2016-08-23 UTC
Arnaud, jasnell, jasnell_, Karli and tantek joined the channel
# 13:09 tantek Cambridge folks, I'm in town for the @W3CAB meeting and would very much like to hang out in person if you're around and available! cc: csarven, rhiaro, sandro, wseltzer jasnell joined the channel
# 13:18 wseltzer waves to tantek jasnell joined the channel
jasnell, jasnell_ and KevinMarks joined the channel
# 15:45 tantek what does that mean? the first HTTP request sent and responded to? # 15:46 aaronpk back in march was the 25th anniversary of timbl's proposal # 15:51 tantek I wonder what the *oldest* still working permalink/URL is then. # 15:56 aaronpk ironically, facebook made an "on this day" post about it and showed this to my in my news feed # 15:56 aaronpk but now that i clicked away, i can't get back to the post # 15:57 tantek but that's a general reader challenge too to be fair # 15:57 aaronpk a general reader would have at least showed me a permalink for the post # 15:57 tantek "what was that thing I just read a few minutes / hours / days ago?" # 15:57 aaronpk and it likely would have still been there when i went back to the reader # 15:57 tantek maybe, or maybe it would have scrolled off (e.g. in a streaming reader) jasnell, jasnell_ and cwebber2 joined the channel
# 16:58 wilkie I think that's just saying "good day" instead eprodrom joined the channel
# 17:01 eprodrom trackbot, start meeting RRSAgent joined the channel
Zakim joined the channel
# 17:01 aaronpk no, iOS, i don't want to update my phone right before i call in to this meeting # 17:01 eprodrom Can anyone scribe? # 17:02 eprodrom scribenick: wilkie # 17:02 eprodrom chair: eprodrom # 17:03 eprodrom akim, who's here? # 17:03 eprodrom Zakim, who's here? # 17:03 Zakim Present: ben_thatmustbeme, wilkie, eprodrom, cwebber, rhiaro, csarven # 17:03 Zakim ... dwhly, bitbear, strugee, bigbluehat, wseltzer, sandro, trackbot # 17:03 Zakim On IRC I see RRSAgent, eprodrom, cwebber2, jasnell_, KevinMarks, tantek, Arnaud, raucao, wilkie, jet, tsyesika, ElijahLynn, csarven, Loqi, rhiaro, ben_thatmustbeme, rrika, aaronpk, # 17:05 eprodrom Can anyone hear my voice? # 17:05 eprodrom OK, that explains a lot # 17:05 eprodrom Give me 30 seconds to call back in # 17:07 wilkie eprodrom: sorry about that. thanks for your patience. probably a good time to get started # 17:07 wilkie eprodrom: I will be chairing today because Arnaud is unavailable # 17:07 wilkie eprodrom: let's start out with approving the minutes for the previous meeting # 17:08 wilkie you might need a colon? how does "proposed" work # 17:09 wilkie eprodrom: barring anything else we have resolved on that # 17:09 Loqi Social Web WG Face to Face Meeting in Lisbon (F2F7) # 17:09 wilkie eprodrom: probably an important thing but not listed is to cover registration for TPAC # 17:09 wilkie eprodrom: we are having a meeting at TPAC september 21st to 23rd # 17:09 wilkie eprodrom: if you haven't registered yet, please do. if you believe you will not be going also let us now. tentively or not. # 17:09 tantek can only participate by IRC today due to being in the AB meeting in-person # 17:10 Loqi eprodrom has 41 karma (40 in this channel) # 17:10 wilkie eprodrom: great. so. we don't have any other administrative issues to discuss. # 17:10 wilkie eprodrom: I'd like to move on to our discussion items. # 17:10 wilkie eprodrom: the first is an update on activity pub and LDN and have rhiaro start us off # 17:10 wilkie rhiaro: last week I went to madison and worked on activity pub and made lots of progress. # 17:11 wilkie rhiaro: it might be better to have cwebber2 talk about those changes because we didn't do much to LDN but rather catch activitypub up to LDN # 17:11 wilkie cwebber2: sounds good. first, rhiaro was an immense help. # 17:11 wilkie cwebber2: the first is to clarify client to client and client to server stuff. although some of this isn't in the document. # 17:12 wilkie cwebber2: first, there is a list of side effects of using various activities in activity streams. # 17:12 