Data on the Web Best Practices Working Group Teleconference

<newton> Hello

<deirdrelee> hi newton

<scribe> scribe: phila

<scribe> scribeNick: phila

<deirdrelee> chair: deirdrelee

<deirdrelee> agenda: https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20160708

Minute approvals

<deirdrelee> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of meeting on 24th June https://www.w3.org/2016/06/24-dwbp-minutes

<yaso> +1

<deirdrelee> +1

+0 not present

<ericstephan> +0 horribly absent lately

<annette_g> +1

<BernadetteLoscio> +1

RESOLUTION: Approve minutes of meeting on 24th June https://www.w3.org/2016/06/24-dwbp-minutes

<deirdrelee> PROPOSED: Approve minutes of meeting on 1st July https://www.w3.org/2016/07/01-dwbp-minutes

+0 not present (again)

<deirdrelee> +1

<ericstephan> +0 again

<Caroline_> +0 not present

<BernadetteLoscio> +1

<gatemezi> +1

<yaso> Already voted :-)

<yaso> +1

RESOLUTION: Approve minutes of meeting on 1st July https://www.w3.org/2016/07/01-dwbp-minutes

BP Doc to CR

deirdrelee: We have voted to got to CR but Phil has some admin that needs to be done.

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/dwbp-cr CR prepartion

phila: That gathers all the info to go to CR

<deirdrelee> phila: we're supposed to contact privacy group on privacy, we haven't done this, but we've thought about privacy, and that's documented in CR prep doc

<deirdrelee> ... if anyone has any more feedback on this, please add

<deirdrelee> ... runs through doc

<deirdrelee> ... hoping that 19th july is date that BP doc is published as CR

<deirdrelee> ericstephan: what constitutes contacting the privacy group, i did attend the privacy group meeting and alert them of draft of bp doc

ericstephan: I alerted the Privacy Wg to the BP draft. They talked about the privacy questionnaire. They were more interested in a qualitative assessment
... I also had a separate discussion with the chair.

<Zakim> annette_g, you wanted to ask if my name can be added to the approval list

<annette_g> You can point to an archived email for me, BTW

<annette_g> s/alos/also

<yaso> I think it's fine, Phila

PROPOSED: That the WG recognises the vote to seek transition to Candidate Rec for the BP document conducted by e-mail, noting also the following addition votes

<yaso> +1

<annette_g> +1

<deirdrelee> +1

<ericstephan> +1

+1

<Caroline_> +1

<BernadetteLoscio> +1

<laufer> +1

<newton> +1

<PWinstanley> +1

RESOLUTION: That the WG recognises the vote to seek transition to Candidate Rec for the BP document conducted by e-mail, noting also the following addition votes

<yaso> We resolved the resolution o/

-> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/08-dwbp-minutes.html#resolution03 The resolution

<scribe> chair: Deirdre

<Zakim> Caroline_, you wanted to ask what else should be included in the BP document before July 19th

<deirdrelee> phila: the document that i created, I will add annette's name and email from Eric about privacy wg

<deirdrelee> ... but the document itself is now frozen

phila: And Peter W's name

<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: when will directors call happen?

<deirdrelee> phila: request will be put in today, and that triggers call

<deirdrelee> ... director for this is Philip Legreut

Philippe le Hegeret is the Director for this

phila: Also need at least 1 editor, at least 1 chair, team contact

<deirdrelee> ... aiming for next week, but let's see, we'll have a doodle

<deirdrelee> ... depending on everyone's availability

<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: next week will be difficult for me

<deirdrelee> phila: week after next very likely

<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: we'd also like to know more about this call - what happens?

<deirdrelee> phila: what they want to know is how doc was developed,how we're going to get implementation, etc.

<deirdrelee> ... not necessarily content or technical detail of doc, more about if we've followed the process

<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: do we have to prepare anything?

<deirdrelee> phila: yes, to demonstrate that we've followed the process

<deirdrelee> BernadetteLoscio: we do this based on the document phila has prepared?

<deirdrelee> https://www.w3.org/2016/07/dwbp-cr

<deirdrelee> ... we can use this as a base?

<deirdrelee> ... should we prepare slides?

<annette_g> I found the calendar entry for the SDW WG meeting that Eric and I attended by Skype. It was March 2.

