16:05:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
16:05:21 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/05/05-social-irc
16:05:30 <sandro> rrsagent, make logs public
16:05:32 <aaronpk> scribenick: aaronpk
16:05:36 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #social
16:05:44 <sandro> (done)
16:05:50 <aaronpk> cwebber: we have kind of a loose agenda today but let's start with introductions
16:06:08 <aaronpk> cwebber: co-chair of this group and editor of activitypub
16:06:34 <aaronpk> aaronpk: co-chair of this group, editor of micropub, webmention and co-editor of websub
16:07:18 <ben_thatmustbeme> i'm good
16:07:18 <aaronpk> ben_thatmustbeme: ben roberts, involved in indieweb, member of the Social WG
16:07:22 <KevinMarks> Ouch, sorry
16:07:42 <aaronpk> dmitriz == codenamedmitri?
16:07:58 <aaronpk> dmitriz: at MIT with sandro, one of the developers on Solid, interested in decentralized authentication
16:08:25 <aaronpk> eknutson: I'm working on an activitypub microblog in javascript that will hopefully also be compatible with gnusocial and mastodon if we can figure out what compatible means
16:09:29 <aaronpk> Gargron: I'm Eugen. I work on Mastodon, I live in Germany.
16:09:34 <dmitriz_> dmitriz_ has joined #social
16:09:42 <aaronpk> geppy1: i'm working on microblogging using web annotations
16:10:02 <aaronpk> KevinMarks: i'm part of the SWWG and indieweb, and helped design opensocial
16:10:41 <aaronpk> maloki: i'm a project manager for mastodon, I like social stuff
16:10:59 <aaronpk> masoud: I'm a scientist but generally interested in decentralized stuff
16:11:20 <cwebber> also if there is anyone who's on irc-only and would like to introduce yourself, I can relay for you
16:11:26 <aaronpk> MMN-work: my name is Michael. I maintain GNUSocial and make sure it keeps working even with OS updates.
16:11:42 <FrankMurphy> FrankMurphy has joined #social
16:11:47 <aaronpk> cwebber: as some people may know, evanpro is co-chair of the Social WG
16:12:19 <aaronpk> nightpool: i'm one of the moderators of a service based on mastodon, i'm interested in activitypub support in mastodon
16:12:40 <aaronpk> sandro: I work for MIT and W3C, I'm the main W3C staff on social. i'm sandhawke online. I like to code in node.js
16:12:44 <nightpool> (s/a service/cybre.space/)
16:13:03 <geppy> geppy has joined #social
16:13:42 <aaronpk> cwebber: the social web community group (CG) is continuing the work of the working group (WG)
16:14:03 <aaronpk> ... i work on activitypub, a client-to-server and server-to-server federation protocol
16:14:13 <cwebber> scribenick: aaronpk
16:14:17 <cwebber> scribenick: cwebber
16:14:25 <sandro> https://github.com/w3c/activitypub
16:14:26 <Loqi> [w3c] activitypub
16:14:42 <cwebber> aaronpk: for those who don't know I'm workign on MicroPub, a client to server system, which is on the second to last stage of the formalization process
16:14:44 <sandro> or spec at https://github.com/w3c/activitypub
16:14:45 <Loqi> [w3c] activitypub
16:15:00 <sandro> q+ to talk about multistack
16:15:09 <cwebber> aaronpk: webmention is a w3c recommendation right now, it's used for doing cross-site comments, more or less an evolution of pingback but more tightly specified
16:15:28 <Gargron> I LOVED THE OLD NAME
16:15:30 <cwebber> aaronpk: the third spec I'm editing is websub, which is basically pubsubhubbub, with a few but few functional changes
16:15:45 <maloki> I can't even say it... I just skip half of it
16:15:50 <cwebber> aaronpk: I should also add that one of the goals of this community group is to continue the work of these specs after this workign group chapter is over
16:15:57 <MMN-work> Gargron: Pubsub my hub!
16:15:57 <ben_thatmustbeme> Gargron, non-native speakers tended to not love it
16:16:11 <Gargron> it sounded like you were summoning the dark lord
16:16:11 <FrankMurphy> Sorry about that... I did the audio test before the call while my laptop was on a dock, but I took it off the dock so something must have gotten thrown off... Hi everyone, my background is a little unorthodox: I'm an attorney by trade (though one with a CS degree) specializing in technology matters and open source. I'm a lifelong techie and became interested in decentralized social networking because of Mastodon. Stumbled onto ActivityPub from there.
16:16:14 <cwebber> aaronpk: one is to develop and formalize extensions around these specs.  Many of our specs are designed to be relatively small at what they describe, but are designed to be extensible
16:16:22 <cwebber> aaronpk: so that's we expect as apart of this cg
16:16:45 <MMN-work> Gargron: PS, you can mute the mic (there's a mic icon in the toolbar in Mumble) so your keystrokes don't reach the audio level for broadcasting. .)
16:17:06 <cwebber> q?
16:17:11 <maloki> FrankMurphy: :> <3
16:17:13 <MMN-work> (or configure push-to-talk, https://tserverhq.com/clients/knowledgebase/100/How-to-setup-push-to-talk-in-Mumble.html )
16:17:29 <ben_thatmustbeme> present+
16:17:31 <cwebber> ack sandro
16:17:31 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to talk about multistack
16:17:41 <aaronpk> sandro: i wanted to explain one thing that may not be obvious
16:17:59 <aaronpk> ... normally in the standards process you expect all the players to get together and come to conensus around one way
16:18:08 <maloki> 15th standard! :o
16:18:12 <KevinMarks_> KevinMarks_ has joined #social
16:18:36 <aaronpk> ... the WG found that pretty difficult, as everyone knows getting consensus is difficult, so we settled on a compromise. we allowed multiple approaches to be developed in the group to be able to make progress.
