15:04:26 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
15:04:26 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/03/28-social-irc
15:05:09 <fr33domlover> aaronpk, is the audio written into the minutes as text? or should I make notes if I need?
15:05:22 <aaronpk> trackbot, start meeting
15:05:22 <trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
15:05:24 <aaronpk> oops
15:05:29 <ajordan> fr33domlover: that's what the scribe is for
15:05:33 <aaronpk> we will need to pick a scribe to scribe the call
15:05:58 <ajordan> https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG#Scribing
15:06:30 <fr33domlover> thanks ajordan i saw that, just wanted to be sure it's happening in this meeting too :)
15:06:53 <aaronpk> ajordan: are you still connecting? guess we can get started once you do
15:07:04 <aaronpk> I know a few others will be joining late in about 25 minutes
15:08:00 <fr33domlover> I can scribe, but I type slowly and english isn't my native language :p
15:08:31 <fr33domlover> (That's why I never scribed before on meetings of this sort :p)
15:09:07 <ajordan> aaronpk: I just connected, did you hear me?
15:09:51 <aaronpk> no, double check mic settings?
15:09:57 <ajordan> oh man I forgot to disable the thing that announces everything
15:09:59 <ajordan> what a nightmare
15:10:01 <ajordan> just a sec
15:10:08 <ajordan> you can start without me
15:10:32 <melody> i can't hear anyone talking for some reason
15:11:19 <ajordan> fr33domlover: probably you want to wait a bit until you recognize everyone's voices
15:11:54 <eprodrom> eprodrom has joined #social
15:12:00 <eprodrom> Halloo all
15:12:07 <ajordan> aaronpk: you're clear
15:12:13 <eprodrom> Weird
15:12:59 <ajordan> I think I fixed my microphone, could y'all hear me?
15:13:09 <ajordan> grr
15:14:22 <ajordan> scribenick: ajordan
15:14:57 <ajordan> eprodrom: hi yeah my name's Evan Prodromou, I'm one of the coauthors of the AS2 spec and also one of the contributors to pump.io, a distributed social networking project
15:15:10 <ajordan> aaronpk: awesome thanks, I think we should just jump right in
15:15:22 <ajordan> ... I see fr33domlover had a question about federation for project hosting using AP
15:15:34 <ajordan> ... I don't know much about that other than that sentence
15:15:49 <ajordan> fr33domlover: I started working ~3 years ago on a repository hosting, sort of like GitLab
15:15:54 <ajordan> ... I want to make it decentralized
15:16:12 <eprodrom> q+
15:16:13 <ajordan> ... so I was thinking about how to match objects I have like users, repos etc. to objects in AP
15:16:25 <ajordan> ... so e.g. a question I have is what things should be actors
15:16:42 <ajordan> ... suppose the users are actors, should the project be an actor or an issue be an actor or a repo be an actor
15:16:42 <aaronpk> ack eprodrom
15:17:00 <aaronpk> scribenick: aaronpk
15:17:27 <aaronpk> eprodrom: users can definitely be actors. issues probably don't need to be followed int he same way, but users and projects would make sense to be actors.
15:17:44 <aaronpk> eprodrom: ultimately deciding what should be an actor in activitypub network is a question of "should I be able to follow this thing"
15:18:09 <aaronpk> eprodrom: I have a question... have you thought about sketching out on the w3c wiki a diagram for this to get commetns and feedback?
15:18:17 <aaronpk> scribenick: ajordan
15:18:19 <ajordan> scribenick: ajordan
15:19:23 <eprodrom> q-
15:19:45 <aaronpk> ajordan: everyone is talking
15:19:53 <aaronpk> mumble fail today
15:20:02 <ajordan> ah sorry my headphones came out of the jack
15:20:04 <aaronpk> haha
15:20:11 <ajordan> if y'all can repeat real quick :/
15:20:13 <Loqi> rofl
15:20:56 <ajordan> fr33domlover: I can make a diagram, and I'd love to get a review on the diagram
15:21:09 <ajordan> ... if I want people to be able to follow an issue, e.g. in Bugzilla where there's a list of emails per issues
15:21:17 <ajordan> ... should I make issues into actors so people can follow them
15:21:27 <ajordan> eprodrom: good question, I guess it comes down to what your use cases are
15:21:33 <ajordan> ... I see the point either way
15:21:42 <ajordan> <ajordan> is it problematic to follow non-actor objects?
