#social 2016-05-10
2016-05-10 UTC
# 
Loqi Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-05-10]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98195&oldid=98166
tantek, shepazu_, jasnell, jaywink, strugee and ben_thatmustbeme joined the channel
# Loqi Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-05-10]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98198&oldid=98195
# Loqi Rhiaro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-05-10]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98199&oldid=98198
# Loqi Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-12-02-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98200&oldid=87096
tantek and shepazu_ joined the channel
# Loqi Eprodrom made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-05-10]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98201&oldid=98199
annbass, shevski and eprodrom joined the channel
# 
eprodrom Hi all
# Loqi eprodrom: KevinMarks left you a message on 5/3 at 2:05pm: I see ("IsFollowing", "IsFollowedBy", "IsContact", "IsMember") which map to a subset of xfn rels , but no rel="me" equivalent (a widely used xfn case) - is that assumed to be covered elsewhere in as2? http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2016-05-03/line/1462309502282
# 
ben_thatmustbeme hi everybody
bengo joined the channel
# eprodrom trackbot, start meeting
RRSAgent joined the channel
# 
RRSAgent logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-social-irc
Zakim joined the channel
# eprodrom present+
# bengo present+
# ben_thatmustbeme present+
# ben_thatmustbeme I can scribe
# ben_thatmustbeme scribenick: ben_thatmustbeme
# eprodrom ben_thatmustbeme++
# ben_thatmustbeme scribe: Ben Roberts
# ben_thatmustbeme Chair: eprodrom
# eprodrom Whoa
# eprodrom Pro macros
shevski joined the channel
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: we are at 5 minutes after and I cound 5 people who have presented
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i hear a couple more joins so i'd like to start the meeting
# ben_thatmustbeme TOPIC: review minutes from last week
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: link in IRC
# eprodrom PROPOSED: accept minutes for May 3, 2016
# ben_thatmustbeme <ben_thatmustbeme> +1
# eprodrom +1
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: we do have a pretty big agenda today so i want to front load the important stuff
# bengo +1
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: any objections?
# eprodrom RESOLVED: accept minutes for May 3, 2016
# shevski present+
# Loqi shevski: tantek left you a message on 5/9 at 6:00pm: short answer, in order to break backcompat. AS2 is not expected to be processed "as is" by AS1 processors. I believe AS2 needed to break backcompat in order to actually make necessary fixes. http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2016-05-09/line/1462842008628
# ben_thatmustbeme ... looking at discussion items i think we can do them in order here
# ben_thatmustbeme TOPIC: updated F2F dates
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: Very quick update, I got in touch with the host late last week, and its no problem to move the date. I have updated the wiki to say monday and tuesday not tuesday and wednesday
# ben_thatmustbeme ... so that is all set now
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: great
# ben_thatmustbeme ... sandro that takes are of the conflict?
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: yes, thank you very much
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: the time to book your flights is now
# ben_thatmustbeme TOPIC: taking webmention to CR
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: i think that by the end of this discussion we will put a proposal forward to take it to CR, there may be other proposals first
# Loqi Abasset made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/2016-05-10]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98203&oldid=98201
# ben_thatmustbeme ... aaronpk asked last week what we would need to take webmention to CR
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i think that we have all or almost all the requirements we expect, is that correct aaron?
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: yes, i completed moving the implementations to github and it editors draft has it
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: have the exit criteria been moved out of the draft too?
