From W3C Wiki

Social Web Working Group Teleconference

13 Jan 2015


Derived from RRSAgent minutes

See also: IRC log


jasnell, eprodrom, Arnaud, aaronpk, Sandro, [IPcaller], Ann, tantek, cwebber2, rhiaro_, Lloyd_Fassett, jessica_lily, tiborKatelbach, wilkie, rhiaro, Wendy, hhalpin

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: tantek review microformats due Jan 14, 2015 [recorded in]

[NEW] ACTION: jsnell to update by Jan 16, 2015 [recorded in]

[NEW] ACTION: jsnell to prepare working draft for publication based on by Jan 16, 2105 [recorded in]

[NEW] ACTION: jsnell to reach out to Open Social Foundation participants to invite them to join the W3C Social Web WG [recorded in]

[NEW] ACTION: jsnell to ask OpenSocial folks about W3C archiving their blog posts [recorded in]

[NEW] ACTION: harry will ask W3C SysTeam about prospect for archiving OSF blog posts and perhaps other content [recorded in]


<trackbot> Date: 13 January 2015

<tantek> since you can’t hear me, I’m P9 :)

<aaronpk> tantek++

<Loqi> tantek has 139 karma

<cwebber2> -q ??P5

<tantek> scribenick AnnBassetti

<sandro> scribenick: AnnBassetti

<tantek> scribenick: AnnBassetti


<jessica_lily> me

approve minutes …. no objections

<jessica_lily> thanks

<cwebber2> no objections here, look good


also need to approve minutes from last meeting



<eprodrom> Sorry, they were in the agenda

<eprodrom> +1

Tantek: suggests postponing approval until next week, so people can have time to read
… no objections; added to next agenda
… next week’s meeting on schedule per usual

<tantek> next week:


Tantek: agenda: Media Objects 2.0 … suggested by elf, but he’s out sick
… thus postponed
… agenda: Activity Streams


James Snell:

<sorry, missed intro words>

scribe: recommend we update working draft
… both vocabulary and core working drafts





Evan: any outstanding issues on 1st Working Draft?

JamesS: no …

Evan: is next step to propose moving this to next Working Draft?

<jasnell> I’ve merged in the extended vocabulary work into the editor’s drafts. I propose that we update the Working Drafts based on the current editor’s drafts

Tantek: next step is to ask if there are any other outstanding issues

<harry> just ping me when moving things to Working Draft

Tantek: I think, James, you asked me to do …. <xx>
… re: microformats

<harry> and I’m happy to send it in and go through pubrules

James: added <some info re: microformats> but not an expert, would appreciate review

Tantek: will take a look

James: be aware there are over 900 examples, many of which are microformats!

Tantek: will look


<scribe> ACTION: Tantek, review microformats, due Jan. 14, 2015 [recorded in [[1]|]]]

<trackbot> Error finding ‘Tantek,’. You can review and register nicknames at <>.

<eprodrom> AnnBassetti: “ACTION tantek blah blah blah”


<scribe> ACTION: tantek review microformats due Jan 14, 2015 [recorded in [[2]|]]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-26 - Review microformats due jan 14, 2015 [on Tantek Çelik - due 2015-01-20].

<tantek> AnnBassetti: can you add the URL to that action?

<tantek> URLs

<tantek> trackbot, 26?

<trackbot> Sorry, tantek, I don’t understand ‘trackbot, 26?’. Please refer to <> for help.

<sandro> action-26?

<trackbot> action-26 – Tantek Çelik to Review microformats due jan 14, 2015 – due 2015-01-20 – OPEN


<aaronpk> i just updated the action with the urls

<sorting out how to properly record an action>

<eprodrom> +1

Tantek: proposal for James to prepare updated working drafts for Activity Streams specs on Friday

<Loqi> I added a countdown for 1/16 12:00am (#5576)

Tantek: proposal ACTION team to review those drafts

<tantek> +1

<jasnell> +1

<rhiaro_> +1


<eprodrom> +1

<cwebber2> +1

<jessica_lily> +1

<aaronpk> tantek, your mic seems to silence until you start speaking, so the first couple hundred milliseconds of your audio is dropped when you start speaking after a gap of silence

Tantek: better to capture explicit support

<blooby> I have a poor voip connection

Tantek: checking why people aren’t indicating their support or rejection of proposal

<aaronpk> +1 sounds good

<wilkie> me. I joined.

