IRC log of social on 2016-12-13

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:10:49 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #social
18:10:49 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/13-social-irc
18:10:51 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
18:10:51 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #social
18:10:53 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be SOCL
18:10:53 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot
18:10:54 [trackbot]
Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
18:10:54 [trackbot]
Date: 13 December 2016
18:10:59 [ben_thatmustbeme]
scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme
18:11:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: AS2
18:11:33 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: we made a small error last week, we decided to publish AS2 without realizing the vocab document had changed
18:12:01 [sandro]
https://www.w3.org/People/Sandro/as2-vocab-cr1-cr2.html
18:12:01 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... it didn't have a change log, but i did a diff and it had a ton of changes, all the examples had changed
18:12:10 [Loqi]
[James M Snell] Activity Vocabulary
18:12:22 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... as well as other clarifications, there is the diff i did last week (link in IRC)
18:12:38 [aaronpk]
present+
18:12:48 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... since then Evan added a changelog
18:13:03 [KevinMarks]
Present+
18:13:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
present+
18:13:08 [cwebber2]
I can look
18:13:28 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: can people take a quick look and see if this seems right to you?
18:13:29 [csarven]
present+
18:14:04 [cwebber2]
sandro, so what's the question? is the changelog right?
18:14:19 [timbl]
timbl has joined #social
18:14:42 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: they are only examples
18:14:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
cwebber2: (beep beep beep)
18:15:09 [cwebber2]
ok I'll just type then
18:15:09 [csarven]
I think I've heard every possible sound that one can make through w3c telcos
18:15:18 [csarven]
That wa sa nice one fo rme
18:15:21 [csarven]
new
18:15:43 [annbass]
present+
18:15:49 [sandro]
present+
18:15:59 [sandro]
PROPOSED: Confirm last week's decision to publish AS2 as a new Candidate Recommendation, now that we have a proper changelog for AS2 Vocabs http://w3c.github.io/activitystreams/vocabulary/#changelog
18:16:06 [Loqi]
[James M Snell] Activity Vocabulary
18:16:07 [annbass]
+1
18:16:09 [ben_thatmustbeme]
+1
18:16:12 [sandro]
+1
18:16:36 [ben_thatmustbeme]
<ben_thatmustbeme> i looked over the examples, again not an expert, but looks good given a quick look through (while scribing)
18:16:36 [rhiaro]
+1
18:16:41 [aaronpk]
+1
18:16:48 [cwebber2]
+1
18:16:49 [sandro]
RESOLVED: Confirm last week's decision to publish AS2 as a new Candidate Recommendation, now that we have a proper changelog for AS2 Vocabs http://w3c.github.io/activitystreams/vocabulary/#changelog
18:16:50 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: any other votes, thoughts?
18:16:53 [jasnell]
jasnell has joined #social
18:16:55 [Loqi]
[James M Snell] Activity Vocabulary
18:17:14 [sandro]
http://as2.amy.gy/reports.html
18:17:16 [tantek]
tantek has joined #social
18:17:16 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: amy i see new implementation reports?
18:17:24 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: i didn't put anything on the agenda
18:17:31 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... maybe just copied from last week
18:17:50 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: i think we are good on AS2, that should be published on thursday
18:17:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
TOPIC: webmention
18:17:59 [jasnell]
jasnell has joined #social
18:18:20 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: in theory we should be moving from CR to REC, but it looks like its not going to happen before the deadline for this year
18:19:25 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: the issues that are open right now are from external commenters, and every issue on there now has a PR for it and i'm waiting to hear back from the commentor about the issue
18:19:55 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... it looks like tantek has given some thumbs up on all of them, but i'm assuming thats just from him and not from the original commentor
18:20:04 [shepazu]
shepazu has joined #social
18:20:05 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: some of these are from Mozilla?
18:20:31 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: yes. They are all just clarifications, but I'd appreciate any review people want to do
18:20:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... these will be the last things to go in to the draft before going to REC
18:21:24 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: that sounds like a good reason not to go to REC before the break, give commenters time to review them and respond
18:21:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... it will be much harder to make any changes after this
18:21:49 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... does anyone want to go over any of these now?
