday that week 14:36:25 ... if anyone else has any WG they are a part of, you might want to check with other groups to see that there is no conflict 14:36:50 ... hearing no objections lets go with Thursday/Friday 14:37:05 sandro: what about annotations? 14:37:20 tantek: do we want to conflict or specificially not conflict 14:37:29 I added a countdown for 3/16 11:45am (#5814) 14:37:44 Loqi has 394 karma 14:37:52 chair: tantek 14:38:01 Resolved: reserve Thursday/Friday for meeting at TPAC in Lisbon 14:38:25 eprodrom: if we are to have another meeting after that it would be close to the end of the year, do we want to schedule that? 14:38:40 tantek: last time we discussed we suggested SF, i'd be happy to host 14:38:56 eprodrom: would there be any benefit to being here? 14:39:05 sandro: not really other than travel rotation 14:39:25 AnnBass: it would be more fair since the summer one is on the west coast 14:39:48 tsyesika: its easier for us to get here 14:40:02 Abasset made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97732&oldid=97731 14:40:03 Abasset made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-06-07]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97733&oldid=97480 14:40:04 Wilkie made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-06-07]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97734&oldid=97733 14:40:06 eprodrom: i'm not sure there is any benefit to meeting that close to the end of our charter 14:40:28 tantek: hopefully its to celebrate our completions 14:40:45 sandro: probably no decisions to make at that point 14:41:14 aaronpk: if we have to decide that before december, is it better to have it earlier? 14:41:27 tantek: now is the time to start planning date ranges certainly 14:41:42 ... normally the TPAC is in early november, so its a little strange this year 14:42:08 eprodrom: could we sketch in a proposed F2F @MIT for early november 2016? 14:42:23 wilkie: we can always revisit this in june 14:42:36 tantek: this would give people plenty of time react 14:43:05 sandro: the week of Nov 14th doesn't conflict with anything (elections, holidays, etc) 14:43:26 tantek: lets just say early Nov so people have time to react to that 14:43:38 AnnBass: are we officially saying it here at MIT? 14:44:14 tantek: there is a proposal for that, I'm still happy to host in san fransisco too 14:44:41 sandro: november is far enough out we can ACTUALLY get our choice of rooms 14:45:28 tantek: we'll follow up on future F2F discussions with that schedule 14:45:40 ... any other input on F2F or all other admin items? 14:46:06 TOPIC: activity streams conformance discussions 14:46:10 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Conformance 14:46:38 eprodrom: just for context, one of the decisions we made was to add a conformance section to AS2 before getting to CR 14:46:50 https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/infrastructure.html#conformance-requirements 14:47:02 ... specificially chose to mimic the html conformacne section 14:47:18 ... this task has been on my todo list for some time, so i'm glad this is done 14:48:10 ... can we step through this? its not as long as HTML5 conformance section as it had a lot of previous versions and its not as significant here for some of those sections 14:48:27 ... non-interactive presentation for example is too detailed for AS2 14:48:59 ... followed structure of html prolog 14:49:17 ... the RFC 2119 is duplicated here, we can probably remove it here or at the beginning 14:49:37 ... in terms of the conformance classes, its a description of the various roles 14:50:02 Abasset made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97736&oldid=97732 14:50:21 ... at times we say implementers must vs documents must, so we call that out here 14:50:43 ... some specific MUST and SHOULDS are called out here 14:50:53 ... if anyone wants to queue up, please do so 14:51:17 ... prefer this vocab over other vocabularies 14:51:32 ... there are JSON-LD features that should not be used 14:51:51 ... those are detailed throughout the doc 14:52:03 sandro: why are these all SHOULDs not MUSTs? 14:52:14 tantek: maybe we should make these MUSTs 14:52:25 eprodrom: the specific sections are SHOULDs 14:52:52 tantek: we should update the SHOULDS to MUSTS as this conformance section seems to say it optional 14:53:05 sandro: it seems rather odd to just repeat all of these from the document 14:53:29 eprodrom: i was trying to bring up key points for conformance 14:54:07 jasnell has joined #social 14:54:14 specifically, we could updated this: "Conforming publishers should make conforming documents available according to the serialization requirements of section 2." to "Conforming publishers must make conforming documents available according to the serialization requirements of section 2." 14:54:18 annbass_ has joined #social 14:54:48 eprodrom: there are ways within JSON-LD to specify multiple languages for example and an AS2 version of that and we are saying to not use those things specifically disallowed by the spec 14:54:55 jasnell_ has joined #social 14:55:24 eprodrom: let me ask a higher level question, i think the intention was to say "what is a good AS2 document?" and i wanted to collect that all in to one section 14:55:38 ... is that a worthwhile goal for this section? 14:55:52 ... is that the wrong kind of effort to put in to this conformance section 14:56:29 tantek: i think from a spec writing side, its better to prefer a MUST instead of a SHOULD 14:56:57 eprodrom: using 1.0 syntax for some of the properties is a MAY (from memory) 14:57:54 sandro: if you are as2 with some compatibility for as1 processors, are you "conformant" 14:58:04 tantek: is there a transition section in the spec? 14:58:06 eprodrom: yes 14:58:22 ... the idea is there are 2 media types 14:58:34 sandro: sounds like as2 media MUST NOT have as1 content 14:58:54 tantek: if you can't come up with a specific reason for a SHOULD, it must be a MUST 15:00:04 the_frey has joined #social 15:00:51 rhiaro: if alternatives exist AS2 terms must be present, but you can have non as2 if there is no equivalent or as long as the equivalent is there 15:01:05 (some discussion about exact phrasing) 15:02:37 http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-core/#example-using-multiple-vocabularies 15:03:06 (i cannot scribe live editing sanely) 15:04:13 http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-core/#naturalLanguageValues 15:05:13 (edits to make last section more clearly) 15:05:25 sandro: have other editors been thinking about conformance clauses 15:05:59 aaronpk: webmention and micropub have short conformance clauses but nothing this complex 15:06:08 tantek: can acitivypub use that 15:06:12 micropub conformance section: http://micropub.net/draft/#conformance 15:06:29 sandro: its much more complex for document formats 15:06:47 consider s/Conforming publishers should make conforming documents/Conforming publishers must make conforming documents 15:06:59 eprodrom: done editing, it now says use the equivalents but also uses parallels 15:08:42 tantek: i had one more suggestion, in the publishers section 15:08:51 sandro: we haven't gotten there 15:09:46 eprodrom: there may be some other examples of documents we can add 15:10:02 Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97738&oldid=97736 15:10:15 ... i give a description of implementations as that word is used a lot 15:10:58 tantek: we can remove "human processors" 15:11:08 * human processes 15:11:30 s/processors/processes/ 15:11:52 sandro: maybe specify they two types of implementations are publishers and consumers 15:12:27 jaywink has joined #social 15:13:21 sandro: i think we can say MUST consider, its not really any way to test or enforce that 15:13:31 ... at least make it stronger 15:13:52 tantek: human impact of the word MUST at least 15:14:57 eprodrom: since most of the publishing requirements are in the spec there is not much need for a large section here other than to say they have to create a document that conforms 15:15:14 ... the final section is on consumers 15:16:03 ... there are things that are MUSTs for them such as continuing to process if they hit things they don't understand 15:17:29 sandro: have you had feedback from jasnell_ on this? 15:17:33 eprodrom: no 15:17:44 tantek: has anyone heard from james? 15:18:02 I'm here. somewhat ;-) 15:18:11 eprodrom: lets make sure we get his sign off. 15:18:12 haven't been able to follow along with the conversation for a bit 15:18:26 Oh hey! 15:18:50 jasnell_: we've just discussed waiting for your review on https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams/Conformance 15:19:12 s/jasnell_:/jasnell_,/ 15:19:21 tantek: do you think there is enough experience with how feed-readers treat other formats, to provide a base of how readers MUST treat AS2? 15:19:40 eprodrom: thats true we do have some experience from nearby domains we could borrow from 15:20:01 tantek: we could at least say "if you are building a feed reader here is your list of MUSTs" 15:20:16 ... it would be a specific subsection for feed readers 15:20:35 Karli: do we mean an RSS reader here or more like a social client 15:20:54 the conformance page looks ok, pretty light in terms of actual conformance rules but that's to be expected 15:21:02 tantek: its better to start more like an RSS reader, and we can expand later 15:21:23 ... i'm not sure we have the experience to do that for social networks yet 15:22:04 for producers, something should be said about conforming to the rules of each property. For instance, "updated" and "published" must be iso8601 date-time 15:22:05 eprodrom: it would take me a while to do examples for all of these classes 15:22:17 tantek: i'm talking about only for 1 specifically, not for any others 15:22:26 "name" and "nameMap" must not contain markup, and consumers must not treat it as markup 15:22:52 "summary"/"content"/"summaryMap"/"contentMap", however, are HTML and consumers should treat them as such, etc 15:22:57 eprodrom: its a very good example to use too 15:23:10 ... i'm happy to do that, maybe even for tomorrow 15:23:45 Action eprodrom to add a section on feed readers to AS2 conformance section 15:23:46 Created ACTION-86 - Add a section on feed readers to as2 conformance section [on Evan Prodromou - due 2016-03-23]. 15:24:23 tantek: i agree with jasnell_'s comments 15:24:28 http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-core/ 15:24:50 there are other examples, I'll see if I can come up with a more exhaustive list 15:24:53 and adding that consumers MUST treat them as such 15:25:08 eprodrom: if you should through this document for capital MUST and Capital SHOULD, we have 30 must 31 should, 18 for may 15:25:31 ... would recaping those be good for this section? 15:25:41 tantek: no, those requirements should be hardened 15:25:44 but they include things like: on as:Link objects, the "id" property must not be considered to be the actual URL to the object, the "href" property must be used for that. The "id" and "href" can have the same value, but they serve different purposes 15:25:57 jasnell_: I count about 30-40 each of MUST, SHOULD, MAY in the text 15:26:07 Is the conformance section a good place to recapitulate them? 15:26:19 not everything is captured as MUST/MAY 15:26:23 Or should be refer to them by reference ("serialization as in sectino 2") 15:26:28 s/sectino/section/ 15:26:58 jasnell_, such as for example, range of properties on different classes 15:26:58 I'll take some time later on today and tomorrow to write up as many of these types of rules as I can 15:27:13 jasnell_: feel free to edit the wiki page 15:27:24 tantek: if those are specific properties, edit the spec 15:27:32 ... those requirements should go with the properties 15:27:47 btw, my apologies for being awol the past couple of months, the Node community stuff has been keeping me quite occupied 15:27:55 ... later in the spec you can say "consumers MUST" and we know what a consumer is 15:28:32 jasnell_: no problem, just glad to get it here 15:28:47 jasnell_: let's powwow one-on-one for further editorial points 15:28:52 +1 15:29:09 if you would, send me a calendar invite for a time that works best for you 15:29:09 eprodrom: are there other things you would expect here or that are confusing? 15:29:57 sandro: i think this is good, the sort of lawyer perspective is what is someone going to get away with because of something we missed here? I think this is the right track but we can't guess what all those loopholes are in the future. 15:30:17 tantek: this is also going to feed into the test suite, any must can be captured in a test 15:30:54 eprodrom: is there a decision point we can make like "include a conformance section" i think we've already approved that, can we add this now as a first draft 15:31:11 sandro: i think we can do that and hope anyone spots any fixes before we publish again 15:31:48 tantek: i think this is good to go in now and i'd like to see it published sooner than later but we can talk about that in publishing schedule later 15:32:09 tantek: shall we take a break? 15:32:21 rhiaro: lunch is here, half an hour early 15:32:36 tantek: lets do issue labels section then break for lunch 15:33:08 TOPIC: Issue Labels 15:33:43 sandro: issues labels on github is an over-contraint problem, you'd like it to be overly clear but issues have to serve several different reasons 15:34:10 ... sometimes they are used for w3c process, sometimes for editors, sometimes for chairs 15:34:18 https://github.com/sandhawke/spot/labels?sort=name-asc 15:34:24 ... i tried to put that all togeter in to a repo of mine 15:35:10 ... commentor stuff is probably w3c process 15:35:33 ... mostly these are on closed issues 15:35:52 ... the Waiting ones are the ones the chairs would look at 15:36:01 ... these are things that would show up on the agenda 15:36:48 the greyed out ones are ones can sort of ignore 15:36:57 q+ 15:37:30 eprodrom: i have two questions on this, we have a large number of repos on this 15:37:40 sandro: i have a script that can put all of these on a repo 15:37:56 eprodrom: this is for a spec repo, what about software / test suite 15:38:06 sandro: i assumed a spec 15:38:21 eprodrom: is there any reason not to start doing this immediately? 15:38:26 tantek: i'd like to see fewer 15:38:56 dmitriz: "editorial" vs "editorial: spec is ambiguous" is there a difference there? 15:39:34 sandro: editorial is not important change, spec is ambiguous is a little more dangerous 15:39:55 tantek: that sounds not editorial 15:40:48 Karli: with owncloud we start with fewer and add them as we need them, its also not clear here who sets these labels 15:41:02 sandro: agreed though i'm not sure we have a good answer to that 15:41:10 ... someone with github permissions 15:41:24 eprodrom: my understanding is that some of these are anticipating questions of CR 15:42:08 sandro: for example we have 176 closed comments on AS2, we would want to have them all organized 15:42:27 tantek: i'm pretty sure thats for last calls etc, so we don't have to go through all old comments 15:42:42 sandro: i don't think thats true 15:43:40 tantek: in other groups after we went to CR we added them to "disposition of comments" but not before we went to CR 15:44:04 ... it was "have you actually responded to all comments after the last call for comments" 15:44:21 sandro: okay, maybe we don't have to do that, We SHOULD do that.. 15:44:29 tantek: i don't think we should, its a waste of our time 15:45:15 dmitriz: in the interest of reducing number of tags, 'waiting for' could be grouped 15:45:54 shevski has joined #social 15:46:11 aaronpk: as an editor i like to mark things specifically for the group 15:46:53 tantek: i think we should limit it to those that help the W3C Process, and add it as needed 15:48:39 sandro: for example james at last f2f, he had to organize them for us 15:48:48 ... this would give us that organization 15:49:11 cwebber2: it would help us get some idea of priority setting 15:50:27 q+ 15:50:55 q? 15:51:00 ack eprodrom 15:51:09 https://shed.bike/ :) 15:51:30 eprodrom: i don't think we are going to come up with an agreed upon list before lunch and i want to eat 15:52:00 sandro: other idea is to add these to the repos and remove any unused ones after a month 15:52:04 annbass_ has joined #social 15:52:15 shevski: we could vote like on the voice 15:52:34 Q+ 15:52:35 shevski: i think that list is too long, i'd be interested to know which are the most important 15:52:56 ... I wouldn't know what are the most important ones 15:53:19 eprodrom: can i suggest moving this to a wiki page and edit it down there? 15:54:27 Q- 15:54:59 aaronpk: i would need a description of what each of these are and what they are all needed for 15:55:34 aaronpk: maybe we just start with a list of these as the official list and if i need to add it, i look up the list and add it as needed to github 15:55:59 sandro: i can give you the CURL to add those with those colors 15:56:08 aaronpk: that does not sound like a lot of work for me 15:57:55 q? 15:57:58 q+ 15:58:08 aaronpk: without these labels the editor has a lot more work 15:58:17 q? 15:58:17 ... these labels would help other people to work on the spec 15:58:20 ack eprodrom 15:58:34 eprodrom: when do we move our repos under the w3c space on github? 15:58:42 tantek: its not a requirement 16:00:11 sandro: i'll add something of a description of them all to the wiki with their colors 16:00:36 tantek: i'm happy to add what i think is important of these 16:01:57 AnnBass: i printed out and ran through editorial changes for the 3 specs on the reading list 16:02:03 i'll give those to editors 16:02:29 Action sandro to add labels to the wiki with short description of each 16:02:29 Created ACTION-87 - Add labels to the wiki with short description of each [on Sandro Hawke - due 2016-03-23]. 16:02:46 Jasnell: I have a paper print of AS, with a few "English" edits ... Would it work for me to give it to Arnaud next week, to give to you? 16:03:12 (Paper is easier for me to edit in this manner, than online ... For making suggestions to you) 16:03:50 reconvene at 1pm 16:03:51 tantek: we are on lunch until 1pm to do as2 validator and taking as2 to CR both of which are led by evan so i'll chair and then we can swap off for the rest of the day 16:03:51 I added a countdown for 3/16 1:00pm (#5815) 16:04:50 hey, sorry, got pulled away for a bit 16:05:33 annbass_ : I'm not likely to see arnaud soon, but if you'd like to scan and email me a copy I'll make the edits 16:05:33 RRSAgent, this meeting spans midnight 16:05:49 Seems like a lottaa 16:06:34 Whoops ... A lotta pages to scan ... Maybe give me your snail mail address in private, and I'll do that? 16:06:59 (23 pages) 16:09:34 annbass__ has joined #social 16:10:02 Tantekelik made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97752&oldid=97738 16:11:05 Karli has joined #social 16:13:19 Karli has joined #social 16:16:11 annbass_ has joined #social 16:16:33 Karli has joined #social 16:16:36 jtilles has joined #social 16:17:20 shevski has joined #social 16:17:54 Karli has joined #social 16:20:30 annbas___ has joined #social 16:23:36 annbass_ has joined #social 16:30:04 annbass has joined #social 16:32:52 annbass__ has joined #social 16:34:39 dmitriz has joined #social 16:39:40 annbass has joined #social 16:40:02 Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97755&oldid=97752 16:40:45 dmitriz has joined #social 16:45:34 annbass_ has joined #social 16:59:27 Arnaud: can you hear now? 16:59:27 nicolagreco has joined #social 16:59:53 nope 17:00:12 in the meantime I tried another computer and had the same results so I'm pretty sure the problem isn't on my side 17:00:46 just refreshed. now? 17:01:51 yes, it works! 17:01:52 thanks 17:07:44 jasnell has joined #social 17:09:05 eprodrom has joined #social 17:09:30 tantek has joined #social 17:09:42 hi :) 17:11:54 dmitriz has joined #social 17:12:22 eprodrom is getting setup to demo the AS2 validator 17:12:28 shevski has joined #social 17:12:30 we need a scribe for the afternoon 17:13:34 thanks cwebber2 for scribing 17:13:37 scribe: cwebber2 17:14:45 Karli has joined #social 17:15:02 scribenick: cwebber2 17:15:26 thanks aaronpk! 17:15:36 the sound is actually pretty good 17:15:40 great 17:15:58 Topic: Demo: Activity Streams 2.0 Validator (Evan Prodromou) 17:16:00 you can hear evan okay? he's on the opposite side of the room as the mic 17:16:07 very well 17:16:11 annbass has joined #social 17:16:14 eprodrom: well I'll get started then. The point of this demonstration from a pull-back, one of the things we have to do as we bring AS2 to recommendation is have a test suite. But one question is what that means for a document format specification. We've taken it to mean two parts 17:16:57 eprodrom: 1 a set of document formats that we expect consumers to consumes, that's in the activitystreams-test-documents, composed of examples from AS Core and Vocabulary specifications, as well as jasnell's javascript stuff for AS2 17:17:07 eprodrom: it's about 100 documents, maybe 200 17:17:15 eprodrom: a number of different documents 17:17:31 annbass has joined #social 17:17:38 eprodrom: our expectation is those writing consumer implementations should be able to consume this, and if their thing explodes they know they have a problem 17:17:50 eprodrom: so it's a fairly low impact test suite for consumers 17:17:55 sandro: it's 200 17:18:17 eprodrom: 200 docs, thanks. on public side we need to validate ? so we decided to build a validator 17:19:00 ... so this is a way to test your documents. the as2 validator is written in node.js, canonical verison at as2.rocks, if there's a reason to run another version we can do that too, software is under w3c software license 17:19:16 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitystreams-validator/issues/11 17:19:19 sandro: it's not linked from as2.rocks 17:19:29 eprodrom: I'll drop it on irc (^^-- above) 17:19:55 ... 2 ways to submit to validator: paste the URL into the URL area; if you see there's things at GitHub let's get the raw version of documents 17:20:11 ... there are bad parts, I think it's served as plaintext, but let's just say we've got this 17:20:27 ... when we hit the url we see this validation report, we see that it's from one of the example documents 17:20:44 ... I'm not crazy about this reports, there are 3 errors which I think is too high, but I think it's a way to do that submission 17:20:55 ... the problem is that we've got several objects in here without a required name property 17:21:01 tantek: is name or name map a must? 17:21:07 eprodrom: yes it's a MUST 17:21:26 ... it's one thing that comes up, it's a MUST with few examples in the spec 17:21:51 ... the other thing that we could do here is to copy paste it in here, take this same document, copy pasta, run another validation 17:21:56 ... and it'll run validation again 17:22:15 ... you can also upload a file, so you can say hey look, I'm in the test documents, how useful, upload that, validate it 17:22:21 s/verison/version/ 17:22:49 ... and there we go. lastly, you can use the validate endpoint as an api endpoint and via your fave programming language or curl on the command line, you can do that 17:22:54 ... let me bring up a terminal... 