tantek I'll add a specific item about f2f at the end of the agenda and try to get on the phone # 17:12 wilkie cwebber2: and a separate section showing targetting and delivery and side effects of activities. # 17:12 wilkie cwebber2: these are cleaning separated which we've been talking about for some time # 17:12 wilkie cwebber2: one thing we discuss is having two separate documents and saying this makes sense from the payload and protocols # 17:13 wilkie cwebber2: but we have seen that the differences is a specialization of some of the LDN specifications # 17:13 wilkie cwebber2: clarifying and using much of the LDN stuff has made the sections clearer and more concise # 17:14 wilkie cwebber2: since we have linked data notifications referenced cleanly in activitypub and sections for client-client and client-server... we will keep it as one document # 17:14 wilkie cwebber2: rhiaro and I agree about this and tsyesika also seems to agree # 17:14 wilkie cwebber2: one concern is... "I want to publish this note to my followers" and somebody replies to you, how does this reply get out to your followers? # 17:15 wilkie cwebber2: pump.io has encountered this issue too. we did a demo implementation and drew things out on paper and we think we've come up with a method and put that in the spec # 17:15 wilkie cwebber2: that if somebody does write a reply you can forward it under some conditions # 17:16 wilkie cwebber2: there are changes to make to the WD and I can make those and go toward a new working draft and feel confident about the state of the document # 17:16 wilkie eprodrom: rhiaro, you were saying there aren't major changes to LDN at this point? # 17:16 wilkie rhiaro: right. there are editorial changes and we should still publish a new LDN WD as well to make sure things are in sync. # 17:16 eprodrom Zakim, who's on the call? # 17:16 Zakim Present: ben_thatmustbeme, wilkie, eprodrom, cwebber, rhiaro, csarven, aaronpk, sandro # 17:17 wilkie rhiaro: lately I've changed social web protocols to catch things up and so we need to publish a new version of that too # 17:17 wilkie eprodrom: great. this might open a can of worms; we discussed last meeting... this is a social web protocols / ldn question, how do we handle having ldn and aligning it with others # 17:17 wilkie rhiaro: right, that's next on my things to attack # 17:18 wilkie rhiaro: I added it to the social web protocols and hopefully I can talk to julien about that # 17:18 wilkie eprodrom: cwebber2, are we ready for a next version then? # 17:18 Loqi changelog has 2 karma (1 in this channel) # 17:18 wilkie cwebber2: I think so I just have to add one thing # 17:19 wilkie eprodrom: my next question is: should we go to working draft or wait until the group can review or just push the next version? I'm also fine with review on the WD. # 17:19 wilkie rhiaro: I was thinking we would publish the new WD today and then have it reviewed since we have some time off # 17:19 eprodrom PROPOSED: publish current editor's draft of ActivityPub plus changelog as new working draft # 17:19 wilkie cwebber2: I agree with that because we want to get to CR either before or by TPAC and this would help us move along # 17:20 wilkie eprodrom: before we start +1'ing it, cwebber2 and rhiaro, does this reflect what you want to do next? # 17:20 tantek we really should provide a link to a changelog for anything we want to propose publishing # 17:21 ben_thatmustbeme 0, don't really like publishing without a review or some changelog, but i will abstain in the interest of saving time # 17:21 cwebber2 I could write a fast changelog that'll be done before meeting end if necessary # 17:22 tantek any document that is rec track should have a changelog with summaries # 17:22 wilkie eprodrom: cwebber2, don't do the changelog during the call if you can help it, but some <laughs> have other opinions on that # 17:22 eprodrom RESOLVED: publish current editor's draft of ActivityPub plus changelog as new working draft # 17:22 wilkie eprodrom: I'm going to mark this as