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: the idea is that when we go to later status we don't want to change the body
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: in my experience, as long as its non-normative changes its okay
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: with that possible astrisk, webmention is technically ready to go to CR
# 
KevinMarks present+
# ben_thatmustbeme ... last week i wanted to make sure that as we took it to CR, we make sure that strategically that the work we are doing as a whole is what we want
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i had a little bit of a concern mapping webmention to our charter
# ben_thatmustbeme ... how does it map, and what about the other items with the charter
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i think last week we figured out that we would be publishing social web protocols as a note that would be our description
# ben_thatmustbeme ... our goal is to move all of our 4 main documents to seperately
# ben_thatmustbeme ... if we have not formalized that as a resolution, i think we should
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: i think we can keep social web protocols as WD for now and publish as a note before the group closes
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i agree with sandro
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: would it be useful to have a vote on this strategy? or have we already done so peice by peice
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i thought we resolved on that at F2F in cambridge. Is there anyone else that is surprised by that or doesn't remember that?
bengo joined the channel
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: i think it would be to have some approved text to explain it to the world
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i am fine leaving amy to work on that for now
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: and we need to review it before it gets published
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: the second point there is, does social web protocols provide that quick description of our strategy. I think it does
# KevinMarks present+
# KevinMarks (forgot to say that earlier)
# eprodrom ack annbass
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: amy has does a great job of comparing differences, etc. Is rhiaro on the line? I think there could be further documentation. If there is anything specific someone wants to see added they should open an issue there. I don't think there is going to be anything contraversial as far as adding MORE description
# eprodrom PROPOSAL: Activity Streams 2, Webmention, ActivityPub and Micropub are recommendation-track documents. We intend to take all four to candidate recommendations as they become ready.
# ben_thatmustbeme annbass: i think what amy has written so far is great, but what will be the follow on work to this? What next? it seems that the procols note could also say "here's whats been done" and 'heres what we are working on next"
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i think thats totally reasonable to add ot the document
# ben_thatmustbeme ... thats not blocking, anyone can open an issue and ask for amy to add it
# ben_thatmustbeme annbass: i think i'm talking of something larger than that. I'm trying to get at "what comes next after these 4 documents"
# ben_thatmustbeme ... its a question of what happens with continuation of the working group
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: i think this is a great topic for the F2F
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i think its a question of scope
# bengo yes
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: i posted a proposal, does that meet everyone's understanding of what we are doing here?
# eprodrom +1
# bengo +1
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i think thats what we have been doing all along, so i want to know why you think that is needed
# ben_thatmustbeme ... unless otherwise stated all documents are rec-track bound unless we state it to not be
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i don't want it to seem like we are confused on that
# ben_thatmustbeme ... if we are working on something, its assumed that it is rec-track bound
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: Solid for example, is something that is mentioned, but we don't have anyone really working on it, so unless someone picks it up and starts running with it, its not going to get done
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i think thats moved mostly outside of the working group. The critical mass seems to have moved out of the WG, which is fine. There are other examples of productive work being done in sort of an external incubation. We could certainly see something end up back here
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: i think what you are saying is that this proposal is not necessary
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i would rather not implicitly or explcitly exclude something like solid, unless there is a good reason for excluding it
# ben_thatmustbeme ... the proposal did not mention various other documents, and there shouldn't be a need for that
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i think we resolved something stronger at the last F2F
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: I would rather stick with that stronger version where we empower editors to move forward
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: this all seems like an aside, can we go back to webmention?
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: there is a proposal on the table
# eprodrom RESOLVED: Activity Streams 2, Webmention, ActivityPub and Micropub are recommendation-track documents. We intend these four documents at a minimum to candidate recommendations as they become ready.
# ben_thatmustbeme i'm going to mark it as resolved, i appreciate the consideration
# KevinMarks s/continent/contingent/
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: are we ready for a proposal for a proposal to take webmention to CR?
# eprodrom PROPOSAL: Publish Webmention as a candidate recommendation
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: sounds good to me
# KevinMarks a proposal for a proposal?
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: technically we are prosing to ASK for it go to CR
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: its clear enough
# eprodrom +1
# KevinMarks +1
# bengo +1
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: if nothing else to say, time to vote
# ben_thatmustbeme <ben_thatmustbeme> +1
# shevski +1
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: anyone else?
# eprodrom RESOLVED: Publish Webmention as a candidate recommendation
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: wohooo
# ben_thatmustbeme i think that was sandro :P
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: now we have to action sandro to do some additional work
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: do we have anything else to discuss here?
