20:04:39 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #profgui
20:04:39 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2018/10/31-profgui-irc
20:04:51 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #profgui
20:05:00 <kcoyle> kcoyle has joined #profgui
20:05:00 <ncar> chair: ncar
20:05:06 <ncar> present+
20:05:18 <ncar> rrsagent, make minutes public
20:05:18 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make minutes public', ncar.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
20:05:32 <ncar> rrsagent, make logs public
20:05:42 <kcoyle> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:05:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/10/31-profgui-minutes.html kcoyle
20:08:10 <kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Meetings:ProfGui-Telecon2018.09.31#Annotations
20:08:40 <kcoyle> rrsagent, make logs public
20:09:05 <kcoyle> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:09:05 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/10/31-profgui-minutes.html kcoyle
20:10:29 <ncar> rrsagent, create minutes v2
20:10:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/10/31-profgui-minutes.html ncar
20:16:22 <kcoyle> action: ncar email to group re: time zones
20:16:31 <kcoyle> scribenick: kcoyle
20:18:05 <ncar> topic: Summarise status after F2F4 - status of FPWD (in relation to recent changes) (informally discussed)
20:18:38 <kcoyle> roba: frames in json-ld; this is a profile because selects subset of it
20:18:57 <kcoyle> ... with contract around serialization. Rob S said he would write up a use case
20:19:33 <kcoyle> here are the minutes: https://www.w3.org/2018/10/26-dxwg-minutes#x06
20:20:04 <kcoyle> roba: we need more detail, could be a use case
20:20:35 <kcoyle> ... suggest we put an issue in prof guidance doc to see if appropriate to json-ld frames
20:22:21 <kcoyle> roba creates issue 524 for json-ld case
20:22:57 <kcoyle> ncar: json-ld is very long, very complex spec. We need to take it seriously and understand how it may fit with profiles
20:27:08 <kcoyle> kcoyle: no other things from f2f friday afternoon that are profile guidance
20:27:52 <kcoyle> roba: there can't be implementations of guidance, can there?
20:28:10 <kcoyle> ncar: will there be a best practices list in the profgui?
20:28:27 <kcoyle> roba: identify conformance and testing would be so there can be implementation evidence
20:28:56 <kcoyle> ... make known in fpwd that we want feedback
20:30:15 <ncar> Created issue https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/525 for Guidance conformance target
20:30:25 <kcoyle> ... and https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/524
20:31:32 <kcoyle> ncar: would be good to use same terminology for all of the documents
20:31:50 <kcoyle> ... what does w3c require for a guidance document?
20:32:33 <kcoyle> action: kcoyle ask Dave and Philippe what we need as implements for a guidance document
20:33:15 <ncar> conformanceTarget issue: https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/521
20:34:07 <ncar> topic: Report back from Conneg & Ontology groups their statuses (discussed informally)
20:36:15 <kcoyle> roba: qsa parameter names, we need to know if a range of existing implementations conform to the abstract model
20:36:35 <kcoyle> ... some checks in w3c have a profile, like fpwd
20:37:43 <kcoyle> ... some existing implementations of negotiation by profiles, and are these in scope in the guidance?
20:38:29 <kcoyle> kcoyle: will we discuss profile negotiation in the guidance document? and to what extent?
20:38:37 <kcoyle> roba: yes
20:39:01 <kcoyle> ncar: I don't jump to that
20:39:25 <kcoyle> kcoyle: is this dependencies between documents?
20:39:38 <kcoyle> roba: this is preparing ourselves for the scope of the guidance document?
20:39:42 <kcoyle> ... are these in scope?
20:40:01 <kcoyle> ncar: can this be an issue?
20:40:23 <kcoyle> ... close the conneg issue and raise this as an issue?
20:40:49 <kcoyle> kcoyle: just qsa or a larger issue?
20:41:27 <kcoyle> ncar: should the guidance doc? ...
20:42:20 <kcoyle> roba: there are existing things that are called profiles in the wild. Does the guidance document recognize those
20:42:36 <roba> Should guidance about profiles identify existing practices using implicit profiles as valid examples or as prior work only
20:42:38 <kcoyle> ... as valid profiles, or non-conformant prior work?
20:43:13 <ncar> Issue initially https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/526
20:43:40 <kcoyle> Should the Guidance doc recognise existing, non-interoperable, profiles as valid
20:44:35 <kcoyle> kcoyle: has taken action about relation to best practices
20:44:53 <kcoyle> ncar: security and privacy issue
20:45:05 <kcoyle> ... do have text in conneg, lars answered questionnaire
20:45:20 <kcoyle> ... do the same thing for this doc?
20:45:28 <kcoyle> kcoyle: our text will be different from conneg
20:45:56 <kcoyle> ncar: putting link to questionnaire in issue
20:48:06 <kcoyle> ncar: closing issue relating to family of docs
20:48:27 <kcoyle> ncar: closing #428
20:50:10 <kcoyle> roba: close "what is a profile?"
20:50:48 <kcoyle> kcoyle: this is more than a definition; it's what is the nature of a profile?
20:52:16 <kcoyle> kcoyle: improve and move definitions?
20:52:40 <kcoyle> ncar: yes, close this one: #371
20:53:21 <kcoyle> ncar: improve introduction - antoine says leave open
20:54:18 <kcoyle> ncar: profiles ontology example - have examples in profgui, not yet known which one
20:54:42 <kcoyle> ... which would be useful in the guidance document?
20:56:53 <kcoyle> ncar: human-readable (https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/369)
20:56:59 <kcoyle> kcoyle: we aren't there yet
20:57:17 <kcoyle> ncar: profont gives us a way to address this problem
20:59:08 <kcoyle> kcoyle: can we remove the profgui label from some of the older ones?
20:59:44 <kcoyle> action: ncar will propose issues that no longer need the profgui label
21:01:17 <kcoyle> kcoyle: asks nick how we will get the writing done
21:01:37 <kcoyle> ncar: been busy with conneg, so no
21:02:08 <kcoyle> kcoyle: suggest prioritize, and assign writing sections to people
21:02:43 <kcoyle> roba: anyone other than antoine?
21:03:07 <kcoyle> kcoyle: both annette and alejandra have shown an interest
21:03:28 <kcoyle> roba: or make a call
21:03:52 <kcoyle> ncar: how close are we?
21:04:24 <kcoyle> kcoyle: my guess is that we need a more detailed outline
21:04:43 <kcoyle> ... maybe look more at issues and requirements than the document, which is very vague
21:05:09 <kcoyle> roba: using issues means we can assign them in github
21:06:02 <kcoyle> kcoyle: requirements tend to be broad; issues may be more specific
21:06:44 <kcoyle> roba: go through issues decide if they go into the document, find a place, ask someone to write it up
21:07:34 <kcoyle> action: ncar (and rob) will go through issues and try to place in document and make assignments or ask volunteers to write
21:07:48 <kcoyle> kcoyle: also need to prioritize
21:09:04 <kcoyle> ncar: can we not prioritize ?
21:09:18 <kcoyle> roba: we can reference dependencies in issues
21:09:38 <kcoyle> kcoyle: really like referencing dependencies
21:10:04 <kcoyle> present+
21:10:11 <ncar> present+
21:10:14 <roba> present+
21:10:17 <kcoyle> meeting: DXWG profgui
21:10:24 <ncar> rrsagent, generate minutes
21:10:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/10/31-profgui-minutes.html ncar
21:10:25 <kcoyle> rrsagent, please create minutes v2
21:10:25 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2018/10/31-profgui-minutes.html kcoyle