15:22:02 <ajordan> fr33domlover: I had an idea about inbox and outbox, I'd like to see if it makes sense
15:22:12 <ajordan> eprodrom: super sorry to do this, but I have to go soon and I have an item on the agenda
15:22:19 <ajordan> ... can I ask CG about next steps for this one thing?
15:22:23 <ajordan> aaronpk: yeah go ahead
15:22:31 <ajordan> eprodrom: so sorry, I don't like hijacking the agenda like this
15:22:46 <ajordan> ... so good news is that ajordan and I met over the weekend along with cwebber and we hacked on AP in pump.io
15:23:01 <ajordan> ... so we have some of the endpoints working as well as generating AS2 from our database
15:23:20 <ajordan> ... as I was looking at our code I realized there's a couple AP props that haven't been added to the context
15:23:33 <ajordan> ... I *think* that requires sandro or rhiaro to actually do the push to the W3C servers though
15:23:36 <eprodrom> https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/465
15:23:36 <Loqi> [evanp] #465 Add "shares" from ActivityPub
15:23:43 <ajordan> aaronpk: I belive that's correct, not sure who else would have access to that
15:23:45 <eprodrom> https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues/464
15:23:45 <Loqi> [evanp] #464 Add "likes" from ActivityPub to context
15:24:07 <ajordan> eprodrom: so I think probably next steps is, I would do this in our GitHub repo and then I'll collaborate with sandro and rhiaro to get it pushed to W3C servers
15:24:24 <ajordan> aaronpk: sorry is this basically a bug with the current context? AP says it should be a thing but it's not in the context?
15:24:27 <ajordan> eprodrom: correct
15:24:36 <ajordan> aaronpk: interesting, sounds like GitHub issues are a good place to track that
15:25:07 <ajordan> eprodrom: the one thing is, I'd like to make sure we do as many of these as possible at once, so I'm gonna do a last pass over AP, add them to the context and ask sandro/rhiaro to do the push
15:25:09 <ajordan> aaronpk: sounds good
15:25:17 <ajordan> eprodrom: do we need to do a vote to approve that process?
15:25:32 <ajordan> aaronpk: I don't think we need to do a vote? we could to document that that's the process we're following
15:25:42 <ajordan> ... and people here can provide feedback, as to whether that's a good idea
15:26:03 <ajordan> aaronpk: anyone have thoughts about that? sounds like this is essentially a bugfix so I'm inclined to just let the editors roll with it since it's not creating anything new
15:26:07 <ajordan> ... seems very reasonable to me
15:26:09 <ajordan> <ajordan> +1
15:26:29 <aaronpk> +1
15:26:31 <eprodrom> PROPOSAL: add shares, likes, and potentially other properties from ActivityPub to ActivityStreams 2.0 context
15:26:33 <eprodrom> +1
15:26:36 <eprodrom> Cool!
15:26:37 <aaronpk> +1
15:26:51 <ajordan> aaronpk: okay well if anyone else... oh there we go an actual proposal to vote on sure
15:26:54 <ajordan> +1
15:27:04 <melody> +1
15:27:12 <ajordan> eprodrom: okay so if we're okay with it I'm going to take the steps and coordinate with sandro to get it pushed
15:27:23 <ajordan> aaronpk: sounds good and can your report back to IRC as to how that goes?