17:23:44 ... so this is just a curl command line http client, will shoot it off to the endpoint 17:24:15 ... the endpoint returns first a list of notes, similar to what we see in the html interface, also returns the input that it received so you can verify you actually got what you thought you did 17:24:32 ... so that is a way to do some validation from the command line... I use this to validate all the documents that are in the test document suite 17:24:38 ... so that's a relatively easy shell 17:24:49 sandro: when I try that I get html with a link to the validator 17:24:54 eprodrom: yeah do it with https 17:25:06 eprodrom: you have to do something to tell curl to do the redirects if you use http 17:25:30 eprodrom: I think this should follow a lot of the use cases, I think there may be other ones, but api endpoint is kind of a failsafe on the rest 17:25:42 eprodrom: there are 4 ways to submit a document 17:26:07 eprodrom: speaking of validation, one of the things that's interesting about AS2 is that it's very permissive. an empty javascript object is a valid AS2 document 17:26:26 eprodrom: no properties are absolutely property, only one is that you MUST have a name on certain kinds of documents 17:26:36 eprodrom: despite that, there are some better and worse AS2 docs 17:26:44 eprodrom: so we might tell users there are things we'd like to see 17:26:51 ... I did this by showing a heirarchy of notes 17:27:21 .... I'm not sure where this comes from but I know it from syslog style errors... ERROR, WARNING, NOTICE, INFO 17:27:54 ... MUST should do error, should should do warning, style issues should be notices or informational, maybe a style thing 17:28:07 ... notice is something you should probably change, and info is just info 17:28:42 ... this seems to be working pretty well... I've implemented almost all the MUST, most of the SHOULDs, and a few of the MAYs and optional properties I haven't yet followed up on 17:29:03 for most of the properties and thet ypes we have in AS2.0 the domain and range of propertis are if you have an actor for the activity what are the things it could be 17:29:19 ... so domain and range of properties, required properties, recommended properties, things allowed and not 17:29:41 sandro: so test documents are those all supposed to be OK documents? or should they be categorized with some as errors, warnings 17:29:51 eprodrom: good question, all of them are "these should work" 17:29:59 sandro: except maybe that one that wasn't ;) 17:30:09 eprodrom: yes maybe that doc or our spec that needs fixing 17:30:19 sandro: it might be nice to manually sort so we can test this 17:30:38 tantek: it's realtively stable at this point, could we add links for all warnings and errors? 17:30:41 eprodrom: good idea 17:30:52 tantek: that way if someone gets an error they can click it to see how to fix it 17:30:55 eprodrom: yeah 17:31:56 eprodrom: there are two views, you can see submitting or validation report, at the moment it's pretty plain janes but 17:32:03 tantek: can you show url based result again 17:32:24 eprodrom: yes, you can also tell one thing it's not doing here is complaining that it's being served as text/plain, which is one more thing it can do 17:32:30 tantek: that's great, here's a thing you can share 17:32:35 eprodrom: right right 17:32:48 ... you can do url=${document location} 17:33:33 tantek: do you have any live sites on the web you can link to 17:33:35 eprodrom: not yet 17:33:50 tantek: valid challenge to working group: who can get a valid stream on their site first 17:34:04 sandro: are there any as1 -> as2 converters 17:34:26 https://as2.rocks/validate?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftsyesika.se%2Ffeed AS2 document on the web :) 17:34:37 eprodrom: any other questoins? 17:34:45 tantek: mostly that it's awesome 17:35:13 ... one nice thing is our discussions are not subject to rfc2019 17:36:30 eprodrom: I'd love help, styling would be nice, I'm not sure, maybe tabs 17:36:42 I agree, nice progress! 17:36:44 My photo albums: https://as2.rocks/validate?url=http://img.amy.gy/files/food/food.json 17:37:12 tantek: next topic is taking AS2 to CR, which is also yours eprodrom :) 17:38:04 Topic: Taking AS2 to CR (Evan) 17:38:47 eprodrom: what I'd like to do is my understanding is that we had three things we needed to do to get AS2 to CR state 17:39:12 eprodrom: these three things were to first resolve (blocking) issues, second provide a test suite, third provide a conformance section 17:39:24 eprodrom: I think as it stands we have first drafts or early versions of those three things 17:39:50 eprodrom: I may need to confirm that about the issues but at least in terms of test suite we have what we've kind of laid out as in terms of test suite, and we have conformance section in a draft state 17:40:02 tantek: for test suite do you have at least one test per feature of the sepc 17:40:08 s/sepc/spec/ 17:40:22 eprodrom: would that be like for each type in the vocab have on document for each one 17:40:31 ... so for properties we have at least one of each 17:40:41 ... a property in as2 can't be an empty array for example 17:40:49 ... here's a document with an empty array, throw an error 17:41:03 tantek: do you have a test for an assertion for each part of the spec 17:41:21 eprodrom: since we have tests from documentation examples, we have pretty good coverage 17:41:43 tantek: that's ok, having a comprehensive test suite is not a requirement to enter CR (but it is to enter) 17:41:53 sandro: I don't remember what the granularity was 17:42:04 tantek: was it raised as an issue to define granularity 17:42:07 sandro: yes 17:42:23 eprodrom: we went down an interesting path with that one, and it got caught up with the conformance classes 17:42:28 s/(but it is to enter)/(but it is to exit) 17:43:08 tantek: we have conformance section, have test suite with a lot of cases covered, so that leaves the open issues 17:43:19 tantek: so where are we in open issues 17:43:33 sandro: we have 12, and I won't snark that they aren't labeled ;) 17:43:46 ... one of them is editorial but it's not my version of editorial! 17:44:11 eprodrom: we have 12, one is "why is as2 so bloated" 17:44:20 sandro: it has more in the issue than the title sounds like 17:44:22 eprodrom: right 17:45:44 eprodrom: so we have quite a few here, some are questions, some may be... I'm not sure if we should mark these as blocking or not 17:45:48 issues like "why is as2 so bloated?" should be closed with a comment stating that this is not actionable, if any particular part is questioned they should be listed in a separate issue 17:46:07 Karli has joined #social 17:46:29 tantek: the question is for you, how much time do you think you need to resolve these, and which of these do you want to ask for some group discussion on to move them forward 17:46:40 "this is not actionable" is my favorite way to close issues :P 17:47:16 eprodrom: not ready to do that today, I might be able to tomorrow, I'd like to run by james, would be great if we could run from 12 to 6 17:47:18 tantek: or 0 17:47:21 eprodrom: right or 0 17:47:32 tantek: I'd like to get as close as we can to that by end of this meeting 17:47:45 ... so given what you said about not willing to categorize, can you be by tomorrow morning? 17:47:54 ... we have agenda item scheduling and... we could do that first thing 17:48:07 ... or you might come back tomorrow and say you resolved all 17:48:09 eprodrom: ha ha ha 17:48:23 sandro: james may participate remotely, maybe we can get an answer from him about ?? 17:48:42 tantek: determine which you need group help for, then can james be present or is he happy to delegate to you about the issues 17:48:46 eprodrom: fine, good 17:48:58 tantek: otherwise will add to agenda for tomorrow morning; go through AS2 issues 17:49:03 eprodrom: with intent to close! 17:49:16 tantek: will block out an hour and a half for that 17:49:32 eprodrom: could I ask for rest of group to look through this? may speed discussion if people understand what topics are 17:49:51 tantek: consider this explicit call for commentary 17:50:02 ... some of these like conformance clause you reasonably fixed 17:50:11 azaroth has joined #social 17:50:15 eprodrom: yeah we were almost done by last f2f, but then we had f2f explosion with new issues 17:50:22 ... this one is interesting can try to take that on today 17:52:03 tantek: every document I've seen has CR exit criteria in spec or include it inline 17:52:07 q+ 17:54:35 ack cwebber 17:54:37 shevski: why not have it be in the official w3c-social? 17:54:38 q+ 17:55:04 aaronpk: it isn't a requirement to do so, some required moving to their own group 17:55:05 ack cwebber2 17:55:10 ack cwebber2 17:55:14 ack 17:55:17 ack next 17:55:42 annbass: question is is there some process where it should go ahead of CR, I could easily see one person's repo goes south or something 17:55:52 tantek: or that's one possible org issue 17:56:13 aaronpk: before github was used more mailing list was only place to do that, but now github is using more 17:56:31 ... so I wonder if we should be archiving that discussion 17:56:48 annbass: that might be an advisory board thing 17:57:26 There is the W3C-wide document on use of GitHub: https://www.w3.org/wiki/GitHub 17:58:00 tantek: repo issue is possibly helpful 17:58:07 aaronpk: that's possibly useful around patent stuff 17:58:11 tantek: lots of good reasons to do that 17:58:44 it seems there is not a good answer to the particular question of archiving the github issues discussions 17:59:06 break for 10 minutes 17:59:21 break until 14:10 EDT 17:59:27 Loqi ^^^ 17:59:30 eprodrom: does the validator send an accept header? 17:59:33 come back at 14:10 EDT 17:59:35 I added a countdown for 3/16 11:10am (#5817) 17:59:37 I could look at the source but it's easier to ask :) 18:00:08 Tantekelik made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97757&oldid=97755 18:04:31 Karli_ has joined #social 18:06:28 Karli has joined #social 18:06:40 bengo has joined #social 18:08:31 Karli_ has joined #social 18:09:01 come back 18:09:02 Countdown set by wilkie on 3/16/16 at 10:59am 18:09:03 you're the only one on the talky right now anyway :P 18:09:11 shevski has joined #social 18:13:35 eprodrom_ has joined #social 18:13:52 scribe: rhiaro 18:13:57 scribenick: rhiaro 18:13:59 TOPIC: Demos 18:14:04 chair: eprodrom 18:14:32 TOPIC: Demo of pump.io - mediagoblin federation 18:14:45 tsyesika: this is a predecessor to activitypub, the pumpio as1 stuff 18:15:24 ... Going to add a photo onto media goblin and send it to a pump io user 18:15:39 ... *does so* 18:15:57 so good! 18:16:03 ... it has federated from mediagoblin to pumpio 18:16:10 ... Can post a reply in pumpio 18:16:25 ... Back into mediagoblin, the reply should show 18:16:29 ... *it does* 18:16:33 Everyone: applause 18:17:00 q+ 18:17:04 tsyesika: Coming up in the release after next 18:17:06 ... Any questions? 18:17:13 eprodrom: Bravo! Couple of questions.. 18:17:17 ... How does it work for idfferent media types? 18:17:24 ... Media goblin is generous with media types 18:17:42 tyesika: Media goblin has a todo to support video and audio in the api for federation. Currently only images federated 18:18:00 ... It will support them in the same way as images. Serialise the video or audio as how as1 defines them, and do the same post request to the inbox 18:18:12 eprodrom: About likes... do they translate to media goblin? 18:18:29 ... If you go to the pumpio page and click like on it 18:18:38 tsyesika: they will work by the time I finish mediagoblin 18:18:45 ... Things are still a bit broken 18:18:51 eprodrom: What do you think next steps are with this? 18:18:59 ... with federation of mediagoblin? 18:19:27 tsyesika: Currently we don't have comments that you make in mediagoblin federated *back*. All activities need to federate and there will be support of like and the others. 18:19:35 ... And then probably the media types as you brought up 18:19:44 ... One of the reasons media goblin is good is support of media types 18:19:53 ... And eventually having a up to date implementation of activitypub 18:20:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97758&oldid=97757 18:20:22 cwebber2: I think it's interesting for the group to know that tsyesika has been working on this for a long time, and you might wonder why it took so long to get to this point, and I think it would be interesting for you to explain what the challenges are 18:20:40 tsyesika: The overwhelming biggest thing for mediagoblin why it took so long is because of the database structure 18:20:53 ... Mediagoblin uses sql, postgres or sqlite, and it was designed prior to federation and the pump api 18:21:13 ... having things like comments that can be on other things, comments on comments and other things being in collections, involves creating generic keys 18:21:19 ... something something referential integrity 18:21:29 ... Lots of challenges implementing federation on an existing implementation 18:21:52 eprodrom: That's a really interesting point, pumpio uses document databases, so couchbase or mongo or redis, but it's relatively easy to wedge little bits of data into places that they weren't intended 18:21:58 ... which is harder to do with an sql database 18:22:24 cwebber2: we're theoretically advocating ... and this applies to others.. it's a general problem when you have assumptinos about what types of things are responses to other types of things 18:22:35 ... Like comments ony being on media, that was an easy assumption, but the rest of the world might not assume that 18:22:48 ... We don't have an answer for constraints in federation 18:22:57 ... and this will be a challenge for owncloud as well. We haven't talked about this in the gorup 18:23:09 ... How to convert existing applications that were designed before you planned to federate, and move them into the federation wrold 18:23:20 ... We're managing it with media goblin thanks to jessica, but not everyone will have the resources for that 18:23:28 ... WHat can we do to help people know and prepare fo rdoing this? 18:23:38 ... Do we permit organisations to set these kinds of constraints? 18:23:49 Karli: database structure is part of that, but not every social network works the same 18:23:59 ... Facebook and g+ and twitter all have apis that work differently 18:24:14 ... twitter has obvious limitations with the size of the text, if you can like, if there are comments or retweets which don't exist in other social networks 18:24:41 ... It's a huge question. Good to have an api that you can use to model all kinds of social interactions, but does it mena that every social network has to support everything that every other social network supports? 18:24:49 ... You could drop things that are not supported 18:24:53 eprodrom: that's probably a great way to handle it 18:24:58 ... THere might be other ways to do it too 18:25:07 ... You oculd have a little grey image icon 'there is something here I don't understand' 18:25:13 ... like a puzzle piece in html documents 18:25:17 ... some embedded stuff that doesn't make sense 18:25:21 ... pumpio just throws stuff out 18:25:46 tantek: the experience with webmention is that there are situations where having defined fallback behaviour is useful and implementable. And also sometimes just dropping stuff works. Very case by case. 18:26:02 ... By starting with.. just get comments working. Suddenly everything else can have a fallback that can be interpreted as a comment 18:26:18 ... So when people started doing lieks via webmention, by including a summary in your like that says 'so and so likes this' 18:26:28 ... if you understand likes you ignore the summary and just increment your counter or whatever 18:26:33 ... but if you don't, you can display it as a comment 18:26:38 ... so there's no new implementation needed 18:26:49 Karli: so it's the responsibilty of the consumer to ignore or translate something? 18:27:20 tantek: we didn't have to, because comments were designed in such a way to handle summary/content/etc, that later interactions could provide fallback content like a summary, so that something that only implements comments doesn't have to do anything new 18:27:26 aaronpk: reacji is a great example 18:27:31 ... Someone posts a single emoji reply 18:27:36 ... Slack formalised the name 18:27:46 ... You choose an emoji character as a reply 18:27:49 ... you see on github a lot 18:27:58 ... You end up with long comment threads full of emoji 18:28:10 ... Slack did a thing where they showed the emoji with the number of people who reacted with that 18:28:33 ... So we're starting to experiment with that, so ifyou don't do anything an dsomeone posts an emoji reply you show it as a comment, but if you want to you can not show it as a comment you can pull it up and create a counter 18:28:46 ... the like example seems trivial becasue everyoen knows what it is, but now it's happening again 18:29:24 cwebber2: one of the things that's interesting about ... you must have started with a database structure that still allows that 18:29:37 ... but existing implementatkons like mediagoblin start with databases where it's still difficult to even do fallbacks in that way 18:29:58 ... if your table only contains these fields, what do you do as a fallback? If you have hard coded links between tables, you need to be able to make that generic enough to do fallbacks 18:30:15 ... In indieweb you have this view that everything is a post and you can adapt that. But other things don't have that assumption in their worldview 18:30:21 ... So how do we build on these different world views? 18:30:32 ... You would be surprised at the different world views, even trying to be accommodating for fallbacks 18:30:38 tantek: the more you can minimise those assumptions the better 18:30:49 cwebber2: that's not necesarily true for an organisation that already came in iwth its own assumptions 18:31:12 tantek: from a spec point of view. Of course organisations have their own assumptions. But with a spec, the more you can minimise the assumption sthat you're asking peopel to take on, the less work it is to make it compatible 18:31:20 shevski: the problem also is that this stuff is going to continue to evolve 18:31:24 ... reactionmojis 18:31:45 ... it's going to be really fluid. You don't want want to get into a race of being compatible now, because it's not going to stay around. It needs to be generic and extensible, and quite basic int erms of standards 18:31:52 q+ 18:31:55 tantek: we've done both, compatible with now and generic 18:32:08 ... the web took off because every single piece was cmpatibile with what already existed 18:32:14 ... you could serve html over ftp, or plain text over http 18:32:30 eprodrom: I'd like to bring it back to the pumpio and mediagoblin federation 18:32:54 ... There is a lot of pumpio federation process that's kind of string and chewing gum 18:33:07 Karli has joined #social 18:33:09 ... THe oauth key discovery process is like from an older version of oauth2 that's no longer compatible 18:33:13 ... There's the dial back stuff 18:33:17 ... There's the webfinger stuff in there 18:33:27 nicolagreco has joined #social 18:33:33 ... And probably other bits, hacked to make them work 18:33:58 ... Do you think that where we're going with activitypub is going to .. what's th erelationship with all that stuff and where we're going with activitypub? 18:34:05 tsyesika: good question 18:34:13 ... ap at the moment doesn't specify too much of those details 18:34:18 ... We've decided oauth2 18:34:23 cwebber2: we were also told not to pick a stance there 18:34:35 tsyesika: so it's vague, so currently they would be incompatible because you can implement oauth2 in several ways 18:34:38 <3 OIDC (which is a more specified flavor of oauth2) 18:34:47 ... the discovery stuff, we do have stuff but we think it will change 18:34:55 cwebber2: we already agreed on some change. We just haven't written yet 18:34:56 including discovery, dynamic client registration, etc 18:35:17 tsyesika: so doesn't specify all of that, but as a downside will lead to incompatible implemenations without specifying 18:35:24 cwebber2: do you think there's anything other than auth? 18:35:31 Fair. Communities of different size tho 18:35:32 tsyesika: i don't think anything other that's major 18:35:43 cwebber2: that's the big thing that's a known problem. If it's a constraint then it's a constraint 18:36:01 eprodrom: I see two ways of doing that. One is to include authenticaiton and say this is how you get an oauth 2 key in order to make these calls, and here are the steps 18:36:29 ... Another way to maintain compatibility is to have a suite of specifications, AP specifically talks about getting your activities back and forth, and then a discovery specification and an authentication specification or something like that, which would be short 18:36:59 cwebber2: I think discovery would be smooth put in there, but authentication I would be enthusiastic about saying there are auxilliary specs, but they might not make it to rec within this group's lifetime, but we have something that we can point people to. I think that's a good route. 18:37:11 eprodrom: this is a lot of trouble to go to to end up with incompatible implementations 18:37:18 ... As one of the other people who has done this, I know how much trouble this was 18:37:23 ... I'm really impressed 18:37:26 ... Any other quesitons? 