IRC log of social on 2016-11-08

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:03:11 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #social
18:03:11 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/11/08-social-irc
18:03:13 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
18:03:13 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #social
18:03:15 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SOCL
18:03:15 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
18:03:16 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
18:03:16 [trackbot]
Date: 08 November 2016
18:03:23 [annbass]
present+
18:03:25 [eprodrom]
Can someone scribe?
18:03:27 [rhiaro]
present+
18:03:27 [Loqi]
rhiaro: tantek left you a message 6 days, 18 hours ago: do you know how we (chairs / staff) can make blog posts here: https://www.w3.org/blog/ (as other WG chairs (including non-W3C-team people) seem to be able to) ?
18:03:32 [aaronpk]
present+
18:03:35 [tsyesika]
present+
18:03:37 [eprodrom]
present+
18:03:47 [sandro]
present+
18:03:47 [Loqi]
sandro: tantek left you a message 6 days, 18 hours ago: do you know how we (chairs / staff) can make blog posts here: https://www.w3.org/blog/ (as other WG chairs (including non-W3C-team people) seem to be able to) ?
18:03:48 [tsyesika]
hey rhiaro
18:04:09 [rhiaro]
Zakim, pick a victim
18:04:09 [Zakim]
Not knowing who is chairing or who scribed recently, I propose aaronpk
18:04:11 [eprodrom]
Scribe?
18:04:13 [sandro]
scribe: sandro
18:04:34 [sandro]
RRSAgent, pointer?
18:04:34 [RRSAgent]
See http://www.w3.org/2016/11/08-social-irc#T18-04-34
18:04:54 [eprodrom]
Zakim, who's here?
18:04:54 [Zakim]
Present: annbass, rhiaro, aaronpk, tsyesika, eprodrom, sandro
18:04:56 [Zakim]
On IRC I see RRSAgent, eprodrom, tsyesika, annbass, jasnell, strugee, KjetilK_, sandro, ben_thatmustbeme, wseltzer, oshepherd, cwebber2, wilkie, raucao, csarven, pdurbin,
18:04:56 [Zakim]
... bigbluehat, bitbear, dwhly, ElijahLynn, jet, aaronpk, Loqi, rrika, rhiaro, trackbot
18:05:04 [sandro]
chair: Evan
18:05:38 [eprodrom]
PROPOSED: accept https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-11-01-minutes as minutes for Nov 1 2016 telecon
18:05:44 [rhiaro]
+1
18:05:53 [annbass]
+1
18:06:03 [eprodrom]
+1
18:06:05 [sandro]
+1
18:06:10 [aaronpk]
+1
18:06:40 [eprodrom]
RESOLVED: accept https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-11-01-minutes as minutes for Nov 1 2016 telecon
18:07:01 [eprodrom]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-11-17
18:07:07 [Loqi]
Social Web WG Face to Face Meeting at MIT (F2F8)
18:07:14 [sandro]
evan: Reminder: Face-to-Face meeting next week, in the Boston area
18:07:38 [sandro]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-11-17
18:07:39 [Loqi]
Social Web WG Face to Face Meeting at MIT (F2F8)
18:07:54 [sandro]
eprodrom: Media wiki tables are a challenge, but we can do it!
18:07:56 [rhiaro]
q+
18:08:02 [eprodrom]
ack rhiaro
18:08:07 [annbass]
very bummed I cannot be there
18:08:14 [sandro]
rhiaro: telecon tuesday or cancel it?
18:08:35 [sandro]
eprodrom: I'll be in transit
18:09:02 [sandro]
eprodrom: Anyone who thinks we should have a telecon Tuesday?
18:09:15 [eprodrom]
PROPOSED: cancel Tuesday Nov 15 2016 telecon
18:09:18 [eprodrom]
+1
18:09:19 [sandro]
+1
18:09:22 [rhiaro]
+0
18:09:25 [aaronpk]
+0
18:09:26 [annbass]
+1
18:09:40 [ben_thatmustbeme]
present+
18:09:56 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
18:10:01 [eprodrom]
RESOLVED: cancel Tuesday Nov 15 2016 telecon
18:10:39 [sandro]
eprodrom: dinner?