18:22:29 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: wasn't there something about 1mb hard-written in to the spec
18:22:56 [KevinMarks]
Can we talk them through and commit the PRs, and wait for commenters in that state?
18:23:03 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: yes in the security considerations, should put limitations on fetching" "for example, 1 mb or 5 seconds"
18:23:25 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: i would have imagined we would say that clients have to read at least the first MB
18:23:51 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: i'm happy with the text on 86
18:25:12 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: if anyone is reviewing these now and we are happy with it, i'm happy to merge PRs in and then wait for commenter after the merge
18:26:35 [aaronpk]
https://github.com/w3c/webmention/issues/76
18:26:41 [aaronpk]
https://github.com/w3c/webmention/pull/85/files
18:27:00 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: this should be pretty easy, i basically added a background section at the top of the document
18:27:31 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... explaining how webmention was built from and on top of pingback
18:28:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: pingback never specified what to do for updates and deletes
18:28:39 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: correct, it actuallly could not be used for updates as it said to reject a pingback that was already registered
18:28:48 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: what about trackback?
18:29:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: trackback was just actually sending the comment snippet, there wasn't anything about URLs in the spec
18:29:46 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: whenever i explain webmention, i have to use the word trackback for them to understand it
18:30:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
annbass: would it be possible to add some little comment about trackback as well?
18:30:17 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... set the historical context
18:31:13 [KevinMarks]
I suspect talking to people who haven't been on the web for a decade, trackback references will only confuse
18:32:46 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: i don't know, trackback is so old and overrun with spam it doesn't seem worth mentioning
18:33:23 [ben_thatmustbeme]
annbass: i suppose but as sandro said when he explains it he has to reference trackback
18:33:46 [sandro]
https://movabletype.org/documentation/trackback/specification.html
18:33:47 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: even just bringing up trackback spec confuses me, do we want to link people to it
18:34:10 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... the spec talks about installing cURL, thats not a spec
18:34:32 [ben_thatmustbeme]
<ben_thatmustbeme> can we just say "and other linkback methods" or something?
18:34:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: maybe i can include a sentence about webmention being in this family of linkback mechanisms
18:35:10 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: and maybe link to wikipedia for those that don't know what linkback is?
18:35:42 [sandro]
"Webmention provides a [[LinkBack]] mechanism. It began as a simplified version of [[PingBack]].... "
18:35:44 [ben_thatmustbeme]
csarven: i think thats a good way as there are other methods that may be coming up
18:35:59 [annbass]
I like that suggestion .. shows there are some other 'link back' mechanisms, with a ref, but without having to delve into any history or details
18:36:09 [sandro]
"Webmention provides a [[LinkBack]] mechanism, somewhat akin to TrackBack. Webmention itself began as a simplified version of [[PingBack]].... "
18:37:40 [tantek]
tantek has joined #social
18:37:41 [csarven]
I don't know if anyone actually cares about this but AFAIK, Semantic Pingback (circa 2010) predates Webmention. Whether that needs to be said somewhere is something else.
18:38:04 [csarven]
and both derive from Pingback.. or I don't know if WM derived/simplified from SP or not.
18:40:15 [KevinMarks]
Right, there are lots of these, so referring to the general idea is better than an attempted genealogy.
18:41:14 [tantek]
the specific request was for Pingback since that is what is widely known and deployed (and thus folks have some understanding of its security etc characteristics in practice)
18:41:23 [KevinMarks]
Technorati was link back as a service, Blogger has had backlinks based on Google crawl for years,
18:41:25 [tantek]
it wasn't about a full genealogy of all experiments
18:41:36 [tantek]
to add clarity from the commenter's perspective (Mozilla)
18:41:40 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: i think what i want to do is just mention that webmention is a linkback and it links to the wikipedia page
18:41:44 [tantek]
so no need to add anything beyond that
18:41:51 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i'm doing that right now
18:42:43 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: looks good
18:42:51 [KevinMarks]
Or we end up going back to Xanadu and Memex
18:42:53 [tantek]
no
18:42:58 [sandro]
:-)
18:43:07 [tantek]
the linkback abstaraction is academic
18:43:24 [tantek]
the specific request was for pingback and/or trackback
18:43:32 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: since tantek opened these issues, i'll wait for tantek to go back to the original commentor
18:43:33 [tantek]
because of practical deployment experience reasons
18:43:35 [csarven]
Then just say Pingback!
