#social 2015-12-15

2015-12-15 UTC
bblfish, bengo, shepazu_, jasnell, Arnaud1, KevinMarks, jaywink, wilkie, prtksxna, the_frey and shevski joined the channel
#
Loqi Rhiaro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87305&oldid=0
bblfish and prtksxna joined the channel
#
ben_thatmustbeme so is the march 2016 F2F dates firm?
#
ben_thatmustbeme s/is/are/
jasnell and jasnell_ joined the channel
#
Loqi Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87314&oldid=87305
#
Loqi Benthatmustbeme made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87315&oldid=87314
#
Loqi Benthatmustbeme made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87318&oldid=0
shevski, melvster1, bblfish, prtksxna, eprodrom and tantek joined the channel
#
Loqi Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-08]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87323&oldid=87158
#
Loqi Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87324&oldid=87315
shevski joined the channel
#
Loqi Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87325&oldid=87318
#
Loqi Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87326&oldid=87325
#
cwebber2 ben_thatmustbeme: I don't think so but I could be wrong
#
cwebber2 ben_thatmustbeme: I think we narrowed it to two sets of days
#
cwebber2 but didn't decide which
#
Loqi Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87327&oldid=87324
#
Loqi Tantekelik made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87330&oldid=87327
#
Loqi Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87329&oldid=87328
#
Loqi Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-08-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87331&oldid=87182
#
ben_thatmustbeme from the notes it looked like one was decided and waiting on rsvps, so i created the page
#
ben_thatmustbeme cwebber2: there is nothing about another date for MIT that i see, http://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-02-minutes#Next_Face-to-Face_meeting
#
Loqi Tantekelik made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87334&oldid=87330
#
Loqi Benthatmustbeme made 3 edits to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87337&oldid=87326
#
Loqi Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87336&oldid=87334
prtksxna joined the channel
#
jasnell_ eprodrom: you here?
#
jasnell_ eprodrom: when you get a chance, please go to https://www.w3.org/Member/ and login, then select "User Account" from the menu on the right side of the page. Let me know what numbers it has for you in the profile page URL. It should look like: https://www.w3.org/users/(\d)+
melvster1 and bblfish joined the channel
#
cwebber2 mornin
#
jasnell_ present+ jasnell
#
eprodrom present+ eprodrom
#
aaronpk need to start trackbot before those get logged
#
cwebber2 present+ cwebber2
#
cwebber2 oh right
#
tantek trackbot, start meeting
#
trackbot is preparing a teleconference.
RRSAgent joined the channel
#
RRSAgent logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-social-irc
#
trackbot RRSAgent, make logs public
#
RRSAgent I have made the request, trackbot
#
trackbot Zakim, this will be SOCL
#
Zakim I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
#
trackbot Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
#
trackbot Date: 15 December 2015
#
rhiaro present+ rhiaro
#
aaronpk present+
#
ben_thatmustbeme present+
#
tantek present+ tantek
#
cwebber2 present+ cwebber2
#
jasnell present+ jasnell
#
eprodrom I'll do it
#
tantek scribe: eprodrom
bengo joined the channel
#
rhiaro has her hands full for a while otherwise would offer
#
tantek zakim, who is here?
#
Zakim Present: Arnaud, csarven, rhiaro, aaronpk, shanehudson, sandro, elf-pavlik, kevinmarks, wilkie, eprodrom, jasnell, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber, tantek, hhalpin, james, tsyesika,
#
Zakim ... wseltzer, akuckartz, shepazu, Rob_Sanderson, Shane_, rene, cwebber2, Benjamin_Young, bengo, KevinMarks_
#
Zakim ... dwhly, bret, bitbear, ben_thatmustbeme, tommorris_, cwebber2, oshepherd, rhiaro, tsyesika, jet, rrika, raucao, aaronpk, Zakim, sandro, trackbot, wseltzer
#
Zakim On IRC I see bengo, RRSAgent, bblfish, prtksxna, tantek, eprodrom, jasnell, the_frey, wilkie, jaywink, KevinMarks, Arnaud, shepazu, Loqi, tessierashpool_, bigbluehat, ElijahLynn,
#
eprodrom tantek: let's get started. Participation limited to members.
#
tantek present+ sandro
kevinmarks2 joined the channel
#
rhiaro where is zakim getting this list?
#
rhiaro ... it's not even irc
#
aaronpk zakim only knows who's on IRC
#
rhiaro it's not irc either though
#
aaronpk oh and it's not even correct
#
Zakim ACTION I have been told this is
#
shepazu Zakim, code?