16:18:47 <cwebber> https://www.w3.org/TR/social-web-protocols/
16:18:49 <Loqi> [Amy Guy] Social Web Protocols
16:18:50 <sandro> https://www.w3.org/TR/social-web-protocols/
16:18:52 <Loqi> [Amy Guy] Social Web Protocols
16:19:01 <aaronpk> ... we don't know enough about the space to be able to make the right calls so we hope that having multiple specs instead of no specs will move things forward
16:19:19 <aaronpk> ... the social web protocols document is an overview of the relationships between all the specs
16:19:30 <cwebber> q?
16:19:36 <aaronpk> cwebber: the WG agreed that if we do extensions then this group would be the place to do it
16:19:53 <aaronpk> cwebber: does anyone have questions about the working group and its relation to the community group?
16:19:54 <nightpool> just as a quick, 30,0000 foot view: micropub is more about client-to-server communication, right?
16:20:18 <cwebber> scribenick: cwebber
16:20:29 <cwebber> aaronpk: yes micropub is specifically about client to server
16:20:50 <cwebber> aaronpk: you'll notice a recurring theme about the specs I'm working on is they're very broken up into discrete parts
16:20:56 <KevinMarks_> composable specs
16:21:03 <cwebber> aaronpk: federation and client to server are in separate parts
16:22:14 <aaronpk> cwebber: activitypub by contrast bundles both C2S and S2S in the same document but you can implement one and not the other
16:23:02 <cwebber> https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/2017-05-05#Topics
16:23:02 <KevinMarks_> you're gapping a lot
16:23:05 <aaronpk> this section is a nice side-by-side comparison https://www.w3.org/TR/social-web-protocols/#how-do-the-specs-relate-to-each-other
16:23:20 <ben_thatmustbeme> note that it is entirely possible to do micropub for C2S and activitypub for S2S or activitypub for C2S and webmention or LDN for S2S, etc
16:23:22 <MMN-work> KevinMarks: I think he's just pausing. .)
16:23:32 <aaronpk> cwebber: feel free to queue up if you want to bring up any topic
16:23:38 <KevinMarks_> hm, maybe it's my client
16:24:20 <aaronpk> cwebber: one example of an extension would be mastodon's content warnings, so we could do that as an extension in activitypub and formalize how that works in this group
16:24:30 <MMN-o> MMN-o has joined #social
16:24:45 <aaronpk> nightpool: what are the specific extension points of activitystreams and activitypub?
16:25:04 <aaronpk> cwebber: it can be the verbs, or any object or property. activitystreams uses JSON-LD to do its extensions
16:25:47 <aaronpk> however one of the things we agreed on is if we have common extensions in activitystreams, then this group is allowed to define extensions to add to the JSONLD context so that people don't have to keep tacking on JSONLD contexts
16:26:08 <aaronpk> that could be new verbs, new nouns, or extensions in activitypub for defining new behaviors and side effects
16:26:40 <aaronpk> nightpool: <scribe missed the question>
16:27:05 <KevinMarks_> Q was 'what can we extend? is it just verbs?'
16:27:15 <sandro> q?
16:27:17 <geppy> q+ activitypub implementations and tests
16:27:23 <cwebber> ack geppy
16:27:43 <Gargron> +q
16:27:45 <aaronpk> geppy: last time i checked in there were some tests in progress, but i haven't seen any implementations of activitypub, maybe i;m looking in the wrong place?
16:27:48 <nightpool> question was "just so I make sure I have this correctly, if I implement a linked set of extensions, I'm allowed to include a new context, and that works somewhat like an xml schema?"
16:27:55 <nightpool> aaronpk ^
16:28:02 <aaronpk> cwebber: there's a test suite in progress. we have an activitystreams report template.
16:28:09 <nightpool> (that was the followup for the question about extension points)
16:28:18 <aaronpk> cwebber: it's my responsibility to get that up and is what i'll be working on for the next few weeks
16:28:36 <aaronpk> sandro: do people have test suites they use for ostatus?
16:28:39 <aaronpk> that could be repurposed?
16:29:01 <aaronpk> MMN-o: we have tests for gnusocial but they haven't been updated in forever
16:29:07 <sandro> o
16:29:08 <sandro> ok
16:29:08 <KevinMarks_> mostly they try and interoperate and grumble about it ;)
16:29:13 <aaronpk> since they are ostatus it would be a huge rewrite to update for activitypub
16:29:28 <cwebber> q?
16:29:31 <geppy> q+ do you need help with AP tests?
16:29:35 <cwebber> ack gargon
16:29:41 <cwebber> ack Gargon
16:29:57 <cwebber> ack Gargron
16:30:04 <aaronpk> Gargron: there is a work in progress activitypub impelemntation in mastodon. it's read only right now, it exposes some objects through the JSON api
16:30:31 <aaronpk> there is some effort to make that work for server-to-0server implementaiton. mastodon is not looking to implement client-to-server APIs since we're quite happy with how our own APIs work and the app ecosystem around it
16:31:00 <aaronpk> Gargron: there is no one test suite people can use to test whether their software is compatible with OStatus. mastodon has its own test suite for compatibility with various specs like Salmon and PubSubHubbub
16:31:12 <aaronpk> so tests like that could be written for activitypub as well
16:31:15 <aaronpk> q+ to talk about tests
16:31:20 <MMN-work> WebSub has a test suite that's being worked on afaik, which is a part of OStatus (in practice).
16:31:23 <KevinMarks_> q+ websub.rocks
16:31:27 <nightpool> (meta question: is there a place where we can add topics for later that's less immediate then queuing? or should we just queue?)
16:31:46 <MMN-work> Good, KevinMarks .)
16:31:47 <cwebber> q?
16:31:51 <cwebber> ack aaronpk
16:31:51 <Zakim> aaronpk, you wanted to talk about tests
16:32:20 <nightpool> q+ geppy to ask do you need help with AP tests?
16:32:21 <cwebber> q?
16:32:39 <nightpool> (geppy: your earlier one didn't go through for syntax reasons)
16:32:42 <KevinMarks_> ack websub.rocks
16:32:45 <cwebber> KevinMarks_, were you queuing yourself?
16:32:45 <cwebber> ah
16:32:46 <cwebber> ok
16:32:52 <cwebber> scribenick: cwebber
16:32:57 <KevinMarks_> I thought I was
16:33:02 <cwebber> aaronpk: these aren't tests that are like unit tests, more functional tests
16:33:13 <geppy> (nightpool: thanks!  I didn't realize I need to say "... to ...".)