18:10:48 [rhiaro]
I will lead everyone to Veggie Galaxy unless overridden by someone else
18:10:52 [aaronpk]
rhiaro++
18:10:52 [sandro]
.. it'd be good, but let's figure it out later
18:10:52 [Loqi]
rhiaro has 136 karma in this channel (247 overall)
18:10:59 [ben_thatmustbeme]
regrets+ julien
18:11:06 [sandro]
VeggieGalaxy++
18:11:06 [Loqi]
veggiegalaxy has 1 karma
18:11:37 [sandro]
topic: AS2 issue-312
18:12:17 [sandro]
eprodrom: Must every AS2 object have a name? Complicated
18:12:27 [cwebber2]
hiya
18:12:28 [sandro]
.. I think re resolved to have a fallback name property
18:12:29 [cwebber2]
dialing in
18:12:38 [sandro]
w/ re / we /
18:13:00 [sandro]
eprodrom: right now we have a SHOULD requirement for .name of every Activty, Collection, Image, Person, etc
18:13:07 [ben_thatmustbeme]
https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/312
18:13:25 [sandro]
.. question was raised -- for some objects, like a Collection, the name fields forced
18:13:29 [cwebber2]
present+
18:13:40 [sandro]
.. Sometimes it doesn't seem like there should be a name
18:13:44 [sandro]
.. a Page of a Collection
18:14:24 [sandro]
.. the counter argument: there will be many consumers that will want to present activities that they might not understand, or be able to render in any specific way, so it'd be nice to have something like name to fallback on
18:14:34 [sandro]
.. esp with extension types, or obscure types
18:15:20 [tantek]
tantek has joined #social
18:15:30 [sandro]
.. Problem with doing that: some consumers may want to have customized presentation, and they wouldn't be able to tell which names were really specific to that object (eg my name) vs a generated name like (eg Unnamed Person)
18:16:03 [sandro]
.. so the resolution is to have a fallback name required, and an option name would be allowed.
18:16:17 [sandro]
.. fbname might be "a person", name "evan prodromou"
18:16:18 [tantek]
present+
18:16:26 [sandro]
.. Why is this on the agenda?
18:16:28 [rhiaro]
q+
18:16:57 [sandro]
rhiaro: I put it on the agenda, because I didn't think we'd decided what the names were going to be.
18:17:09 [sandro]
.. If we're making a normative change, we need to extend CR
18:17:15 [sandro]
.. and I'm implementing and need to know what to do
18:17:17 [KevinMarks]
KevinMarks has joined #social
18:17:30 [ben_thatmustbeme]
would we need a fallbackNameMap?
18:17:31 [sandro]
eprodrom: Yeah, I don't think we'd picked the final properties
18:18:24 [sandro]
rhiaro: biggest thing is if we're going to make a normative change -- which seems unavoidable -- if we make .name the required property, or if a we add another required property that's also normative ...