resolved and... great # 17:22 tantek I believe AS2, Micropub, Webmention have all done a good job of providing changelogs for every published draft and that's been very helpful # 17:22 wilkie eprodrom: in all aspects, next time we have proposals coming up from editors moving to WD that you bring a changelog with you. either something you can link or drop into the channel. # 17:22 tantek (if anyone would like examples of existing changelogs in the group) # 17:23 wilkie eprodrom: I'd like to move on to the next topic # 17:23 KevinMarks cwebber2: reading scrollback your notification issue sounds like salmentions # 17:23 eprodrom TOPIC: Proposal: publish new WD of SWP # 17:23 wilkie rhiaro: this morning I added PuSH and refactored a section. the link of the git log I dropped in the channel should give you an idea of the changes. # 17:24 wilkie eprodrom: do we have questions on Social Web Protocols? # 17:24 tantek (since SWP is not rec-track, having an in-draft changelog is not as important) # 17:24 wilkie eprodrom: ok. great. I'd like to ask... rhiaro would you mind adding a changelog to this document? # 17:24 tantek rhiaro: can you provide a link to the draft you have staged to publish? # 17:25 wilkie eprodrom: I'd like to propose publishing this editors draft as a new working draft # 17:25 tantek ben_thatmustbeme: yes that's my understanding since it non-normatively compares / relates *other* specs # 17:26 wilkie eprodrom: I'll give some time to look it over # 17:26 wilkie rhiaro: just to add this has a less important time table but it is important that people not see it too out of date # 17:27 wilkie eprodrom: I think it is important to keep this up to date and appreciate that you took the time to do that # 17:27 wilkie eprodrom: I don't want to rush you. I know you are reading it now. # 17:28 wilkie eprodrom: alright. great. I'm going to mark this as resolved. rhiaro, if you won't mind to fix that typo even if it isn't part of the resolution. # 17:29 wilkie eprodrom: next agenda item is to publish a new working draft of LDN # 17:29 wilkie eprodrom: rhiaro, can you tell us all what's going on with LDN # 17:29 wilkie rhiaro: nothing substantive except some clarifications # 17:29 wilkie rhiaro: it does have a changelog here but it is just editorial stuff but thought it doesn't hurt to keep things up-to-date # 17:29 Loqi changelog has 3 karma (2 in this channel) # 17:30 wilkie eprodrom: the document doesn't have a changelog? # 17:30 wilkie rhiaro: I linked to the document that has a changelog # 17:30 wilkie eprodrom: maybe in the future, especially since you did say there are explanatory differences, to explain what those differences are # 17:30 wilkie eprodrom: everybody please mute if you aren't me <laughs> thank you # 17:31 wilkie eprodrom: the one on linkedresearch.org is the editor's draft? I believe? # 17:31 wilkie eprodrom: great. so I am going to propose publishing this as a new working draft of LDN # 17:31 tantek this is a second WD right? we already did a FPWD? # 17:32 wilkie eprodrom: rhiaro, does that make sense to you? # 17:32 wilkie eprodrom: and yeah, this is the second WD I believe # 17:32 wilkie eprodrom: (upon seeing rhiaro's affirmative on IRC) ok. great. if this makes sense, let's vote. # 17:32 rhiaro yay, resolutions... this is what happens when everyone takes 2 weeks off :) # 17:33 wilkie eprodrom: <laughs> everyone is more willing to make progress when we've had 2 weeks off. # 17:33 wilkie eprodrom: if you are to vote please do so. in this case I will mark it resolved. # 17:33 wilkie eprodrom: there is a new working draft. great. # 17:34 wilkie eprodrom: let's move on to our next item which is about AS2 # 17:34 wilkie eprodrom: probably easier to have tantek chair while we go over the next item since it makes sense for me to address what is going on with AS2 # 17:34 tantek I can't chair, I'm speaking in person at the AB meeting :/ # 17:34 wilkie eprodrom: ah. ok. I'll chair myself and try to push through this. # 17:35 wilkie eprodrom: so. the state