16:33:42 <cwebber> aaronpk: you can see examples at webmention.rocks and micropub.rocks
16:33:47 <nightpool> (yeah, you can elide the person if you're queueing yourself, but you do need to say "to")
16:33:59 <cwebber> aaronpk: those are good examples of tools that people can use
16:34:07 <sandro> q+ to clarify q syntax
16:34:21 <cwebber> KevinMarks_: what I meant to say is that websub.rocks is to test for conformance for mastodon gnu social etc
16:34:24 <cwebber> q?
16:34:24 <aaronpk> KevinMarks_: websub.rocks is a way to test the websub implementation of mastodon and gnusocial which should already pass it
16:34:26 <cwebber> ack geppy
16:34:26 <Zakim> geppy, you wanted to ask do you need help with AP tests?
16:34:37 <cwebber> geppy: do you need help with the ap tests?
16:35:31 <geppy> Shiny, thanks!
16:35:32 <cwebber> q?
16:35:34 <cwebber> ack sandro
16:35:34 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to clarify q syntax
16:35:55 <cwebber> cwebber: yes, let's talk more after meeting (and it's in scheme)
16:36:08 <Gargron> +q websub.rocks, server authorization/trust
16:36:16 <cwebber> sandro: so you do "q+ to: foo" to remind yourself about a topic
16:36:20 <geppy> (Oh, thanks for explaining q!)
16:36:27 <cwebber> q?
16:36:32 <Gargron> oops
16:36:40 <sandro> queue=
16:36:49 <KevinMarks_> https://toot.cat/users/cwebber/updates/21078
16:36:50 <Loqi> [[MOVED] Christopher Webber] Hey everyone!  So the first call of the Social Web Incubator Community Group is at 4PM GMT this Friday, May 5th.  I hope you can make it! https://www.w3.org/community/swicg/2017/05/01/social-web-incubator-community-group-kick-off-call/ This will be a...
16:36:53 <cwebber> Gargron: I'm reminded of websub.rocks which is an amazing resource
16:37:08 <cwebber> Gargron: it's not really a test you can add any account and it work
16:37:26 <cwebber> Gargron: The problem is that websub.rocks does not work for mastodon, which is mainly because the implementation of private status in mastodon
16:37:39 <cwebber> Gargron: the problem is if you have ??? only then is the push done to the server
16:37:53 <cwebber> Gargron: so status is done not only to anyone who subscribes, but this accidentally breaks websub.rocks
16:38:14 <cwebber> Gargron: so I have no problem doing this change
16:38:18 <ben_thatmustbeme> would be good for public statuses for subscription between services
16:38:38 <cwebber> Gargron: one problem with OStatus is nothing about reachability is not specified in the spec, so I had to invent my own xml tag, and no other software understood that tag
16:38:48 <nightpool> "if you have at least one authorized follower" for the ??? cwebber
16:38:52 <cwebber> Gargron: ActivityPub solves this
16:39:00 <aaronpk> s/???/if you have at least one authorized follower
16:39:11 <cwebber> Gargron: but the problem still remains that the user has to be aware of what servers the status travels to
16:39:21 <cwebber> Gargron: because a rogue implementation can simply be modified to leak/reveal them
16:39:29 <cwebber> Gargron: so I'm bringing up that concern
16:39:29 <cwebber> q?
16:39:31 <cwebber> q+
16:39:33 <MMN-work> q+ to discuss public web content accessibility
16:39:35 <cwebber> ack cwebber
16:39:39 <aaronpk> scribenick: aaronpk
16:39:44 <sandro> q+ to talk about rogue implementations and private messages
16:40:27 <aaronpk> cwebber: to clarify, rogue implementations can be modified to leak, if i sent something to mallory's server but she also runs it for 5 other people, she's CC'd on this, she can post it publicly. is that the problem you're taling about?
16:40:36 <aaronpk> Gargron: yeah the server can decide to ignore any privacy settings
16:40:56 <nightpool> For the record, the specific question was about how subscription confirmation works
16:40:57 <aaronpk> cwebber: in activitypub, each message is suppoes to go into individual people's inboxes. but yeah a badly written server could dump it into a public timeline or whatever
16:41:08 <sandro> q-
16:41:09 <aaronpk> email has this problem as well but email doesn't have public lists
16:41:18 <aaronpk> it's an easier mistake to make when you have a public feed
16:41:32 <aaronpk> my understanding is the only way to completely get around it is end to end encryption
16:41:44 <aaronpk> Gargron: on the other hand, something related to trustworthiness of servers and conveying that
16:41:46 <dmitriz> q+
16:41:50 <KevinMarks_> q+ to mention twitter history here
16:42:06 <aaronpk> cwebber: not everyone is excited about the "web of trust" idea
16:42:08 <sandro> q+ to mention standard TOS
16:42:11 <nightpool> q+ to clarify subscription question
16:42:22 <ben_thatmustbeme> yikes queue
16:42:31 <aaronpk> this kind of ties in to anti-abuse tooling. it's something worth exploring. this is a topic in itself.
16:42:43 <cwebber> ack MMn-work
16:42:43 <Zakim> MMN-work, you wanted to discuss public web content accessibility
16:42:48 <KevinMarks_> previously
16:42:50 <KevinMarks_> https://indieweb.org/private
16:42:58 <aaronpk> MMN-work: there's always the question of what's the threat model
16:43:23 <aaronpk> ... given the OStatus problem of posts being not protected enough, the use cases are very different for privacy for public communication.
16:44:24 <aaronpk> ... i'm not sure if it's within the scope of activitypub to discuss these things, since of course public discussions should be available like a URL can point to a resource that is a discussion. of course ostatus only covers this specific use case. activitypub addresses private messaging, but i dont think its within scope to say how to protect these messages to be redistributed. since they might be
16:44:26 <aaronpk> redistributed by rogue people vs rogue admins.