#
aaronpk RIP zakim
#
eprodrom tantek: eprodrom, you had an item about IE application
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom eprodrom: we're working on IEs and re-evaluating how we do IEs. We want the current application backlog to be part of that, so we'll be evaluating over the next few weeks.
#
eprodrom wonders if that was really very efficient after all
#
eprodrom TOPIC: approval of minutes from 2015-12-08
#
eprodrom https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-12-08-minutes
#
cwebber2 +1
#
ben_thatmustbeme +1
#
cwebber2 just read :)
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: approve minutes of 2015-12-08
#
rhiaro +1
#
eprodrom +1
#
jasnell +1
#
aaronpk +1
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: approve minutes of 2015-12-08
#
shepazu present+ shepazu
#
eprodrom TOPIC: Face to Face in March 2016
#
eprodrom tantek: we have a date set at the December F2F
#
eprodrom tantek: I'd like to see us confirm the date
#
eprodrom tantek: dates are march 16 and 17
#
rhiaro were we gonna email the list too?
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: Face to face meeting at MIT in March 16 and 17 2016
#
eprodrom sandro: I'd like to see more RSVPs so we know who will actually be there
#
eprodrom tantek: how long should we wait
#
eprodrom sandro: get all RSVPs this week?
#
eprodrom tantek: delay another week?
#
ben_thatmustbeme q+
#
Zakim sees ben_thatmustbeme on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom sandro: please RSVP now
#
eprodrom q+
#
Zakim sees ben_thatmustbeme, eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom tantek: you have one week to RSVP or indicate objection
#
ben_thatmustbeme q-
#
Zakim sees eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack eprodrom
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom q-
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: RSVP or indicate problems with F2F date by Jan 5
#
eprodrom +1
#
tantek https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-03-16#Participation
#
tantek +1
#
aaronpk +1
#
ben_thatmustbeme i'm guessing this will spill in to the next topic of meeting next week or not
#
ben_thatmustbeme +1
#
Loqi Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87338&oldid=87336
#
cwebber2 +1
#
eprodrom sandro: +1
#
rhiaro +1
#
jasnell +0 (no input, not sure I'll be able to go)
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: RSVP or indicate problems with F2F date by Jan 5
#
eprodrom tantek: (or sooner)
#
eprodrom TOPIC: Next telcon (12/22 and 12/29)
#
eprodrom tantek: upcoming telcons will be during holiday period
#
eprodrom tantek: this tends to be lighter when people are on vacation
#
aaronpk both are fine for me
#
rhiaro 0 no opinion on either... will show up if there's a call
#
jasnell prefer no more calls this year
#
eprodrom tantek: should we have a telcon on these days? none or 22 or 29 or both
#
eprodrom non
#
eprodrom none
#
cwebber2 I would also prefer none
#
ben_thatmustbeme Either are fine with me
#
jasnell won't be here the next two weeks
#
cwebber2 it's going to be crazy over here
#
aaronpk actually preference is only 22nd, but okay with none
#
eprodrom tantek: I see 3 votes for none, 1 for the 22nd, and 1 no opinion
#
eprodrom tantek: if there's no other input, seems like majority is in favour of none
#
eprodrom ben_thatmustbeme: I said either are fine
#
eprodrom tantek: that makes 2 no opinions
#
eprodrom tantek: seems to be a strong bias towards having none
#
sandro (fine with any options)
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: Skipping telcons on 12/22 and 12/29, next telcon on 5 Jan 2016
#
Loqi I added a countdown for 1/5 12:00am (#5780)
#
sandro secretly cheering, but would never admit it
#
ben_thatmustbeme can someone update the main wiki page with that info, and who is chairing
#
cwebber2 :)
#
eprodrom thanks Loqi
#
Loqi you're welcome
#
eprodrom TOPIC: Activity Streams 2.0
#
ben_thatmustbeme laughs
#
eprodrom tantek: everyone was asked to give CR blocking issues by this meeting
#
eprodrom tantek: jasnell, have we addressed all blocking issues?
#
eprodrom jasnell: we have 4 open proposals
melvster joined the channel
#
eprodrom https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/261
#
jasnell https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/261
#
jasnell https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/269
#
jasnell https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/276
#
jasnell https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/277
#
eprodrom jasnell: don't believe we have any blockers
#
cwebber2 we agreed at f2f that the "expires" one is something interesting to explore but definitely not a CR blocker
#
eprodrom tantek: if these belong in the spec, they are blockers
#
eprodrom tantek: we can consider them non-blockers if there are non-normative changes
#
eprodrom jasnell: Only 276 is normative, changes a SHOULD to a MUST
#
eprodrom tantek: 277 would be a normative change
#
eprodrom q+
#
Zakim sees eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom jasnell: I wouldn't consider that a blocker for CR
#
Loqi Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87339&oldid=87337
#
Loqi Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87340&oldid=87339
#
Loqi Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87341&oldid=87340
#
eprodrom tantek: we have to close issues to resolve all open substantive issues
#
eprodrom tantek: 261 may be editorial
#
eprodrom sandro: I need to think that over
#
eprodrom q?