of AS2, a brief recap, on AS2. We had our CR meeting. # 17:35 tantek so that eprodrom can be free to discuss AS2 as editor # 17:35 wilkie eprodrom: after our meeting we had some issues brought up by i18n group. # 17:35 wilkie eprodrom: we decided to pull out of CR to better address these concerns and we've been addressing them for the last few weeks. # 17:36 wilkie eprodrom: as of today, jasnell_ did a few PRs to resolve these existing issues and so, depending on your measurement, we might be ready to go to CR right now # 17:36 wilkie eprodrom: however we have new issues that are currently on our list # 17:36 wilkie eprodrom: those will probably not be a problem but there are at least 1 or 2 normative changes # 17:37 wilkie eprodrom: where I am, as an editor, wondering is if we need to get to 0 issues to reach CR, or is it better to go to CR with the document as we've agreed and resolve these in the next months # 17:37 wilkie eprodrom: that's where we are at the moment. we are in an administrative point. as an editor, I want to move to CR and resolve as we go along # 17:37 Zakim sees ben_thatmustbeme on the speaker queue # 17:38 eprodrom ack ben_thatmustbeme # 17:38 tantek we really need other people who were on the AS2 CR transition call to contribute to this discussion (apologies that I cannot) # 17:38 wilkie ben_thatmustbeme: I was wondering if we go to CR and have normative changes, we have to redo CR. what does that entail # 17:38 wilkie sandro: I am on the phone. the second version of CR involves us being willing to do it and its not a lot of work but it has about a 3 week turn-around so it is better to avoid it if you can # 17:39 tantek in my experience any "real" / practical spec has at least 2 CRs # 17:39 rhiaro He's done it, the i18n issues are resolved in the current ED # 17:39 wilkie sandro: my understanding, though, is that we had a meeting (you weren't on this meeting) and we were waiting for these issues and jasnell_ said he would fix them and then said he would fix them today and we had resolved these # 17:39 tantek that is, implementers of the first CR nearly always find substantial issue that require normative changes # 17:39 wilkie sandro: what is the status of these edits? anyone know? # 17:40 wilkie eprodrom: yeah. jasnell_ has made a PR for changes to how we handle bi-directional text # 17:40 wilkie eprodrom: basically, for those who aren't following this, we came down to a fundamental difference between using bidirectional markers at the unicode level and using bidirectional markup in the html level # 17:41 wilkie eprodrom: there were strong resolution to not use the markup in certain fields and we can to a satisifactory compromise that doesn't require markup in the name field # 17:41 tantek could you link to the "satisfactory compromise" for ther ecord? # 17:41 wilkie eprodrom: jasnell_ made those changes and they are in the editor's draft... let me make sure... yes. section 4.7... I can drop this # 17:41 tantek link to the *discussion* that resulted in the "satisfactory compromise" # 17:41 wilkie eprodrom: ah, yeah, satisfactory compromise... let me see if I can link to that # 17:42 wilkie eprodrom: this is about using natural language and bidirectional text # 17:43 wilkie sandro: sounds like we solved the bidirectional issues # 17:44 wilkie eprodrom: we have 6 issues. one is easy to fix. one is normative and a change from a MAY to a SHOULD. # 17:44 tantek issue 336 is too long to be considered a "Summary" # 17:44 wilkie eprodrom: either than that... they seem to be resolved # 17:44 wilkie sandro: sounds like there is nothing here that would need a second CR if we changed it? anything that would change implementations? # 17:44 tantek my understanding is that NO properties are added to AS2 as a result of this discussion right? # 17:45 wilkie eprodrom: it doesn't seem like that a publisher or consumer would be significantly different between this MAY or SHOULD # 17:45 wilkie eprodrom: it is just a shift of emphasis, I'd think # 17:45 wilkie sandro: