xmpp-social[Takyoji] Just for clarification: is ActivityPub essentially acting as a neutral transport for the 'Objects', or is there any specific behavior that should occur if the server doesn't understand the type of Object being received (such if it's something other than the ActivityStreams types)?
xmpp-social[h2b] ajordan, I got a problem with my jabber account password change. A few hours ago, my laptop with all digital data was stolen. The system automatically authorizes in the account on operating system startup. I forgot my password and cannot restore the access. Please help me
xmpp-social, timbl, Gargron, JanKusanagi and jankusanagi_ joined the channel
cwebber2tantek: one thing I wanted to go over was issue 25, eg how to handle replies and fallback, it talks about extensibility a bit, which is adding new features over time which we've done in general for PTD. So specifically for responses, any kind of response like likes, posts, shares, we almost always have text equivalent which is something we've seen when people post things to twitter, or facebook has an "all activity" page where you can
cwebber2tantek: that being the case, if some new response type comes up in the future, like you're bookmarking something or etc then you should always be able to say "hey this is a response" and then have text equivalent in summary property
cwebber2tantek: so any existing impls that don't know as response will be able to show something sensible, as in something author produced that shows something sensible
cwebber2tantek: I feel pretty confident about this change so I wanted to bring to the group explicitly. other than objections and people saying "no you're wrong this will never work", I would like feedback on "this sounds reasonable", but I can accept lack of feedback. Ideally I'd like to say "accept my proposal and publish a new WD based on this change". that's my longest answer to you
rhiaro... since I'm uisng a cool new bleeding edge non blocking async implementation, something isn't implemented yet, and I have to add something to the language
rhiaro... Looking at the screenshot, you have a number of 'OK's - are they not meaningful because of the async problem or is this something someone could run now?
rhiaro... in Mastodon you might follow someone. Usually the follow is just automatic, but if they have a private account, they manually accept and reject who they're following
rhiaro... at the end of last meeting, evan suggested we can still use the followers thing for the public subscribe, and pointed out that AS2 has a way of doing this kind of subscription using Offer and Accept/Reject on offer to do friend requests
rhiaro... I took a look and thought about it and unfortunately I think that's going to result in something disjoint, because we'll have two different mechanisms for follow
Loqi[cwebber] Amy suggested over PM that:
* If a server returns 200 or 201, assume the follow just went through
* If returning 501, the server doesn't support following
* If a server returns 202, then the server will send an Accept / Reject
rhiaro... a) if we add the Offer and relationship thing we're going ot have to add that like immediately and I'd need your help because I don't think I'd get it completely right
rhiaro... THe other side of it is I"m not sure the Accept/Reject, aside from backwards incompatability, is so bad, because if you look at the case Mastodon supports both
rhiaroeprodrom: Right. Alice wants to follow Bob, Alice sends a Follow to Bob and at that point the request is that their relationship is in a waiting state
eprodrom"For example, Undo may be used to undo a previous Like or Follow." -> "For example, Undo may be used to undo a previous Like, Follow or Block."
rhiaro... We could add a blocks property to actors and say hey it should be in this collection. Useful for client to server, but suepr weird because only the actor would be able to read that collection. So it would be weird to notice that on a person's profile
cwebber2sandro: last time we talked about this I think I said we also need implementation reports to major existing implementations? mastodon for example
cwebber2eprodrom btw the reason you saw so many passing in the screenshot was because it was running against my implementation, testing against puck's found some more issues that need to be resolved on theirs, mistakes I had made also but had fixed in my implmentation
cwebber2aaronpk: now that we're in Rec, if people find minor typos or larger possible issues (not adding features) what options might there be for normative issues?
cwebber2sandro: more like traditional FOSS'y stuff, just assume everyone speaks for themselves and nobody has authority over anyone else, just document if nobody disagrees, if disagreement then document that too
cwebber2eprodrom: could I pose a suggestion, which is anything you don't feel comfortable unilaterally updating might not be an eratta? may be something normative or which needs to go into next version of spec?
cwebber2tantek: since we have a link in the doc which links to an errata document, a WG resolution on an issue drives addition of stuff to that page. becomes a delta document of sorts
cwebber2tantek: if we get to the point saying this is a non-trivial amount of errata, there's a process for releasing 1.01 or etc. depends on if it's normative or non-normative changes
cwebber2aaronpk: I'm on board with typo issues just filing them without discussing them, but this one is technically normative but spirit of this was incorrectly converted into text for the spec
cwebber2aaronpk: it's the ability to add features itself, not going to make it so you have to do things differently with current implementation to support features as-described in spec
cwebber2sandro: can be filed as a recognized problem, but we can't say here is the approved solution... we can only take a solution as far as what would be a working draft, but we can't have w3c recognition on approved solution
cwebber2tantek: but before we try to answser the hard problem, if there are any typos or etc that you can resolve by proposing errata text to add to the doc etc and add to them, that would be a good start
cwebber2tantek: similar to micropub we have open webmention issues that are probably worth processing into webmention errata, so aaronpk maybe see if you can quickly document into errata etc
Loqi[evanp] @strugee I don't know. I think that mechanism is a bad idea. I think the best you can do is do the brittle method, with possibly doing some type inferencing in JSON otherwise.
ajordanI don't remember why that was added and I know cwebber2 likes it but tbh wrapping things in a Create clientside just doesn't seem like that much effort
Loqi[cwebber] I've become over time a lot less of a fan of the "auto-wrap-in Create" feature, though I'm even *more* not a fan of requiring a Create at all... I think just-an-object could be the same as wrapping in Create, and the Create is indeed fairly artificia...
puckipediabut yeah. I'd be OK with removing the Create if that's the average consensus. I would have more issues if it were possible to use it, but not required
tantekas informally mentioned on the telecon this morning (audio) before we started officially, here's my summary and scene by scene listings of the features demonstrated in the The Social Network trailer, as material for a social web test where the different roles are performed by people with different services/sites/implementations: https://indieweb.org/The_Social_Network#Trailer
saranixa quote from hubzillaland "Protocols design is like this: if the protocol designer only can think of saying A, then all you will get to say is A. This is fine if all you want to say is A. If you can think of more to say than A, something clever, like B, but you are only allowed to say A, you will become unhappy fairly quickly. This is not the problem, the problem is the millions of people who believe getting to say A is really amazing."
xmpp-social [h2b] admin for this xmpp server
Loqi Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2017-07-25]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=103930&oldid=103854
aaronpk that's not what i see https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=103962&oldid=103959
RRSAgent logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/07/25-social-irc
cwebber2 tantek: one thing I wanted to go over was issue 25, eg how to handle replies and fallback, it talks about extensibility a bit, which is adding new features over time which we've done in general for PTD. So specifically for responses, any kind of response like likes, posts, shares, we almost always have text equivalent which is something we've seen when people post things to twitter, or facebook has an "all activity" page where you can
tantek PROPOSED: Publish new WD of Post Type Discovery with change as proposed by editor in https://github.com/tantek/post-type-discovery/issues/25
ajordan AS2 issues too: https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams/issues
Zakim tantek, you wanted to quickly mention Webmention issues https://github.com/w3c/webmention/issues and errata https://github.com/w3c/webmention/tree/master/errata