#
Zakim sees eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack eprodrom
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom eprodrom: I think we can resolve some of these during the call
#
cwebber2 q+
#
Zakim sees cwebber on the speaker queue
#
tantek https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/269
#
eprodrom tantek: Let's make progress where we can
#
cwebber2 I have something to say on this one
#
eprodrom tantek: time boxed by 10 min
#
eprodrom q?
#
Zakim sees cwebber on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack cwebber
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom cwebber: tsyesika and I had a lot of conversation about what we can do about transient and expirable activities
#
eprodrom cwebber: I wasn't convinced about expires at the F2F
#
eprodrom cwebber: but I'm increasingly convinced
#
eprodrom cwebber: so we could mark it at risk
#
eprodrom jasnell: I thought we could just leave it as a non-blocker
#
eprodrom tantek: we have to call it one way or the other
#
eprodrom q+
#
Zakim sees eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
jasnell propose closing the issue until it's figured out later
#
cwebber2 q+ to say I would also be open to this being an extension
#
Zakim sees eprodrom, cwebber on the speaker queue
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees eprodrom, cwebber on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack eprodrom
#
Zakim sees cwebber on the speaker queue
#
melvster jasnell++
#
Loqi jasnell has 40 karma
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees cwebber on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack cwebber2
#
Zakim sees cwebber on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack cwebber
#
Zakim cwebber, you wanted to say I would also be open to this being an extension
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
shepazu q+
#
Zakim sees shepazu on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: close issue 269
#
melvster +1
#
tantek ack shepazu
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
cwebber2 +1
#
eprodrom shepazu: could also consider moving this to v2
#
eprodrom shepazu: will maintain continuity
#
melvster v2? of I thought AS2 was v2 ...
#
cwebber2 I'm fine with that, but if that makes this convo more complex
#
cwebber2 I'd say just close it.
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: close issue 269 unchanged
#
sandro -1 okay with closing it, with the theory that we can add it as an extension, although this particular thing is extremely hard to add as an extensions, since it can't be silently igored
#
eprodrom +1
#
sandro -0 okay with closing it, with the theory that we can add it as an extension, although this particular thing is extremely hard to add as an extensions, since it can't be silently igored
#
melvster +1
#
aaronpk +1
#
bengo -1 It's important to have 'expires' as part of object authoring/representation (by end-users) and not just processing requirements (of silos/etc)/extensions
#
cwebber2 :(
#
sandro (my -1 was a typo)
#
sandro (bengo is not in the WG, so chair is not counting his vote)
#
bengo (yep)
#
eprodrom tantek: don't recognize objections from non-members
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: close issue 269 unchanged
#
cwebber2 would be happy to work with bengo to make an extension
#
eprodrom tantek: encourage cwebber2 to make this work as an extension
#
eprodrom tantek: 276 is next
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
jasnell btw, updated the working drafts today based on the decision at the f2f (finally got evan's id in there)
#
shepazu notes that bengo is an implementer, so his feedback is valuable
#
tantek https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/276
#
eprodrom jasnell: 276 requires valid AS to use vocab
#
eprodrom jasnell: SHOULD use AS2 vocabulary -and- other vocabularies, if you use those other vocabularies
#
eprodrom jasnell: proposal is to say MUST instead of SHOULD
#
cwebber2 I think should is fine
#
eprodrom jasnell: SHOULD is probably strong enough
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: close issue 276 without change
#
melvster +1
#
cwebber2 +1
#
eprodrom jasnell: I'd like to have input from Rene
#
eprodrom tantek: you can object to this
#
jasnell -1 would prefer to allow Rene to speak on this before closing
#
tantek https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/277
#
eprodrom jasnell: 277 removes the Actor type
#
eprodrom jasnell: it's an abstract supertype
#
cwebber2 q+
#
Zakim sees cwebber on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom jasnell: unusual to implement but otherwise not used
#
tantek ack cwebber
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom jasnell: would remove this to make it simpler
#
ben_thatmustbeme q+
#
Zakim sees ben_thatmustbeme on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom cwebber2: even if this is not directly used, it's still valuable for structuring
#
eprodrom q+
#
Zakim sees ben_thatmustbeme, eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack ben_thatmustbeme
#
Zakim sees eprodrom on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom cwebber2: it's not the end of the world, though
#
shepazu q+
#
Zakim sees eprodrom, shepazu on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom ben_thatmustbeme: is there any other mechanism we can use to say, this is an abstract type?