18:37:34 tantek: how much work would it be to update these implementations to use as2/ap 18:37:50 tsyesika: I don't think.. it's still significant amount of work, but not too bad 18:38:08 cwebber2: lots of things close, major things that are different are.. moving from as1 to as2 is not very hard, but needs to be done. 18:38:12 ... We need to change over the way it does discovery 18:38:19 ... And ... those are the biggest things 18:38:29 ... I think there are a lot more small things, but most things are close 18:38:36 tsyesika: I don't think it's too bad 18:38:52 cwebber2: shouldnt' be as much work as it was to restructure the database 18:39:04 Going to be far less work to get to that point 18:39:17 tantek: When do you think you'll have an implementaiton of the current version of ap? 18:39:29 annbass has joined #social 18:39:37 cwebber2: this depends on resources within the project. We were lucky that we could bring jessica on with a crowdfunding campaign 18:39:52 ... now that money is ending and jessica got a job that is supprotive of her work in this group luckily 18:40:15 ... But I'm currently at Stripe retreat, but after this we don't know what our resources are. Might be volunteers 18:40:17 ... Really hard to say 18:40:38 ... THe stuff that you're seeing here is for a release in the next week 18:40:53 ... Then we're polishing 1.0, then we'll start moving things towards ap 18:41:01 ... That's basically the state of the wrold 18:41:17 ... How long that will take... I'm already bad at estimations... so doing that for a project where I have no idea what our resources are, I'm not going to bother 18:41:28 tantek: so you think you can release with this implementation? 18:41:45 cwebber2: yes, with notes that should expect federation stuff to change, and in the interim it will federate with pumpio 18:41:55 ... Users are expecting that first stage of federation will be at this level 18:41:59 tantek: maintain back compat? 18:42:05 cwebber2: I'm more worried about authentication for that 18:42:16 ... activitystreams stuff is manageable 18:42:18 ... Not that worried 18:42:23 ... Don't want jessica's work to not get out there 18:42:28 ... Really want working federation otu the door 18:43:11 tantek: several generations of frozen federation suites out there that are being left behind. Like diaspora, federating amongst itslef and nobody else. And GNU social. Thousands of users, but not federating with others, only themselves. 18:43:17 ... Movement has been slow. 18:43:41 ... This is why I'm concerned that if you're going to make a release that includes this work will it end up like one of those, or will it move quickly and break things? 18:43:47 cwebber2: I'm hopi;ng move quickly and break things 18:43:51 ... our goal is to support the work in this group 18:43:57 ... We've been clear about that with users 18:44:01 can confirm that lunch will be delivered 18:44:02 Countdown set by rhiaro on 3/16/16 at 7:37am 18:44:05 ... And some people in disapora are paying attention to what we're doing here 18:44:22 eprodrom: Can I challenge us to do a similar demo to this with AP in portland? 18:44:29 cwebber2: We can certainly try 18:44:35 ... But it's going to be a tumultuous time in our lives 18:44:45 ... We will try, but no promises. Set your expecations accordingly. 18:45:17 Karli: I'm still part outsider.. but at owncloud we want to implement something soon. But we need something that is relatively stable 18:45:33 ... That we can see a path. 18:45:49 tantek: what level of breaking new ground vs. interoperating with a few things vs interoperating with a lot ofthings are you comfortable with? 18:46:02 Karli: We already implemented federation for sharing files 1.5 years ago, and several of the steps here 18:46:15 ... Version 3 of our api which is backward compatible, and 1.5 years later it's something 'stable' or 1.0 18:46:20 ... So no problem with adapting to changes 18:46:39 ... But as I understand this group, there are some really different approaches, like activitypub and solid stuff and other approaches, which are completely different 18:46:45 ... We can't implement 2 or 3 different approaches 18:46:51 eprodrom: That's a good segue 18:47:14 TOPIC: Demo of micropub CRUD 18:48:32 it works! 18:49:12 aaronpk: Since the last time we talked I've worked on spec and implementation to support editing and deleting posts 18:49:12 ... So I can show the whole workflow 18:49:26 ... Quill is a micropub client that I wrote that currently only supports creating 18:49:33 ... My website is the micropub server which uspports full CRUD 18:49:39 ... And there's a micropub client built into my site 18:49:56 ... *creates post in Quill* 18:50:02 https://talky.io/socialweb is empty - are you doing demos somewhere else I can see? 18:50:06 ... *shows Quill output* 18:50:44 *** please hold for technical issues*** 18:50:55 *** elevator music *** 18:51:02 aaronpk fiddles with talky computer 18:51:16 *** and we're back! *** 18:51:24 I can hear, but screen is fuzzy 18:51:34 screenshare instead of cam? 18:52:04 aaronpk: So, created a post. It's on my site here 18:52:24 I suspect screensharing needs even more RAM than cam 18:52:59 ... Location sent with browser location api to micropub request 18:53:23 *** everything crashes *** 18:53:41 *** uncrash *** 18:53:56 aaronpk: When I'm logged into my site, I have a menu bar which lets me edit 18:54:06 ... Loads a javascript micropub client 18:54:17 ... Because I'm logged in my site generates an access token the client can pull out of the page 18:54:30 ... I gave myself a couple of fields I commonly want to edit: tags, syndication urls, date 18:54:41 ... So I can add tags, hit save 18:54:54 ... What's happening is the js app is talking to my micropub endpoint directly, no other serverside componant at all 18:54:58 ... *does so* 18:55:22 ... In order to populate this interface with existing tags etc, it uses a new part of micropub which is the R in CRUD which lets the client request specific properties 18:55:30 ... I don't need to load the entire content of the post to edit 18:55:35 ... So it reuqests just the pieces that it needs 18:55:47 ... There's no way to edit the text of the post with this interface, don't have a client for thsi yet 18:56:00 ... Turns out that I don't often edit the text. Wanted to optimise this for the most common edits 18:56:06 ... Do plan on building a full editor for html posts in Quill 18:56:14 ... Also have a delete button 18:56:43 why is videoconferencing still so flaky? I had this working in 1999 with tiny amounts of RAM and it ran for weeks at a time 18:57:09 KevinMarks: let's move back to webcams with pages that refresh every 30 seconds on a jpeg link 18:57:14 ... JS client could drop in with one file. Only special thing is how to get the access token, but I don't see why other people can't reuse it 18:57:24 ... I could open source it 18:57:30 ... There's not a lot of code 18:57:39 ... Here's the micropub request in jquery 18:57:48 nicolagreco has joined #social 18:57:48 ... The rest is just ui stuff 18:58:05 I'd accept multicast RTP 18:58:19 (audio has gone) 18:58:51 sigh .. trying to get it going 18:59:13 is sound back? 18:59:13 jasnell: so, big favour to ask you 18:59:28 sound just came on for me 18:59:37 talky is good 18:59:50 TOPIC: Demo of events and webmention 18:59:50 ok .. arnaud and kevinmarks ... you can hear? 19:00:01 yes, thanks 19:00:17 aaronpk: Here's a new interface in quill for posting events. Needs cleaning up, but minimal and works 19:00:26 ... *posts event* 19:00:58 and the gpu just coughed a hirball and blacked out all my browser windows 19:01:21 yay, i can hear again 19:01:43 aaronpk: Event posted to my site, and appears in Woodwind, a reader 19:01:59 ... The reader recognises that this is an event post and adds these additional rsvp buttons 19:02:03 s/clenaing/cleaning/ 19:02:13 ... I authenticated with the reader, and during that process I granted it an access token that lets it become a micropub client to my site 19:02:25 ... So when I click a star on a post, it makes a micropub request to my site 19:02:34 ... Similarly, when I click an rsvp button it makes an rsvp post on my site 19:02:40 ... Also a micropub request 19:02:53 ... So I see the rsvp in the events feed on my site 19:03:42 aaronpk: created in quill, quill added it to my site, woodwind read it from my site, woodwind created a new post to rsvp and posted that to my site 19:03:48 shevski: in what ways can I rsvp to your event? 19:03:58 aaronpk: You can rsvp by writing a post on your site htat's an rsvp post and send a webmention to this page 19:04:05 ... and you'll show up in that list 19:04:25 shevski: any other way? Only way is for me to create a post on my site using...? 19:04:38 aaronpk: doesn't matter how you create as long as it iends with with html + microformats 19:04:50 shevski: Why can't I go on your site and click a button? 19:05:11 aaronpk: you want me to host your rsvps? 19:05:16 shevski: or have that as an option 19:06:17 ... it's a little hardcore 19:06:30 aaronpk: my site is not a general purpose events site, it's just my site. I also don't have a comments form. 19:06:53 annbass: *trying to send rsvp from known* 19:08:09 dmitriz: is there any access control? Can events be private? 19:08:12 aaronpk: not right now, planning to 19:08:30 dmitriz: haven't had chance to look at the spec, how does the recipient of the webmention discover that is of type event 19:08:49 aaronpk: here's the parsed microformats of the rsvp post. has in-reply-to and rsvp properties 19:09:01 ... that's enough that my site recognises that it's an rsvp 19:09:16 ... THe event itself looks like this, which has type: h-event, and start and end date 19:09:32 ... The post type discovery spec tells you how to get from amicroformats object to something else 19:10:35 dmitriz: you don't have access control on this site, but is there provision for private and public? 19:10:47 aaronpk: what you're talking about would be more on the reading and consuming parts of the spec 19:10:59 ... THe way that woodwind found the post, you would need to have a way to authenticate to begin with 19:11:28 ... We don't have anything.. woodwind found this via PuSH and polling the feed. There isn't a mechanism in PuSH to support private posts. But it's on the consuming side rather than the micropub side 19:11:33 ... Similarly in webmention we need a way to verify things that are private 19:12:27 TOPIC: Demo of rsvp with Falcon 19:12:56 tantek: I have an rsvp post that I"m going to be sending to aaron's event 19:13:33 ... **php warnings, blames aaronpk** 19:14:02 ... Is showing debugging info about finding webmention endpoints 19:14:52 ... posts, reloads aaron's event post 19:15:49 ... rsvp is there 19:15:53 ... and on my site 19:16:56 ... and on twitter 19:17:08 ... using twitter's proprietary api 19:18:17 eprodrom: 20 minute break to recharge 19:18:32 ... (recharge parking meter / people) 19:18:43 reconvene at 3:40pm EDT 19:18:44 I added a countdown for 3/16 12:40pm (#5818) 19:19:22 shevski has joined #social 19:20:47 tantek has joined #social 19:25:03 Arnaud: haha i never considered that! 19:25:10 is it not used as a verb in french? 19:26:34 eprodrom_: favor? 19:27:32 well the R part is the verb Respondez S'il Vous Plait - "respond if it pleases you" 19:29:27 bengo has joined #social 19:30:17 but RSVP becomes a noun, and then a verb becasue that's how English imports external code 19:35:14 Karli has joined #social 19:39:01 reconvene 19:39:02 Countdown set by wilkie on 3/16/16 at 12:18pm 19:41:35 Karli_ has joined #social 19:43:08 Karli has joined #social 19:43:39 snarfed has joined #social 19:45:35 jasnell: so, the only thing keeping us from voting to take AS2 to CR is that there are a number of open issues on the repo 19:46:11 ok, I weighed in on most of them 19:46:32 just need to know how the WG chooses to resolve those 19:46:40 Perfect 19:46:56 So, the favor was, "Please weigh in on them by tomorrow morning so we have an idea where you stand." 19:48:07 It's likely that unless there's some intense debate tomorrow we'll default to resolving per your recommendation 19:48:27 Karli has joined #social 19:49:52 re: RSVP, KevinMarks got it right :) 19:50:35 is "RSVP" as an abbreviation used in french? 19:50:40 it's also that it seems to be used both for the question and the response in english, that's the most confusing part to me 19:51:33 yes, it is used as an abbreviation but only at the bottom of an invitation or something like that 19:51:59 ah yes. in english I would send you an RSVP 19:52:34 shevski has joined #social 19:52:57 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/DocumentStatus 19:53:38 in French RSVP is merely used as the prompt/question 19:53:52 TOPIC: demo of rsvps 19:53:52 then you would just talk about "responses" 19:54:49 ben_thatmust: *shows rsvp demo, same as aaronpk's* 19:54:57 ... Now a reactji - emoji response 19:55:17 ... post with a single emoji in it is the original post 19:55:24 ... but the response shows as a count 19:55:26 tantek has joined #social 19:55:28 ... *it is a poop* 19:55:37 ... A bunch of others from testing 19:55:58 eprodrom: it's not a different post type, it's just ap ost that has a single emoji? So you're looking in the content? 19:56:10 ben_thatmust: yes, I'm parsing out if it's a single emoji. Much harder than I expected 19:56:28 ... An emoji is a bunch of characters, or two letters that form a flag, which is a single emoji 19:56:36 ... Any questions? 19:58:19 ... *annbass attempts to send poopji* 19:58:20 annbass, can you post a reply? 19:59:02 reconvene 19:59:03 Countdown set by wilkie on 3/16/16 at 9:03am 19:59:25 TOPIC: Owncloud demo 19:59:40 "*it is a poop*" 19:59:42 Loqi: what is that 20:00:03 Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97759&oldid=97758 20:00:08 snarfed has left #social 20:00:11 Karli: owncloud is not technically a social network 20:00:21 ... First, install owncloud server - unzipping a file 20:00:26 ... update some permissions 20:00:45 ... and voila 20:01:12 ... lots in to userdatamanifesto.org/owncloud 20:01:38 ... can deploy anywhere that supports php 20:01:56 ... desktop and mobile clients are synchronised for files and favourites, comments, tags 20:02:27 ... Owncloud is not social in itself, its for protecting my own files 20:02:35 For the logs, my federated RSVP permalink from my demo: http://tantek.com/2016/076/t2/going-to-w3c-social-web-working-group 20:02:37 ... you can have calendar, contacts, gallery, all kinds of things 20:02:52 ... So now we have two servers, we can do federation 20:02:57 ... Can share calendar etc with other pepole, uses caldav 20:03:09 ... calendar is one of the most popular owncloud use cases these days 20:03:23 ... here's a folder of documents with an example .odt file 20:03:32 webmention implementations were: Falcon (sending), p3k's Telegraph (sending), webmention.io (receiving), ben.thatmustbe.me (sending and receiving) 20:03:37 ... here is the sharing side bar, can share with people on the same server, or I can send out links to everyone, or I can do federation 20:03:44 ... For federation I type in a federation ID which is a host name + a username 20:04:05 ... so I can now do federation with a user on another server 20:04:07 micropub implementations were: p3k (server), Quill (client), Woodwind (client), ben.thatmustbe.me (server and client) 20:04:13 ... one server pings the other server and says here is a sharing request 20:04:30 ... on the other server, it shows a notification which lets me accept the sharing request 20:04:41 ... and then I have... maybe... or not... 20:04:51 ... I have the documents folder shared between the two servers 20:04:58 ... The actual transfer of the files is done via webdav 20:05:05 ... but we had to come up with our own protocol for the invitation process 20:05:19 ... so this was implemented 1.5 years ago. Nowadays solid does stuff here that could have been resused but wasn't because of timing 20:05:33 ... The social part is then if you click on this shared folder the sidebar opens, which lets you comment 20:05:38 ... which is visible to everyone with access to this file 20:05:49 ... and there's an activitystream which lets you see what's happening with this folder. New files, comments, changes 20:05:58 ... And there's an overall activity feed where I can see everything that's going on on my server 20:06:06 sandro: does the activity feed live on the same server as the file? 20:06:08 Karli: yes 20:06:18 sandro: so if 100 people share a file, there's one feed? 20:06:28 Karli: everyone with access to a file or folder also sees the activity on this file or folder 20:06:38 sandro: if I make a comment it's sent back to the server where the file is 20:06:55 Karli: this is the part that's missing. We do everything with webdav. Sharing information including comments via webdav 20:07:03 ... We could just read comments from remote servers via webdav 20:07:09 ... but if there's a different appraoch we would implement that 20:07:18 dmitriz: how do yu handle permissions and access control? 20:07:36 Karli: if you go on a folder, sharing, there are different ways to share 20:07:49 ... you can password protect links, allow expiry, allow read only 20:07:57 ... expiration date google announced yesterday, but we had for 5 years 20:08:00 dmitriz: HAH 20:08:16 Karli: Other people can delete files, or add a new file in a shared folder 20:08:25 dmitriz: where do you store access control information? 20:08:32 Karli: filesystem for storing files, metadata including access control in database 20:08:38 ... can be sqlite or mysql or postgres 20:08:55 ... So not a social network, we're approaching this from a different direction 20:09:03 ... Idea was for file hosting. But of course I want to share my files with someone 20:09:08 ... But without uploading it to a social network 20:09:20 ... All this sharing information is also present on the desktop clients 20:09:35 ... communicates via rest api with the server to initate the sharing request with the server 20:09:49 shevski: if something is shared do they get a copy? what if they both change at the same time? 20:09:58 Karli: on the desktop and mobile side we do bi-directional syncing 20:10:07 ... does conflict detection and you might get a conflict file if necessary 20:10:15 ... but the federation is not synced, it's a live connection 20:10:37 annbass has joined #social 20:10:47 ... We have implemented our own api for the activity feed but we want to do the next version with AS2 20:11:00 ... Means we will implement desktop and mobile clients for consuming as2 20:11:30 cwebber2: we should talk about if... the challenging thing with the database that we talked about.. the upload media stuff we should talk about. We have some vague discussion fo that in AP but needs work 20:11:36 ... I'd be interested to see the direction and work together on that 20:11:56 Karli: Another thing from a strategic perspective.. a lot of people see owncloud as a dropbox replacement 20:12:08 ... But I think this will evolve into a social network 20:12:17 ... We have 8 million users 20:12:26 ... so kind of a trojan horse 20:12:38 sandro: how many companies run servers? 20:12:49 Karli: the biggest installation that we are involved with is for half a million for universities in German 20:12:59 ... But we just learnted that there's an installation in India with 1.1 million users 20:13:19 ... Scaling is actually quite easy based on web technologies 20:13:25 Karli has joined #social 20:13:40 TOPIC: dinner 20:13:46 sandro: dinner at 6, any objections? 20:14:44 TOPIC: Implementations 20:15:14 shevski: I thought the status doc would be upated and we could just review it 20:15:24 ... but it hasn't. Maybe we need to go over what we're tryign to do with it and who is going to update what 20:15:27 tantek: what's it for? 20:15:45 shevski: The idea was to partly start thinking about what are the next steps to get to CR for various things, and what do we need for the implementationr eport 20:15:55 ... and what can we do in the time we have to grow adoption for any of these things 20:16:07 hhalpin has joined #social 20:16:10 ... Fulfilling process requirements and also the wider problem of getting more users and implementations? 20:16:25 tantek: it has links to implemenations? 20:16:27 Where's the links to existing implementations? 20:16:29 shevski: it doesn't at the moment 20:16:35 sandro: webmention has a link 20:16:42 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/DocumentStatus 20:17:11 eprodrom: we have 2 things. One is documeting implementations, and one next steps 20:17:19 nicolagreco has joined #social 20:17:52 sandro: this is the link to all the other documents 20:17:58 ... trying to get peopel to focus on what happens next 20:18:08 eprodrom: I think us as chairs need it to see what to do to push things forward 20:18:31 sandro: we could just talk about this for as2 right now at least for a few minutes 20:18:43 ... I don't think we've wrapped up next steps for as2 20:18:58 we already have a list of our documents on our home page: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Drafts - no need for a separate page 20:19:04 eprodrom: Let's take til 1630 to discuss listing implementations and maintaining the list from hereon 20:19:16 ... and from 1630 to 17-1730 discussing next steps for documents 20:19:29 tantek: I want to kill the document status page because I think it's useless and busy work 20:19:38 ... We already have drafts on our homepage 20:19:43 ... s/drafts/links to drafts 20:19:56 q+ 20:20:08 We should have a page that lists implemenations per spec 20:20:14 Given that we have soooo many specs right now 20:20:17 eprodrom: the purpose of this document status was leading up to this meeting, it's value goes down now we're at the meeting. We cna just talk about it 20:20:26 The rest of the material on the page is busywork 20:20:34 However, the list of implementations is super-important for CR exit 20:20:48 q? 20:20:49 sandro: I find this useful to see status of documents, I don't mind where 20:20:50 q+ 20:20:54 aaronpk: what status do you mean? 20:21:01 if you're editing a draft, please update https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Drafts with a link to your Issues page 20:21:01 (just to repeat what I said above) 20:21:03 ... WD or other major ones, what are they? 20:21:38 eprodrom: let's take 10 minutes per draft and takl about next steps 20:21:39 +1 20:21:56 ... For editors can say what they're doing, and people with experience of rec process can say what we're shooting for next 20:22:19 just added links to issues for webmention and micropub 20:22:26 sandro: the output of this conversaiton si not documented anywhere besides the minutes 20:22:31 eprodrom: could we put this in github? 20:22:34 sandro: see what they are first? 20:23:03 eprodrom: start with AS2 20:23:07 TOPIC: AS2 status report 20:23:21 eprodrom: Big next steps are test suite, conformance section, and closing recent issues 20:23:27 ... In december we were almost all closed but now we have more 20:23:51 ... But we are going to try to close those tomorrow morning 20:24:03 ... Hopefully we can close them quickly, most will have editor's recommendation for next steps 20:24:13 ... Unless there's strong debate we can probably move fast. Not that I'm discouraging debate. 