<deirdrelee> phila: yes, but will double-check will Ralph

-> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2016JulSep/0001.html Example CR Transition request

<deirdrelee> ... this is a member space email that i used as a request to submit transition request

<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: what's involved in the extension?

<deirdrelee> phila: because we're in CR this shouldn't be a problem, but we should be 4 wks in CR, and then we'll be outside of charter

<deirdrelee> ... so we need a little while, so we'll go until sept/oct time

<deirdrelee> ... after CR the next phase is proposed CR, where w3c members vote on document

<deirdrelee> ... at this stage we won't need calls any more

<annette_g> oops, that SDW meeting was webex, not Skype

<deirdrelee> deirdrelee: phila you'll look after the extension?

<deirdrelee> phila: yep

Implementation form

<newton> http://w3c.br/form-dwbp/

newton: WE made this form
... I can ask you to test it before we send it to implementers
... You need to provide the organisation info
... then the list of Bps is shown

Caroline_: When we were in Zagreb, we had a list of people we thought could help us with implementations
... Should we recover that?

phila: I should be able to find it...

deirdrelee: This ties into dissemination. That list from Zagreb will be useful of course.
... We need to contact people to get that feedback.
... Groups from within the group are valid and important but we can get more which would be good.

<Caroline_> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1n6tOphCLXLrzHrdyRUHVgrgx1YARdauBQBy9jSJXgDQ/edit

Caroline_: I really like the wiki page you, deirdrelee, created for the LC review
... A standard e-mail that we can copy will be useful

deirdrelee: Sure

BernadetteLoscio: The BPs at risk maybe...
... I was analysing the test and there are some about which I have some doubts
... Should I send a message to the group to discuss this?
... How can we proceed.

deirdrelee: How many?

BernadetteLoscio: 8 but that can be because it's not clear for me that it is possible to test.

<annette_g> I have an issue

newton: The form - I want you to test it and if you have an issue filling it in, we can change it

<annette_g> in Safari and Firefox

<annette_g> will send an email

<laufer> newton, we can put draft data in this test phase?

<newton> @annette_g I used javascript to make assynchronous request

phila: 8 BPs we're not sure about? That's worrying having just resolved to go to CR

<annette_g> javascript should be fine

<newton> @laufer yes, you can fill the form and make tests, after we can reset it and send to all implementers

BernadetteLoscio: BP5, we say chaeck if a user agent can automatically discover the licence
... For that, we need to implemetn a crawler or something

<annette_g> SyntaxError: Unexpected token '='. Expected a ')' or a ',' after a parameter declaration.

BernadetteLoscio: No sure if we should create a crawler

<hadleybeeman> phila: for BP8, I would simply use curl

phila: Use cURL to get the full HTTP load

<annette_g> clicking the different tests doesn't make any changes. When I fill in and submit the org info, I get some json back.

<newton> @annette_g Firefox and chrome worked here for me. Now I'm having issues with safari too.

<annette_g> I don't see a way to do anything other than submit the org info.

<hadleybeeman> phila: but you don't have to build a client that understands and recognises licenses. We have a separate working group for that.

BernadetteLoscio: And for BP 16 and 20...

<newton> @annette_g you were supposed to get this json in an assyc request (via AJAX), but it seems to be broken and not working on Safari

BernadetteLoscio: 16 is about vocabularies and 20 is not clear for me

deirdrelee: For BP 6 and 8 etc. A lot of the stuff we have implemeted automatically test for a lot of those things so we, Ireland, have them
... And to prove and implementation, we're not asking for a demo, we're taking people on trust.
... If they say their work passes, it passes.
... I don't think anyone has to build anything new.
... This harvester shows the licence etc.

ack

annette_g: Noting the nature of the doc, anything that made the list of all should be something that we feel are common enough to be findable.