#
tantek ack eprodrom
#
Zakim sees shepazu on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom jasnell: that's possible, but not a current notion
#
cwebber2 q+
#
Zakim sees shepazu, cwebber on the speaker queue
#
tantek zakim, close queue
#
Zakim ok, tantek, the speaker queue is closed
#
cwebber2 q-
#
Zakim sees shepazu on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom eprodrom: similar to Content type, which we removed
#
eprodrom tantek: we're over time
#
tantek ack shepazu
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
cwebber2 (jasnell, if we did stick with abstract types, shouldn't activity be one as well?)
#
melvster let's not rush ... AS2 seems *really* close to CR ...
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: accept issue #277 and drop the Actor type
#
jasnell cwebber2: yes, likely
#
cwebber2 -0
#
jasnell +0
#
eprodrom +1
#
melvster +1
#
cwebber2 my -0 should be non-blocking though.
#
ben_thatmustbeme 0, i do think it would make more sense to keep info about the grouping, though that could be just a matter of informative notes in the spec
#
aaronpk +1
#
KevinMarks present+
#
eprodrom tantek: I don't see blocking objections, so I'd like to declare this resolved
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: accept issue #277 and drop the Actor type
#
eprodrom tantek: we have not hit zero issues, so we could do it at the next telcon
#
rhiaro http://w3c-social.github.io/social-web-protocols/social-web-protocols
#
eprodrom TOPIC: Social Web Protocols
#
eprodrom rhiaro: I have resolved a number of issues, and no FPWD-blocking issues have been raised
#
Loqi Sandro made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87345&oldid=87341
#
eprodrom tantek: do you believe this has been sufficiently reviewed?
#
eprodrom rhiaro: everyone who's active in the group has commented on issues, and it was required reading
#
eprodrom sandro: is it worth having someone assigned to read it?
#
eprodrom q+
#
Zakim whispers to eprodrom that the speaker queue has been closed
#
tantek zakim, open queue
#
Zakim ok, tantek, the speaker queue is open
#
eprodrom tantek: but you feel confident
#
tantek ack eprodrom
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
sandro q+
#
Zakim sees sandro on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom eprodrom: this isn't a spec, so what will its lifecycle look like?
#
eprodrom rhiaro: this could be an umbrella for multiple specs, published as a note
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees sandro on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom yes
#
tantek ack sandro
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom sandro: we can document similarity between stacks
#
eprodrom tantek: let's take this to a proposal
#
KevinMarks +1
#
eprodrom PROPOSAL: take Social Web Protocols to First Public Working Draft
#
ben_thatmustbeme +1
#
tsyesika +1
#
rhiaro +1
#
aaronpk +1
#
sandro +1
#
cwebber2 0
#
eprodrom +0
#
cwebber2 for a specific reason
#
melvster 0
#
cwebber2 I sent a large amount of feedback to rhiaro which has not been addressed
#
cwebber2 but
#
cwebber2 I don't know if that warrants holdin git off
#
cwebber2 because
#
ben_thatmustbeme i think amy, you have a text :P
#
cwebber2 I don't know enough about this process
#
shepazu wonders what that buzzing is?
#
rhiaro that was irc notifications on my phone, sorry
#
eprodrom tantek: FPWD doesn't have to reflect consensus
#
eprodrom tantek: It tells the public that we are working on this, possibly for rec track
#
cwebber2 tantek, thanks for that indication, okay, in that case, I am +1
#
eprodrom tantek: starts the clock on declaring exclusioins in terms of IP
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
melvster O_o
#
eprodrom s/exclusioins/exclusions/
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: take Social Web Protocols to First Public Working Draft
#
eprodrom tantek: let's timebox next items to 5 min
#
eprodrom tantek: all edits have been made per jasnell
#
sandro yes, i agree decision was made at f2f.
#
ben_thatmustbeme +1
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: push new WD of AS2
#
eprodrom +1
#
eprodrom TOPIC: WebMention
#
aaronpk http://webmention.net/draft/
#
eprodrom I just dropped off the call, can someone scribe please?
#
rhiaro will
#
ben_thatmustbeme scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme
#
rhiaro never mind
#
Loqi Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87346&oldid=87338
#
ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: there were no new issues on github over hte past week when we requested blocked issues, i have been incorporating feedback and latest version is available and was converted to respec
#
ben_thatmustbeme ... link in irc
#
ben_thatmustbeme tantek: do you believe the spec has received sufficient review to take it to FPWD?