20:24:59 ... At which point it's possible we could vote to transition to CR in this meeting 20:25:04 ... Then we would publish a new updated version based on the decisions that are made tomorrow morning 20:25:12 ... one last editorial pass, then have something ready to go to cr 20:25:30 ... If the group says we do x, implementors implement x, and we probably on't need another vote 20:25:40 ... Or we could do editorial and then a round of review 20:25:50 ... Or we say the editorial is implementing what we decided and we can go to CR 20:25:52 q+ 20:25:53 ... That might be a decision to make tomorrow 20:26:04 q? 20:26:09 ack tantek 20:26:17 tantek: How many implementations do we have of current activitystreams drafts? 20:26:29 cwebber2: one in activipy and half in the guile one 20:26:43 eprodrom: I was just making a list on the activitystreams implementation page and I count 4.5 20:26:57 ... java, javascript, activipy, validator which okay that's cheating, and.. 20:26:59 tantek: why is it cheating? 20:27:08 eprodrom: is it an implementation or an implementation tool? 20:27:11 tantek: implementation 20:27:14 eprodrom: then we're at 4.5 20:27:36 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams#Implementations 20:28:21 q? 20:28:33 q+ rhiaro 20:28:37 ack eprodrom_ 20:29:13 hhalpin: helpful to have a big page with all implementations 20:29:21 q? 20:29:25 ... with implementations that are either conformant or planning to be 20:29:29 q- 20:29:33 ack hhalpin 20:29:39 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Drafts 20:29:49 rhiaro: oh, now I feel like a jerk 20:29:50 eprodrom, added! 20:30:02 Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97761&oldid=97711 20:30:03 eprodrom: doesn't matter, will ask later :) 20:30:03 Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/DocumentStatus]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97762&oldid=97698 20:30:04 Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97763&oldid=97761 20:30:07 q? 20:30:11 ack sandro 20:30:49 https://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out 20:30:50 sandro: As we get to having the validator on the test suite for something like as2 it would be nice to see the implementations look more like this (matrix with tests and validations), for each document does it pass it, and results 20:30:51 as example 20:31:16 ... A list is nice early, but by the time we have a test suite we should have more detail about conformance 20:31:17 q? 20:31:23 ... And then what's the process for getting peopel to give us results 20:31:46 eprodrom: for pumpio I could maybe take links for kinds of feeds on a pumpio site and link to each of those and say if they validate 20:31:52 ... these are the kinds of feeds that we generate 20:32:02 sandro: I guess actually what I want is depending on the feature granularity 20:32:08 ... is there a feed from that implementation that uses that feature 20:32:33 eprodrom: we need to move our implementation pages from we implement this to implementation reports 20:32:39 sandro: we could borrow something from other groups or roll our own 20:32:52 ... An action item on someone who's willing to do it? 20:33:06 tantek: until we have a test suite we don't need this. First step, make a test suite 20:33:12 sandro: needs to be soon though 20:33:21 eprodrom: test reports to exit cr 20:33:26 tantek: which implementations are testable? 20:33:30 ... a library is not really testable 20:33:38 ... no working group I know of has used a library to exit cr 20:33:51 ... not an implementation for any workign group I've been involved in 20:33:51 q+ 20:33:54 q+ 20:34:01 sandro: don't do universal generalisations 20:34:10 sandro: B-) 20:34:19 shevski: what are the formal requirements for w3c implementation report? 20:34:26 ... I'm interested in demonstrating genuine adoption 20:34:28 /me sandro isn't that a universal generalization? ;) 20:34:38 ... I don't think something should become a standard if only 3 people care about it 20:34:56 ... If we have 5 different things we need to start talking to peopel and lining up implementations or maybe there is already 100s of peopel and companies using it 20:34:59 q? 20:35:00 ... Things in the wild 20:35:02 q+ 20:35:07 I would suggest adding an estimate on the number of users per implementation. 20:35:07 ack shevski 20:35:25 ... Stuff people can be interested in, like mooncake which thoughtworks built which displays activitystreams from varous sources, they have demos, good to list user friendly things so people can see what it looks like 20:35:35 ... so if people are looking at as2 and deciding, they can see if they want to use it 20:35:36 hhalpin, did mooncake use the java library of AS2 or have its own 20:35:38 +1 20:35:43 hhalpin, is that another implementation? 20:35:58 I think they re-coded it using Clojure 20:36:03 eprodrom: if we look at previous implementations for as2 that's definitely an outreach process and we do have a little bit of a psychological advantage to ahving 2.0, we can ask people when they're going to upgrade 20:36:06 So you *may* have another implementation there. 20:36:08 ... 'why are you using the old version'? 20:36:13 ... good pressure with a version number 20:36:17 ... but that is a contact process 20:36:22 q+ to comment on we need to start talking to people and lining up implementations or maybe there is already 100s of people and companies using it 20:36:23 ... and that might be a next step is to be reaching out 20:36:33 shevski: whose responsibility is it to do that? Editors for each draft? 20:36:33 That being said, I'm not sure if they have any users per se. There was supposed to be 3 pilots: Iceland, Finland, Spain - I think Finland is interested. 20:36:46 sandro: we're not there yet 20:36:55 shevski: but for initial implementaton report? 20:37:00 tantek: that's produced *during* CR 20:37:04 Email Jaako Korhonon re Finland and Natalie from Thoughtworks via Clojure details, I've been removed by W3C/ERCIM from D-CENT for almost a year so not tracking :) 20:37:17 q? 20:37:21 eprodrom: definitely a snowball effect of seeing implementations listed 20:37:23 ack hhalpin 20:38:03 bengo has joined #social 20:38:11 hhalpin: think it would be useful.. we don't test how many users something has.. assume it has users, not ask how many. That being said, users are good. Even though it's not formally part of the process should be something the wg takes into account 20:38:26 ... So eg. per library list code bases that use it 20:38:39 ... Keep track of how many users each implementation has 20:38:44 q? 20:38:50 ack sandro 20:38:52 ... Would help for people looking in from outside to see what the state of play is 20:38:53 https://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/ and http://caniuse.com/ 20:39:06 sandro: Looking at two other implementation reports. I don't think we shoudl worry about w3c, but what the users want 20:39:10 ... see ^ 20:39:15 Yes, but caniuse doesn't measure "users" :) 20:39:21 We assume all these browsers have users. 20:39:24 Its harder in this case 20:39:30 ... Tells users what they can use to get to use as2 20:39:38 doesn't it measure browser market share? 20:39:39 ... if it's good enough for users it's good enough for w3c 20:39:39 Still, adding guess user numbers helps 20:39:42 ... but it's a lot of work 20:39:46 q? 20:39:57 ... that includes covering extensions in theory, that's where it really starts to pay off 20:40:01 ack tantek 20:40:01 tantek, you wanted to comment on we need to start talking to people and lining up implementations or maybe there is already 100s of people and companies using it 20:40:03 Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97767&oldid=97763 20:40:08 ... how many consumers consume this extension so should I produce it 20:40:16 So, in theory in some of the SemWeb space (GRDDL comes to mind) I've seen stuff with users numbering in less than a dozen go to Rec, but I think W3C is discouraging that kind of thing. 20:40:19 tantek: I agree that listing things that are accesible to users is a good thing 20:40:28 ... Good to list user friendly things so people can see what it looks like, as shevski said 20:41:02 ... Before we ask anyone outside this WG to implement something, I would like to see implementations by people in this wg 20:41:08 Typically a WG converges, then we do a call for implementations. Its a bit odd to do a call for implementation without some convergence! 20:41:11 ... For each draft, at least one. I think we're close to that 20:41:33 ... I would hope we have an implementation from the group we can point to 20:41:40 sandro: I would hope the editors would have some implementation 20:41:47 q? 20:42:08 cwebber2: and also with actual code 20:42:55 shevski: so people can see 'that is the kind of thing I want in my app, I will use this spec' 20:43:03 ... so get a sense of something working 20:43:57 eprodrom: implementation and advocacy is going to become a very big issue before we go to cr 20:44:06 ... right now we're collecting lists, next step is to collect test results as well as outreach 20:44:07 https://wordpress.org/plugins/activitystream-extension/ 20:44:12 ... may be something we should start in the next few weeks 20:44:18 ... but post CR, does that sound fair? 20:44:38 tantek: what do we need to take things to CR, then once we're in CR what do we need to do to exit? 20:44:43 ... A test report is not required to enter CR 20:44:51 ... For implementations,t hat's up to the wg to decide 20:45:07 ... how much implementation verification do we want internally before we are comfortable taking something to cr 20:45:29 ... we have a few implementations including a validator that anyone can try. We can make some claim like the validator implements 90% of AS2 20:45:38 ... Then we can tell people that when we enter CR, to help encourage more 20:45:45 ... Hopefully an example for those spec to follow 20:46:05 ... If we have implementations from editors, 90%, 50% of the spec, that is useful to include as part of going to CR 20:46:07 q? 20:46:23 TOPIC: Social web protocls 20:47:23 err 20:47:27 I can hear sounds but not really Amy 20:49:07 Needs catching up with current state of specs it talks about 20:49:14 eprodrom: what's our intention with publication? 20:49:17 Note is fine 20:49:22 sandro: remaining flexible depending on contents 20:49:32 shevski: seems like a primer 20:49:42 q+ 20:50:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97768&oldid=97767 20:50:29 eprodrom: we're shooting for another version in early april and will iterate on a regular basis over the coming months 20:50:39 eprodrom: .. Webmention 20:50:49 aaronpk: A few more issues that I wasn't able to close myself, would like to go through those tomorrow 20:51:06 ... With those resolved I feel like things are stable enough that there are no major blocking issues and plenty of implementations.. 20:51:09 tantek: how many? 20:51:24 aaronpk: there's a list on the document. dozens? There are two roles, sending and receiving. I believe it's dozens of each 20:51:28 ... it is documented in the spec 20:51:33 ... enough where I feel like things are working fine 20:51:59 ... The next thing I want to do is work on a test suite so there are tools for peopel to test their implementations on both sides 20:52:03 ... interactive validators basically 20:52:09 ... a lot already exists as small utilities 20:52:22 sandro: the small utitlities haven' treally poked the edge cases right? 20:52:27 ... like where the endpoint is discovered?a 20:52:52 aaronpk: some test for xss for example, so they'll send you a webmention with a script hyou should be filtering out. kind of adjacent to the spec itself as the spec doesn't say you have to show a comment on a post 20:53:00 tantek: do you have a privacy and security section? 20:53:03 aaronpk: minimal, could be expanded 20:53:20 tantek: could expand to answer the privacy and security questionnaire from the TAG 20:53:25 ... currently optional part of specs 20:53:45 ... AB and TAG are gathering experience with it, but if you're not sure what to say about security and privacy this is one way of expanding 20:53:53 https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/ 20:54:05 i'm guessing its that aaronpk 20:54:17 dmitriz: From what I remember from AS2 and AP specs the security and privacy ocnsiderations sections used language with 'must provide x level of privacy' and so on: how is that testable? 20:54:22 ... how can we enforce that? 20:54:34 q? 20:55:07 tantek: how that plays into conformance requirements is a separate qusetion 20:55:11 eprodrom: probably unenforceable 20:55:17 ... very difficult to test whether someone has considered something 20:55:22 hhalpin: testing privacy is hard 20:55:37 ... there are ways, but they're not part of w3c test suite or well understood, basically research projects, maybe in the future 20:55:45 ... obvious things like breaks same origin policiy we can note that 20:56:03 ... Point on social web protocols.. seems like we're not going to converge... If we don't converge and we have this document saying there are 3 things 20:56:13 ... And if someone has the spare time to shim between these formats 20:56:45 ... if such a shim existed that would make SWP more useful 20:56:52 some parts are easy to shim, some overlap completely, some not 20:57:03 Karli: would be desireable to have an overlap 20:57:15 ... instead of trying to solve it like a failed attempt with a library 20:57:31 eprodrom: there are some formulations we could use to define it. It's an interesting question but I want to bring us back to document status 20:57:52 aaronpk: Beyond testing, I would like to know what is then expected of me as the editor or us as the group to move forward 20:58:04 q? 20:58:05 ... Reading the w3c process documents is overwhelming, so what is the human readable version of the next step? 20:58:11 ack hhalpin 20:58:19 Note that Test the Web Forward stuff doesn't apply here 20:58:25 ... Assuming we close issues and build a test suite, what's left? 20:58:36 But basically, the Process Doc is pretty easily explained and its legal to publish different documents. 20:58:37 eprodrom: then we have the decision of whether we're going to publish one, two or some convergence 20:58:42 As long as they can all fulfill CR 20:58:53 That being said, it would obviously be more desirable to have a convergence 20:58:56 ... We resolved to move them all forward with no dependencies 20:59:08 tantek: we should ask the same things as as2 of every other draft 20:59:16 eprodrom: test suite, conformance section 20:59:20 tantek: just want to be consistent 20:59:25 aaronpk: conformance is already in there 20:59:32 ... oh no, micropub has it, not webmention 20:59:36 ... okay, will do that 20:59:39 q? 20:59:43 nicolagreco has joined #social 20:59:55 ... if it applies to every spec can we put this list somewhere? 21:00:23 https://services.w3.org/xslt?xmlfile=https://www.w3.org/2005/08/01-transitions.html&xslfile=https://www.w3.org/2005/08/transitions.xsl&docstatus=cr-tr 21:02:09 sandro: webmention is simple enough we can say 2 complete senders and 2 complete receivers 21:02:44 sandro: exit criteria is 2 implementations of each feature 21:02:45 Karli has joined #social 21:02:58 tantek: define what 'feature' means 21:03:58 ... sandro said sending and receiving are features, but you said features break downmore 21:04:05 aaronpk: features like updates and deletes 21:04:17 ... existing implementations are various overlapping subsets 21:04:33 TOPIC: Activitypub 21:04:53 cwebber2: I dont' know if we need to leave owen on there, should we remove him because he's not a current editor? 21:04:59 sandro: make him an author or former editor 21:05:19 cwebber2: we can do that 21:05:41 ... In terms of things that are next, we have a list of actionable bugs 21:05:46 ... Might be useful to use some call time 21:05:51 ... Some I've been stuck 21:05:55 ... Issues are slow 21:06:02 ... Easier to go through on a call 21:06:12 ... I think we'll make a lot of changes 21:06:16 ... I'd also like to work on implementations 21:06:24 ... So we can test the federation stuff works the way that we expect it to 21:06:31 ... Media goblin is a good option 21:06:42 ... Maybe somebody in the pumpio community will jump on it 21:06:55 ... Possibly something smaller 21:06:58 https://wordpress.org/plugins/activitystream-extension/changelog/ !!!!!!!!!!! 21:07:06 ... Bugs, then implementations, then the whole conversation about conformance 21:07:11 "1.1.0 initial AS2 feed (beta)" 21:07:12 ... I probably will need guidence 21:07:27 ... As for worrying about the test suite, I'd like to do that after the implementations are at a certain stage, so we know what we're testing 21:07:48 eprodrom_ cool! 21:08:03 eprodrom: work on bugs, do a new version, get review, then start talking about test suite? 21:08:09 cwebber2: I'd like to see implementations before test suite 21:08:27 ... I don't think test driven makes sense for standards, when you don't know what you're pushing forward 21:08:39 - close actionable bugs 21:08:47 - work on implmentations (1 or ideally 2) 21:08:57 - conformance section and security considerations 21:09:00 - test suite 21:09:11 surely you will write tests as you write implementations; the question is if you can generalize them 21:09:59 KevinMarks, quite probably, you probably heard what I just said :) 21:10:03 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97769&oldid=97768 21:10:08 - and exit cr in between the last two 21:10:19 cwebber2: having a mniinmal implementation that includes tests would be good 21:11:00 eprodrom: date for next version of ap? 21:11:06 ... may? 21:11:12 cwebber2: ...sure, mid-may 21:12:02 TOPIC: Micropub 21:12:30 aaronpk: Add privacy and security section 21:12:33 ... conformance is already there 21:12:39 ... make a plan for building test suites 21:12:42 ... That doesn't go in the spec right? 21:12:45 tantek: yeah 21:12:55 aaronpk: CR exit criteria 21:13:12 ... And several combinations of things in micropub spec, multiple kinds of server and client implementations 21:13:33 ... A server or a client does not have to support all features, so there are many different kinds of valid implementations 21:13:44 ... Would like to publish another update of this before asking for it to go to cr 21:14:15 tantek: Also for all, identify what you consider at risk 21:14:17 rhiaro, cool 21:14:29 ... Once you have figured out what the features are, among that set of features decide if there are any that you consider at risk 21:14:46 ... If you think it's too new or you're not confident in it, label any of them (preferably not all) at risk and let the wg know 21:15:20 ... people in wg, if you object to a feature file issues or ask for it to be put at risk. Or if you think a feature is essential you can argue against putting at risk 21:15:30 ... Editors can say what you consider at risk and why 21:15:38 ... Or you can say none ofthem are at risk 21:15:42 snarfed has joined #social 21:15:47 jasnell has joined #social 21:16:22 ... The effect on the process is that if you get to the end of the cr period you can drop at risk features without having to publish another draft 21:17:01 I agree with Tantek, At Risk is a powerful mechanism but I would invite anyone to make suggestions/requests 21:17:21 this is not limited to editors 21:17:32 q? 21:17:59 TOPIC: post type discovery 21:18:11 s/TOPIC: post type discovery/ 21:18:26 tantek: when can we expect a new draft of micropub? 21:18:32 aaronpk: both of them by april 8th at the latest, hopefully earlier 21:18:57 tantek: if you dont' meet all requirements for cr, you can still publish another wd immediately 21:19:02 ... for all drafts 21:19:07 ... if you're resolved issues 21:19:10 ... close to 0 21:19:29 aaronpk: in that case I will propose to publish a new draft on the 29 21:19:34 on the next call 21:19:43 shevski has joined #social 21:20:08 cwebber2: issue closing party 21:20:16 TOPIC: post type discovery 21:20:28 tantek: I have had issues finding the time to convert that into the proper format to publish so I need help 21:20:45 ... I don't have a godo workflow for editing that draft on the wiki then turning that into a form that I can publish on w3c 21:20:57 annbass: what's involved with converting it? 21:21:09 tantek: if you use respec it expects a certain syntax 21:21:17 ... which is not mediawiki 21:21:24 http://blog.fuzzy.io/?feed=as2 21:21:41 ... so either I have to manuall convert it every time, or convert it once and keep it in sync, or give up on the wiki and just use github 21:21:49 tantek: I was hoping I could pipe the wiki page into the publication process and have it work 21:22:02 hhaplin: when people have edited specs in wikis in the past... it's possible.. 21:22:14 ... you just have to put effort in to convert, but it's a lot of work 21:23:16 tantek: I could iterate on issues and close them next 21:23:20 ... in editors draft 21:23:27 ... would be pgoress before trying to do conversion 21:23:37 eprodrom: and what form would help take? 21:23:56 ... you want a coeditor, or general participation in wiki editing? 21:24:05 tantek: looking for suggestions in conversion process 21:24:13 ... wiki is good for iterating, but not for publishing 21:24:25 ... Open for suggestions 21:24:35 ... If I have to convert to respec in github then fine, but I'm looking for suggestions 21:25:07 eprodrom: any other questions? 21:25:30 ... If not, we are at the end of our agenda. Pretty impressed. 21:25:39 tantek: worth spending a couple of minutes on bringing up other docs we had as editors drafts 21:25:57 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Drafts 21:26:52 ... Action Handles 21:26:55 ... Handlers 21:26:59 ... was separated from as2 21:27:02 ... only broken links 21:27:04 Action handlers is a broken link 21:27:04 Error finding 'handlers'. You can review and register nicknames at . 21:27:51 ... Not sure what happened to it. I think we have enough work, so we drop this as a work item? 21:28:06 ... Not to say we ban it, but fo rnow we admit that nobody is actively working on it 21:28:13 ... If someone wants to bring it back they can do that in the future 21:28:20 ... But for now we can move it from the list of drafts 21:28:26 ... jasnell is not here so I want to give him a week to pipe up 21:28:27 It's ok 21:28:40 jasnell won't oppose this motion 21:28:46 cwebber2: we should put it on the table and mail the list 21:28:58 ben_thatmust: we can resolve to remove it and bring up objections in the next telecon 21:29:12 ah well then Arnaud :) 21:29:14 easy! 21:29:52 PROPOSED: Drop Action Handlers Editor's Draft from our list of working group drafts, without prejudice 21:29:55 +1 21:30:10 +1 21:30:10 +1 21:30:12 +1 21:30:18 +1 21:30:19 +1 21:30:24 +1 21:30:29 +1 21:30:32 +1 21:30:41 /me I like the "without prejudice" bit 21:30:54 +1 21:31:00 +1 21:31:17 RESOLVED: Drop Action Handlers Editor's Draft from our list of working group drafts, without prejudice 21:31:38 tantek: the other one is jf2 21:31:52 ben_thatmust: I have not had much time due to personal small people reasons to work on this 21:32:12 ... I certainly would like to see something of this go to a note, because I think it's been useful and it's standardising several implementations that are using json formats of microformats 21:32:20 ... but I don't have the time to push that toward a rec 21:32:31 sandro: is it dependant on microformats? 