16:44:27 <cwebber> ack dmitriz
16:44:51 <aaronpk> dmitriz: one thing i noticed in a lot of these decentralized social specs is the spec starts with authenticaiton/authorization/access control are out of scope
16:44:59 <aaronpk> so there's definitely a need to point implementers to some sort of solution
16:45:09 <aaronpk> i think private messages are a serious problem that needf to be solved
16:45:24 <aaronpk> one possible solution is end to end encryptioon and the PKI which comes with its own set of problems but does work
16:45:38 <aaronpk> another solution that requires more standards is interoperable cross domain authentication and authorization
16:45:57 <aaronpk> we have a version of that in the Solid project but it's RDF based and not necessarily applicable to the people here
16:46:25 <aaronpk> but how this applies to private messages is if we agree on how to identify users across federated instances and how to express access control on a message we can have a higher level of protection than doing web of trust for servers
16:46:32 <cwebber> q?
16:46:41 <cwebber> ack KevinMarks_
16:46:41 <Zakim> KevinMarks_, you wanted to mention twitter history here
16:46:59 <aaronpk> KevinMarks_: one of the reasons twitter turned off their public stream is it was too complciated to maintain with a mix of public and private posts in the stream
16:47:19 <aaronpk> the indieweb approach to this is to have a server person, but that means you trust the server admin in that case
16:47:29 <aaronpk> i liked to the private posts experiments https://indieweb.org/private
16:47:32 <nightpool> not only does it not scale, it doesn't even make sense for non-technical users.
16:47:46 <aaronpk> q+ to clarify the server per person
16:47:54 <aaronpk> s/liked/linked
16:47:56 <cwebber> ack sandro
16:47:56 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to mention standard TOS
16:48:11 <aaronpk> sandro: there are some interesting technical problems that kevin and dmitri mentioned
16:48:12 <MMN-work> +q to ask about scalability of per-person-distribution and ActivityPub's POV
16:48:13 <nightpool> +1 social problems
16:48:20 <aaronpk> i'm interested in the legal/social problems of trusting server admins
16:48:32 <aaronpk> there are 1000+ mastodon instances, and most of them seem to use the default terms of service
16:48:39 <KevinMarks_> well, it depends on multiusers trysting admins - withknown does the same
16:48:39 <aaronpk> i'm curious whether the admins even know they are using the default ToS
16:49:18 <aaronpk> we could have a couple standard ToS like creative commons style, and you as an admin pick the one you want that you're willing to commit to your users
16:49:29 <aaronpk> then users hasve a reaonsable legal/social level of expectation
16:49:35 <KevinMarks_> eg https://teach.kqed.org/ has many users that  trust kqed as admin
16:49:43 <aaronpk> of course this doesn't stop bad actors but it sets the bar for what's legal and whats the expecation of appropraite behavior
16:49:55 <cwebber> ack nightpool
16:49:55 <Zakim> nightpool, you wanted to clarify subscription question
16:49:55 <FrankMurphy> Agree with your observations on the ToS issue. Happy to lend my expertise on that front.
16:50:12 <aaronpk> nightpool: to clarify around fthe original question. the question was about how mastodon currently concept of a "confirmed follow"
16:50:16 <aaronpk> and it uses that to pre-vet servers
16:50:29 <aaronpk> the idea was mastodon does somewhat solve this problem already
16:50:31 <cwebber> q+
16:50:42 <KevinMarks_> Salmon--
16:50:42 <Loqi> salmon has -1 karma
16:50:56 <cwebber> q-
16:50:57 <Gargron> +q to: follow requests via salmon
16:51:03 <Gargron> +q to follow requests via salmon
16:51:05 <cwebber> ack aaronpk
16:51:05 <Zakim> aaronpk, you wanted to clarify the server per person
16:51:08 <nightpool> salmon++
16:51:08 <Loqi> salmon has 0 karma
16:51:08 <cwebber> scribenick: cwebber
16:51:17 <nightpool> :P
16:51:20 <sandro> "q- later" is a trick to move yourself to the end of the queue   :-)
16:51:32 <cwebber> aaronpk: KevinMarks_ mentioned the indieweb approach of one server per person, but that's not exactly it, each user has one url
16:51:52 <KevinMarks_> I was being uncelar, sorry
16:51:56 <FrankMurphy> q to cwebber: Somewhat relatedly, is data portability within the scope of the ActivityPub spec? Textbook use case is a user wanting to take his content from one ActivityPub-compliant instance to another.
16:52:10 <cwebber> aaronpk: each person has a top level url, but might be a subdomain or suburl... the point is your user is a url, so you can have your own site, but it works with multiple users on sites.
16:52:14 <cwebber> FrankMurphy: could you q+?
16:52:20 <cwebber> q?
16:52:27 <cwebber> ack MMN-work
16:52:27 <Zakim> MMN-work, you wanted to ask about scalability of per-person-distribution and ActivityPub's POV
16:52:31 <sandro> q+ to talk about future meetings -- seems like there's a lot to talk about -- how many weeks between meetings would you like, and how many minutes should the meetings be?
16:52:39 <cwebber> q+ to: antiabuse
16:52:46 <aaronpk> MMN-work: regarding public posts, which are readable by anyone with the URL and private posts which require authentication
16:52:47 <FrankMurphy> q+ to cwebber: Somewhat relatedly, is data portability within the scope of the ActivityPub spec? Textbook use case is a user wanting to take his content from one ActivityPub-compliant instance to another.
16:52:48 <cwebber> q- to:
16:52:53 <cwebber> q- antiabuse
16:53:04 <cwebber> q+ to talk about antiabuse
16:53:07 <aaronpk> in gnusocial you distribute a post one time to one server, even though there are multiple users on that server
16:53:20 <aaronpk> that's very efficient
16:53:31 <aaronpk> but if you have a private account and distribute to 100 followers, i assume activitypub sends one per person?
16:53:39 <KevinMarks_> websub works for public posts between servers; for private posts you would need to send one per subscriber
16:53:47 <aaronpk> my question is whether activitypub addresses the distirbution issue for public/private posts
16:54:00 <aaronpk> cwebber: we do have a separate endpoint users can set up for public endpoints
16:54:16 <cwebber> q?