18:18:25 [tantek]
q+ to note that IIRC at the f2f we decided to drop the SHOULD for name, which should not affect any conformant implementations. the fallbackname did not have consensus
18:19:00 [sandro]
eprodrom: If we use name as the mostly-required (SHOULD) and add an optional "title"
18:19:13 [sandro]
.. that minimizes the normative impact
18:19:30 [sandro]
rhiaro: It'd need to be MUST to be a reliable fallback
18:19:31 [cwebber2]
:|
18:19:33 [cwebber2]
no MUST
18:19:49 [tantek]
BTW such a "fallbackname" is kind of a brand new feature and having never been incubated is not really appropriate to add during CR
18:19:59 [cwebber2]
tantek: it's not a new feature
18:20:00 [sandro]
eprodrom: I see that point, but we've had it as a should for so long, and it's serving that same role
18:20:10 [cwebber2]
tantek, this used to be two separate fields
18:20:16 [cwebber2]
tantek, and then they were combined
18:20:16 [sandro]
rhiaro: Okay, so we're relying on developers taking the SHOULD very seriously
18:20:23 [cwebber2]
tantek, and now we've realized that's a mistake
18:20:25 [sandro]
eprodrom: Well, that's how it's been used
18:20:32 [tantek]
cwebber2, ok, in that case ok with "at risk"
18:20:33 [cwebber2]
tantek, granted, "fallbackName" is a new *term*
18:20:43 [cwebber2]
since it used to be displayName iirc
18:20:52 [cwebber2]
q+
18:20:57 [rhiaro]
q-
18:21:02 [sandro]
eprodrom: Making it a MUST would be hardening that requirement, which seems unneeded
18:21:03 [eprodrom]
ack tantek
18:21:03 [Zakim]
tantek, you wanted to note that IIRC at the f2f we decided to drop the SHOULD for name, which should not affect any conformant implementations. the fallbackname did not have
18:21:04 [sandro]
q?
18:21:06 [Zakim]
... consensus
18:21:32 [sandro]
tantek: What I recall from F2F, with one objection, was the drop the SHOULD from .name
18:21:55 [sandro]
.. having a fallback name, people were open to that, editor was supposed to provide proposal
18:22:30 [sandro]
.. regarding fallback name, Chris and I spoke, and I'd be okay adding something at-risk
18:23:00 [sandro]
cwebber2: So, I'm looking at the notes
18:23:02 [cwebber2]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-09-23-minutes#AS2
18:23:03 [rhiaro]
That way of thinking about it makes it sound almost like it's a non-normative change, that's what I was looking for :)
18:23:06 [cwebber2]
RESOLUTION: Return distinction between "user entered or otherwise significant name" and "text fallback" and shift SHOULD from meaningful name to text fallback.
18:23:08 [tantek]
yay citationd
18:23:13 [tantek]
s/citationd/citations
18:23:14 [Loqi]
:D
18:23:51 [sandro]
.. I think that was a good resolution
18:24:09 [sandro]
so what to call them?
18:24:17 [sandro]
s/so/.. so/
18:24:36 [tantek]
ugh, the whole reason we renamed to "name" was because others using "meaningful name" were using that
18:24:38 [sandro]
cwebber2: main motive is avoid a new CR --- so make name be the fallback
18:24:44 [rhiaro]
I agree with everything cwebber2 is saying
18:24:54 [sandro]
cwebber2: But I like the name as the meaningful name
18:25:33 [sandro]
sandro: if it's an extension, then it doesn't need a new CR
18:25:38 [sandro]
cwebber2: I think this is core
18:25:52 [rhiaro]
It's only like 4 weeks, right
18:25:53 [sandro]
tantek: I'd like another CR to do this
18:25:55 [rhiaro]
It's not so bad :p
18:26:43 [rhiaro]
AS2 is for life, not just for the charter period.
18:26:44 [sandro]
eprodrom: Yeah. My feeling here is ... the spec is forever, so let's try to do the right thing for the long term.
18:26:52 [annbass]
+1 on 'doing right thing'!
18:27:07 [sandro]
.. let's not have our short-term scheduling issue be the problem.
18:27:21 [tantek]
q+ to note that I did propose a way to potentially avoid a second CR at the f2f
18:27:36 [sandro]
eprodrom: so let's have .name be the meaningful name, and something else .depiction? as the fallback
18:27:51 [sandro]
cwebber2: how about .displayName ?
18:27:58 [sandro]
.. or .fallbackName
18:27:59 [tantek]
I can live with fallbackname
18:28:05 [sandro]
+1 fallbackName
18:28:16 [tantek]
however I have a counterproposal for avoiding a 2nd CR (I think)
18:28:18 [sandro]
eprodrom: I like fallbackName
18:28:30 [sandro]
.. sounds a bit like tempInteger but I see the point
18:28:51 [tantek]
(that I made at the f2f)
18:28:51 [sandro]
q?