21:32:31 q? 21:33:00 aaronpk: I have found it useful for dealing with apis and services that use micropub and webmention, it sort of sits in th emiddle of everything and is used by both of thise, but I don't need to normatively refernece it as a spec, but ti has been useful in building implementations 21:33:12 ... that's how I have some iterations of the document that I have been taling to ben about but haven't been updated or anything 21:33:16 ... but it's been useful 21:33:21 ... but I don't need to tie the specs to it 21:33:27 ... I could if it was there, but 21:33:37 tantek: what do you need to do as editor to produce a working draft towards a note? 21:33:39 sorry, I've got to go - see you 21:33:40 ben_thatmust: I don't know 21:33:46 ... definitely needs editorial changes 21:34:15 ... it's difficult because I'm definining the spec without the vocabulary. Trying to say was written with microformats in mind but you could apply any vocab to it 21:34:22 aaronpk: the more useful parts I"ve found are tied to the vocabulary 21:34:23 microformats2 parsing doesn't define a vocabulary either 21:34:41 ... Using as this is the one way to represent a blog post or an author with the microformats vocabulary 21:34:58 ... Useful to me whether or not it's a spec 21:34:58 I did a generic mf2 to jf2 converter 21:35:30 tantek: if you want to take it to note we can make this intention clear up front 21:35:34 ... so we can plan for that as a group 21:36:03 ... non rec track draft 21:36:14 ... When do you think it will be in good enough shape to publish as a non rec track draft 21:36:22 ben_thatmustbeme: I need some time to work on it 21:36:36 ... Can say... april 21:36:54 sandro: So, there's a WordPress plugin that implements AS2 21:37:50 eprodrom: time to wrap up. Any other agenda items that we need to address before the end of the day? 21:37:53 dinner is 6:15 http://www.opentable.com/atasca 21:38:12 sandro++ 21:38:14 sandro has 30 karma 21:38:54 (dinner isn't sponsored) 21:39:07 ... Agenda for tomorrow 21:39:11 q+ 21:39:32 ... tomorrow afternoon, can go through issues that editors want to bring to the group 21:39:56 aaronpk: I do have issues on wm and mp that I would like to discuss 21:40:03 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97771&oldid=97759 21:40:04 ... Not many, like 2 on mp 4 on wm 21:40:33 eprodrom: I'll update agenda 21:42:16 ... FIN 21:42:45 St Patricks Day in Boston? 21:42:52 I would think so 21:44:23 night yall enjoy dinner 21:44:31 nicolagreco has joined #social 21:48:51 jasnell_ has joined #social 21:50:02 Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97772&oldid=97771 21:50:03 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97773&oldid=97772 22:53:18 nicolagreco has joined #social 23:22:49 dmitriz has joined #social 23:36:28 jasnell has joined #social 00:43:43 jtilles has joined #social 01:01:12 tantek has joined #social 01:04:14 dmitriz has joined #social 01:20:33 nicolagreco has joined #social 02:24:26 Arnaud has joined #social 03:19:50 jtilles has joined #social 03:20:27 jasnell has joined #social 03:39:20 jasnell has joined #social 04:48:49 Zakim has left #social 05:53:32 nicolagreco has joined #social 07:06:30 jaywink has joined #social 07:23:32 Arnaud1 has joined #social 07:23:39 KevinMarks has joined #social 07:34:37 jasnell has joined #social 08:43:14 Arnaud has joined #social 08:43:15 KevinMarks_ has joined #social 09:36:13 jasnell has joined #social 11:38:00 jasnell has joined #social 12:00:49 nicolagreco has joined #social 12:34:54 tantek has joined #social 13:01:01 nicolagreco has joined #social 13:15:05 jasnell has joined #social 13:15:49 dmitriz has joined #social 13:26:39 Karli has joined #social 13:34:45 nicolagreco has joined #social 13:40:05 Karli has joined #social 13:43:27 Karli has joined #social 13:47:20 Karli_ has joined #social 13:48:08 eprodrom_ has joined #social 13:48:25 I'm running late; there by 10:15. 13:51:12 Karli has joined #social 13:51:44 eprodro64 has joined #social 13:55:09 Karli_ has joined #social 13:56:32 good morning #social - my ETA this morning is 10:05ish. If y'all are ready to go, have eprodrom get us started! 13:57:59 Karli has joined #social 14:03:14 nicolagreco has joined #social 14:05:04 annbass has joined #social 14:06:54 Karli has joined #social 14:07:42 dmitriz has joined #social 14:09:34 tantek has joined #social 14:10:02 Rhiaro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97774&oldid=97773 14:14:15 Karli has joined #social 14:14:44 updated: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-03-16 14:14:50 specifically: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-03-16#March_17 14:15:45 trackbot, start meeting 14:15:47 RRSAgent, make logs public 14:15:47 Zakim has joined #social 14:15:49 Zakim, this will be SOCL 14:15:49 I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot 14:15:50 Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference 14:15:50 Date: 17 March 2016 14:15:55 scribe: wilkie 14:16:01 present+ 14:16:05 present+ 14:16:09 present+ 14:16:10 present+ 14:16:11 chair: tantek 14:16:11 shevski has joined #social 14:16:11 present+ 14:16:17 present+ 14:16:19 present+ 14:16:37 present+ 14:16:47 present+ 14:17:12 present+ 14:18:45 tantek: if nobody thinks of any other agenda items, this is all for today. which seems reasonable 14:18:52 tantek: how many issues do things have? 14:19:01 aaronpk: 4 14:19:03 Karli has joined #social 14:19:06 sandro: and micropub? 14:19:18 aaronpk: no issues that need discussion. just a couple of pull requests. 14:20:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97775&oldid=97774 14:21:57 Karli_ has joined #social 14:26:34 annbass: I have a comment. The socialwg interest group has always been considering what it is they are do. it is still an open question if we need such a group. 14:27:42 annbass: I think this should still be a community effort. I've met and talked to Syrian people who were caught and tortured and I've asked them what they use for social tools and communication and they say "whatever we can find" 14:27:58 ... so I do think there are use cases we aren't aware of. 14:28:05 tantek: do you want some time to talk about that? 14:28:06 @rhiaro - there is an issue open for what you mentioned, in fact, https://github.com/w3c-social/activitystreams-validator/issues/16 14:28:11 annbass: yes. 14:28:19 present+ Karli 14:28:28 present+ AnnBass 14:29:18 annbass: our interest in the consortium is to make a good place to work and so I would like some feedback, public or private, about the w3c and what could improve. 14:29:28 annbass: the challenges haven't been where I thought they would be 14:29:31 tantek: such as? 14:29:46 annbass: you would think about diversity and such but the problems have been mainly technical 14:29:59 tantek: and some social interactions 14:30:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97776&oldid=97775 14:30:09 annbass: yeah 14:30:29 tantek: that's a problem that has made it up fairly far in the organization 14:30:39 annbass: yeah, and how we can address that is something worth discussing 14:31:27 tantek: yeah, there is what you could say is w3c's broad tolerance for different social behaviors. 14:31:53 tantek: which are obstacles to technical discussion and finding solutions. so if we could find solutions to that. 14:32:37 annbass: yeah, and certainly there are people who have a problem with this. such as women or quieter people who have a problem with people who are strongly argumentative and vocal. 14:33:01 shevski: which is what tantek was saying. those people can be disruptive and at times bullies. 14:33:22 shevski: the problem is when nothing happens to those people visibly, then people see that and say 'I don't want to be involved. this is not a safe space.' 14:33:40 annbass: me too. I see that and I try and then I say "nah, I'm done" 14:33:45 tantek: and you've seen that at the highest 14:34:01 annbass: yeah. but we've all seen that. and what can we do. 14:34:07 shevski: a code of conduct is what you do 14:34:15 annbass: we have one 14:34:18 tantek: it's a rather new thing 14:34:28 annbass: no, it has been there for 10 years I think 14:34:48 annbass: but also, what we have to do is maybe training 14:35:08 Karli_: the problem with a code of conduct is that people may not see it or it isn't enforced and people don't respect it 14:35:30 annbass: another thing is that people don't realize even if you call it out that they have done something wrong and correct for that 14:36:13 annbass has joined #social 14:36:20 shevski: on the community group stuff. I like having /something/ is good. 14:36:53 shevski: having something from the community about what they want is good. such as "I want quick communication among many devices" and there isn't that. 14:37:04 tantek: *whispers* that's not social, those are machines 14:37:10 eprodrom_ has joined #social 14:37:31 shevski: but it is! I'm talking to people. through machines. 14:37:51 tantek: [evan enters] photo time! 14:44:03 14:44:27 shevski has joined #social 14:46:04 eprodro99 has joined #social 14:46:21 eprodrom_ has joined #social 14:46:23 eprodrom: has everybody taken a look at the issues? 14:46:24 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues 14:46:25 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues 14:46:47 eprodrom_: what I would like to do is work from oldest to newest and see what we can do to clarify those. 14:46:51 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/249 14:47:04 tantek: to be clear these are ones you think need discussion 14:47:26 eprodrom_: these are ones that are open... let's say that of the ones we have there are 3 that are significant changes... 14:47:33 tantek: want to go through the hardest ones first? 14:47:38 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/249 14:47:41 eprodrom_: maybe the easiest ones first? 14:47:48 s/I think this should still be a community effort./My suggestion is to move the IG to be a Community Group (CG), so that anyone in the world can participate, without being a W3C member or Invited Expert./ 14:47:49 tantek: ok 14:48:26 eprodro58 has joined #social 14:48:33 eprodrom_: 249. so, some of the examples don't have the properties described in the text. james is +1, I'm +1. so there isn't a problem with this. 14:48:55 tantek: if you and the other editors think something is editorial then we don't need to look at it. we trust your judgment. 14:49:06 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/279 14:49:15 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/280 14:49:45 eprodrom_: for the CR exit issues. we need explicit exit criteria (279), a list of separate features (280) 14:49:47 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/281 14:50:06 s/I've met and talked to Syrian people who were caught and tortured and I've asked them what they use for social tools and communication and they say "whatever we can find"/I suggest the main goal of the CG might be to collect additional social use cases that we haven't thought of, especially from people who haven't participated before, or who are from cultural environments we personally haven't experienced./ 14:50:16 eprodrom_: let's just say that when these are resolved and assuming the editorial issues are solved, we're good 14:50:41 tantek: these are not editorial. the conformance clause is certainly normative. the separate features may be editorial but might not so you may still want group review. 14:51:06 tantek: but the group has reviewed the conformance clause and said it looks good. so anything that has been reviewed can just be dropped in. 14:51:15 tantek: so there is really only one thing left to review 14:51:21 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/289 14:51:32 s/our interest in the consortium/Also, I am now co-chairing the W3C Positive Work Environment Task Force (PWET) with Amy van der Hiel. Our interest in the consortium/ 14:52:14 eprodrom_: the issue is we don't have a good vocabularity around relationships 14:52:24 http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-vocabulary/#connections 14:52:29 s/yeah, and how/how/ 14:52:32 eprodrom_: in the specification, we said there should be an external vocabulary for this 14:52:38 http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-vocabulary/#dfn-relationship 14:52:48 eprodrom_: we don't refer to one but we talk about one 14:52:55 dmitriz: you show it in the examples 14:53:34 q+ 14:53:38 eprodrom_: right. if we defer this part of the specification to a TBD section about extensions, why don't we push the relationship stuff to a future extension 14:53:56 eprodrom_: it makes sense to me 14:54:28 s/yeah. but we've all seen that. and what can we do./I'm not sure about that. But we've all seen it in various situations. What can we do to improve?/ 14:54:43 q? 14:54:45 ack cwebber2 14:54:49 ack cwebber 14:54:52 eprodrom_: james has not had a chance to comment but I feel that there isn't a reason to wait for him. my opinion as an editor is that we should just push it to extension. 14:55:04 s/has not/has/ 14:55:19 jasnell has joined #social 14:55:34 +1 on dropping relationships from AS2 per comment in issue: https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/289#issuecomment-197916259 14:55:55 cwebber2: it seems like maybe some verbs or vocab would be lost. do you know of any use-cases that may be lost by dropping this to an extension? 14:56:11 eprodrom_: AS1 didn't even have relationships like this 14:56:38 cwebber2: I'm +1 on this then. If people feel strongly about this as an extension then we can do that. it doesn't seem like a blocker for activity streams itself. 14:56:42 s/people don't realize even if you call it out /people don't realize THEY have behaved that way, even when you call it out; / 14:56:52 cwebber2: just wanted to make sure we didn't drop something else as a consequence 14:57:23 tantek: I would just propose the issue and see if anyone objects to the editor's proposal 14:57:28 tantek: I don't hear any objections 14:57:34 eprodrom_: ok I'll just mark that as group resolved 14:57:56 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/290 14:58:03 eprodrom_: next one is 290. it is around transitive activities. 14:58:33 eprodrom_: the idea is to add one of the classes in vocab to core. james is fine with it. I'm fine with it. it is a reasonable thing to do. 14:58:48 sounds good to me 14:59:12 eprodrom_: basically, transitive classes are an extended class and they are used often enough that it seems more useful in core. 14:59:21 eprodrom_: any objections to that? 14:59:25 eprodrom_: great 14:59:47 eprodrom_: the last one [is 292] which is adding a deleted tag to objects 14:59:59 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/292 15:00:20 eprodrom_: the idea is to add a deleted timestamp to provide a tombstone for objects 15:00:40 eprodrom_: so you can have an image and they say this image has been deleted 15:01:13 cwebber2: this seems useful because you were already talking about 410 GONE and this would be useful certainly in activitypub and media goblin right away 15:01:26 aaronpk, didn't #indiewebcamp recently discuss a dt-deleted? what was the conclusion? 15:01:35 eprodrom_: there are cases where you want to say this object is deleted but valid 15:01:38 (or at list citation to prior discussion) 15:01:48 dmitriz: it can be as useful or not depending on your server's retention policy 15:02:09 dmitriz: if you are the kind of server that commits to sending 410s whenever possible you want this, if not you may want to garbage collect and 404 15:02:21 dmitriz: so this is an option for those servers with permanent retention policies 15:02:38 cwebber2: it seems this doesn't require people to do it 15:02:38 q+ to point out privacy implications of sharing the deleted timestamp 15:03:07 eprodrom_: we have seen this before and then we pushed it to an extension but seeing it come up again we consider adding it to the spec 15:03:13 ack aaronpk 15:03:13 aaronpk, you wanted to point out privacy implications of sharing the deleted timestamp 15:03:15 q? 15:03:31 +q 15:03:45 aaronpk: I think we should have a way to specify the deletion without the timestamp for when people want to delete but not disclose when 15:04:10 cwebber2: since there is already the deleted flag 15:04:14 aaronpk: what is the deleted flag 15:04:23 I think chris means the deleted timestamp? 15:04:41 per jasnell comment: "type": "Delete", 15:04:42 cwebber2: the thing we are discussing. for instance we can send a 'delete' verb to servers and they might ask 'why is this gone' and people can do that but it is optional. 15:05:11 eprodrom_: I think what aaronpk is saying is that it is good to have a delete property. but it being a timestamp there are privacy concerns. 15:05:16 q+ 15:05:17 q? 15:05:21 ack cwebber 15:05:47 eprodrom_: people want to delete things because they don't want them to be published and thus may not want it there 15:06:01 dmitriz: you can place the timestamp date but not return the data and just 404 15:06:10 aaronpk: but the problem is when you want to propagate that 15:06:19 cwebber2: then you can have a timestamp or date 15:06:21 aaronpk: that would solve it 15:06:35 How does Twitter notify deletes? 15:06:35 s/or date/or boolean/ 15:06:35 this is why for Atom we came up with the deleted-entry 15:06:41 atom tombstones rfc 15:06:52 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6721 15:06:53 eprodrom_: and if that is good we can do that. the only problem is when implementations are only checking if it is truthy, but they will likely do that anyway. 15:07:18 jasnell: so, deleted becomes a timestamp or boolean 15:07:20 Sound OK? 15:07:45 not sure I understand the privacy concerns around deleted being a date but ok 15:08:05 tantek: I do think the timestamp is important especially for synchronization 15:08:25 yes, having deleted as a timestamp is fairly critical for sync 15:09:02 aaronpk: for the twitter api, the tweets generally come through as just the data on the tweets. there are some actions that come through for instance a scrub-geo action to remove location. 15:09:08 tantek: so they are using keys as verbs sometimes 15:09:10 aaronpk: yep 15:09:33 tantek: what is the proposed solution? 15:09:52 eprodrom_: to add a deleted property to the object and its range is either a timestamp or a boolean 15:10:08 cwebber2: can I request we note that it is optional to handle cases where people prefer a 404 15:10:13 eprodrom_: +1 15:10:26 nicolagreco has joined #social 15:10:50 aaronpk: when there is a delete action in the stream, it should be required to have that flag to know it is deleted 15:10:51 however, if deleted is a boolean, it should be noted that synchronization will be difficult 15:11:17 it should also be noted that just because there's a deleted property in the object, it doesn't mean implementations have to delete the content 15:11:36 aaronpk: I'm thinking when a system is pulling in a feed, how does it know to delete, so it needs to see that delete to know when to get rid of it 15:11:41 cwebber2: there is a delete verb 15:12:03 eprodrom_: cwebber2 is addressing the idea that there is a controversy between sending a 404 or 410 15:12:09 aaronpk: that's pulling the individual object 15:12:10 eprodrom_: yes 15:12:50 also keep in mind... {"type": "Delete", "object": {"id": "http://example.org"} work perfectly well for this too 15:12:57 eprodrom_: if we don't have objections, I'm going to say this is our resolution 15:13:03 without introducing a new property 15:13:11 tantek: this is a new introduction 15:13:18 eprodrom_: yeah, this is the first new property is a while 15:13:26 tantek: would you consider marking it as at-risk? 15:13:46 cwebber2: we could but we are going to use it immediately in media goblin 15:13:49 q+ to say that jasnell's option may be better 15:13:56 dmitriz: even though the field is optional 15:14:04 tantek: that doesn't alter the fact that it is in the spec 15:14:22 tantek: [to cwebber2] that is good to know. it is useful to know. 15:15:09 eprodrom has joined #social 15:15:23 ben_thatmustbeme: jasnell says we can add a type "Delete" 15:15:30 also, if you're going to go down the tombstone route, please make sure you take the additional security issues into consideration 15:15:30 cwebber2: we already have a type "Delete" 15:15:39 eprodrom: yeah, I think the idea there is that we have a "hole" 15:15:52 cwebber2: you can still see the case where you have a Photo and you want that deleted 15:16:03 q- 15:16:08 cwebber2: we could do this but it doesn't seem as interesting when the group came to some consensus around the property 15:16:24 cwebber2: adding an object doesn't seem less tricky than adding the flag 15:16:45 eprodrom: the reason I like this is say you have a naive implementation and it is looking at a collection of image objects. 15:16:58 eprodrom: if it is not aware of tombstoning it may show an image that has been deleted. or its metadata. 15:17:14 eprodrom: however if the type has changed, the tombstone will look foreign and it will skip it. 15:17:30 eprodrom: basically, naive implementations will do the wrong thing with the flag 15:17:36 please keep in mind that adding a tombstone does not compel anyone to actually delete anything 15:17:52 dmitriz: the argument is essentially if somebody writes something and is wrong to the spec it will break 15:17:54 if the content has been syndicated, the best you can do is distribute the *intent* for it to be deleted 15:18:06 aaronpk: it is worth considering since doing it wrong leaks information 15:18:49 tantek: it is good practice to assume partial implementations and decide if such a thing would do bad things for users 15:18:59 dmitriz: so how does it work? it replaces the id? 15:19:07 eprodrom: yes. it shares the id. 15:19:33 dmitriz: is the worry about retrieving the collection? then it is up to the server to not send that deleted image. 15:19:47 what about undeleting? 