16:54:19 <cwebber> ack Gargron
16:54:19 <Zakim> Gargron, you wanted to follow requests via salmon
16:54:20 <aaronpk> servers can short-circuit to send to each individual person, so if 100 people share a public endpoint then you can send to that one endpoint to reach all 100 users
16:54:37 <ben_thatmustbeme> https://mastodon.social/@kevinmarks/4937649
16:54:39 <Loqi> [Kevin Marks] @lambadalambda @Ronkjeffries @KevinMarks which is why I made unmung.com/mastoview
16:54:40 <aaronpk> Gargron: follow requests weren't difficult to implement because activitystreams already contained all the necessary verbs
16:54:53 <aaronpk> the only missing part was specifying when a profile is "locked", thereby requiring authorization in the first place
16:55:11 <aaronpk> you send a "request friend" group with the target as the person you want to follow
16:55:21 <aaronpk> the server displays it as a follow request and the end user can reject or authorize it
16:55:38 <aaronpk> it's either an authorize verb or reject verb, and it goes back via salmon to the requester
16:55:49 <KevinMarks_> is this why remote follow takes 3 clicks?
16:55:54 <cwebber> q?
16:56:32 <aaronpk> Gargron: the way public/private URLs work in mastodon is public posts have public URLs, but private posts don't. they always return 404 regardless of who accesses them unless they use authentication
16:56:56 <aaronpk> the private posts are distributed one time when they are created using pubsubhubbub, and that's the only way the other servers receive that content. they can't access it later via public urls because there is no authentication mechanisms for servers to access that content later
16:57:09 <KevinMarks_> https://botsin.space/users/quinn/updates/582
16:57:10 <Loqi> [quinn ❎] Why do I have to follow someone three times to follow them once?
16:57:16 <cwebber> ack sandro
16:57:16 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to talk about future meetings -- seems like there's a lot to talk about -- how many weeks between meetings would you like, and how many minutes should the
16:57:19 <Zakim> ... meetings be?
16:57:22 <aaronpk> sandro: we have 3 minutes left in this call
16:57:27 <aaronpk> it's great having everyone on the call
16:57:27 <nightpool> oh, yikes, it was only an hour?
16:57:31 <dmitriz> hahaha
16:57:38 <Loqi> awesome
16:57:43 <sandro> Poll for next meeting time: http://doodle.com/poll/vvn2rn36ikgpx96b
16:58:14 <cwebber> 2 (every 2 weeks)
16:58:20 <sandro> 1 120
16:58:22 <aaronpk> maybe we can do a strawpoll in IRC, how often do you want to come to a meeting? 1-every week, 2- every 2 weeks. and how long would you want the calls to be?
16:58:26 <geppy> 1 120
16:58:30 <cwebber> I could do every 1 week if people find it helpful
16:58:35 <nightpool> 1 / 120
16:58:36 <dmitriz> do we have a mailing list or message board to have async discussions on this stuff?
16:58:43 <aaronpk> 1 60 or 2 120
16:58:52 <ben_thatmustbeme> 1 / 60 or 2/120
16:58:53 <maloki> 2 120
16:58:59 <MMN-work> I'll jus read the minutes, I probably don't have more time than 1/month .)
16:59:11 <ben_thatmustbeme> you can also leave messages here too
16:59:16 <nightpool> http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/today
16:59:22 <nightpool> logs ^
16:59:29 <sandro> https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG
16:59:43 <geppy> 1 week, 120 minutes
16:59:54 <cwebber> 1 90
16:59:59 <FrankMurphy> 2/120
17:00:06 <Gargron> 1^60
17:00:09 <Gargron> oops
17:00:10 <Gargron> 1 60
17:00:12 <dmitriz> 1, *
17:00:15 <eknutson> 2 60
17:00:23 <ben_thatmustbeme>  8 / 600
17:00:25 <ben_thatmustbeme> :P
17:00:25 <KevinMarks_> 2w 60
17:00:26 <nightpool> 1 90 is good actually. I think this meeting should probably go a little longer though
17:00:31 <nightpool> because it's a kickoff
17:01:21 <maloki> Maybe it's popular because people want to get through all these "pent up" discussions :)
17:01:22 <dmitriz> is the lack of mailing list / message board incidental, or intentional?
17:01:59 <ben_thatmustbeme> also as a "social" group, its good to use social methods
17:01:59 <nightpool> I think github works pretty well as async
17:02:05 <nightpool> re: mailing lists
17:02:21 <sandro> github issues are pretty good for ML-type stuff
17:02:27 <cwebber> scribenick: cwebber
17:02:47 <cwebber> aaronpk: I think you covered most of it, mailing lists tend to drag out whereas github links tend to allow for resolutions; irc tends to be great when you have the logs
17:02:48 <dmitriz> do we have a CG github repo?
17:02:50 <sandro> star this: https://github.com/swicg/general
17:02:51 <Loqi> [swicg] general: General issue tracker for the group
17:02:54 <dmitriz> aha
17:02:59 <cwebber> aaronpk: I'm not inclined to add another channel, mailing list free has worked great for indieweb
17:03:01 <cwebber> q?
17:03:46 <nightpool> +1
17:03:47 <geppy> +1
17:03:47 <aaronpk> proposed: 30 minute extension
17:03:48 <eknutson> +1
17:03:48 <Gargron> +1
17:03:49 <cwebber> +1
17:03:49 <aaronpk> +1
17:03:50 <sandro> +1 extend half an hour
17:03:51 <FrankMurphy> -1
17:03:53 <maloki> +1
17:03:55 <MMN-work> +0.5
17:04:06 <cwebber> ack FrankMurphy
17:04:06 <Zakim> FrankMurphy, you wanted to cwebber: Somewhat relatedly, is data portability within the scope of the ActivityPub spec? Textbook use case is a user wanting to take his content from
17:04:07 <FrankMurphy> (mic not working) is data portability within the scope of the ActivityPub spec? Textbook use case is a user wanting to take his content from one ActivityPub-compliant instance to another.