18:28:52 [eprodrom]
q?
18:28:55 [eprodrom]
ack cwebber2
18:28:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
q+ to ask about SHOULD / MUST of fallbackName
18:28:59 [eprodrom]
ack cwebber
18:29:09 [eprodrom]
ack tantek
18:29:09 [Zakim]
tantek, you wanted to note that I did propose a way to potentially avoid a second CR at the f2f
18:29:29 [sandro]
q+ to ask if you need fallbackName when there's a name
18:29:44 [sandro]
tantek: another idea, without CR
18:29:49 [sandro]
.. drop SHOULD from name
18:29:50 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro, i was going to cover that too
18:30:00 [sandro]
.. say consumers that need some kind of fallback name
18:30:11 [sandro]
.. should use the .summary property
18:30:29 [sandro]
.. and say publishers, if you don't provide a name, you SHOULD provide a plaintext .summary
18:30:43 [sandro]
.. In my experience, the situations where you don't provide a name
18:31:02 [sandro]
.. and consumers still want a something, my exoperience and indiewebcamp experience, is summary works well for that
18:31:28 [sandro]
.. eg a LIKE doesn't have a meaningful name, but it does have a summary which can be used in contexts that don't understand Like
18:31:31 [sandro]
.. that works well
18:31:51 [sandro]
.. it works in clients that don't understand this kind of reaction, but understand reactions in general
18:31:58 [tantek]
<tantek> +1 with use as "summary" for fallback text since that seems to work, and does not require adding a new term (thus does not require a new CR)
18:32:20 [sandro]
.. I'm advocating for this, that this doesn't need a new CR
18:32:30 [sandro]
.. would this break any existing implementations?
18:32:32 [cwebber2]
q+
18:32:52 [sandro]
.. I'm trying to find a way to keep the funcationlity people want, in a way that folks have seen working
18:33:10 [sandro]
eprodrom: sounds like a solid proposal, I like it
18:33:21 [sandro]
.. only objection I might have is
18:33:49 [cwebber2]
q+ to say it would be fine, but explain I think it'll still result in a new CR though
18:33:57 [rhiaro]
q+ to ask if we'd have to kick html out of summary for this to work?
18:34:00 [sandro]
.. the name/title slot typically has max six words, but in some cases, the summary might be several sentences long. An Abstract or TL;DR type thing.
18:34:13 [sandro]
.. that's my only concern here
18:34:39 [sandro]
tantek: I agree that's a real case
18:34:53 [rhiaro]
I can hear tantek and eprodrom just fine
18:34:54 [eprodrom]
Did I just fall off the call, or did tantek?
18:34:57 [eprodrom]
I think it was me
18:35:19 [eprodrom]
I'm going to call back in either way, since I can't hear.
18:35:29 [sandro]
.. but in all the cases where there's a longer article, there's a name provided in practice.
18:35:34 [sandro]
.. I think
18:35:42 [eprodrom]
tantek: would you mind chairing for 5 minutes while I reconnect?
18:35:47 [sandro]
.. When summary is longer, there tends to be a meaningful name
18:35:58 [sandro]
.. Also, it's possible for people to provide really long names anyway
18:36:07 [rhiaro]
If summary is long, the consumer knows they're allowed to truncate it, since it's sthe fallback
18:36:16 [sandro]
.. Maybe provide guidances, saying .name and .summary MIGHT be long
18:36:27 [sandro]
q-
18:36:51 [tantek]
q?
18:36:54 [tantek]
chair: tantek
18:36:57 [tantek]
ack ben_thatmustbeme
18:36:57 [Zakim]
ben_thatmustbeme, you wanted to ask about SHOULD / MUST of fallbackName
18:37:17 [sandro]
ben_thatmustbeme: in either case, whether we use fallbackName or .summary, is it a MUST or a SHOULD?