15:19:48 aaronpk: it is talking about synch. a server has already seen the image and now needs to remove it. 15:20:09 cwebber2: tsyesika, how do we handle this? 15:20:21 tsyesika: it is much like a tombstone. it is in a tombstone table and it is a field in that table. 15:20:27 tantek: is there undeleting? 15:20:35 cwebber2: there is an undelete verb but we don't handle that 15:20:46 tantek: there seems to be an idea in social media: to delete and then undelete 15:21:15 cwebber2: there is interest in undelete and undo actions but doesn't have bearing on this decision 15:21:32 tantek: I'm just trying to see if the solution would be un-lossy for undeleting purposes 15:21:47 cwebber2: I don't see how the structure of this would prevent the UI experience 15:21:53 cwebber2: it seems more at the API or stream level 15:22:03 this conversation is mixing two different things. (a) A server hosts it's own content, publishes at content at one point, then needs to indicate that it's been deleted. (b) A consumer has received content from someone and needs to be told that it's been deleted 15:22:18 eprodrom: my experience is that deletion is something that gets implemented late and involves lots of bug squashing 15:22:40 eprodrom: whereas every activity streams processor needs to handle types it doesn't recognize 15:23:04 s/solution would be un-lossy/solution would be lossy for privacy purposes, but un-lossy/ 15:23:05 dmitriz: do we say every consumer must ignore every type it doesn't recognize? 15:23:22 for both, a {"type": "Delete", "object": "http://example.org"} is sufficient. For (a) the thing being deleted simply goes away and a new activity is published indicating what happened to it. For (b) the new activity is a signal that it ought to get rid of the thing that was deleted. 15:23:28 eprodrom: let's not call it type "Delete" but rather "Tombstone" that has a formertype 15:23:32 cwebber2: former type flag? 15:23:36 eprodrom: yeah if you really need that 15:23:41 q? 15:23:42 cwebber2: I'm more sold on this than I thought I would be 15:24:07 cwebber2: in which case there is an optional field for the date. so two fields 'when' and 'formertype' 15:24:30 for undelete, if you assign an ID to the delete activity, {"id": "http://example.org/delete/1", "type": "Delete", "object": "http://example.org/note"}, you can easily follow that up with a {"type": "Undo", "object": "http://example.org/delete/1"} 15:24:35 tantek: maybe we give jasnell some time to reflect on this 15:24:44 eprodrom: ok I'll take an action to review this with jasnell this afternoon 15:24:47 we would probrably want to call it whenRemoved 15:24:50 the type 15:24:51 tantek: maybe that will cause it to converge a little bit more 15:24:55 eprodrom_ has joined #social 15:25:05 mainly because properties can merge and "when" could appear unclear 15:25:15 between multiple type objects at least 15:25:24 and each property needs its own uri anyway 15:25:59 tantek: how well does this mesh well with activity streams at large? 15:26:08 format vs protocol? overlap vs separation? 15:26:51 eprodrom: the tombstone kind of blends in the noun or verb distinction 15:27:14 tantek: many of these social web implementations have delete. I also like this tombstone approach. 15:27:27 eprodrom: we have still a couple of questions 15:27:27 https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/296 15:28:25 eprodrom: name is a should not a must but it is not in many of our examples 15:28:48 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitystreams-test-documents/blob/master/vocabulary-ex161-jsonld.json 15:28:56 tantek: you could say the examples need to be fixed, or you could say the examples show that you don't need a name and should stay a SHOULD 15:28:57 Most of the "Activity" 15:29:32 "While all properties are optional (including the id and type), all Object instances SHOULD at least contain a name (or equivalent nameMap)." 15:29:33 q+ 15:29:47 ack cwebber 15:30:47 cwebber2: I think SHOULD should be removed since we fold the title in to name and many don't have name. why should it be there if the biggest producer of AS doesn't have them. 15:31:04 eprodrom: there are many objects that have a type but not a name. I think it should remain a SHOULD. 15:31:25 aaronpk: if you are going to say things SHOULD have a name, I worry that people will just throw a name into things. 15:31:59 jasnell: for Activity and IntransitiveActivity types, does it makes sense to SHOULD a name? 15:32:02 cwebber2: there are cases where you don't know exactly what to put for it. 15:32:46 eprodrom: what I'd like to do is recommend we leave it as a SHOULD right now and get jasnell's feedback and follow up this afternoon 15:33:39 tantek: when a SHOULD is good in a spec is when it is explicit about when it is used and when it is ok to not 15:33:48 cwebber2: I think I would want to know the motivation for a SHOULD in the first place 15:34:04 eprodrom: the idea is you could take a collection of objects and show them in a list 15:34:21 tantek: it was required in Atom I think which is where it may be coming from 15:34:50 eprodrom: how about we propose to explain the reasons for this being a SHOULD 15:34:51 PROPOSAL: explain the reasons for this being a SHOULD 15:35:12 tantek: I've already seen this soak up a lot of discussion time 15:35:16 seems weird but no objections 15:35:17 eprodrom: with Atom, yeah 15:35:32 tantek: any objections to explaining why you should put a name and why you shouldn't in some other cases 15:35:44 tantek: no objections, I think you are good to go on that proposal 15:35:50 re: Tombstones ... https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/292#issuecomment-197935286 15:36:39 eprodrom: dmitriz, do you want to discuss 297? 15:36:54 historically, with AS1, "displayName" was strongly recommended only when extension types were used, to give implementations something to use if they did not understand the type 15:37:01 dmitriz: in as vocab, we have several types for representing polls and stack-overflow-like questions and answers 15:37:04 "displayName" was not required, however, if the type was well known 15:37:10 the same rule would apply here 15:37:19 dmitriz: how do we handle closing polls or locking a question? 15:37:23 if the object is using a core type from the vocabulary, then name is largely optional 15:37:33 dmitriz: I believe jasnell's answer was "no we don't" 15:37:36 if the object is using an uncommon type or an extension type, name should be provided 15:38:15 jasnell: Good example 15:38:28 tantek: does anybody implement this for polls? 15:38:42 s/implement this for/implement/ 15:38:45 eprodrom: statusnet 15:38:52 tantek: should we mark polls at-risk 15:39:03 tantek: this fits jasnell's answer that this can be done as extension 15:39:53 eprodrom: I think it makes sense to have it be an extension 15:40:22 tantek: any objections? 15:40:58 no objections. move Poll to an extension 15:41:15 dmitriz: I have another issue. about 'scope' and 'context' properties in the vocabularity 15:41:17 fwiw, closing a question is actually an activity. one could easily imagine {"type": "Close", "object": {"type": "Question", ... } 15:41:33 dmitriz: it seems like the two are fairly similar 15:41:44 dmitriz: they aren't 15:41:49 jasnell, any objection to moving Question / Poll to an extension? 15:42:10 tantek: I see no reason to move it to an extension but whatever the WG decides 15:42:10 https://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-vocabulary/#dfn-scope 15:42:16 (evan said it would give us a chance to give them a more proper thorough treatment that implementations that care about those would like) 15:42:37 dmitriz: scope deals with scoping the intended audience for the object and relates to the to/bto/cc/bcc fields 15:42:39 dmitriz: 'context' seems like reply-to and useful for comments. 'scope' seems like access control and is this appropriate at this level? 15:42:41 (no current implementations - in the room - have intent to implement, hence it made sense to consider as an extension) 15:42:49 dmitriz: it seems to fit the same purpose as the 'to' field 15:42:55 cwebber2: do we have any known uses of 'scope'? 15:42:58 eprodrom: no 15:43:02 yes 15:43:03 cwebber2: can we drop it? 15:43:14 eprodrom: I would like to give time for jasnell to review and answer 15:43:20 tantek: do we open the issue? 15:43:26 eprodrom: yes 15:43:46 cwebber2: I think dropping scope seems ok 15:43:57 -1 to dropping scope 15:44:00 -1 to dropping context 15:44:17 what is the use case for scope? 15:44:21 tantek: can jasnell get on talky? 15:44:27 jasnell: can you get on the talky? 15:44:28 it seems to be overloading access control / to: field 15:44:39 no I cannot, I'm on another call concurrently 15:45:06 tantek: alright. open the issue and note we have some consensus at the meeting. we will have to come back to it. 15:45:26 but we have an important outstanding objection from jasnell so we will have to come back to it to better understand it 15:45:43 jasnell, no problem, we are capturing the current state for future discussion 15:45:46 eprodrom: that means we are done 15:46:17 tantek: you have a bunch of editor, not editorial, editor actions. we only have two after that? 15:46:20 eprodrom: right 15:46:54 tantek: do we want to consider publishing a new working draft of activity streams? even before CR draft. 15:47:01 eprodrom: I think that makes sense. what does that mean for going to CR. 15:47:22 tantek: it doesn't harm anything. it just puts another draft out such that the changes between that draft and CR are fewer. 15:47:46 tantek: and it helps to get stuff like the conformance section to get more review 15:47:55 re scope and context, https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/300 15:48:03 to/bto/cc/bcc deal with notifications 15:48:18 scope deals with scope the audience, it's a different role than to/bto/cc/bcc 15:48:36 eprodrom: I should be able to have that by next telecon 15:48:38 context is something else entirely... it describes a larger context in which the object exists 15:48:43 tantek: you don't have to wait til the next telecon 15:49:00 tantek: proposal is to publish new AS working drafts with outstanding edits completed 15:49:03 eprodrom: great 15:49:09 +1 15:49:24 PROPOSED: publish new AS2 working drafts with outstanding (agreed, reviewed) edits completed 15:49:32 +1 15:49:40 +1 15:49:41 +1 15:49:50 +1 15:49:53 +1 15:49:55 +1 15:50:01 +1 15:50:05 +1 15:50:11 +1 15:50:24 RESOLVED: publish new AS2 working drafts with outstanding (agreed, reviewed) edits completed 15:50:31 +1 15:50:44 tantek: that is completely in your camp. the sooner the edits are done, the sooner we get a new draft. so close to CR. 15:51:10 tantek: we have 10 minutes but lunch is here so let's break for lunch. any objections? 15:55:35 fwiw, I'm entirely -1 to removing Relationship 16:01:16 shevski has joined #social 16:04:36 nicolagreco has joined #social 16:05:38 eprodro34 has joined #social 16:06:36 nicolagreco_ has joined #social 16:19:08 nicolagreco has joined #social 16:45:04 melvster has joined #social 16:45:11 nicolagreco has joined #social 16:55:47 Karli has joined #social 16:57:14 shevski has joined #social 17:02:16 scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme 17:02:46 chair: tantek 17:03:05 (continuing from informal conversation during break) 17:03:32 TOPIC: create update and delete of social objects 17:03:42 https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-03-16#March_17 17:03:47 rhiaro: I want to start with a demo of my own 17:04:08 (the lunch conversation will be recapped soon) 17:04:28 DEMO: Activitypub posting to a site (Amy) 17:04:32 (setting up) 17:08:30 rhiaro: i started building posting clients 17:08:33 ... 17:09:05 ... the first i want to show is checkins. I made a checkin client, it authenticates with indieauth, and endpoint discovery the micropub way but its an activitypub client 17:09:14 ... (in terms of the data) 17:11:02 (technical difficulties) 17:12:17 dmitriz has joined #social 17:15:00 ... creates an arrive activity on her site 17:15:40 ... backdated the checkin so it says she has been there for an amount of time 17:16:45 ... using another client I create an AS extension object of Consume activity with what i ate (Lunch - Free) 17:17:13 rhiaro.co.uk/stuff?format=json 17:17:43 ... shows the AS objects that were just created 17:18:34 shows another client for rsvps / travel plans / etc 17:19:25 rhiaro: all of these are posting activitystreams json object through activitypub by a micropub discovery method (as i just reused the code for it for now) 17:20:33 ... the interesting thing was that i was able to do activitypub create without caring about the other parts of the activitypub spec 17:21:07 ... when i post with quill my micropub endpoint translates it to activity pub first 17:21:33 eprodrom_ has joined #social 17:21:40 tsyesika: you said its to a micropub endpoint, do you also output the actities as microformats? 17:22:17 rhiaro: there are some, but in my mind these are completely decoupled. The pages use accept-headers 17:23:09 ... it is different as if you visit my endpoint (in this case the equivalent) it shows nothing 17:23:35 ... in doing this is became really clear how close these two were together 17:23:45 aaronpk: i can sort of summarize from break 17:23:50 aaronpk is giving a state of Micropub 17:24:13 ... the state of micropub is that when i created Micropub originally it was just create. That simplicity has led to many many clients. 17:24:37 ... the main goal of micropub is to allow many clients you didn't write to post to your site 17:24:54 ... for the majority of cases there already exists a way on your own system to edit and delete 17:25:06 (how many clients do create only?) 17:25:17 ... that said there is also a lot of value to being able to create and delete 17:25:32 q? 17:25:33 ... i'm not super happy with the version i have in MP now 17:25:45 ... it works, but i'm not tied to it. 17:25:59 ... right now it accepts form encoded or json for create 17:26:18 ... the form encoded is important for posting images and video at the same time by multipart 17:27:12 ... i was looking to see if there was a way to use non-form encoding for update & delete but still allow files 17:28:03 (explains some examples from the spec) 17:28:53 aaronpk: It would be more convenient if there were only one path for updates as it right now allows both 17:29:21 ... looking at the twitter API there are seperate endpoint for images 17:29:43 ... that returns an ID and then you have to just use that ID or it gets deleted in an hour 17:30:00 ... i like that method as it gets rid of form encoded 17:30:11 ... that simplifies the whole update and delete process for me 17:30:26 ... when you do that there is very little difference between that and activitypub 17:30:32 ... this is where i see the overlap 17:30:50 ... why should i bother making up this new type if activitypub already has this? 17:31:18 ... this is why rhiaro and I were talking about this earlier with the naming of "SocialPub" being the join of the two 17:31:49 ... if you look at it as just updates and deletes. micropub is a special case of create 17:32:03 cwebber2: would that be for just notes or other things as well 17:32:26 aaronpk: it could cover things as well, images, videos, events, etc 17:32:50 ... i also have the same for flights and legs of flights, thats super ugly as form encoded 17:32:52 nicolagreco has joined #social 17:33:27 ... for that one i would rather use a json object. There are plenty of cases for json format but i want that simple version for posting, thats the micro in micropub 17:34:12 sandro: can i rephrase this? why not do it as micropub is the form encoded posting and "activity update" is the indirect way to modify the resource that has activity streams data on it? how does that not address your use case? 17:34:14 q? 17:34:19 annbass has joined #social 17:34:33 aaronpk: i'm not creating acitivites i'm creating posts, so its a different vocabulary 17:34:50 sandro: activity sreams gives us a patch for those 17:35:00 aaronpk: thats what i could use 17:35:43 ... the other major difference between the specs, activity pub expects you send the entire object but i want to just modify single properties and i think activity pub would benefit from that 17:36:08 cwebber2: do you think thats something that should go in to AS2 as an object 17:36:14 aaronpk: i don't know 17:36:20 cwebber2: i don't know either 17:37:10 tantek: what if i gave you a week to discuss this asyncronously then maybe you can get consensus between you two and you can pitch it to the group 17:37:35 cwebber2: we do also have some method of an undelete 17:38:15 tsyesika: we discussed some of this before lunch 17:38:29 tsyesika: presumably this would be in both our specs we would refer to this social pub document. creating is still different. in activity pub we currently require you to always create posts in an activity 17:38:54 ... we could allow this to post a single object for client to server but not server to server 17:39:14 aaronpk: i do support that idea, i think creating is the most important action and that should be as simple as possible 17:39:31 ... we would be looking for creating a CRUD syntax both specs could use 17:40:03 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97778&oldid=97769 17:40:08 ... maybe you make that exception, but the idea is that there would be 1 way to create things that would be in common 17:40:34 cwebber2: this sounds appealing of reaching concensus on something that has previously been very different on 17:40:46 nicolagreco has joined #social 17:40:58 tsyesika: i think its a good idea to make use of this time tosee if we can resolve this as we have an open issue on activytpub now 17:41:32 cwebber2: evan was a strong objector to seeing a "pure system" of always having activity wrapped objects go away 17:42:02 ... he didn't seem happy about it. i asked about the api only, and he didn't seem happy about it. 17:42:10 aaronpk: i can see that making sense in the stream as well 17:42:35 cwebber2: i think i'm ok with it, but i think its important that tsyesika be convinced since she is the main implementor 17:43:17 q+ 17:43:26 (example of creating offline on a plane, and publishing later) 17:43:27 tsyesika: i'm certainly in support of convergence. the create activity is useful in itself as it can contain information that is different from the object, say the offline creation is different from the publish date 17:43:44 (note: dt-created property has been discussed in other contexts for this reason too) 17:43:51 (separate from published or updated) 17:44:09 tsyesika: i'm interested in seeing if on the micropub side you would be willing to have it so that the server can always accept the wrapped activity as well as the unwrapped format 17:44:51 rhiaro: micropub doesn't say anything about what the server does with it when i gets the item, thats not part of the spec. all you have to do is have an endpoint that advertises itself as such 17:45:41 aaronpk: we have a difference in authors, you could set the author in the object or the created date, so its assumed that the server will fill those in 17:45:54 tsyesika: its the same in activity pub 17:46:13 q? 17:46:15 ack cwebber 17:46:21 cwebber2: it sounds like thats not so big a difference. 17:46:35 ... this seems like a minimalist create mode 17:46:47 sandro: creation shortcut mode 17:47:07 tsyesika: with a few caviats, i'm on board with this 17:47:27 s/caviats/caveats 17:47:44 cwebber2: if our side supports that and your side supports the unwrapping activities 17:48:17 aaronpk: whats left in micropub is having the file uploading endpoint, form encoding .. 17:48:32 cwebber2: we might be able unify on the image endpoint too 17:48:50 cwebber2: thats an easy collaboration endpoint 17:49:05 tantek: i'd like to see that image endpoint written up 17:49:15 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/23 17:49:29 the out-of-band create mechanism 17:49:31 rhiaro: there are a couple places where the two specs are unsure of things so this is great 17:49:47 aaronpk: this would be great for me to keep micropub as simple as it should be 17:50:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97779&oldid=97778 17:50:17 cwebber2: if it is much smaller and we have a way to translate vocabularies 17:50:31 ... i can see it getting added to mediagoblin 17:51:05 rhiaro: i was able to do that method to determine what data is being send 17:51:14 tsyesika: i'm curious vocab convergence 17:51:23 aaronpk: i think thats a seperate discussion that we could have 17:51:35 ... i tried to leave it out of micropub as much as possible 17:51:49 ... that way i can post to it without even knowing what its posting 17:52:03 ... i like the aspect of it 17:52:07 jtilles has joined #social 17:52:09 tantek: what to most implementation support? 17:52:45 aaronpk: most support only creating and most already have some other storage properties that they are matching to 17:53:14 ... when i built mine i specifically have the endpoint write directly to storage, so that it is sorted out when rendering 17:53:55 cwebber2: i feel like where we are at a point where we are at a point where these are practically going to be shared but we need some idea of what mapping between the vocabularies means 17:54:11 q? 17:54:23 aaronpk: the problem that keeps coming up in the indiewebcamp channel is how do we propogate changes to old posts 17:54:42 ... the readers are all based around new posts 17:55:24 ... this is where i'm seeing activity streams being useful for this, and while i might not have a mapping on my main site, but i might use it as a stream of whats going on 17:55:43 cwebber2: rhiaro you were working on the mapping between the two at some point i think 17:56:10 rhiaro: there is some pages and such, but the other important part is post type discovery 17:56:43 rhiaro: so there are some properties that map directly but there are a few places where it takes some work 17:57:11 cwebber2: so will microformats will reference this activitypub document 17:57:35 s/activitypub document/socialpub document 17:57:40 s/microformats/micropub 17:57:55 ... is there going to be a seperate socialpub document or will it be both specs take on some changes? 