From W3C Wiki


Social Web Working Group Teleconference

30 May 2017

See also: IRC log


eprodrom, sandro, ajordan, cwebber, ben_thatmustbeme, aaronpk, tantek, cwebber2


<eprodrom> cwebber2: are you calling in?

<cwebber2> eprodrom: yes

<eprodrom> Awesome

<eprodrom> scribe?

<scribe> scribe: sandro

<scribe> scribenick: sandro


eprodrom: This is our new meeting time

Approval of previous minutes

<eprodrom> PROPOSED: approve as minutes for 23 May 2017 meeting


<eprodrom> +1

<tantek> good morning

<cwebber2> +1

<ajordan> +1

<tantek> +1 from what I recall reading it later that day

<ben_thatmustbeme> +1

<aaronpk> +1

RESOLUTION: approve as minutes for 23 May 2017 meeting

Charter Extension

sandro: Please keep trying to find AC Reps to vote

(access controlled link)

until June 16

I think Evan can read this, but maybe not.

tantek: curious

<tantek> can you see this?


eprodrom: okay, we'll try to figure out who we know

sandro: to remind them to give feedback

<ajordan> tantek: not authorized for me

tantek: we'd love feedback as part of those conversations as well

Next Telcon

June 6


eprodrom: test suite?

cwebber2: life took over, family emergency, etc, still not ready
... one issue for discussion

<tantek> eprodrom_ vs eprodrom


<Loqi> [brianolson] #225 Needs provisions for encrypting content for privacy

cwebber2: someone's asking for end-to-end encryption

<eprodrom> Fixed!

cwebber2: Can we say it's worth exploring, but not feasible in the spec at this time


<ajordan> +1

eprodrom: If you literally are going to encrypt activities as posted to your outbox, so they're only readable to recipients who know it, the server couldn't do the routing


<Loqi> [cwebber] So there are two ways to encrypt things. You can encrypt things between servers, which is done via SSL/TLS. You could also give each user a public/private keypair on the server, but at that point you're nearly in "as good/bad" of a situation as HTT...

cwebber2: I think I captured that in the issue.
... If you just want an encrypted wrapper, we could maybe support that in extension, but s2s side effects wouldn't work
... server can't, eg, increase likes, add someone to list, etc
... encrypted wrapper would have lots of side effects. Just delivery of an object.

eprodrom: it would be possible to do encrypted-content property
... or to have an encrypted-note type, that has much of the same properties as node, but we expected 'content' value to be opaque. That would cover much of what people expect from end-to-end.

cwebber2: or encrypted-payload field, with json object.
... like email, as far as envelope being visible
... still, not something we're going to do in this WG

<tantek> runyourownserver++ :)

<Loqi> runyourownserver has 1 karma

eprodrom: the usual answer is 'run your own server'
... I agree, closing that

sandro: invite commenter to propose extension in CG

cwebber2: Sure
... I will have a better update next week

ajordan: Did we ever cover Direct-Message issue?

<tantek> issue number?


<Loqi> [annando] #196 How to differentiate between posts and private (direct) messages?

ajordan: We talked about this, but I can't remember what we said

<tantek> ajordan, you can bring up any substantive issue in github on our CRs, the agenda items for those specs are inclusive of that "open issues"

cwebber2: evan made the case we covered this with to,bto,cc,bcc

ajordan: Let's remember our state on this for next week

eprodrom: it was two weeks ago

ajordan: let's move on for today



<Loqi> [aaronpk] Here is some proposed text to add this to the spec.

<Loqi> Before:

<Loqi> > The successful response from the subscriber's callback URL MUST be an HTTP !RFC7231 success (2xx) code. The hub MUST consider all other subscriber response codes as failures; tha...

<ben_thatmustbeme> grep of minutes list shows #196 mentioned on 4/25, 5/2 and 5/9 cwebber2

aaronpk: Last week we agreed to incorporate this HTTP 410 issue
... Julian wanted MAY instead of SHOULD.
... New WG

<ajordan> tantek: yeah

sandro: contingent on clarification
... although with MAY it's hard to imagine it being a problem

tantek: I agree, the MAY makes it even less likely to raise concerns. It's pointing direction for implementation. Is it possible to test this?

aaronpk: I do plan on test, waiting for text to be in

tantek: if it's widely implemented, than in a 1.1 we could upgrade it to a SHOULD

aaronpk: In that case I'll go ahead with a new CR

tantek: I think this would be normal WG post-REC maintenance

sandro: I'll still check with Ralph, don't want to get this wrong

aaronpk: I checked on github's impl
... turns out they don't implement discovery
... their topic URLs don't return anything when you touch them
... and their subscription request requires Access-Token
... so it's not really PubSubHubbub
... they do send fat pings
... but it's undefined if they match URL, since URLs don't work
... not a lot of good news
... I'm asking someone at github to look into it
... but not optimistic because of their general need for authentication

Post Type Discovery

tantek: Nothing new
... hopefully soon

Any other documents?

<ajordan> Zakim: who is on the call?

eprodrom: We approved pub of social web protocols

<ben_thatmustbeme> I have been working on updates to JF2

<ben_thatmustbeme> but that will be a bit before done

sandro: rhiaro is at conf this week

ajordan, comma not colon

Social Incubator CG

cwebber2: Tomorrow! Show Up!

<ajordan> sandro: :/

eprodrom: Nice. Short meetings are good.

<tantek> +1 to that


sandro: help add to CG agenda and get the word out

<Loqi> hehe

<ajordan> cwebber2: might want to announce on the CG page

eprodrom, adjourned, see you tomorrow and next week!

<cwebber2> ajordan, yes probably

<eprodrom> trackbot, end meeting

<ben_thatmustbeme> sandro++

<Loqi> sandro has 39 karma in this channel (46 overall)

<tantek> sandro++ for minuting

<Loqi> sandro has 40 karma in this channel (47 overall)

<ben_thatmustbeme> eprodrom++

<Loqi> eprodrom has 46 karma in this channel (47 overall)

<cwebber2> eprodrom++

<Loqi> slow down!

<cwebber2> sandro++

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

  1. approve as minutes for 23 May 2017 meeting

[End of minutes]