we don't know what we want to do with this one at this point? # 17:45 wilkie eprodrom: I'd make it a SHOULD but jasnell_ probably has different ideas about it # 17:45 wilkie rhiaro: realistically we would have a second CR on this # 17:46 wilkie rhiaro: seems like we will get feedback from implementers, unless you don't think so. seems like it would probably happen # 17:46 tantek are we willing to write tests for this detail? # 17:46 wilkie sandro: I feel like MAY vs SHOULD won't hurt but the safest thing we could do is make it at-risk # 17:47 wilkie eprodrom: so put it as SHOULD and say "at-risk" # 17:47 wilkie sandro: or leave it as MAY and say "at-risk" and it may change to a SHOULD # 17:47 wilkie sandro: whatever way we think it is likely to go and just put it 'at-risk' # 17:47 wilkie eprodrom: I like marking it 'at-risk' and publishing as-is # 17:47 tantek can we actually make it at-risk when i18n says it's a requirement? # 17:47 wilkie sandro: and the other 5 issues don't seem like normative changes? # 17:48 tantek I'm worried that we drop it, then i18n objects when we try to go CR->PR # 17:48 rhiaro it officially switched to https on 1 Aug I believe # 17:48 wilkie eprodrom: one is normative but... it is whether we support the HTTP content or what makes most sense # 17:49 wilkie sandro: I don't think I've thought about this for context uris, but for namespace URIs this doesn't change # 17:49 wilkie rhiaro: right, but this changes javascript implementations... this is an implementation problem # 17:49 wilkie sandro: it does seem possible that browsers will be a pain in this way # 17:50 wilkie eprodrom: my feeling is HTTPS makes most sense. our implementor base is small and this is the time to do it # 17:50 wilkie eprodrom: the only down-side is that there are some older libraries that don't support HTTPS but I think they are a smaller and smaller number # 17:50 wilkie eprodrom: and it makes sense to push it to HTTPS everywhere # 17:50 wilkie sandro: there are complexities here that I didn't think were there at first # 17:51 wilkie eprodrom: let's make it HTTPS in the editor's draft and we'll mark it 'at-risk' that we might also support just HTTP # 17:51 wilkie sandro: yeah. the main reason to not put HTTPS there is... # 17:51 csarven It is the reference to context in HTTP is a problem if on HTTPS - client side / browser issue # 17:52 csarven Hope for the best and have implementations fix their stuff?? # 17:52 wilkie sandro: the URIs might need some place to mark that it is HTTPS or not otherwise it will pull it from the base url # 17:52 wilkie sandro: I never thought about the mixed-content warnings so I don't know what the right thing to do is # 17:52 wilkie sandro: let's say 'at-risk' and figure it out. # 17:52 rhiaro And maybe having it called out in the CR doc will help with getting feedback # 17:52 Loqi [Kevin Marks] ”® inline RTL works in reverse without implementers knowing
#indieweb # 17:52 wilkie eprodrom: we're ok with at-risk and then figure it out? # 17:53 wilkie eprodrom: sounds like I have two 'at-risk' notes to put in. and besides that looks like we are ready to go and I can have a version ready to have out thursday? # 17:53 wilkie rhiaro: if they say no for thursday we can do it next tuesday # 17:54 eprodrom ben_thatmustbeme: I'll keep that in mind # 17:55 wilkie eprodrom: if anyone has a question about AS2 and what we are doing right now, this is a great time to ask # 17:55 sandro PROPOSED: Proceed to CR with both ActivityStreams documents, including the changes worked out with i18n and items marked At Risk in this meeting, as per Ralph's go-ahead from the transition meeting. # 17:56 eprodrom RESOLVED: Proceed to CR with both ActivityStreams documents, including the changes worked out with i18n and items marked At Risk in this meeting, as per Ralph's go-ahead from the transition meeting. # 17:56 wilkie eprodrom: unless we have any objections, now is the time to do so # 17:57 wilkie eprodrom: now we have something to point to in terms of resolutions. # 