18:37:28 [cwebber2]
-1 on MUST
18:37:57 [sandro]
tantek: Yes, if there's no name provided, summary becomes a SHOULD. SHOULD is strong enough, doesn't need to be MUST, because we might get empty summary values.
18:37:58 [cwebber2]
it's just fallback text, if someone doesn't have it, it's hot a *huge* deal
18:38:02 [eprodrom]
back
18:38:18 [sandro]
.. this keeps a smaller change.
18:38:34 [eprodrom]
name -> summary -> "an object"
18:38:37 [sandro]
ben_thatmustbeme: If .name isn't present, the publisher SHOULD provide a .summary
18:38:49 [sandro]
tantek:Right, but we should also give guidance in case both are missing.
18:38:57 [sandro]
.. that's a possible thing in the real world.
18:39:29 [sandro]
sandro: The test suite should have an entry missing both\
18:39:33 [tantek]
eprodI would be ok with that
18:39:34 [sandro]
eprodrom: it does now
18:39:40 [cwebber2]
q?
18:39:49 [tantek]
eprodrom, I would be ok with something like that up to the consumer (localization etc.)
18:39:50 [eprodrom]
ack cwebber
18:39:50 [Zakim]
cwebber, you wanted to say it would be fine, but explain I think it'll still result in a new CR though
18:39:52 [tantek]
chair: eprodrom
18:40:14 [sandro]
cwebber2: I'm fine with .summary, and I'm against MUST, as we discussed in F2F
18:40:17 [tantek]
+1 cwebber2
18:40:26 [sandro]
.. I want to raise a Devil's Advocate argument
18:40:48 [sandro]
.. if we move the SHOULD, that still might need a new CR
18:41:05 [sandro]
.. if BigBlueHat were here, he'd argue that SHOULD's aren't normative
18:41:43 [sandro]
tantek: It's not that SHOULD's arent normative, it's about new features, and breaking implementations.
18:42:04 [sandro]
.. so if implementations do something different, then you'd need a normative change in response
18:42:05 [rhiaro]
It means that most of my activities don't have summary..
18:42:06 [sandro]
.. case by case
18:42:24 [sandro]
rhiaro -- or a name?
18:42:32 [rhiaro]
sandro: aye
18:42:37 [eprodrom]
q?
18:42:49 [sandro]
tantek: If we think this is compatible with implemnentations, it should be okay
18:42:57 [sandro]
cwebber2: Let's check with James
18:42:58 [rhiaro]
..maybe it's fine
18:43:03 [tantek]
q?
18:43:20 [sandro]
eprodrom: No, we don't need to wait for James. He's aware of our schedule.
18:43:34 [tantek]
jasnell can raise an issue based on this conclusion if he wants and we can consider that if/when that happens
18:43:39 [tantek]
+1 eprodrom
18:43:48 [sandro]
eprodrom: This is in the spirit of what we agreed at the F2F
18:44:08 [eprodrom]
q?
18:44:12 [cwebber2]
+1 sounds good
18:44:16 [eprodrom]
ack rhiaro
18:44:16 [Zakim]
rhiaro, you wanted to ask if we'd have to kick html out of summary for this to work?
18:44:27 [eprodrom]
!!
18:44:37 [sandro]
rhiaro: This all sounds good. I'm fine using .summary this way. Great to have it not considered a normative change.
18:44:41 [sandro]
.. what about Markup, though
18:44:59 [sandro]
sandro: name does not have markup, but summary does ?
18:45:13 [sandro]
eprodrom: leave it as is
18:45:19 [sandro]
sandro: advice to implementors?
18:45:27 [eprodrom]
PROPOSED: name -> MAY, summary -> SHOULD, add section on string representation of object
18:45:39 [tantek]
not sure if that made it through
18:45:40 [tantek]
summary is a SHOULD *only* in the absence of name
18:45:52 [tantek]
don't want a general SHOULD on summary
18:45:54 [eprodrom]
PROPOSED: name -> MAY, summary -> SHOULD if no name, add section on string representation of object
18:46:02 [rhiaro]
Also there was that thing about keeping it required for Article ..?