<wilkie> :)

<wilkie> sorry I’m late

<eprodrom> Seems like pretty strong consensus with no objections

<eprodrom> Agreed!

Tantek: declares consensus; would prefer more responses

<jasnell> if anyone finds any issues before friday, post them to the mailing list as well as github

<eprodrom> jasnell: I think we’re about to do that in the next section


<scribe> ACTION: James Snell to update by Jan 16, 2015 [recorded in [[3]|]]]

<trackbot> ‘James’ is an ambiguous username. Please try a different identifier, such as family name or username (e.g., jsnell, jktauber).

<jasnell> yes, jsnell


<scribe> ACTION: jasnell to update by Jan 16, 2015 [recorded in [[4]|]]]

<trackbot> Error finding ‘jasnell’. You can review and register nicknames at <>.

<wilkie> ‘jsnell’


<scribe> ACTION: jsnell to update by Jan 16, 2015 [recorded in [[5]|]]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-27 - Update by jan 16, 2015 [on James Snell - due 2015-01-20].

<aaronpk> here is the URL

<aaronpk> maybe trackbot should post the URL of the action after it creates it?


<scribe> ACTION: jsnell to prepare working draft for publication based on by Jan 16, 2105 [recorded in [[6]|]]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-28 - Prepare working draft for publication based on by jan 16, 2105 [on James Snell - due 2015-01-20].

<aaronpk> I will go update 27

James: these Working Drafts have been stable for awhile, thus would like to consider moving to Last Call

Tantek: yes, that will be the next step
… having stability on the editor’s working draft is important for moving to next steps

James: if anyone sees an issue in the spec(s), please raise issue on GitHub, but copy the mailing list
… will ensure James sees it promptly

Tantek: anything else on this topic?



scribe: next topic: Microsyntaxes
… Evan’s topic?

Evan: actually elf’s, but happy to speak to it
… issue came up on mailing list
… number of diff systems doing microsyntaxes
… example: with Twitter you put @name to mention a particular user
… Twitter then routes that tweet in a special way

<tantek> Instagram also handles @-references like that

Evan: Facebook, Google do similar, with diff syntaxes
… discussion about how to recognize this
… via our mailing list
… how to handle “magic” symbols
… receiver should not have to do special parsing
… To: and Cc: properties should handle
… perhaps add note in Activity Streams that microsyntax in content for other properties should not have to be parsed by the processor
… will check if there’s a github issue; will check

Tantek: do you want this to be in the Friday draft?

Evan: this wasn’t proposed by me … nice to have by Friday, but not a crisis if added later

Tantek: agrees

James: I’m the one who started this on mailing list
… won’t be prob to add by Friday to the spec
… I don’t see any normative changes; should be just editorial

Evan: agrees

Tantek: sounds as if we’re resolved on how to handle microsyntax
… any issues, Evan or james?



Tantek: last agenda item … Open Social announcement
… press release issued shortly after last meeting
… want to ensure people are aware of this occurence
… Open Social has formally moved their work to W3C
… and expect this WG, plus the Social Web IG to do any follow-on work

James: notes that Press Release raised some issues for some …
… he cannot speak for Open Social officers board (Matt Marum, etc.)>
… believes any add’l resources they had, they donated to W3C and decided to close themselves down
… does not believe there are any implications that this WG would work on anything specific to that work

<harry> we can hear you evan

<harry> we have no formal commitment to existing OpenSocial specs, although we hope this work and membership can feed into the Social WG’s new work.

Evan: I wondered, did this announcement mean that we are expected to maintain current or new version of OpenSocial spec?

<jasnell> no, there are no obligations with regards to the opensocial specs themselves.

Evan: worried that this implied we might be taking on a big amount of new work

<Arnaud> there is no change to the charter, nor any proposal or request to do so

<harry> Yep, no additional charter items

<Arnaud> so, this doesn’t change what we are doing

Evan: appears that OpenSocial gave us their “seal of approval”, but without any new charter or additional work
… seems positive

Tantek: I agree
… I cited our charter in the announcement for that reason
… maintaining the OpenSocial spec is NOT in our charter; we need to be clear about that
… if anyone thinks we should do that, it needs to be added to our charter

<jasnell> to be clear, no one has suggested that the social wg ought to maintain the opensocial specs

Tantek: does anyone think we need to add that to our charter?