17:04:10 <Zakim> ... one ActivityPub-compliant instance to another.
17:04:40 <MMN-work> PS. I'm not a customer with GitHub so if I were to start discussing issues I guess I'd have to relay it through others. But I also realise I'm probably not going to be the one taking on issues .)
17:04:41 <ben_thatmustbeme> https://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/today <-- logs
17:04:50 <nightpool> Having client-to-server in the spec gives it some amount of data portability, right?
17:04:53 <aaronpk> cwebber: the spec doesn't say anything about data portability. it can be done in pump.io with a script that exports/imports everything. you could do the same in activitypub. what you'd want is to set up redirects.
17:05:12 <Gargron> +q to follower portability
17:05:48 <MMN-work> aaronpk: Yes, but I started cleaning out accounts at proprietary disservices a couple of years ago.
17:05:54 <sandro> q?
17:06:08 <KevinMarks_> https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/98
17:06:09 <Loqi> [kevinmarks] #98 Subscription migration is unclear
17:06:16 <dmitriz> incidentally, cross-domain identity is a pre-requisite for being able to export/transfer your followers & contacts list
17:06:17 <cwebber> q?
17:06:25 <cwebber> ack Gargron
17:06:25 <Zakim> Gargron, you wanted to follower portability
17:06:46 <KevinMarks_> https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/issues/177#issuecomment-292780728
17:06:46 <Loqi> [kevinmarks] The logical thing to 301 is the user's URL so systema.com/@usera 301s to
17:06:47 <Loqi> systemb.club/@userb (and the atom feed, obviously). This does rely on the
17:06:47 <Loqi> site being migrated from to co-operate, yes, but ti is less fiddly than
17:06:47 <Loqi> requiring a new webfinger call....
17:06:59 <aaronpk> Gargron: about follower portability. i've been looking into that. one of the main concerns was that if someone gained access to your account, if follower migration existing you could move followers to someone else which would basically be forever
17:07:00 <nightpool> yeah follower exfil is a big deal.
17:07:09 <aaronpk> nothing else you can do on mastodon has such a destructive action
17:07:14 <dmitriz> export & import is slightly different, though, than destructively “moving” followers
17:07:55 <aaronpk> the other concern with moving followers (in ostatus), obviously this should be a salmon slap or a message in the feed, but the problem is there is no activitystreams verb or object to describe "moved" or "migrated"
17:08:03 <aaronpk> another approach is to do some sort of redirect
17:08:12 <aaronpk> but we want to do webfinger lookups as little as possible
17:08:17 <aaronpk> then handle that account without doing additional networking
17:08:20 <MMN-work> dmitriz: I guess export is just "download my activitystream" .)
17:08:33 <aaronpk> recently we added a one-day cooldown for doing webfinger lookups because we found issues with people changing URLs on their servers
17:08:33 <dmitriz> but specifically export for the followers list / contact book
17:08:41 <MMN-work> (that's how data portability - but not identity moving - is done (when it works) in GNU social)
17:08:41 <aaronpk> which meant that their accounts would be broken unless you do a second webfinger lookup
17:08:51 <aaronpk> so now the next day it will do a second webfinger lookup to update the URLs
17:09:02 <aaronpk> i'm not sure if doing http redirects is in the spec for webfinger or how it should be treated
17:09:13 <maloki>  Right now it's actually just follows on export. Not your posts.
17:09:18 <aaronpk> the main problem i can foresee is in mastodon the assumption is the username and domain is a unique combination
17:09:21 <dmitriz> globally unique? or unique per domain?
17:09:26 <dmitriz> oh ok
17:09:27 <aaronpk> changing it from one to another in the database çould lead to collisions
17:09:37 <aaronpk> i'm open to suggestions and brainstorming on this part
17:09:44 <cwebber> q?
17:09:47 <cwebber> ack cwebber
17:09:47 <Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to talk about antiabuse
17:09:56 <dmitriz> for one, sounds like we need to clarify, with regards to WebFinger and redirects
17:10:03 <sandro> Maybe we want a Follower Migration github issue?
17:10:12 <dmitriz> yes please!
17:10:51 <aaronpk> cwebber: one of the topics id like to see addressed in this group is filtgering and antiabuse
17:10:52 <sandro> https://github.com/swicg/general/issues/1 created
17:10:53 <Loqi> [sandhawke] #1 Follower Migration
17:11:05 <aaronpk> both helping people discover things in the firehose or helping people who are being harassed
17:11:12 <KevinMarks__> KevinMarks__ has joined #social
17:11:16 <aaronpk> we don't have enough time to talk about it in this meeting but i wanted to put it out there
17:11:29 <sandro> q+ to ask about future of webfinger
17:11:47 <cwebber> ack sandro
17:11:47 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask about future of webfinger
17:11:50 <geppy> (speaking of which, is rhiaro/Amy here?  or is she defending her thesis?)
17:12:08 <cwebber> geppy, she got her thesis in and is now on a meditation retreat :)
17:12:14 <geppy> (Nice!)
17:12:14 <ben_thatmustbeme> https://github.com/swicg/general/issues/1 created, thanks to sandro
17:12:15 <Loqi> [sandhawke] #1 Follower Migration
17:12:16 <aaronpk> sandro: we have a bit of an impedance mismatch between mastodon/gnusocial vs activitypub around identifiers of individuals
17:12:33 <dmitriz> that’s not quite a mismatch, in that WebFinger is just a mechanism to *resolve* an email to a URL
17:12:36 <aaronpk> ostatus uses email-like identifiers, whereas activitypub and indieweb the idea is just use a URL rather than email-like identifiers
17:12:41 <cwebber> we have an issue about this in activitypub btw https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/194
17:12:42 <Loqi> [cwebber] #194 Include informative section suggesting how WebFinger users can migrate towards ActivityPub adoption?