18:46:15 [tantek]
and informative consumer guidance on what to do with too long of a name/summary or if both are empty
18:46:22 [sandro]
sandro: yes, but that doesn't address markup
18:46:45 [tantek]
summary -> SHOULD be there and be plain text if no name
18:46:53 [sandro]
sandro: would be say something like: when you're using summary as a backup name, it's okay to strip out the markup.
18:47:03 [sandro]
eprodrom: Yes, non-normative advice.
18:47:10 [tantek]
yes
18:47:25 [sandro]
sandro: I'm concerned stripping markup might change semantics
18:47:50 [sandro]
eprodrom: okay to leave the markup, too
18:47:53 [sandro]
q?
18:47:56 [tantek]
q+
18:48:03 [rhiaro]
q+ to say I feel like cases where it might change the semantics are probably 'name' cases
18:48:05 [eprodrom]
q?
18:48:05 [tantek]
q-
18:48:16 [tantek]
oops disconnected, reconnecting
18:48:28 [cwebber2]
oof
18:48:30 [sandro]
eprodrom: I'd note that summary has markup
18:48:34 [cwebber2]
welllll
18:48:42 [tantek]
sandro no
18:48:44 [sandro]
sandro: I think we said name needs to work without markup, so fallback name does too
18:48:54 [rhiaro]
q-
18:48:58 [tantek]
implementations of Atom etc. already drop markup from 'name' or 'summary' when displaying
18:49:02 [cwebber2]
that doesn't mean that summary renders in the same way as name...
18:49:07 [tantek]
so no this is not an issue in practice
18:49:14 [cwebber2]
taking markup out of summary seems bad
18:49:39 [rhiaro]
I think it's fine saying if publisher is using summary as a fallback, SHOULD NOT have markup
18:49:39 [sandro]
sandro: Tantek, you're saying it's well know, even if not in spec, that markup might be stripped from sumary
18:49:55 [cwebber2]
-1 on taking markup out of summary, +0 on permitting stripping markup from summary (though depending on markup, that might not always be easy)
18:49:57 [sandro]
tantek --- no sound
18:50:01 [tantek]
implementations already do it (consuming code removes markup from name / summary in Atom)
18:50:11 [tantek]
sandro I am still disconnected, attempting dialing
18:50:11 [wilkie]
the biggest dependency I've had in implementations is libxml which is a troublesome dependency to support on many machines. I only need it to strip HTML out, which I do 100% of the time.
18:50:21 [tantek]
right
18:50:46 [sandro]
eprodrom: consumer can do anything, so no point in saying they can strip markup
18:51:03 [sandro]
.. maybe advice against markup in summary when used as fallback
18:51:17 [rhiaro]
That sounds good to me
18:51:20 [sandro]
-1 eprodrom consumers can do whatever they want
18:51:21 [cwebber2]
I want waffles
18:52:23 [eprodrom]
PROPOSED: name -> MAY, plaintext summary -> SHOULD if no name, add section on string representation of object
18:52:55 [sandro]
tantek: Also informative guidance on both being too big or empty
18:52:58 [wilkie]
HTML in fields are good if I can just ignore them completely if I'm likely going to strip the HTML and can't rely on preserving the intended representation
18:53:03 [eprodrom]
PROPOSED: name -> MAY, summary -> SHOULD if no name, add section on string representation of object including informative guidance on name or summary being very long
18:53:03 [sandro]
.. because we have thoguht about
18:53:32 [ben_thatmustbeme]
PROPOSED: change name to may, if no name, SHOULD provide a plaintext summary, add a sectino on string representation, add guidance to the fact that summary or name may be too long
18:53:36 [ben_thatmustbeme]
hows that
18:53:37 [ben_thatmustbeme]
?