Harry: we had to keep the announcement secret until announced .. apologizes for no preceding discussion with WG
… no formal obligation
… hope some of them might join this WG

Tantek: <confirms accuracy of minutes>

Harry: <agrees>

<harry> again, if anyone is worried or has concerns, do feel free to email

Arnaud: no change to the charter, and no one has asked for change to charter

<harry> we thought that since there would be no change to the charter, this is more a big +1 to the existing work and a chance to get new folks involved than anything else.

Arnaud: good news

<harry> Also, this clarifies the space.

Arnaud: Open Social Foundation acknowledged that the “social web” work is happening here, in this W3C WG
… OSF had some $$ left, which they donated to us
… perhaps towards a F2F dinner or some such

<harry> So if you are a developer, you can just go to Social WG

<harry> for standards, IG for use-case

<jasnell> that’s something I can talk to Matt about

Evan: re: Harry’s point … wonder if our WG chairs might reach out to former OSF members, inviting them to participate here

<jasnell> I can take that action

<jasnell> yes please

<jasnell> otherwise I’ll forget :-)

<harry> Yes, it would be good to invite OSF people here

<harry> We’ve seen some emails from Matt Marum from SugarCRM but a lot aren’t here

<harry> participants

<eprodrom> We’d want all the Open Social member organizations and their contact people

<jasnell> jsnell will reach out to previous opensocial members to solicit participation in the Social WG


<scribe> ACTION: jsnell to reach out to Open Social Foundation participants to invite them to join the W3C Social Web WG [recorded in [[7]|]]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-29 - Reach out to open social foundation participants to invite them to join the w3c social web wg [on James Snell - due 2015-01-20].

Wendy: thanks Evan and James for the outreach! good collaboration!
… with “lawyer hat” on, notes W3C has not yet seen the $$
… does not know how much $$ there will actually be
… actual conclusion and transfer is still in work

Tantek: notes domain name now redirects to one W3C blog post
… wonders if any of the OSF content will be archived and preserved?

Sandro: in the past, W3C has occasionally taken on a web site for archival purposes
… not sure if it’s appropriate here

Ann: what is process to make that happen?

<harry> I think TimBL is not needed

<harry> I can file a

Sandro: TimBL thought it was important and got SysTeam to do it

<harry> but I think it’s just in the backlog

Arnaud: thinks this was part of the negotiation
… that they would keep the domain and single page

<tantek> for example this document on just redirects to the blog post:

<jasnell> the specs are archived on github


Wendy: <said about the domain and single page> .. if this group thinks there is specific content to be saved, we should point it out
… we should identify the crucial content, so W3C can look into it

<harry> IMHO its probably ok to just keep OpenSocial on github

Tantek: modest request: it would be nice if at least blog posts from OSF could be preserved, to be referenced as history
… including permalinks

<jasnell> I’ll take that action item to follow up on also

<harry> I’m happy to ask Systems Team if ex-OSF people

<jasnell> meaning that I’ll ask the opensocial folks about it and report back

<harry> are ok with that


<scribe> ACTION: jsnell to ask OpenSocial folks about W3C archiving their blog posts [recorded in [[8]|]]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-30 - Ask opensocial folks about w3c archiving their blog posts [on James Snell - due 2015-01-20].

<jasnell> got an answer from andy

<jasnell> Andy Smith says, “we have backed all of them up, and they can be made available if necessary”

<harry> will go to me

<jasnell> “but we felt given the direction of the work and community it was not necessary to manage the migration over”

<jasnell> “In terms of twitter and social media, that will gradaully shift over to the w3c exclusively over the next 6 months or so”

<tantek> simple request from the Social Web WG: can W3C at least archive the social content (e.g. blog posts) from


<scribe> ACTION: harry will ask W3C SysTeam about prospect for archiving OSF blog posts and perhaps other content [recorded in [[9]|]]]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-31 - Will ask w3c systeam about prospect for archiving osf blog posts and perhaps other content [on Harry Halpin - due 2015-01-20].

James: other content might be the OSF Twitter account, …
… right person to ask is Andy Smith, who is my colleague at IBM
… I will liaise with him

<harry> jasnell, let’s co-ordinate when you are ready to publish those drafts!

Tantek: past our closing time .. any thing else?
… end of meeting

<eprodrom> Thanks Tantek!

Tantek: thanks all!

<jasnell> harry +1

<cwebber2> thanks AnnBassetti !

<tantek> trackbot, end meeting