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: yes, i do believe a number have people have read it over and contributed their thoughts
#
ben_thatmustbeme PROPOSAL: take webmention to FPWD
#
sandro +1
#
melvster -0 a 5 minute window is not quite enough time provide accurate feedback, will send feedback to list ... non blocking
#
cwebber2 +1
#
rhiaro +1
#
ben_thatmustbeme ben_thatmustbeme: +1
#
eprodrom +0
#
KevinMarks +1
#
jasnell +0
#
melvster PS webmention.net was also down for some of today
#
ben_thatmustbeme tantek: as background we did request anyone provide feedback at F2F over this time, so it has been public
#
eprodrom thanks ben_thatmustbeme
#
eprodrom scribe: eprodrom
#
ben_thatmustbeme scribenick eprodrom
#
ben_thatmustbeme scribenick: eprodrom
#
eprodrom tantek: recognize that there was time for feedback
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: take webmention to FPWD
#
eprodrom TOPIC: ActivityPump
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom cwebber: tsyesika and I had a significant meeting in private to address difficult issues in AP
#
eprodrom cwebber: I will be filing issues along those points, thoughts on how to clean up rough edges for implementers
#
eprodrom cwebber: have commented on issues, but haven't put FPWD on the agenda this week
#
eprodrom cwebber: to my knowledge, no one has raised a blocker on AP
#
eprodrom cwebber: happy to delay until next call
#
eprodrom tantek: we didn't ask for FPWD-blocker issues
#
eprodrom cwebber: can I ask now?
#
sandro q+
#
Zakim sees sandro on the speaker queue
#
tantek ack sandro
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom PROPOSED: Request raise FPWD-blocking issues on ActivityPump by 5 Jan 2016
#
cwebber2 actually, can we delay till Jan 12
#
cwebber2 I will be on a train :)
#
cwebber2 well
#
eprodrom sandro: we mentioned at F2F to keep both AP and micropub in sync
#
cwebber2 I could do jan 5 but I think jan 12 would be easier
#
eprodrom PROPOSED: Request raise FPWD-blocking issues on ActivityPump by 12 Jan 2016
#
ben_thatmustbeme just lost networking
#
eprodrom q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
aaronpk I would be okay with Jan 12 for micropub too.
#
aaronpk still need time to work on webmention fpwd :-)
#
cwebber2 yes, I'm okay with it
#
cwebber2 sounds great
#
eprodrom +1
#
tsyesika +1
#
aaronpk +1
#
cwebber2 +1
#
rhiaro +1
#
cwebber2 (should we get an update to the proposed?)
#
cwebber2 for the webmention part too
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: Request raise FPWD-blocking issues on ActivityPump by 12 Jan 2016
#
tsyesika +1
#
eprodrom PROPOSED: Request raise FPWD-blocking issues on ActivityPump and micropub by 12 Jan 2016
#
rhiaro +1
#
cwebber2 +1
#
tsyesika +1
#
KevinMarks +1
#
eprodrom +1
#
aaronpk +1
#
melvster 0
#
sandro +1
#
eprodrom RESOLVED: Request raise FPWD-blocking issues on ActivityPump and micropub by 12 Jan 2016
#
sandro tantek: just that one resolution
#
eprodrom tantek: previous resolution was incorrect
#
aaronpk s/RESOLVED: Request raise FPWD-blocking issues on ActivityPump by 12 Jan 2016//
#
aaronpk let's see if that fixes the minutes
#
eprodrom tantek: Postponing post-type detection until next call
#
eprodrom tantek: additional issues?
#
eprodrom +1
#
tantek q?
#
Zakim sees no one on the speaker queue
#
eprodrom And a very good year!
#
Loqi Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87347&oldid=87346
#
ben_thatmustbeme waves goodbye to 2015
#
eprodrom <~~~
#
eprodrom tantek: enjoy your holidays
#
sandro happy december, everyone!
#
eprodrom tantek: next meeting 1/5, Arnaud to chair
#
eprodrom trackbot, end meeting
#
trackbot is ending a teleconference.
#
trackbot Zakim, list attendees
#
Zakim As of this point the attendees have been Arnaud, csarven, rhiaro, aaronpk, shanehudson, sandro, elf-pavlik, kevinmarks, wilkie, eprodrom, jasnell, ben_thatmustbeme, cwebber,
#
ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom++
#
Loqi eprodrom has 28 karma
#
Zakim ... tantek, hhalpin, james, tsyesika, wseltzer, akuckartz, shepazu, Rob_Sanderson, Shane_, rene, cwebber2, Benjamin_Young, bengo, ben_thatmust, KevinMarks_
#
tantek eprodrom++
#
Loqi eprodrom has 29 karma
#
trackbot RRSAgent, please draft minutes
#
RRSAgent I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-social-minutes.html trackbot
#
trackbot RRSAgent, bye
#
RRSAgent I see no action items
#
eprodrom aaronpk: it worked!