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: do we want to resolve to publish the current editors draft first and assume that is the version we are taking to CR
# eprodrom PROPOSAL: Publish Webmention editor's draft as a working draft
# eprodrom PROPOSAL: Publish Webmention editor's draft as a working draft that we believe is CR-ready
# eprodrom +1
# bengo +1
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: what we are basically saying from the groups perspective, this is the version that is ready for CR, but it can now work its way through W3C
# eprodrom RESOLVED: Publish Webmention editor's draft as a working draft
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: one way is to write a transition request, and there are a bunch of questions to answer about it
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: is that something that has to be done privately?
# eprodrom RESOLVED: Publish Webmention editor's draft as a working draft that we believe is CR-ready
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: i'm used to it being done on a wiki
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: do we have anything ELSE to do on taking webmention to CR
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i think that for next weeks call we should probably give an update on where we are but otherwise its moving along nicely
# ben_thatmustbeme TOPIC: AS2 status
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: a quick update, we are at inbox 0 on issues for AS2. I did a new editors draft this morning that closes all the outstanding issues. That was one of our big items for taking AS2 to CR
# ben_thatmustbeme ... what i'd like next is are there any questions about as2, issues on it, etc
# KevinMarks I sent one last week in chat, not GH
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: were there any issues that you felt you had to make a decision on despite objections?
# eprodrom ack aaronpk
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: probably the one on the relationship schema, i think that we came to a solution that everyone was happy with, but the differences were minimal and we came up wiht reasonable compromises there
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: i was just looking throught them and i don't see any labels on them and i thought we were going to do that for them all
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: i will go back through them and do that
# eprodrom q?
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: any other question?
# ben_thatmustbeme s/question/questions/
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: in that case, i'd like to put it for review for the next week and plan to take it to CR next week
# ben_thatmustbeme ... does that sound reasonable?
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i think the better way to say that, is there any issues people have with taking it to CR, bring them up next week
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: have you taken a look at noting what to put as at-risk or not, also have you gone through a bunch of boxes to tick on implementation reports, test suite, etc
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: i think the main one there is the implementation report. we have a validator, and a test suite
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: are we okay going to a working draft
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: i found it very helpful for myself and others to have a "changes between versions" is there anything like that for AS2
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: we have not had that up until now, I can do that for recenty edits, and i can probably go back through git-log review, is that worth it?
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: i think it is. Its been 5 months since the last WD
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: a summary would be good, it doesn't need to be a diff by diff change
# KevinMarks writing release notes is a good idea
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i think a high-level change log since the last WD would be good
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: on a related note, do we have differences from AS1
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: WHY we changed from AS1, not just how
# ben_thatmustbeme shevski: i was wondering if there is any documentation of why things changed, whats the major benefit of changing, what does the future look like for AS2 and not worry that there is going to be some other version.
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: there is a big section that talks about the differences, and it does give a reason for each difference, so there is that, the question is 'whats the benefit' I'm not sure thats reasonable to put into a specification itself
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i'm not sure that kind of advocacy should be part of a document
# bengo i agree
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i'm okay with drafting that, but i'm not sure this document makes sense
# KevinMarks not so much advocacy as reasoning
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: i think its fine being in the spec, from the view that its the motifvation for the spec
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: html5 over html4, css, etc have examples of that
# ben_thatmustbeme ... it is relevent as we move to CR and its a call for implementations
# shevski yep
# ben_thatmustbeme ... its in our best interest to provide that
# shevski (and how have we made AS2 future proof)
# ben_thatmustbeme ... part of the challenge here is that we don't have that many implementers of AS2 here so we recognize that a lot of our implementations are going to come from outside of the group and i see that as pretty important to convice others to upgrade
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: what are we looking for, a paragraph on why its better to always update to later specs, or something specific about as2
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: what problems were people having with as1 that made them want to change the spec, like "i wanted json instead of xml"
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: i agree with sandro, what were the motivations in changing it
# ben_thatmustbeme annbass: i am hearing two conversations here, 1) why are there changes, and 2) why use activity streams at all
# ben_thatmustbeme sandro: no, i wasn't saying that
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: as2 is not backwards compat with AS1, what are the main reasons we had to break backcompat
# ben_thatmustbeme tantek: empathizing with the implementers, "yes, it breaks backcompat, but we find that it will improve ..."