17:12:56 <dmitriz> q+
17:13:01 <aaronpk> i think we could use webfinger to map between the two but my guess is that mastodon has no intention of giving up email-like identifiers so webfinger is around for the long haul
17:13:03 <MMN-work> +q to explain acct: usage and user URI
17:13:04 <cwebber> q+
17:13:19 <nightpool> q+ to migration faq in general
17:13:21 <cwebber> q-
17:13:27 <cwebber> q+ to talk about webfinger
17:13:33 <aaronpk> this is going to show up when users refer to people, like on the sides of billboards or whatever. having two different end-user visibility standards is going to be a bit of an issue
17:13:41 <cwebber> ack dmitriz
17:13:53 <aaronpk> dmitriz: i wanted to clarify that webfinger is just a protocol to turn an email into a URL
17:14:15 <aaronpk> part of the reason why openid 1 and 2 failed was that it turns out that using raw URLs as identifiers had incredible usability problemns
17:14:30 <aaronpk> yahoo spent a lot of money on usability studies to ask is it okay to use URLs as identifiers
17:14:44 <aaronpk> webfinger was used by openid connect to address this usability problem
17:14:56 <aaronpk> so let's solve the problem from openid 1 and 2 and set up this protocol to resovle from one to the other
17:15:11 <aaronpk> google at the time was part of the working group, and said they'd enable webfinger but then backed off
17:15:29 <cwebber> q?
17:15:30 <aaronpk> i think we should remember the usability studies and the general difficulty of just using URLs
17:15:41 <cwebber> ack MMN-work
17:15:41 <Zakim> MMN-work, you wanted to explain acct: usage and user URI
17:15:59 <aaronpk> MMN-work: in gnusocial, both work. you can give just a domain or an email address
17:16:09 <aaronpk> and they both will find the feeds
17:16:12 <aaronpk> anyone can implement both
17:16:31 <sandro> aaronpk, maybe we can move forward with this BOTH approach, with tests for both
17:16:32 <cwebber> sandro, see PM btw
17:16:42 <maloki> Which is why you should be me@aaronpk.com ;)
17:17:06 <aaronpk> the follower migration thing, the problem is if your URL is the identifier, how do you update this huge body of statuses to the new URI or how do you keep the old URI
17:17:38 <cwebber> ack nightpool;
17:17:40 <cwebber> ack nightpool
17:17:40 <Zakim> nightpool, you wanted to migration faq in general
17:17:49 <cwebber> q+ sandro
17:17:50 <dmitriz> useful link explaining WebFinger and using WebFist as a fallback mechanism: http://www.onebigfluke.com/2013/06/bootstrapping-webfinger-with-webfist.html
17:17:57 <sandro> q+ to ask if ActivityPub should be kept open a few more months for more input, esp re c2s
17:18:00 <aaronpk> nightpool: the CG should think about migration and creating migration guides
17:18:04 <aaronpk> i'd be willing to help work on that
17:18:12 <cwebber> ack cwebber
17:18:12 <Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to talk about webfinger
17:18:41 <KevinMarks__> webfist.org is down :(
17:18:51 <dmitriz> dohhh
17:18:55 <aaronpk> cwebber: this is something i'm interested in, obviously we have important federated systems that use webfinger, we have a bug open to discuss whether this is osmething that should be handled in activitypub itself or as an extension
17:19:16 <KevinMarks__> see also https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/AccountDiscovery
17:19:22 <aaronpk> it's something i'd really like to get right, so i'd like to sit down with people who are already implementing this and looking to implement activitypub
17:19:31 <cwebber> ack sandro
17:19:31 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask if ActivityPub should be kept open a few more months for more input, esp re c2s
17:19:56 <KevinMarks__> I would love to replace webfinger with a small rel template
17:19:57 <aaronpk> sandro: the social web working group was chartered through the end of june, which means activitypub is in its final stages
17:20:17 <maloki> *yes*
17:20:26 <aaronpk> with the recent success of mastodon, i've been talking to w3c management to say maybe we should not close the door just yet
17:20:44 <aaronpk> the divergence between the mastodon c2s and activitypub c2s protocol maybe if we give it a few more months we could converge the two
17:20:48 <ben_thatmustbeme> Gargron++ "thanks to mastodon"
17:20:48 <Loqi> gargron has 1 karma
17:20:59 <KevinMarks__> yes to what, maloki?
17:21:14 <aaronpk> so i'd like to ask for quick feedback as to whether you think slowing down activitypub to make some changes that bring everyone in this call closer
17:21:15 <cwebber> q?
17:21:19 <maloki> My reaction to "thanks to mastodon" :>
17:21:22 <Gargron> q+ to importance of webfinger
17:21:24 <nightpool> q+
17:21:29 <cwebber> ack Gargron
17:21:29 <Zakim> Gargron, you wanted to importance of webfinger
17:21:44 <aaronpk> Gargron: there's a history of emails hacving username@domain syntax, and xmpp as well
17:21:53 <aaronpk> that's why when I started looking into ostatus it clicked right away
17:22:04 <aaronpk> it's easy enough to say I'm gargron at mastodon.social
17:22:11 <KevinMarks__> q+ to say why webfinger is creaky and overkill
17:22:16 <aaronpk> rather than a URL which contains a protocol and scheme
17:22:19 <MMN-work> Btw, WebFinger lets you do a URL lookup and not just acct: (the acct: uri is separate from WebFinger/RFC7033
17:22:30 <user1> user1 has joined #social
17:22:35 <aaronpk> it's really important to keep that and it should be part of activitypub going forward
17:22:46 <cwebber> q?
17:22:46 <aaronpk> it will be confusing if some implementations can address people in that format and some don't
17:22:48 <MMN-work> since it just says "a domain name should respond to resources on this URL" not speciying the format of the resource
17:22:52 <cwebber> ack nightpool
17:23:11 <aaronpk> nightpool: i think there's a lot of work that can be done in extensions, but some of this core stuff around webfinger or subscription would be useful to address in the core standard
17:23:20 <cwebber> ack KevinMarks__
17:23:20 <Zakim> KevinMarks__, you wanted to say why webfinger is creaky and overkill
17:23:55 <aaronpk> KevinMarks__: i agree that being able to look up a username at a domian is useful, but the way webfinger does it is overkill
17:24:10 <aaronpk> there is a simpler way to do it rather than webfinger wrapping it in 3 levels of indirection
17:24:26 <aaronpk> the account structure is something you can explain to people
17:24:40 <aaronpk> the thing that doesn't make sense is the well-known URLs when you've got perfectly good ways of doing things with link rels and link headers
17:24:41 <cwebber> q?