#
aaronpk hooray!
#
aaronpk http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-social-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary
#
tantek s/Postponing post-type detection/We lack sufficient time to discuss taking Post Type Discovery to FPWD, thus let's postpone discussing that until the next call/
#
eprodrom http://www.w3.org/2015/12/15-social-minutes.html#ResolutionSummary
bengo joined the channel
#
ben_thatmustbeme is surprised aaronpk hasn't made loqi pregen wiki version of mimutes immediately after RRSAgent generates them :P
#
melvster wasnt time to raise an objection to webmention in the current call, ill elaborate on the mailing list (again), but it boils down the the issue I raised on the ML in June, and also on aaron's github, that the messaging layer needs to name things with URIs in order to achieve interop, syntactic sugar out of band is OK, provided that the semantics are well defined, they are not right now, from reading Sandeep's original proposal I think the idea was to alig
#
melvster n with Semantic pingback, which seems to be a developing consensus ... I'll send this to the ML
#
melvster but well done on publishing the draft in a stable location, that will help a lot people searching for it
nickstenn_ joined the channel
#
rhiaro melvster: if I recall there was a suggestion that we have default namespace for terms that people can use if they want, and you said that would be okay?
#
melvster rhiaro: yes but I would have said let's do that first, then go to FPWD
#
melvster it can happen after too
#
melvster just as long as its not forgotten
#
aaronpk it's still listed as an open issue on github
#
rhiaro yeah, it's not like it's too late. FPWD isn't even consensus.
#
aaronpk jasnell: how does activitystreams handle that?
#
rhiaro if it's an open issue on gh it won't be forgotten then
#
rhiaro aaronpk: is that in the JSON-LD bit of as2?
#
aaronpk I thought it was different but am not sure
#
jasnell if the @context is missing, it assumes the normative @context is used
#
aaronpk i guess i'm looking for the language you used to describe that
#
melvster part of this is a typical (quite long) conversation which goes over the advantages of using URIs in the messaging layer of specs (ie interop) ...
#
aaronpk and I can use the same language to describe the query params
bengo joined the channel
#
melvster it's a quite easy fix, the harder thing is to explain why it's useful
#
rhiaro http://jasnell.github.io/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/activitystreams-core/index.html#jsonld
#
aaronpk i don't see why it's useful, no. webmention is interoperating just fine without it right now
#
rhiaro third paragraph
#
aaronpk thx rhiaro
#
melvster aaronpk: yes, your POV is appreciated, but this is a common POV, so that's why it's useful to explain the advnatages of using URIs
#
rhiaro to be fair, webmention is interoperating just fine right now amongst people who aren't storing that data as-is alongside a bunch of other data from different sources
#
melvster cant be done in a 5 minute time box, when people are used to doing things a certain way, but it does help when trying to make a standard
#
rhiaro which is potentially likely to happen once it becomes more widespread
#
aaronpk there was no 5-minute timebox since we asked for blocking issues to be filed last week
#
aaronpk but anyway, do you have a suggestion for how to phrase this in the spec? i'm not certain how this tranlsates to form-encoded params outside of json-ld
#
melvster "we are interoperating just fine" -- is the cry of *every* silo :)
#
jasnell aaronpk: see http://www.w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/#jsonld
#
jasnell last paragraph
#
ben_thatmustbeme melvster: the question was if it was a blocker for FPWD, and you weren't on the call
#
ben_thatmustbeme that was the 5 minutes
#
Loqi Eprodrom made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2015-12-15-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87349&oldid=0
#
ben_thatmustbeme you could have pointed to the github and said THIS is a blocker
#
ben_thatmustbeme that is doable within 5 minutes
#
aaronpk melvster: I'm not opposed to adding something to this effect, I just don't know what to add, and you seem to have strong opinions about it so I would appreciate an actual proposal
#
melvster ben_thatmustbeme: i didnt block it ... see my vote it specifically said, "non blocking" ... however I have raised concerns, and will continue to try and explain them
#
melvster aaronpk: understood, I'll suggest something, if it's unclear
#
rhiaro I guess what's needed is: if you wish to store webmention data as rdf, here is the namespace to use for terms?
#
ben_thatmustbeme nods
#
rhiaro since it's not passed around as rdf in any form, not sure beyond that though
#
melvster related is rhiaro's "ripples" : https://github.com/solid/solid-spec/blob/master/ripples.md
#
rhiaro I'd like to note that isn't 'my' ripples, but a collaborative effort between several people
#
melvster yes!