15:27:41 <ajordan> eprodrom: okay I have to run, I appreciate it and especially fr33domlover I appreciate you letting me agenda jump, I know that's a hassle
15:27:48 <ajordan> fr33domlover: it's okay
15:27:50 <ajordan> aaronpk: thanks evan
15:27:55 <eprodrom> Outie
15:28:15 <ajordan> aaronpk: before we go back to fr33domlover's questions, does anything else have anythign to talk about? otherwise I think we should just go back to the original questions
15:29:15 <ajordan> aaronpk: okay so back to your arcitecture questions
15:29:30 <ajordan> fr33domlover: okay so because I'm doing this for project hosting I have lots of objects and concepts that are extensions to plain AP
15:29:55 <ajordan> so my question is if I have things like new actor types, it won't just be like group, person, service, it'll be like issue, repo
15:30:14 <ajordan> ... so if I have all these extra properties, does it make it harder for my app to federate with existing implementations
15:30:20 <ajordan> ... like e.g. pump.io once they have AP
15:30:48 <ajordan> ... so could someone on pump.io comment on an issue or whatever despite pump.io not understanding the extensions
15:30:56 <ajordan> ... do I need to be careful about stuff to make sure I'm still compatible
15:31:04 <aaronpk> scribenick: aaronpk
15:31:15 <aaronpk> ajordan: let me think about it for a minute
15:32:02 <aaronpk> ... citation needed, but I think pump.io should accept anything it doesn't recognize, so as long as you provide some sort of sensible alternative content, like a fallback description in summary, then it should display
15:32:07 <aaronpk> ... and you can certainly add comments to that
15:32:38 <aaronpk> ... it might not show up in the pump web UI or clients, i'm not sure, but you could use a pump account. like if you had a client that displayed issues you could use your pump account
15:32:58 <aaronpk> ... you would need to write your own JSON-LD context so other implementations can understand that
15:33:08 <aaronpk> ... pump.io probably wont end up caring about that, but other implementations do
15:33:24 <aaronpk> fr33domlover: great i'll end up doing that
15:33:53 <aaronpk> ... the spec says you can treat the data as plain JSON, so do implementations usualyl understand JSON-LD? would that be a problem? or can I trust them to accept what they don't understand
15:34:23 <aaronpk> ajordan: the answer is complicated. in the spec, all the authorization stuff is unspecified. in real life... let me find the wiki url
15:34:31 <ajordan> https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/ActivityPub/Authentication_Authorizationhttps://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/ActivityPub/Authentication_Authorization
15:35:19 <aaronpk> ... what has happened in real life is all of the implementations have converged on this authentication scheme where server-to-server people use HTTP signatures and linked data signatures, so all implementations are full JSON-LD processing or they have a corner where they care about LD and the rest they treat it as plain JSON
15:35:31 <aaronpk> ... mastodon does it as mostly plain JSON, pump will do it as plain JSON
15:35:38 <aaronpk> ... kroeg will do json-ld, not sure about the others
15:35:47 <aaronpk> fr33domlover: so either way I need JSON-LD for the things you linked
15:35:50 <saranix> hmm... I suppose the same applies to my chat presense question... so if someone is "following" the room actor, they will get objects like { summary:"@foo is now away"}, but what should the type:{} be? Should it be a top-level activity of some kind? Since type:Add, object:type:{away status", etc.} seems kinda overly verbose
15:36:15 <aaronpk> ajordan: if someone is consuming JSON-LD you can treat it as plain json except for the signatures. if you're producing it then you have to worry more about JSON-LD
15:36:32 <aaronpk> fr33domlover: okay thank you
15:36:48 <ajordan> s/producing it/producing data with extensions/
15:37:01 <aaronpk> fr33domlover: one more question. I was thinking about inbox/outbox for actors
15:37:10 <aaronpk> ... it adds new addresses like actorid/inbox actorid/outbox
15:37:21 <aaronpk> ... that differs from RESTFUL applications where you can get and post the object ID directly
15:37:47 <aaronpk> ... I had this thought, suppose a project is an actor, since a project is part of the application itself, it's not a person, it doesn't need to GET its own outbox or POST to its inbox
15:38:12 <aaronpk> ... so the only things you need from an outbox and inbox for a project is people need to be able to post to an inbox to send changes and get from the outbox to see events
15:38:26 <aaronpk> ... so if I make the inbox the same url as the actor, and the outbox can have a url like actorid/changes
15:38:39 <aaronpk> ... then if I want to make a project into an activitypub actor, I don't need to add a new URL to my application
15:39:01 <aaronpk> ... since the changes are already visible as an HTML page, so I can use the Accept header to return the activitystream
15:39:35 <aaronpk> ... in regular REST applications you post to the object to make changes, so if you use the same URL for the inbox as the actor then you can use the content-type header whether you're receiving plain JSON or HTML form input, it all goes to the same URL
15:39:51 <aaronpk> ... so I was wondering if that's okay, and not surprising to other implementations, that the inbox URL and actor ID are the same
15:40:00 <aaronpk> ajordan: off-hand, I don't think that should be a problem
15:40:11 <aaronpk> ... this has been discussed recently on IRC with saranix I think?