17:58:54 rhiaro: i think since i've implemented this seperately as the create part, i'm in favor of breaking up activtypub into smaller docs 17:59:24 tsyesika: i have to admit one of the things i want for activity pub is to break it up into smaller steps that are implementable seperately 17:59:56 ... so if i want to use only part of it, i can, but if some larger system wants to do all of it, they can 18:00:47 q? 18:01:09 cwebber2: so heres a proposal kind of based off of what amy has done previously, would this be a reasonable restructuring of the document would be just "how to write a simple document" and then 'servers handling the client to server api' and then 3rd was server to server api 18:01:45 rhiaro: i would see it as 'heres how to get data to the server' then 'heres what to do with it once it gets to the server' 18:02:30 rhiaro: so if you wanted to do the second half you could do that seperately. you could do client to server just sending files for examples 18:02:54 cwebber2: so maybe socialpub becomes client to server entirely and then activitypub becomes server to server 18:03:04 ... is that a proposal that we are willing to work towards? 18:03:24 tsyesika: well there are more ways to break this up than just client to server and server to server 18:03:35 ... like posting an activity vs updating 18:03:46 rhiaro: i think the client to server seperates very easily 18:04:06 cwebber2: i think the simpler way is saying socialpub is client to server and activitypub becomes server to server 18:04:29 tantek: i feel like there is part of it you are agreeing on some and others you are not 18:04:53 ... it seems like you are talking the same language now and thats a huge step 18:05:05 ... i want to capture this as a set of action items 18:05:25 rhiaro: i could start with this as a section of social web protocols 18:05:51 tantek: i also so a number of suggestions for next steps for activity pub that could be done 18:06:20 ... i'll trust you as editors to continue to converge on these proactively 18:06:31 ... but i'd like to see you not depend on each other. 18:07:00 ... amy you have a bunch of stuff written up, do you feel you can add that to social web protocols 18:07:06 rhiaro: yes 18:07:13 aaronpk: i can help with that 18:07:22 tantek: for now you can add it and publish and iterate 18:08:16 ... so we can action you and then the rest can happen asyncronously 18:08:38 ... so that if anyone gets stuck on their document they are not stopping anyone else 18:09:18 aaronpk: it sounds like the best thing i can do is replace the whole update and replace section and assume it will be moved to the social web protocols eventually 18:09:46 tsyesika: i think the main this for us is to update our spec to allow this simple editing 18:10:23 tantek: i think the other idea you had to update to do this seperate sections of incremental implementations that would be great 18:11:00 action rhiaro to incorporate your work done in to the social web protocols document for the others in the group to review 18:11:00 Created ACTION-88 - Incorporate your work done in to the social web protocols document for the others in the group to review [on Amy Guy - due 2016-03-24]. 18:11:03 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/32 <- issue here 18:11:54 tantek: both of you (aaron and tsyesika) to keep track of that on your githubs 18:12:18 eprodrom__ has joined #social 18:14:24 ben_thatmustbeme: i would like to see outbox read and write seperated out 18:14:33 cwebber2: i think there is some more discussion on that 18:14:58 tantek: can you create an issue on social web protocols to capture that amy? 18:15:22 tantek: we are not breaking for 15 minutes 18:15:27 s/not/now 18:15:37 resume at 14:30 EDT 18:15:39 I added a countdown for 3/17 11:30am (#5819) 18:21:01 Karli_ has joined #social 18:29:02 resume 18:29:03 Countdown set by tantek on 3/17/16 at 11:15am 18:30:00 Thank you Loqi 18:33:11 hi there 18:33:22 I can see a tantek 18:34:09 jasnell has joined #social 18:34:23 KevinMarks_: can you hear? 18:34:36 TOPIC: open issues for activitypub 18:34:40 yes i can 18:35:40 eprodrom_: i think the idea was to put some time this afternoon in to resolving open issues 18:36:08 cwebber2: i would like to proceed by first addressing issue 71 18:36:16 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/32 18:36:25 sorry https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/71 18:36:46 scribe: sandro 18:37:44 tsyesika: we have certain terms like inbox, outbox, ... and rhiaro suggested generalizing this as a stream array 18:38:09 .. also a way to achieve (something) about inbox and outbox 18:39:01 cwebber2: So the question is... Amy's suggestion is instead of followers, .... use types, .... 18:39:55 cwebber2: What could be true is we could have a term in activitypub that here's a term for ... 18:40:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97780&oldid=97776 18:40:03 Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97781&oldid=97780 18:40:13 cwebber2: Amy's propositiyon soun ds interesting but I dont think object types is the right way to break it up 18:40:22 shevski has joined #social 18:40:30 cwebber2: c-s or s-s might have different streams, and maybe this is a way to do that 18:40:51 i'll be back 18:41:05 cwebber2: so there could be a "likes" stream, maybe a subset of collection, or maybe it's own URI, 18:41:15 q+ 18:41:17 .. I'm not sure which, I'd like to open it for discussion 18:41:23 .. I think people do have arbitrary streams 18:41:46 aaronpk: I have struggled with this problem. I think I understand why you have these distinctions 18:41:48 eprodrom__ has joined #social 18:41:58 annbass has joined #social 18:42:04 .. on my homepage I have some kinds of posts, but not others, and down at the bottom I have links to the others 18:42:22 .. I curate the collections based on how I want people to read it, NOT on types 18:42:25 .. so I have health 18:42:28 .. and travel 18:42:37 .. and events I'm going to that are not in Portland 18:42:45 .. so these are very much mixed types 18:42:54 q+ are these different semantically than tags? 18:42:54 .. and I have my primary stream 18:43:07 q? 18:43:12 ack aaronpk 18:43:14 q+ to ask are these different semantically than tags? 18:43:15 .. In an old version of my site I had them by type, but that didn't work well 18:43:51 eprodrom__: Certain groups, like Chris' Friends, or Chris' main feed, or Things Chris Likes, ... a core set of five predefined 18:44:04 .. then have other unqualified streams 18:44:29 cwebber2: Because followers and likes have API specific purpose 18:44:33 eprodrom__: Right 18:44:59 .. So just have a relationship Stream might do this 18:45:24 cwebber2: WIth the addition of arbitrary labeling of these new streams 18:46:02 cwebber2: Sounds like have consensus, which I'm recording on the issue 18:46:24 "So we will have special API specific collections, like likes and followers and inbox, but streams should be supported as a general bucket for interesting collections." 18:46:25 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/48 18:47:08 cwebber2: This kind of moves into Who Do You Trust 18:47:21 .. I think we've agreed, you trust same origin, otherwise you link back and verify 18:47:36 .. the desire for supporting static sites 18:47:50 .. So I would point my endpoints off-server 18:47:57 .. in which case how do you know who has authority 18:48:11 .. Are there other origin scoping tools? 18:48:25 .. or do we just not want to permit that kind of static site thing 18:48:57 sandro: Doesn;t a link serve as delegation? 18:49:23 cwebber2: If the profile is on a static site, maybe we can trust what it points to, yes.... 18:50:52 cwebber2: adding comment on issue 18:51:33 jasnell has joined #social 18:51:49 eprodrom__: ap.io gets an UpdateOn dustyclould, and it knows how to do it. I don't see why we need to proscribe server behavior 18:52:36 cwebber2: If you get a message from me that there's something new, and my endpoints are on another server, should you trust them 18:52:58 eprodrom__: If I remember how pump.io does it, it checks to see the authentication of the actor 18:53:33 cwebber2: In APub you can have an update that's an update of a blog on another site. And you'd trust the author. 18:53:57 cwebber2: Can you fake that you're someone else? 18:54:17 IMHO there's nothing specific about the same origin that implies you can trust it, that's just a typical pattern used together with centralized services 18:54:21 cwebber2: Assuming you want to support static sites, you'd need something like this 18:55:20 sandro: same origin isn't relevant here. It's following trust-bearing links 18:55:53 tantek: CSP - content-security-policy can help if you want to do this offline 18:56:21 harry: So for example you could trust ... (something) 18:56:37 nicolagreco has joined #social 18:56:45 cwebber2: I think I understand how to handle this 18:56:58 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/23 18:57:00 tantek: I'm happy to answer CSP questions, since I just implemented it for my site 18:57:04 jasnell_ has joined #social 18:57:18 hhalpin has joined #social 18:57:25 CSP is here Sandro 18:57:43 https://www.w3.org/TR/CSP/ 18:57:45 cwebber2: The main challenge for us is how to do discovery 18:57:53 Typically, you want to use it when you are authorizing Javascript from outside the same origin. 18:58:06 Would be useful if the endpoint has a feed that has some JS, and should be recommended to use. 18:58:14 hhalpin: documentation of my experience with CSP: https://indiewebcamp.com/CSP 18:58:18 shevski has joined #social 18:58:27 CSP support works well in browsers now 18:58:42 So any SOP exceptions, particuarly if they involve javascript, should use CSP 18:58:45 if you separate the image upload from the post, and then use a URL, that implies you could use an external url for an image? 18:58:58 cwebber2: Is it useful to put on the user's profile page where I submit my photos 18:59:29 aaronpk: You see things like this on a multiuser system 18:59:56 nicolagreco has joined #social 19:00:24 nicolagreco has joined #social 19:00:38 tsyesika: Someone might want their media whereever they want it 19:00:57 cwebber2: It feels a bit silly to me 19:01:10 tsyesika: People might have multiple endpoints 19:01:21 eprodrom__: Discoverable endpoints for upload? Sounds great 19:01:51 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/34 19:01:54 cwebber2: okay, sounds good 19:02:32 cwebber2: This has come up a few times. It bothers me we still don't have this 19:03:09 .. the main challenge that was blocking this is what happens when activities represent other activities that don't exist any more 19:03:37 ... transient activities, like IM or strawberry-watering. 19:04:01 .. one approach is to have activities with no id, and they get delivered through federation but other otherwise not interesting 19:04:09 .. or give them a UUID 19:04:25 Topic: Open issues for ActivityPub 19:04:39 eprodrom__: We talked about the 'scope' property earlier today. Would that be a way to address this? 19:04:42 Open issues for Webmention at 15:35 19:04:44 I added a countdown for 3/17 3:35pm (#5820) 19:04:48 .. maybe I put a scope of 'game update' 19:04:53 in general, you need an id or some kind for HTTP REST retrieval of ids from X to X1 in terms of polling, right? 19:04:54 !cancel #5820 19:04:56 Ok, I cancelled it 19:04:56 q+ that sounds like a notification 19:05:03 Open issues for Webmention at 15:35 EDT 19:05:05 I added a countdown for 3/17 12:35pm (#5821) 19:05:40 q+ to say that sounds like a notification 19:05:48 q? 19:05:49 q- 19:05:49 eprodrom__: One of the problems with client-defined-expiry is that client lie and cheat and are bad. They say keep this forever, it's important. 19:05:58 q+ 19:06:06 .. Clients might have advisory info, but the server needs to decide. 19:06:18 .. IRC updates from the F2F, scope might be F2F 19:06:47 cwebber2: mauybe that's a fed only concern 19:07:07 q? 19:07:08 q+ 19:07:25 eprodrom__: Once again you're trying to dictate server behavior. Also this might not be that important. identica has a lot of updates, but it's not that big really 19:07:45 aaronpk: It sounds like you're kind of talking about a Notification, which is not an activity 19:07:56 cwebber2: Yes, but also a chat that you don't want to keep around 19:08:09 eprodrom__ has joined #social 19:08:14 aaronpk: Off The Record messaging is a different thing, with its own set of considerations 19:08:23 .. Call these notifications, and it makes sense. 19:08:59 aaronpk: You probably don't want to casually throw OTR into the spec 19:09:14 Karli has joined #social 19:09:15 cwebber2: Yeah, if we just put OTR in here, we'll probably get it wrong 19:09:43 cwebber2: In this world, there's generally an expectation that people can retrieve things, so OTR wil be hard 19:09:59 cwebber2: How would we show notifications? 19:10:15 .. Some server-to-server notificaton, like your quota is reached 19:10:31 eprodrom__: Is that about too much data? I dunno what this is for. 19:10:58 dmitriz: This is misusing scope. James said it would be renamed to 'audience'. And access-control-like thing. 19:11:24 cwebber2: OpenFarmGame has its own type. So servers could garbage-collect them easily enough. 19:11:52 cwebber2: In an earlier version of the spec, it seemed like servers had to keep things around forever 19:12:12 .. that was also part of our motivation for tombstones 19:12:36 eprodrom__: That might be good to document. For example, twitter API only lets you go back 800 tweets, which is like a day. 19:12:36 Re OTR end-to-end encrypted messaging, there is a new protocol called Axolotl that is used by Signal/WhatsApp/(interest from Mozilla/Wire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axolotl_%28protocol%29 19:12:47 That is a revision and fixes mpOTR issues 19:12:59 However, I agree that OTR is out of scope. 19:13:27 dmitriz: Agreed clients lie, but the client setting an expiry on a stream is useful. 19:13:35 jasnell has joined #social 19:13:44 However, happy to ask the nextleap folks (George and Karthik - https://nextleap.eu) to see if they can staple Axolotl on top of whatever comes out of ActivityPub, since folks are going to be working on that for the next 2.5 years 19:13:50 cwebber2: Could be via an extension 19:14:08 eprodrom__: Like 'earliest item in colleciton is X' 19:14:45 .. Most social systems don't go back very far now, so we shouldn't ask that of folks. 19:15:01 .. "This is everything in the inbox. Note some servers limit the number of pages you cna go back." 19:15:12 cwebber2: okay, resolved 19:15:12 +1 finding earliest item in collection 19:15:39 shevski has joined #social 19:15:45 Do we have some normative way of getting id numbers per feed in AS2.0 and ActivityPub? 19:15:50 [looking in spec] 19:15:58 "we won't support id-less notificaitons. Clarify that it's up to servers if they want to keep around objects as long as they want. If they want to delete objects, like maybe delete a bunch of game notifications, that's a-ok. 19:15:58 Perhaps a future extension will permit clarifying how long users might expect they can continue to access data." 19:15:58 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/issues/77 19:16:18 tsyesika: Can we specify indieauth for authentication? 19:16:41 tsyesika: Or is that out-of-scope? 19:16:54 q+ 19:17:10 +1 OAuth 2.0, with a nonn-normative recommendation for use of rel="me" w/i IndieWeb 19:17:13 melvster has joined #social 19:17:13 q- aaronpk 19:17:14 ack aaronpk 19:17:20 ack dmitriz 19:17:28 q+ 19:17:37 hhalpin: indieauth is oauth2 so ... 19:17:50 q+ 19:17:57 q+ 19:18:00 .. I feel like you should normatively require oath2 and suggest indieauth 19:18:03 q+ 19:18:07 q? 19:18:09 +1 to hhalpin 19:18:15 ack hhalpin 19:18:43 hhalpin: How do you do the REST call where you get X from Y 19:18:53 q? 19:18:57 Like without re-polling everything 19:19:02 That is something Objective8 from D-CENT hit 19:19:17 We can normatively refer to OAuth 2.0 - its an IETF rec 19:19:29 In fact, OAuth 2.0 does more or less give interop 19:19:47 OAuth 2.0 is Authorization 19:20:01 agreed that interop is the goal 19:20:06 reference something if it helps interop 19:20:08 sandro: oauth2 doesn't tell you what you need to make this work 19:20:13 +1 OAuth 2.0 and Bearer Token spec 19:20:19 +1 to that as well 19:20:26 bearer tokens in a federated context is not that easy 19:20:29 Authentication should be left out (WebAuth + password stuff) 19:20:29 aaronpk: Use oatuh2 and bearer-tokens, but that still leaves stuff underspecified 19:20:38 (this is something we've been struggling with in Solid, as well) 19:20:43 identity in a federated context is not the easy 19:20:44 Identity, well, it's tough. There's some takeup of OpenID Connect (OAuth 2.0 profile) 19:20:51 aaronpk: Identity is what's really useful here 19:20:57 But it's not as universal in takeup as OAuth 2.0 19:21:02 q? 19:21:04 .. So "just use oauth" doesn't sove the problems 19:21:05 q- 19:21:07 q+ 19:21:30 eprodrom: So Use Auth2 with Bearer-Tokens, that's clear enough, but... 19:21:30 q? 19:21:38 q- 19:21:46 cwebber2: "This is a stub to be expanded" 19:22:09 JSON Web Signatures is just a way to sign the bearer token if bearer token is JWT 19:22:12 cwebber2: This was left in there as a to-be-worked-on 19:22:18 jasnell_ has joined #social 19:22:21 eprodrom: We keep saying don't do this :-) 19:22:35 I'm happy to take an action to review/edit that piece. We could make it non-normative but no guidance is kinda crazy 19:22:39 cwebber2: Is the right thing to do to say that Auth and Ident are left as an open question 19:22:45 q? 19:22:46 q+ 19:22:53 q? 19:23:14 ack dmitriz 19:23:14 sandro: Leave it out of the spec, and put a best practice in a Note 19:23:38 dmitriz: In Solid, we've been looking at this, and IndieAuth is one of the things we considered. 19:24:01 .. but because of all the redirects, it's nice in a browser, but not so clear in an API 19:24:13 .. Facebook and others solve that by giving an API token, but that's non-trivial 19:24:27 q? 19:24:33 .. So lets get something working, but yeah, leave it not in the spec for now 19:25:09 eprodrom: My feeling is, if you need to, Auth2+BearerTokens, but I can see lots of other ways to do this, unauth, basic auth, client certs, etc 19:25:23 .. Telling me I have to use a certain kind of auth messes things up for me. 19:25:35 q? 19:25:37 ack next 19:25:55 tsyesika: So we should say "folks SHOULD use OAuth2 + BT" ? 19:26:15 eprodrom: Pump.io isn't going to bother with indieauth. We'll stick with username and password. 19:26:26 .. we'll just generate our own tokens 19:26:36 barnabywalters has joined #social 19:26:52 .. so it's okay as a SHOULD or a best-practice. Don't require more than you can. 19:27:04 q? 19:27:11 ack cwebber 19:27:36 cwebber2: Implementations will probably do what the others do. 19:27:51 q+ 19:27:57 ack tantek 19:28:08 tantek: tsyesika said goal should be interop 19:28:35 .. we can't normatively refer to indieauth, in part because of charter, but we can do an informative non-normative reference 19:28:48 .. one way would be to ask if there are any implementations that have an intent 19:29:08 aaronpk, is specification of indieauth as informative / non-normative currently the state in your standards? 19:29:17 in micropub? 19:29:21 aaronpk: yes 19:29:36 .. if no intends to implement both, then don't bother 19:29:46 http://micropub.net/draft/#authentication-and-authorization 19:29:53 q? 19:30:14 q+ 19:30:44 amy: my site uses indieauth, but it delegates the work to indieauth.com 19:31:24 aaronpk: The interesting part here is starting from your URL and ending up getting a bearer token 19:31:51 jasnell has joined #social 19:32:10 tantek: So you have an implementation to compare against ( rhiaro's ) 19:32:26 tantek: Just style it in a spec as NOTE 19:32:40 ack hhalpin 19:33:15 hhalpin: A total stub then that's not going to work because no-one is going to read it. 19:33:37 hhalpin: So say O2 + BT and NOTE: try IndieAuth 19:33:47 BT = bearer token 19:33:50 hhalpin: But obviously it's not going to be usef by everyone 19:34:02 Open issues for Webmention 19:34:03 Countdown set by tantek on 3/17/16 at 12:05pm 19:34:20 q+ 19:34:22 hhalpin: "SHOULD Oauth2 + Brearer-Token" 19:34:30 q? 19:34:33 hhalpin: Happy to have relevant experts look over this text 19:34:37 ack eprodrom 19:34:48 eprodrom: Does IndieAuth work in non-browser applications? 19:34:55 dmitriz: RIght, that's a problem 19:35:04 eprodrom: Also, not in server-to-server 19:35:16 I would also keep authentication out of scope, server to server is OAuth 19:35:21 eprodrom: We should define server-to-server method 19:35:22 in terms of authorization 19:35:27 happy to review that text 19:35:38 aaronpk: So I just say use Bearer-Token 19:35:52 http://micropub.net/draft/#authentication-and-authorization 19:35:56 aaronpk: MIcroPub has text like this 19:36:11 tantek: How do private webmentions work? 19:36:14 q? 19:36:18 q- 19:36:33 ack cwebber2 19:36:50 ack next 19:36:51 cwebber2: Let's aim for the same text between micropub and activitypub 19:37:11 cwebber2 reads micropub spec parts aloud 19:37:49 sandro: that wouldn't allow client-certs that evan wants 19:37:59 eprodrom: Ah yes, I wouldn't want MUST 19:38:29 aaronpk: I definetely want multiple ways to get the token, so I leave that open. 19:38:59 aaronpk: I like the requirement of Bearer-Tokens, because it's what everyone does anyway. 19:39:07 q? 19:40:03 aaronpk: Separate out authentication from authorization 19:40:27 aaronpk: Separate how you get the bearer token from how you use it. 19:40:37 eprodrom: Make the Bearer-Token a SHOULD 19:40:40 aaronpk: yep 19:41:38 you have to separate THREE parts not TWO : 1. identity 2. authentication 3. authorization 19:41:40 aaronpk: SHOULD use bearer-token, SHOULD use oauth2 to get it 19:41:51 sandro: let's go for MAY use oauth2 to get it 19:42:01 sandro: since there are other perfectly legit ways 19:42:22 this is why oauth is not a good fit for the social web, it doesnt do identity (or doesnt do it very well at least) 19:43:10 cwebber2, probably down to about 22 issues, and several more we can deal with among the editors 19:47:16 nicolagreco has joined #social 19:49:41 jasnell has joined #social 19:53:41 shevski has joined #social 19:58:08 q? 19:58:30 q? 19:58:39 scribe: rhiaro 19:58:45 TOPIC: Webmention open issues 20:00:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97783&oldid=97781 20:00:07 melvster has left #social 20:00:27 http://github.com/aaronpk/Webmention/issues/9 20:00:44 aaronpk: Source and target form parameters are not URIs, how can we convert them to URIs because it's important for some people 20:01:22 ... My thoughts are it has not caused any issues with any implementations that these are not URIs, so unless anyone has a single sentence they can describe a solution right now we can do it, but if not I propose we close 20:01:43 sandro: prefix with http://.....