18:43:36 [tantek]
not for definitional ones
18:43:40 [csarven]
No need to talk about LInkback inf act
18:43:47 [tantek]
csarven - right, just Pingback is enough
18:43:54 [tantek]
that's what the issue said originally
18:43:59 [tantek]
not sure what all this bikeshedding is about
18:44:22 [sandro]
it's done, tantek
18:44:44 [tantek]
I confirmed that just referencing Pingback is enough, the way the pull request did when I reviewed it earlier this morning
18:44:52 [tantek]
(pull request on the issue)
18:45:00 [tantek]
linkback--
18:45:00 [Loqi]
linkback has -1 karma
18:45:57 [aaronpk]
https://github.com/w3c/webmention/issues/84
18:46:16 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: this is a tricky one, it sounded like he misunderstood what the section was about
18:46:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... it was specifically about the POST request
18:47:18 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... that was the section, but the comment, was about republishing private comment, essentially a totally different issue which we hadn't talked about before
18:47:33 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... instead of changing that section, I added another section about his actual concern
18:48:05 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... since webmention doesn't specify anything about republishing, its an note under the verification section
18:48:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... it mentions that the receiver might be republishing that
18:48:44 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i added a note below that about not unintentionally changing the privacy on that
18:49:05 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... just trying to make sure people are aware of it, without specifying what to do about it. thats a job for the next layer up
18:49:28 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: i'm happy with that change
18:50:00 [KevinMarks]
That's a useful clarification.
18:51:15 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: closing 71 since tantek opened that and he thumbs upped it
18:51:30 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: do we know when the publishing moritorium is over?
18:51:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: we'll figure it out laster
18:51:41 [rhiaro]
January 3, 2017: Publications resume
18:51:57 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: are we meeting on the 20th and/or 27th
18:52:22 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i'd guess we are not meeting the 27th, we COULD meet the 20th, i'd prefer not to
18:52:36 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: i'd be up for dropping the 27th meeting
18:52:48 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... that means the next meeting would be the date publishing ends
18:52:56 [tantek]
tantek has joined #social
18:53:22 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: if you want to go and prepare a draft for the third, assuming all the commenters are happy
18:54:11 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: rhiaro have you gone to sleep?
18:55:00 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: we'll try to move things along and get it published when the moritorium ends
18:55:16 [KevinMarks]
http://epeus.blogspot.com/2004/02/technorati-xanadu-and-other-dreams.html historic info for csarven
18:55:46 [tantek]
sandro, did you hear back re: REC publishing? is it already too late?
18:56:37 [sandro]
no answer, tantek
18:57:00 [sandro]
tantek, can you get a positive response from the commenter?
18:57:24 [csarven]
KevinMarks: Do I have to read this? What was the inquiry?
18:58:08 [tantek]
sandro, already preflighted that with the proposals in the issues
18:58:56 [tantek]
also, to be clear, the Mozilla vote on the PR was to Yes to publish, with *suggested* changes, not required
18:59:24 [sandro]
Sure, but since they're editorial improvements, it's not nice to ignore them.
18:59:46 [tantek]
especially as these are all editorial / non-normative, I believe the changes being made reflect the intentions of the commenter
18:59:57 [tantek]
(from having spoken with the commenter in-person last week)
19:00:05 [sandro]
excellent, okay
19:00:08 [tantek]
(we had a Mozilla All Hands last week)
19:01:21 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: i've been looking up on "linkback" and it looks like the term only exists on wikipedia
19:01:38 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... it looks like it was created there
19:01:45 [cwebber2]
to linkback?