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: here's what i would like to do, we have 2 sections on relationship with AS1.0 , one in the introduction, one is much more detailed
# ben_thatmustbeme ... i think in that introduction another paragraph or two that describes what the differences are and why. what the advantages are
# shevski yep benefits!
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: i think that would be helpful, i think that also a short summary of the issues of as1 that prompted as2, that would be what a developer would be interested in. what was wrong with AS1 that it needed to change
# bengo For me the most important things about as1 -> as2 is the json extensibility story and w3c stewardship.
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: this is somewhat archeology for me, i am going to have to ask james for some, research others. Its going to be a lot of digging
# ben_thatmustbeme ... it feels like a lot of busywork
# ben_thatmustbeme aaronpk: i think what shevski is getting at is a much higher level of a 'why at a high level did we break back-compat'
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: so something like 'we are compatible with json-ld, we are supporting different languages, that type of thing
# ben_thatmustbeme shevski: the other thing for me, is what new features, and how much thought of the future of as2 and how it can be extended without breatking compatibility in the future
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: so something about the future also?
# ben_thatmustbeme <ben_thatmustbeme> i was going to bring up extensability section
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: does our section on extensability cover that? I'm guessing it doesn't
# ben_thatmustbeme shevski: i'm interested in building trust about switching to it. I don't think it has to be line by line or anything
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom: would you mind adding an issue on github and i'll see if i can draft something up
# ben_thatmustbeme ... some sample text would be great as to what you are looking for
# shevski okay
# ben_thatmustbeme ... it sounds like we are not ready for a WD, so i'm not going to ask for that
# ben_thatmustbeme if thats it, then thats it, thanks everybody
# shevski thanks all!
# ben_thatmustbeme eprodrom i don't think i'm supposed to do the trackbot end meeting
# 
tantek shevski, I think you've been actioned to open a new issue on https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues with specific "why" questions
# eprodrom ben_thatmustbeme: I'll do it
# eprodrom trackbot, end meeting
# ben_thatmustbeme seems rather unofficial :)
# RRSAgent I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-social-minutes.html trackbot
# RRSAgent I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2016/05/10-social-actions.rdf :
# ben_thatmustbeme Zakim, bye
# Loqi Benthatmustbeme made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-05-10-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98204&oldid=0
# shevski tantek, evan has started an issue here: https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/313
# shevski in terms of building trust & motivating people to invest in adopting this - I think it's likely covered by benefits of AS2 (esp vs AS1) and section on extensibility
# shevski so unless anyone has any thoughts on that, I won't create another issue
shepazu joined the channel
jasnell, bengo and almereyda joined the channel
# Loqi Sandro made 4 edits to [[Socialwg/Webmention CR Transition Request]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98208&oldid=0
# Loqi Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-05-10-minutes]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98210&oldid=98204
# Loqi Aaronpk made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/Webmention CR Transition Request]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98212&oldid=98208
# Loqi Sandro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/Webmention CR Transition Request]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98213&oldid=98212
# Loqi Sandro made 7 edits to [[Socialwg/Webmention CR Transition Request]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98221&oldid=98213
# Loqi Aaronpk made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/Webmention CR Transition Request]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98218&oldid=98217
# Loqi Sandro made 2 edits to [[Socialwg/Webmention CR Transition Request]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98223&oldid=98221
tantek joined the channel
# tantek hello #social - FYI I've created https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-17 - please add agenda items for discussion here: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-05-17#Discussion_Items
# Loqi Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2016-05-17]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=98224&oldid=98167