17:24:55 <KevinMarks__> I wrote a bit at https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/AccountDiscovery
17:25:10 <aaronpk> cwebber: this meeting has been a success in my view. there certainly won't be a shortage of things to discuss in the future.
17:25:15 <MMN-work> KevinMarks: Let's talk more about the rel= stuff over OStatus, I remember you mentioning it on that videopodthing and I totally want to make sure GNU social works with indieweb if there are any implementations that desire it.
17:25:20 <ben_thatmustbeme> KevinMarks++
17:25:20 <Loqi> kevinmarks has 6 karma in this channel (273 overall)
17:25:23 <aaronpk> i'd like everyone to take a moment to fill this out
17:25:26 <MMN-work> KevinMarks__: *goes to link*
17:25:35 <cwebber> http://doodle.com/poll/vvn2rn36ikgpx96b
17:25:59 <KevinMarks__> the rel stuff I discussed at http://www.kevinmarks.com/distributed-verify.html
17:26:00 <Loqi> Distributed Verification 2016-09-22
17:26:04 <sandro> PROPOSED: Would like to extend the Social Web WG so there's time to update ActivityPub, to take into account currently exciting projects
17:26:10 <Gargron> +1
17:26:11 <nightpool> +1
17:26:15 <maloki> +1
17:26:15 <sandro> +1
17:26:15 <cwebber> +1
17:26:17 <dmitriz> +1
17:26:17 <KevinMarks__> +1
17:26:19 <ben_thatmustbeme> MMN-work, i'd definitely be interested in that discussion
17:26:21 <geppy> +1
17:26:28 <FrankMurphy> +1
17:26:46 <MMN-work> +/- 0
17:26:59 <KevinMarks__> q+ to ask if the swicg should take over https://www.w3.org/community/ostatus/ formally
17:27:34 <cwebber> RESOLVED: Would like to extend the Social Web WG so there's time to update ActivityPub, to take into account currently exciting projects
17:27:45 <cwebber> ack KevinMarks__
17:27:45 <Zakim> KevinMarks__, you wanted to ask if the swicg should take over https://www.w3.org/community/ostatus/ formally
17:27:46 <cwebber> q?
17:28:03 <aaronpk> KevinMarks__: there is an ostatus w3c community group, it might be worth formally redirecting it
17:28:09 <aaronpk> sandro: evan said he'd do that so i'll nag him again
17:28:35 <aaronpk> Gargron: can someone put all the ostatus protocols onto that web page? it currently doesn't contain any information, and ostatus.org expired.
17:28:42 <sandro> +1 yeah
17:28:44 <MMN-work> Rollerstatus tyccoon
17:28:47 <dmitriz> I ran into that problem as well (the ostatus specs being down)
17:28:47 <KevinMarks__> q+ to say use the wiki https://www.w3.org/community/ostatus/wiki/Main_Page
17:28:52 <nightpool> that's probably not the right place for it?
17:28:57 <nightpool> But somewhere, yeah
17:29:04 <FrankMurphy> Rollercoaster Tycoon... The imagination runs wild
17:29:09 <nightpool> cwebber -- for puns
17:29:11 <cwebber> q?
17:29:26 <cwebber> ack KevinMarks__
17:29:26 <Zakim> KevinMarks__, you wanted to say use the wiki https://www.w3.org/community/ostatus/wiki/Main_Page
17:29:28 <aaronpk> sandro: spread the word about this group, i'm sure there are more people who would want to be involved
17:29:34 <dmitriz> what’s the relationship again between this group & the SocialWG?
17:29:39 <ben_thatmustbeme> no
17:29:49 <ben_thatmustbeme> you cannot i don't believe
17:29:51 <sandro> dmitriz, complicated  :-)
17:29:55 <dmitriz> heh
17:29:58 <aaronpk> dmitriz, https://chat.indieweb.org/social/2017-05-05/1494000822923000
17:29:59 <Loqi> [aaronpk] cwebber: the social web community group (CG) is continuing the work of the working group (WG)
17:30:17 <sandro> dmitriz, basically, the WG is much more formal
17:30:28 <MMN-work> Cheers!
17:30:31 <ben_thatmustbeme> cwebber++
17:30:31 <Loqi> cwebber has 13 karma
17:30:33 <KevinMarks__> ah. well, you can always edit this wiki
17:30:34 <ben_thatmustbeme> aaronpk++
17:30:34 <Loqi> aaronpk has 77 karma in this channel (1307 overall)
17:30:35 <aaronpk> RRSAgent, end meeting
17:30:35 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'end meeting', aaronpk.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
17:30:36 <sandro> cwebber++
17:30:36 <Loqi> cwebber has 14 karma
17:30:37 <FrankMurphy> Thanks, cwebber!
17:30:38 <aaronpk> er
17:30:38 <KevinMarks__> or the indieweb one
17:30:41 <cwebber> aaronpk++
17:30:41 <Loqi> slow down!
17:30:42 <nightpool> cwebber: ++
17:30:46 <aaronpk> magic bot incantations
17:30:48 <sandro> aaronpk++
17:30:51 <nightpool> oops let me try that again
17:30:53 <nightpool> cwebber++
17:30:55 <sandro> RRSAgent, make logs public
17:30:58 <aaronpk> Zakim, go away
17:30:58 <Zakim> I don't understand 'go away', aaronpk
17:31:02 <ben_thatmustbeme> trackbot end meeting
17:31:02 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:31:02 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been ben_thatmustbeme
17:31:04 <sandro> Zakim, who was here?
17:31:04 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, sandro.
17:31:10 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:31:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/05/05-social-minutes.html trackbot
17:31:11 <sandro> Zakim, list attendees
17:31:11 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been ben_thatmustbeme
17:31:11 <aaronpk> oh we didn't present+
17:31:11 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
17:31:11 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
17:31:11 <ben_thatmustbeme> wait what?