#
rhiaro (in fact I just wrote down other people's thoughts)
#
melvster rhiaro: re your comment above, exactly, yes.
#
rhiaro melvster: well, that seems doable
#
melvster everyone wins then ... webmention can be used as is, and also in systems like Solid and AS2
#
melvster assuming you would want to ...
#
melvster but there's plenty of time to discuss this, between fpwd and next stage, ill try and explain my thoughts in more detail
#
melvster (hopefully have a bit already, but essentially what rhiaro said would give best of all worlds)
#
tantek I really want to thank the editors that have worked on the documents we approved for publication today.
#
tantek jasnell++
#
Loqi jasnell has 41 karma
#
tantek rhiaro++
#
Loqi rhiaro has 193 karma
#
tantek aaronpk++
#
Loqi aaronpk has 32 karma
#
Loqi Jaywink made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87350&oldid=87345
#
tantek We as a Working Group now have REC-track drafts in the pipeline for every one of our three charter REC-track deliverables, Social Data Syntax (AS2), Social API (Social Web Protocols), Federation Protocol (Webmention) http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html#deliverables
#
tantek That's an excellent achievement for the group, and a great way to show progress for the year.
#
aaronpk great way to end 2015!
#
cwebber2 \o/
#
tantek As a WG we definitely had some rough spots this past year, and I'm hoping that we've now turned a corner and are going into 2016 with renewed energy and productivity.
#
melvster tantek: one minute it "doesnt have to reflect consensus" the next its "REC track" ... love your perspective and optimism! :D
#
cwebber2 tantek: I feel like that's true.
#
tantek melvster: if you're asking for serious clarification, the contents of a *FPWD* in particular do not need to all reflect WG consensus, that's per W3C process.
#
tantek and yes, as has been pointed out by the chairs & staff, a FPWD is by default REC-track unless it says otherwise in the document
#
melvster tantek: yes but W3C process is also to read related topics on the Mailing List ... so as I say I love your particular take on W3C process and where things stands, long live optimism! :)
#
tantek "Social Web Protocols" in particular indicates that one possible destination for it is to become a WG Note.
#
Loqi hugs melvster
#
tantek melvster, no that is incorrect, there is no required reading of the mailing list in W3C process, and in particular, this group was started with the mailing list as an explicit non-requirement.
#
melvster tantek, pointer ...
#
tantek you may request details of the starting of the WG from the W3C staff who started it, Harry Halpin
#
melvster he's not here now
#
tantek irrelevant - you asked for a pointer to the start of the WG, he can provide it. his contact information is at the bottom of the charter: http://www.w3.org/2013/socialweb/social-wg-charter.html
#
melvster is a skeptic, would be interested in a pointer if one exists, ML is in the w3c process document, so i guess it's a question of "interpretation" :) ...
#
tantek you have been given a path to a pointer, if you are interested, you may pursue it.
#
melvster tantek: if the chair cant provide a pointer, I am not interested in going on a wild goose chase, I'll take the lack of ability to do so at face value ... w3c process doc is my guide
#
tantek melvster I did provide a pointer, to a w3c staff contact
#
tantek if the w3c staff contact cannot provide a pointer, then you may re-raise the question
#
Loqi Jaywink made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/Github]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87351&oldid=87140
#
melvster tantek: he's not staff contact
#
melvster afaik
#
tantek he was for the relevant establishment
#
tantek hence he is the source to contact
bengo joined the channel
#
tantek if you feel unable to email Harry for any reason, you may also email Sandro contact Harry on your behalf
#
melvster tantek: enough for me to know no one in this group can provide a pointer
#
melvster tantek: let's just agree to differ :)
#
tantek melvster, you don't know that, because you are refusing to ask the right person (w3c staff) for a pointer
#
tantek your refusal to work towards something you are asking for shows bad faith in actually wanting it
#
melvster tantek: i asked the chair, that is enough for me
#
melvster i will simply take your response at face value
#
aaronpk a chair. we have more than one.
#
tantek and as chair I gave you a pointer to pursue. if you don't wish to pursue it I will assume you no longer care about the issue.
#
melvster tantek: you are welcome to assume what you will, let's not discuss further, if you discover new information ie a point that is a URL to back up your claim, I'd be interested, otherwise let's just agree to differ on this one, and move on
#
tantek we'll leave it with an outstanding way for you to discover what you want, whether you pursue it or not. there is no obligation for chairs to jump through hoops for you.