17:57 wilkie eprodrom: aaronpk, are you good with pushing micropub for two weeks from now? or should we extend? # 17:57 wilkie aaronpk: I'm ok with waiting two weeks and come up with a more concrete proposal # 17:58 wilkie eprodrom: great. how long do you think it will take? we can extend 10 minutes # 17:58 tantek +1 on AS2 CR (sorry to be delayed, multitasking is hard) # 17:58 wilkie eprodrom: great. thank you very much. appreciate your flexibilty on that. # 17:58 wilkie eprodrom: thank you everybody for your time. I believe that wraps it up for us. # 17:58 eprodrom trackbot, end meeting # 17:58 Zakim As of this point the attendees have been ben_thatmustbeme, wilkie, eprodrom, cwebber, rhiaro, csarven, aaronpk, sandro, KevinMarks # 17:58 tantek I'm worried about only 5 people coming to the f2f - will we have enough to talk about for 2 days? # 17:59 tantek sandro, eprodrom can you confirm (or not) that you're coming to the f2f? # 17:59 aaronpk well rhiaro and cwebber2 met for 4 days and seemed to have plenty to talk about :) # 17:59 eprodrom tantek: I'd say 40% chance I'll attend # 18:02 Loqi Social Web WG Face to Face Meeting in Lisbon (F2F7) # 18:17 wilkie for a group that is about designing things to connect people over networks they collectively control, there is a lot of emphasis on staffing the f2f :) # 18:17 wilkie but for serious, I could never afford to go to Lisbon, although I have been there and it is a fascinating city with lots of neat art # 18:19 rhiaro we'll just have to work together to eat your share of the food # 18:30 tantek wilkie, as much as technology has helped connect us and provide the ability to do remote work / collaboration, there are still (experientially) times when a f2f meeting really helps make critical progress. # 18:33 rhiaro hey wilkie, hate to be impatient, but how abouts those minutes? I need to link to the resolution to publish new WDs :) # 18:36 wilkie rhiaro: I'm doing it now! doesn't your site log when I use your pandoc lol # 18:38 rhiaro heh, I should project access logs onto my wall # 18:38 wilkie do we not put minutes into a separate wiki page? # 18:40 wilkie ok. that pages for the last few meetings are a little different then # 18:41 rhiaro so I just dumped the minutes on the same page # 18:41 rhiaro because lazy. But... I could correct I guess.. # 18:41 rhiaro Actually thought it helped with differentiating between formal and informal meetings, let's run with that # 18:42 rhiaro s/lazy/I carefully thought through the problem and came to a conclusion :) # 18:48 wilkie it takes *some* effort to get the content links and resolution links to work Arnaud and tantek joined the channel
# 20:22 Zakim excuses himself; his presence no longer seems to be needed # 20:36 Loqi Social Web WG Face to Face Meeting in Lisbon (F2F7) Arnaud joined the channel
tantek and Arnaud joined the channel
wseltzer waves to tantek
ben_thatmustbeme waves to tantek
aaronpk although apparently it looked like this before http://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/technology/2016/08/04/First_website-large_trans++mRnaWIkzDVpCKltYOKrpmWcvpPK2JYbNyr271tCSyh0.PNG
tantek REMINDER: telcon today https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-08-23
RRSAgent logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/08/23-social-irc
KevinMarks present+
rhiaro This is the version to publish https://linkedresearch.org/ldn/WD-ldn-20160823/#change-log
cwebber2 notes that ChangeLog has been added https://w3c-social.github.io/activitypub/#changes-from-13-june-2016-to-present-version
csarven I hope there is alignment with https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/347
@dustyweb New ActivityPub Working Draft out today! https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/ Major thanks to .@rhiaro for major help on this revision :) (twitter.com/_/status/768176341707550720)
Loqi Abasset made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-08-23]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=99267&oldid=99208