19:01:48 [tantek]
that sounds likea violation of Wikipedia's no original research rule
19:01:51 [cwebber2]
https://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy-ab&site=&source=hp&q=linkback&=&=&oq=&gs_l=&pbx=1
19:01:54 [cwebber2]
seems to be a lot of results
19:02:01 [tantek]
nothing citable
19:02:04 [ben_thatmustbeme]
annbass: do whatever you feel is right
19:02:13 [aaronpk]
cwebber2, look at the results, they're not about the 4 methods
19:02:19 [tantek]
cwebber2 - if there were, the linkback article itself would have a citation
19:02:20 [KevinMarks]
No, you do t have to read anything, I thought you were be interested in the history of this
19:02:21 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: i find myself using the term 'backlinking'
19:02:30 [cwebber2]
ah ok
19:02:33 [annbass]
the point is to help the uninitiated reader understand
19:02:37 [ben_thatmustbeme]
<ben_thatmustbeme> sandro, but backlinking is really,r eally generic though in my mind
19:02:48 [cwebber2]
I gotta go though
19:02:52 [cwebber2]
later everyone!
19:02:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: a backlink is a name for the link itself
19:03:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... that is a kind of different thing
19:03:19 [tantek]
cwebber2 - made-up stuff on wikipedia is bad for everyone
19:03:52 [ben_thatmustbeme]
<ben_thatmustbeme> i'm not sure i like us linking to wikipedia in the spec anyway
19:04:08 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: yeah, lets go back to the pingback version then
19:04:17 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: i think i like that better
19:05:40 [ben_thatmustbeme]
so there are 3 issues, 3 PRs, tantek believes they address all the issues raised
19:05:49 [ben_thatmustbeme]
s/so/.../
19:06:14 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: so i will merge the PRs and leave the issues waiting for commenter so we don't lose track of them
19:06:21 [ben_thatmustbeme]
... i'll do that and I'll stage this
19:06:50 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: okay, it looks like we can probably go ahead for december 15th
19:06:56 [ben_thatmustbeme]
<ben_thatmustbeme> \o/
19:07:57 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: any last minute things from anyone else?
19:08:19 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: do people want to meet next week?
19:08:27 [tantek]
do we need to resolve to pubilsh anything?
19:08:35 [tantek]
(today)
19:08:35 [ben_thatmustbeme]
aaronpk: i might have some trailing things still for other work items
19:08:45 [sandro]
no resolution needed, really, but we did conmfirm AS2 with the changelog.
19:08:52 [KevinMarks]
“As we all know, Ted Nelson meant hypertexts to have bidirectional links. But due to a laboratory accident in Switzerland, we ended up with this lame thing.”
19:08:53 [sandro]
webmention REC should go out this week
19:09:14 [sandro]
"That was NO accident"
19:09:24 [tantek]
wow we'll actually deliver at least one charter deliverable within our original charter period!
19:09:27 [annbass]
gotta go ..
19:09:29 [annbass]
thanks Sandro
19:09:47 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: okay, tentatively there is a meeting for next week, might get cancelled if we end up with nothing on the agenda
19:09:50 [sandro]
meeting as planned next week, unless nothing turns up for the agenda
19:09:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
Chair: Sandro
19:10:05 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: and we said no meeting on the 27th
19:10:07 [sandro]
no meeting on Dec 27th.
19:10:09 [tantek]
present+
19:10:17 [tantek]
(just on IRC, sporadically :P)
19:10:24 [ben_thatmustbeme]
regrets+ evan
19:10:54 [KevinMarks]
You were present in github
19:11:29 [sandro]
ADJOURNED
19:11:40 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: talk to you all either in 1 week or 3, and have a happy december
19:11:41 [tantek]
sandro++ thanks for chairing!
19:11:41 [Loqi]
sandro has 32 karma in this channel (37 overall)
19:11:49 [tantek]
ben_thatmustbeme++ thanks for minuting!
19:11:49 [Loqi]
ben_thatmustbeme has 60 karma in this channel (181 overall)
19:11:54 [ben_thatmustbeme]
sandro: don't all say bye at once everyone
19:11:58 [ben_thatmustbeme]
rhiaro: bye
19:12:10 [sandro]
thank for scribing ben_thatmustbeme !
19:12:14 [tantek]
so maybe meeting next week, but definitely canceled the 27th?
19:12:24 [aaronpk]
yes
19:12:43 [ben_thatmustbeme]
trackbot end meeting
19:12:43 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
19:12:43 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been aaronpk, KevinMarks, ben_thatmustbeme, csarven, annbass, sandro, tantek
19:12:51 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
19:12:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/13-social-minutes.html trackbot
19:12:52 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
19:12:52 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items