#
tantek I find your resistance to using email to find out about whether email is required (which you seem to assume), puzzling.
bengo joined the channel
#
melvster tantek: you are welcome to your opinion, i simply asked you to back up your statement and you could not ... i have no further interest
#
tantek I have backed up my statement with a reference to W3C staff contacts for you to pursue. It's not my opinion, it's a fact of the WG which as chair I am telling you, on the record, and inviting you to appeal to the W3C staff if you object.
#
tantek By not appealing to W3C staff we can only conclude that you accept the statement as fact.
#
tantek And yes, you may accept the statement as fact and declare you have no further interest in pursuing. That is ok too.
#
melvster tantek: I hear you, but I dont agree with your opinion, it contradicts the w3c process document, the burden of proof is on you ... you clearly cant provide that proof ... so let's just agree to differ and move on ... you wont change your mind, and I wont change mine (unless new info emerges) ... thanks for your input, im afraid im not going to indulge you by continuing this conversation, as it's not a productive use of time ...
#
melvster waves ..
#
tantek melvster: you were the one to request use of my time. I gave you a way to resolve your issue, you rejected it. By not continuing the conversation as stated previously, I will accept your lack of further interest in pursuing and thus acceptance of what you were told.
#
tantek If you wish to continue to claim you disagree, you have actions to take accordingly. Your absence of actions however, indicates that you don't actually disagree, but only claim to.
#
aaronpk jasnell: any tips for how to get started on publishing a FPWD? I have the spec in Respec format already
#
aaronpk I also can't seem to find documentation on w3.org
melvster joined the channel
#
aaronpk sandro: ping since you probably know too :-)
#
jasnell you'll need to work with sandro to get it bootstrapped
#
jasnell once the FPWD is done, the rest is fairly simple and largely automated
#
tantek aaronpk, you may find the tips that the Webapps WG captured useful: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Webapps/SpecEditing
bengo joined the channel
#
tantek I recall a question earlier about how does one find one's W3C id, that I think sandro answered in our chairs call
#
tantek https://www.w3.org/users/myprofile
#
aaronpk jasnell: cool, so what is the thing that actually publishes the doc at w3.org/TR/activitystreams-core/ ?
#
tantek once you login with your w3c credentials, you will see that it redirects to a / number URL
#
tantek that number is your W3C id number
#
jasnell I use echidna (https://github.com/w3c/echidna). I created a simple publishing tool that you can use once you're bootstrapped. npm install -g echpub
#
jasnell but you can't use it for FPWD
#
aaronpk can't use echidna for FPWD or can't use your npm tool?
#
melvster "you don't actually disagree, but only claim to" -- not quite right, I disagree, but you are not listening, so moving on, please stop telling me my own opinion as if you know it better than me, it's wrong, and impolite. just stop. let's move on.
#
melvster this is the sort of attitude that causes people to leave the group
#
tantek melvster, I have listened to your questions and provided accessible ways (multiple!) for you to answer them. Your not accepting those accessible ways are your problem, not mine, nor the working group's.
#
tantek I am not discussing opinion, merely the fact that you are rejecting the accesible actions provided to you to answer your own questions.
#
tantek If you object to doing work to answer your own questions, then yes, you may find it difficult to work in this working group, as we expect everyone to do work to answer their own questions.
#
tantek I leave that up to you.
#
melvster thanks you for your input, moving on ...
#
tantek Thanks melvster. I'll accept that as your acceptance of the fact that we do not require email in this WG.
#
aaronpk rhiaro: do you already have a plan/process for publishing FPWD? you hang out with sandro more than I do so I might need your help with this :-)
#
rhiaro aaronpk: I read this http://services.w3.org/xslt?xmlfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/01-transitions.html&xslfile=http://www.w3.org/2005/08/transitions.xsl and clicked on the pub rules stuff, and put the url into the pubrules thing and it gave a bunch of stuff to fix, so will start there
#
rhiaro I assume it will become clearer in the fullness of time
#
jasnell aaronpk: can't use echidna for FPWD
#
aaronpk rhiaro: ah a validator, neat. I'm getting a whole bunch of errors. Does it need to be run on the HTML version of the spec instead of the respec source?
#
jasnell html version
bblfish joined the channel
#
aaronpk jasnell: you had to do something special to get it to use the new license, right?
#
jasnell https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/blob/master/activitystreams-core/index.html#L10
#
aaronpk jasnell++
#
Loqi jasnell has 42 karma
bengo joined the channel
#
cwebber2 jasnell: aaronpk: oh thanks
#
cwebber2 does that
#
Loqi Lfassett made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-03-16]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=87352&oldid=87350
bblfish, shevski, bengo, kevinmarks3 and shepazu joined the channel