15:40:50 <aaronpk> ... it is worth noting that in activitypub, the client-to-server stuff is totally separate from server-to-server, so if you wanted to, you could implement a "regular" rest client-to-server API and then use activitypub for server-to-server.
15:41:03 <aaronpk> ... i'd encourage you not to of course, since if you implement activitypub client-to-server you get all the clients
15:41:16 <aaronpk> fr33domlover: I noticed they're separate, and I agree I want the existing clients to be able to communicate
15:41:29 <aaronpk> ... so I think i'll go for what I said, making the inbox and actor id the same
15:41:46 <aaronpk> ajordan: sounds great
15:41:57 <aaronpk> fr33domlover: thanks for the feedback, i'm done asking questions for this meeting
15:42:01 <ajordan> np
15:42:05 <ajordan> scribenick: ajordan
15:42:28 <ajordan> aaronpk: thanks, great questions and I like trying to reuse existing URLs and things like that, sounds great
15:42:44 <ajordan> ... well cool, anyone else have any new topics they want to squeeze in since we have a few extra minutes?
15:42:48 <ajordan> ... I don't see anything on the wiki
15:42:59 <melody> i think saranix said they wanted to talk about chat on AP
15:43:12 <ajordan> aaronpk: alright well in that case let's call the meeting early
15:43:27 <saranix> BUMP: so if someone is "following" the room actor, they will get objects like { summary:"@foo is now away"}, but what should the type:{} be? Should it be a top-level activity of some kind? Since type:Create, object:type:{away status", etc.} seems kinda overly verbose
15:43:40 <ajordan> aaronpk: well thanks everyone for coming, hope it's been useful and let's do it again in two weeks
15:43:44 <ajordan> fr33domlover: yes thanks
15:43:59 <ajordan> aaronpk: and thanks ajordan for scribing
15:44:06 <ajordan> <ajordan> np! I've been slacking recently lol
15:44:32 <aaronpk> trackbot is slacking so I think i'm gonna have to generate the minutes manually
15:44:32 <trackbot> Sorry, aaronpk, I don't understand 'trackbot is slacking so I think i'm gonna have to generate the minutes manually'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
15:44:38 <ajordan> <ajordan> wait
15:44:43 <ajordan> <ajordan> saranix is here
15:44:52 <aaronpk> ohai
15:44:55 <aaronpk> wait not on the call tho
15:45:05 <saranix> yeah I don't do mumble
15:45:43 <aaronpk> someone want to take the question?
15:46:30 <ajordan> saranix: I would think it would be an Edit on the Actor
15:46:54 <aaronpk> i'll leave you all to continue this in IRC :)
15:46:59 <saranix> ajordan: oh yeah, that makes sense
15:47:03 <ajordan> <ajordan> are we done on Mumble? my laptop is about to die
15:47:14 <saranix> ajordan: but AP requires Edits send the Full Object... which sucks for chat
15:47:16 <ajordan> s/saranix: /<ajordan> saranix:/
15:48:16 <ajordan> scribenick: nobody
15:49:04 <ajordan> aaronpk: do we want to end the meeting? or what's happening
15:49:16 <ajordan> also
15:49:18 <ajordan> present+
15:49:18 <aaronpk> trackbot, end meeting
15:49:18 <trackbot> Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel.
15:49:24 <aaronpk> I don't know what's wrong with trackbot
15:49:32 <aaronpk> RRSAgent, end meeting
15:49:32 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'end meeting', aaronpk.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:49:36 <ajordan> #sysops?
15:49:36 <aaronpk> RRSAgent, stop logging
15:49:36 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'stop logging', aaronpk.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:49:41 <aaronpk> :sigh:
15:49:48 <ajordan> RRSAgent, bye
15:49:55 <ajordan> RRSAgent: make logs public
15:49:55 <aaronpk> RRSAgent, make minutes public
15:49:55 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', aaronpk.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:50:15 <ajordan> should we `bye` RRSAgent?
15:50:19 <aaronpk> RRSAgent, bye
15:50:19 <RRSAgent> I see no action items