18:53:47 [ben_thatmustbeme]
GAH
18:53:53 [aaronpk]
haha I type "functino" all the time
18:54:00 [Loqi]
aaronpk: lol
18:54:00 [eprodrom]
PROPOSED: change name to may, if no name, SHOULD provide a plaintext summary, add a section on string representation, add guidance to the fact that summary or name may be too long
18:54:17 [cwebber2]
+1
18:54:20 [sandro]
+1
18:54:30 [eprodrom]
+1
18:54:30 [sandro]
(okay with "very long)
18:54:35 [rhiaro]
+1
18:54:36 [wilkie]
+1
18:54:37 [aaronpk]
+1
18:54:41 [ben_thatmustbeme]
very long is fine too
18:54:41 [tsyesika]
+1
18:54:49 [ben_thatmustbeme]
didn't tantek want "or both may be empty"
18:54:53 [tantek]
+1 ok with s/too/very, and ok adding guidance on if both name & summary are empty
18:54:53 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
18:54:57 [rhiaro]
This is just the text of the proposal, not what will go in the spec, it's okay ;P
18:55:13 [eprodrom]
RESOLVED: change name to may, if no name, SHOULD provide a plaintext summary, add a section on string representation, add guidance to the fact that summary or name may be too long
18:55:39 [annbass]
+1
18:56:16 [sandro]
topic: AS2 Validator
18:56:24 [sandro]
eprodrom: plan to have new version for F2F
18:56:28 [sandro]
.. patches welcome
18:56:42 [rhiaro]
Thanks!
18:56:59 [KevinMarks2]
KevinMarks2 has joined #social
18:57:00 [sandro]
topic: pubsub.rocks
18:57:33 [sandro]
aaronpk: pubsub.rocks now has test tool for publishers and subscribers
18:58:00 [sandro]
aaronpk++
18:58:00 [Loqi]
aaronpk has 67 karma in this channel (1137 overall)
18:58:11 [sandro]
aaronpk: next step is if you're building a hub
18:58:21 [sandro]
.. that'll build implementation report
18:58:27 [eprodrom]
q?
18:58:41 [ben_thatmustbeme]
just to note, there are a bunch of new implementation reports for webmention https://webmention.net/implementation-reports/summary/
18:58:48 [tantek]
pubsubrocks++ !
18:58:48 [Loqi]
pubsubrocks has 1 karma
18:59:22 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk++
18:59:22 [Loqi]
aaronpk has 68 karma in this channel (1138 overall)
18:59:26 [sandro]
aaronpk: likely hub test tool will be done next week, but maybe not submitting results
18:59:45 [sandro]
eprodrom, Any other business?
18:59:50 [ben_thatmustbeme]
just to note, there are a bunch of new implementation reports for webmention https://webmention.net/implementation-reports/summary/
19:00:06 [rhiaro]
q+ to note pubsub name change on wiki
19:00:14 [eprodrom]
ack rhiaro
19:00:14 [Zakim]
rhiaro, you wanted to note pubsub name change on wiki
19:00:24 [aaronpk]
https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/push-name
19:00:25 [tantek]
any leaders?
19:01:06 [tantek]
going to be a close call, vote for your pubsub bikeshedding today!!!
19:01:12 [annbass]
thanks Sandro and Evan!
19:01:12 [rhiaro]
o/
19:01:15 [eprodrom]
trackbot, stop meeting
19:01:15 [trackbot]
Sorry, eprodrom, I don't understand 'trackbot, stop meeting'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
19:01:54 [sandro]
eprodrom: Thanks everyone, see everyone at F2F Thursday
19:02:02 [eprodrom]
trackbot, end meeting
19:02:02 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
19:02:02 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been annbass, rhiaro, aaronpk, tsyesika, eprodrom, sandro, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber, tantek
19:02:10 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:02:10 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/08-social-minutes.html trackbot
19:02:11 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
19:02:11 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items