# 20:02:18 ... When people want to represent their data for archival or to pass to other systems they want to make unambiguous the notion of source and target 20:02:25 ... These notions are things that reasonably could have URIs 20:02:37 ... if they were in IANA we could use that, but they're not, so currently everyone has to make up their own uris for these 20:02:48 ... It's a trivial problem to solve, and it's a problem some people have 20:03:05 tantek: an alternative is a registry for form encoded parameters, like rel values, which are not uris 20:03:18 sandro: there's no conjecture that people should use the same form encoded parameter 20:03:22 aaronpk: what is the easy solution? 20:03:42 eprodrom: the solution is, if you want this to be a URI, prefix them with http://w3c.org/ns/webmention# 20:03:49 tantek: isn't this an implementation detail? 20:04:00 sandro: not if you want interoperability with some protocol that isn't webmention 20:04:07 ... people might in theory want to see where webmentions are 20:04:13 aaronpk: there's no definition of get on a webmention endpoint 20:04:24 sandro: you should get back webmentions you're allowed to see 20:04:40 tantek: if you were to publish an activity stream of webmentions, what would that look like 20:04:50 aaronpk: implementations currently just drop webmentions on the floor after they're processed 20:04:52 say that webmention source is equivalent to 'http://www.w3.org/ns/webmention#source' 20:05:04 ... there is an idea of status urls, which can be GET to see status, so the webmention itself has url 20:05:19 an activity stream of webmentions would look like http://mention-tech.appspot.com/ 20:05:20 ... Implementations treat these as temporary and drop them. THere are so many that are spam that come in so they aren't kept 20:05:23 ... but that's the resource 20:05:37 ... but status is the description fo the webmention source and target and maybe what happened to it 20:05:59 tantek: if your implementation wishes to treat these terms as uris then it may use the following: http://www.w3.org/ns/webmention# 20:06:05 ... anyone who wants to use that can 20:06:11 ... anyone who doesn't can skip it 20:06:31 aaronpk: what section does that go in? 20:06:36 tantek: appendix? 20:06:47 aaronpk: it's own section? 20:06:59 tantek: anyone who wants a uri for this you can point them to that section, don't bury it 20:07:13 aaronpk: okay, I'll comment and close the issue when it's added 20:07:22 "URIs for form-encoding properties" 20:07:30 +1 20:07:30 q? 20:07:43 http://github.com/aaronpk/Webmention/issues/20 20:07:59 aaronpk: I've summarised my position at the bottom 20:08:24 ... This is a description of an attack where somebody can send a webmention to a system, and if the system can cause actions to happen on a GET request, I can cause that system to make another GET request somewhere which might have undesireable requests 20:08:34 eprodrom: so I could use it for probing security holes in wordpress servers? 20:08:40 aaronpk: except the attacker doesnt' actually get a response 20:08:47 tantek: you could cause a side effect, not get information 20:08:53 aaronpk: all you can do is make the webmention receiver make a get request 20:09:04 ... which is unfortunately possible but also something that is bad practice no matter what you're doing 20:09:18 ... so it's not really something for the webmention spec: don't make your system vulnterable to get requests 20:09:35 sandro: Never install webmention if you're behind a firewall? You are endangering everything esle behind the firewall 20:09:45 aaronpk: only if yoru system has access to both sides of the firewall 20:09:57 tantek: we should call this out in the security and privacy? 20:10:04 aaronpk: what am I calling out? dont' put insecure systems on the internet? 20:10:08 ... what am I supposed to say? 20:10:32 refer to https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html 9.1.1 20:10:39 sandro: this is putting a system that is perfectly secure in a .. behind a firewall which may seem reasonable because it can't do anythign except webmention, but people might not realise that a putting a blog tha timplements webmention behind a firewall in a way that it has access to the internet 20:10:40 q? 20:10:50 aaronpk: it has to have server access to the internet in order to receive a webmention in the firs tplace 20:10:58 ... you'd have to put an http server inside your firewall that also listens publicly 20:11:05 "In particular, the convention has been established that the GET and HEAD methods SHOULD NOT have the significance of taking an action other than retrieval. These methods ought to be considered "safe"" 20:11:13 q+ 20:11:37 sandro: behind the firewall you have a simple blog and the blog does a post that happens to mention something else behind the firewall and does the webmention processing, dereferences the url that the user put in the post, and that thing out there says go to this url as my webmention endpoint, does that, that was behind the firewall.. 20:11:40 aaronpk: oh okay 20:12:02 hhalpin: why is this not a problem for any system that lets you put arbitrary urls as input? not just webmention 20:12:09 aaronpk: sandro described the actual attack vector 20:12:10 shevski has joined #social 20:12:15 ... blog inside firewall does not listen on internet, has no public endpoint 20:12:19 how is this different from a hyperlink in the browser that you click inside the firewall? 20:12:21 ... a person behind firewall writes a post with a linkt o the attacker 20:12:28 ... blog makes request to attacker 20:12:46 ... attacker can then cause the internal system to make a request to another internal system, if the webmention endpoint of the attacker is inside the firewall 20:12:46 q? 20:13:13 ack cwebber2 20:13:17 Karli has joined #social 20:13:19 aaronpk: when I was addressing this it sounded like I was describing really basic security practices and didnt' want to sound condescending 20:13:20 ack cwebber 20:13:27 q+ to ask same question that KevinMarks asked 20:13:29 cwebber2: would it be possible to post to localhost? cos that sounds like the biggest risk 20:13:37 q? 20:13:37 aaronpk: it could make the software that is verifying the webmention post to itself 20:13:46 cwebber2: can't post to anythign else on a different port on localhost? 20:13:59 aaronpk: the attackers url can advertise a webmention endpoint, which can be anything including localhost, a port, 0.0.0.1... 20:14:06 q+ 20:14:12 cwebber2: there are definitely security things with servers that allow you to access.. 20:14:18 aaronpk: it's only ever going to post source and target 20:14:37 ... I would be willing to add an exception that says if it encounters localhost or 127.* then drop it 20:14:40 ... I'd be happy to put that in security considerations 20:14:46 ... Maybe not obvoius, definitely specific to webmention 20:14:50 eprodrom: and don't repeat failures? 20:14:50 This seems to be a generic problem for any spec that has an 1) input and then 2) takes URLs from that input and GETs them. 20:14:54 ... could be DOS 20:15:00 ... do exponential backoff if you need to 20:15:08 aaronpk: definitely will put in about not sending to localhost 20:15:14 I mean, not sending webmention to localhost makes sense 20:15:21 sandro: I'm thinking of basically saying don't allow a webmention system to cross the firewall 20:15:28 eprodrom: firewall is a loose term 20:15:49 tantek: someone can publish an html document that has img src="localhost.../dosomething" you load that and it accesses your localhost 20:16:00 ... or you can check the html spec and see what it says about image loading and how they treat that problem 20:16:07 ... because cross domain images obviously work 20:16:13 ... so that's one anagolous example 20:16:20 ... Also, rel=stylesheet 20:16:27 ... well defined, interoperable, well hardened 20:16:37 ... Those are two places you could look to see how they solve this and copy taht 20:16:43 +1 tantek this is like the browser fetching an image or stylesheet 20:16:46 ... if it's good enough for a browser it's good enough for webmention 20:16:48 +1 20:16:49 aaronpk: okay 20:16:51 q? 20:16:58 ack annbass 20:16:58 annbass, you wanted to ask same question that KevinMarks asked 20:17:01 +1 (but worth further thinking about) 20:17:03 annbass: KM asked the same question - how is this different than a regular hyperlink going out through the firewall 20:17:08 aaronpk: a hyperlink a person has to click on 20:17:11 deiu has joined #social 20:17:18 The trick is that the link is automatically ran 20:17:21 by the webmention spec 20:17:26 ... this is a side effect of writing a blog post that links to an attackers url, but the person doesn't have to click the link 20:17:34 hhalpin, just like an image is automatically loaded 20:17:34 annbass: i see 20:17:38 although lots of other possible apps outside webmention could do this 20:17:48 image, iframes, scripts, stylesheets 20:17:49 etc. 20:17:54 aaronpk: but similar to receiving a phishing email and having a person click the link 20:18:09 s/anagolous /analogous / 20:18:10 ... The result then is I'm going to find that language and it should clear it up 20:18:23 even sandboxed iframes can do cross-domain GETs for stylesheets and scripts 20:18:48 q? 20:18:52 http://github.com/aaronpk/Webmention/issues/21 20:18:59 q- 20:19:22 ... bengo had suggestion of discovery steps addition of having a 4th step checking a .well-known to find the webmention endpoint 20:19:32 ... which lets you delegate an entire domain to a webmention endopint without having to add it as a link header 20:19:44 ... Question is, is this worth it or is a http link header enough to support whole domain delegation 20:20:02 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97784&oldid=97783 20:20:14 ... One path forward is say: the http link header can be configured at the server level so that's enough to support server-wide delegation 20:20:31 ... You're a large orgnaisation with many different subsystems, which is pretty common, wanting to have a single webmention endpoint across the whole thing 20:20:43 ... the http link header can be configured at the server, not the software, so maybe that's enough 20:20:52 ... Other option is to add this well-known and add it at-risk since ther eare no implementations right now 20:20:57 ... See if anyone implements, and if not drop it 20:21:09 tantek: last time this came up we resolved to stick with follow your nose 20:21:13 ... which this is not 20:21:32 aaronpk: I think bengos' arguement that this was new information is a use case that many different kinds of software installed that we hadn't considered when making that resolution 20:22:00 q? 20:22:30 ... My proposal to clos ethis with no action is justified by an http link header can be configured server wise 20:22:52 DIdn't he also say something about not being able to configure the http header? 20:23:11 aaronpk: I think it's the same amount of work organisationally to add the .well-known path as it would to configure the link header 20:23:20 q+ 20:23:27 eprodrom: the link rel is registered and defined right? So since there is host-meta, the link is already there in http 20:23:38 Karli has joined #social 20:23:43 ... if someone wants to go sniffing around and wants to try some bottom of the barrel ways to try it, there are ways for them to do it already with the link-rel 20:23:55 ... The worst would be to say if you still can't find it try other ways of turning a link-rel into an endpoint 20:24:12 aaronpk: I'd rather not recommend another way for senders to find endpoints, there are already 3 and they have to do ALL of them 20:24:28 ... And if you add a 4th they'll have to do that also and it's a very different mechanism 20:24:51 ... Now you're dealing with parsing link headers (already non trivial), parsing html, then you'd have to also parse xml, also parse json 20:24:58 hhalpin: what are the current ones? 20:25:05 aaronpk: http link header, html link tag and html a tag 20:25:18 hhalpin: not being able to modify the link header is common if you don't have full control 20:25:22 ... but then the a tag should work 20:25:40 aaronpk: if you do have full control you're in the same position to add .well-known as to create link header 20:25:59 hhalpin: but if you can create directoreis and put files in you can't add a link header 20:26:14 ... but then the a tag should be fine 20:26:33 ... In the normal web development world, lots of people don't even know link headers exist 20:26:38 ... but almost everyone knows how to parse html 20:27:03 ... As long as there's a way of putting it in without link headers 20:27:07 aaronpk: totally 20:27:19 sandro: my question si do you ever want to be able to do webmention on a jpeg withotu a link header 20:27:26 ... I think that's not worth worryign about, but I can see that someone might think it is 20:27:28 I'm going to note that this came up with Objective8 and D-CENT 20:27:41 I.e. problems with Link headers (i.e. their developers didn't know HTTP Link headers existed) 20:27:42 aaronpk: sounds like we're okay with slight limitations with current discovery 20:27:48 ... Which support vast majority of use cases 20:27:48 However, it was easy to get folks to add to the HTML 20:27:56 sandro: anything about how you have to parse html? 20:28:02 aaronpk: I think it just says to look for the rel 20:28:07 sandro: html5? 20:28:30 aaronpk: normatively references http link header 5988 and also says ... no doesn't reference html in discovery 20:28:37 sandro: so test suite should have corner cases about how it appears in html 20:28:44 ... and how they differ in closing angle bracket missing etc 20:28:51 aaronpk: I have a ton of that test data already 20:29:33 http://github.com/aaronpk/Webmention/issues/29 20:29:37 ... waiting on IANA to accept 20:29:43 ... paragraph added to spec 20:29:52 http://github.com/aaronpk/Webmention/issues/32 20:30:03 ... Just need to add, tried to do last night, didnt' get to it, but tantek threw some ideas my way so I should be able to do that now 20:30:07 ... And done. 20:30:23 tantek: so you have all issues with a resolution, outstanding editing to do 20:30:32 aaronpk: these three require editing that we agreed to already that I need to do 20:30:50 ... And then conformance requiremetns sectiion I don't have anything we can review right now but we're not going to cr so 20:30:54 tantek: add by when? 20:31:00 aaronpk: if we can agree to publish a new draft I can add it in that process 20:31:13 tantek: if you commit to adding one we can say publish it with the edits we've agreed to 20:31:17 aaronpk: yep 20:31:28 tantek: do you have a path forward on all issues? 20:31:28 aaronpk: yes 20:31:47 TOPIC: Resolutions to publish 20:32:08 tantek: we already resolved to publish new AS2 drafts with edits in the pipeline 20:32:16 ... So any of the others things that editors want to publish new drafts of? 20:32:21 aaronpk: yes webmention 20:32:39 ... I do have a change on micropub to register with iana, queued up, however not a lot of other changes, so I still would like to publish but it's not a huge change 20:32:54 eprodrom: activitypub? 20:33:10 ... Does it make sense to make a resolution right now to publish with discussed edits? 20:33:31 tantek: do you want to give the group a chacne to review your changes before doing another resolution to publish, or are there enough changes the group already agreed to that you can publish once you make them 20:33:42 ... Or do you want more time for those changes plus any others? 20:33:51 cwebber2: Okay we'll make those changes first that the group agreed to 20:33:55 ... Then do more after that 20:34:07 tsyesika: we fix the bugs the group agreed to and publish 20:34:17 cwebber2: right, yes 20:34:28 tantek: one proposal? 20:35:13 PROPOSAL: Resolve to publish webmention, micropub and activitypub pending changes agreed by the wg this face-to-face 20:35:19 +1 20:35:25 +1 20:35:27 +1 20:35:27 +1 20:35:28 +1 20:35:28 ~1 20:35:29 wait 20:35:30 +1 20:35:35 +1 20:35:37 +1 20:35:44 +1 20:35:45 +1 20:35:58 RESOLVED: Resolve to publish webmention, micropub and activitypub pending changes agreed by the wg this face-to-face 20:36:03 +1 20:36:13 TOPIC: any other business 20:36:25 eprodrom: we have spare time, so anything else for next 25 minutes? 20:36:30 sandro: hopefully quick.. 20:36:38 ... I thought more about github spec labels yesterday and cut down to 10 20:36:41 ... from 16 20:36:41 https://github.com/sandhawke/spec-labels-min 20:36:53 https://github.com/sandhawke/spec-labels-min/labels?sort=name-asc 20:36:54 ... It has its own issues 20:37:10 Quick notes, we have assembled a group of security/privacy experts to look at decentralization https://nextleap.eu 20:37:32 And the W3C WebAuth group is likely to have one-factor cryptographic authentication in browsers end of this-year, early-next year 20:37:53 https://www.w3.org/Webauthn/ 20:38:01 does the editor apply these or the commenter? 20:38:30 No changes needed by specs, but just resources and new W3C work 20:38:38 sandro: Editor, or someone with write access to repo 20:39:00 eprodrom: is there an action we can take now? 20:39:11 ... Review them and deicde if we're going to apply them to our spec repos? 20:39:20 tantek: first 6 seems self explanatory 20:39:24 ... What's process communiyt? 20:39:37 sandro: Where someone says "I don't understand how this group works" 20:39:44 ... Not for the editors, but they come up 20:39:51 ... "Let me speak to your manager" 20:40:04 Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=97785&oldid=97784 20:40:13 tantek: I think we might need something stronger 20:40:18 ... Like 'needs chair input' or something 20:40:38 cwebber2: what if it's just like "I'm not sure if this has somethign to do with it" and the editor doesn't know either 20:40:55 tantek: this is for the editor to say "this is not about my spec, this is a group issue, sending to chairs" 20:41:12 sandro: I like this being able to used by groups that aren't w3c, that's why I said 'process community' not chair, to generalise 20:41:38 annbass: but... your example where you said there were issues that were people saying they were being ignored, I was takign that to mean there's been some discomfort of different technical positions proposed and feeling like they're blown off 20:41:47 ... THat's in a different category than waiting for management approval 20:41:47 q+ 20:41:57 tantek: that's "commentors are unsatisfied by response", that's there 20:42:17 Karli has joined #social 20:42:19 ... The director will look at each one of these and see if the commetnor has merit 20:42:43 hhalpin: Do we need to note this unless there's a formal objection? 20:42:56 sandro: the director does like to knwo who is satisfied and who is unsatisfied 20:43:02 hhalpin: I've always just listed formal objections 20:43:27 sandro: talked to Philippe about this 20:44:38 eprodrom: are we comfortable with these labels? 20:44:50 tantek: "waiting for commentor" could mean two different things 20:45:02 sandro: ther'es not a lot o you can do until you hear back 20:45:14 tantek: could be differnet for open vs closed 20:45:29 sandro: if it's closed you might be waiting to see if they're satisfied or not 20:46:22 tantek: 'waiting for group input' -> 'needs group input' 20:46:23 I think we should note that people were unhappy, but if someone (unsatisfied commenter) proposes a technical solution and it doesn't meet the group's requirements (i.e. its not implemented, has no interest from more than one implementer, or has known technical flaws) then the group can argue simply than the unsatisfied commenter did not satisfiy the groups requirement. 20:46:49 ... Do we really need the last one? 20:46:57 sandro: james used that tag sometimes 20:46:59 ... on as2 20:47:04 ... standard github one 20:47:09 ... ('help') 20:47:24 tantek: is that pr requested? 20:47:32 aaronpk: 'happy to have this in there but I'm not gonna do it' 20:47:55 sandro: so, needs volunteer? 20:47:58 tantek: stronger than that 20:48:57 wilkie: point of entry for new people too 20:49:18 tantek: I like that 20:49:35 ... If we can phrase it in a way that makes it welcoming for new folks 20:50:30 sandro: 'needs volunteer' 20:50:40 everyone: k 20:51:12 tantek: can we collapse the first two? commentor needs no response and satisfied by response 20:51:34 sandro: just 'commentor satsified' 20:53:22 *bikeshedding about colors of labels* 20:53:24 as opposed to Commenter Generally Unsatisified With Life? 20:54:41 nicolagreco has joined #social 20:54:52 s/color/colour 20:55:18 tantek: do the editors understand these 20:55:23 aaronpk: what's the rule on timeout? 20:55:29 annbass: will there be a definition documented? 20:55:49 aaronpk: are there some I can't use without group consensus? 20:55:56 sandro: talk the group before doing a commentor timeout 20:56:16 ... And expect that director will look at commentor satisifed and commentor not satisfied 20:56:27 aaronpk: and waiting for commentor? 20:56:39 sandro: before timeout, or waiting for more information before you can address the issue 20:57:37 https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/labels :) 20:57:53 eprodrom: resolved that, 3 minutes left 20:57:54 ... AOB? 20:58:13 ben_thatmustbeme: if anyone wants to help co-write jf2 who knows more about writing specs? 20:58:15 I am happy to help 20:58:17 ... Kevin had offered to help with it I think 20:58:17 yes 20:59:02 jolly good 20:59:06 PROPOSED: make KevinMarks a coeditor of jf2 20:59:14 RESOLVED (by chairs): make KevinMarks a coeditor of jf2 20:59:57 eprodrom: no telecon next tuesday 21:00:04 ... Next telecon 29th March 21:00:14 ... Next f2f in Portland 21:00:19 ... Any plans to do something social this evening? 21:00:34 good luck finding a quiet place tonight 21:00:40 lol true 21:00:47 ... End! 21:01:25 RRSAgent end meeting 21:01:49 RRSAgent, please end meeting 21:01:49 I'm logging. I don't understand 'please end meeting', rhiaro. Try /msg RRSAgent help 21:02:09 RRSAgent, end meeting 21:02:09 I'm logging. I don't understand 'end meeting', rhiaro. Try /msg RRSAgent help 21:02:24 RRSAgent, please generate minutes 21:02:24 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/16-social-minutes.html rhiaro 21:11:55 shevski has joined #social 21:21:30 jasnell_ has joined #social 21:24:19 jasnell__ has joined #social 21:27:47 jasnell_ has joined #social 21:39:16 nicolagreco has joined #social 21:42:56 trackbot end meeting 21:42:56 Zakim, list attendees 21:42:56 As of this point the attendees have been tantek, wilkie, dmitriz, rhiaro, aaronpk, shevski, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber, tsyesika, sandro, Karli, AnnBass 21:43:04 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 21:43:04 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/03/16-social-minutes.html trackbot 21:43:05 RRSAgent, bye 21:43:05 I see no action items