BernadetteLoscio: I was in doubt about some BPs as I don't do that type of implementation
... So I just wanted to be sure that it's possible
... But I think it's not a problem if we have one or two BPs that we're not really sure about then we should say it.

deirdrelee: Anyone else with concerns?

newton: I was in douibt about BP 26 http://w3c.github.io/dwbp/publishing-snapshots/CR-dwbp-20160706/#avoidBreakingChangesAPI
... How can we validate that one?
... With no feedback, we'll lose that BP

deirdrelee: If we have an API that has changed, and a record about how it has changed, then we're OK.
... It's about communication.

newton: I know it's a BP, but if we don't have any real world cases where the API has changed and not broken, I don't know how to validate it.

annette_g: The test is looking to see if people have a test version - that's what we need to show. That's why it's written that way.

deirdrelee: I'm thinking of APIs that we have here and Twitter's API, when it changes, they communicate that.
... If we're concerned about them then we should label them as Feature at Risk

<hadleybeeman> phila: Sorry, but if your'e talking about now marking things at risk, or reviewing — you've lost your CR resolution.

<hadleybeeman> ...Sorry, but you're talking about making changes to the document.

<hadleybeeman> ...Those things go into the CR decision.

<hadleybeeman> ...You can't do it after you've resolved to publish at CR.

phila: Explains what CR resolution means

<hadleybeeman> ...So either what you've got is fine, and you're ready to go — or you start again. A director would say you're talking about being back at working draft.

deirdrelee: I think it's a bit of anxiety

<ericstephan> won't the bp be eliminated naturally if there are no implementation examples?

deirdrelee: As Annete said, we wouldn't have them there if we diodn't think they are BPs. We should gather implementation experience and take that.

BernadetteLoscio: I'm sorry but I didn't explain what I had in mind.
... I don't want to make changes at anything. It's because we're going to make some implementations and I wanted to know how to test some stuff.
... It's more like this than actually changing something.

deirdrelee: The process of starting to gather implementations
... That will give us a better picture of where we are.

ericstephan: I think the implementation experience is the important one now.

<laufer> I think that one thing is to test if one of our BPs was implemented. Another thing is to assert that the BP is a BP.

deirdrelee: Anyone have any real concerns about any BPs being at risk?
... OK.

<hadleybeeman> +1 to laufer

<newton> I recorded my screen in this GIF http://imgur.com/J0swYOQ showing what should happen when you fill the organization info and submit it

deirdrelee: You want people to test that the form is OK. Sounds as if Annette might have found some bugs but let's see.
... I suggest we all have a go and use the form this week. Who knows, by this time next week we might have 2 implementations for BP!
... We can see where were getting lots of implementation and where we need more

newton: Before we send the form abroad, we should first send the form to the WG and then I can fix the bugs.

deirdrelee: Can we not just start using it and if we find a bug, tell you?

<annette_g> It's completely unusable for me.

<gatemezi> +1 to deirdrelee proposal

Caroline_: Wait until the end of the day... we're tweaking.

<gatemezi> We start using the form

<gatemezi> ah ok Caroline_

deirdrelee: OK, we'll start using it from Monday.
... Thanks to Newton and co for all the effort to create the form!

<hadleybeeman> +1 to the approach :)

<laufer> Thanks, newton.

<Caroline_> +1 to thanking newton

<gatemezi> Thanks newton and folks

<hadleybeeman> Thanks newton!!

<newton> we're welcome

deirdrelee: So we can talk about dissemination next Friday.

<newton> please, file bugs and send it to us and we can fix them before start using in production

<newton> :-)

DUV update

ericstephan: We had contact from someone ineterested in DUV nad wanted to include it the LOV
... They had some suggested improvements
... Berna and I need to go over it in the coming week. I also addressed an old action

phila: Thanks

<deirdrelee> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DUV_implementations

deirdrelee: Great news about LOV
... It would be good to have implementation news for the 2 vocabs, including planned implementations

<BernadetteLoscio> https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/List_of_DUV_implementations

ericstephan: I notice that the DQV team, was listing publications,. We had an AGU submission accepted.
... Hopefully we'll get Bernadette to attend in December
... So I can list those.

deirdrelee: AOB?
... So Phil will follow up on the Director's call.

<ericstephan> get ready....get set....IMPLEMENT and DOCUMENT!

<hadleybeeman> :)

<yaso1> Great!

deirdrelee: And everyone needs to start using the form and next Friday we can look at dissemination.

<BernadetteLoscio> thanks!

<yaso1> Bye all

<laufer> bye all!

<annette_g> bye!

<newton> bye

<deirdrelee> RRSAgent: generate minutes