2016-08-16 UTC
jasnell and shepazu joined the channel
Arnaud joined the channel
# 16:57 csarven cwebber2 rhiaro Are we on / doing this IRC only or? # 16:58 rhiaro yeah, I think tsyesika can be here on irc too RRSAgent joined the channel
Zakim joined the channel
# 17:01 rhiaro feedback from the likes of tsyesika and csarven would be welcome :) # 17:02 csarven Sorry for that. My situation is reliable for audio. I can listen but may not respond that well. So, IRC is most suitable. # 17:02 csarven i.e., read and respond.. or read later and you summarise now # 17:03 csarven Probably bes tthat you summarise since this is AP specific # 17:03 rhiaro I think you know the summary csarven, we've discussed in the past, so this is the materialisation of the general idea of pointing to LDN from AP, and clarifying some of the AP notifications stuff # 17:03 cwebber2 instead, we'll separate activitypub into client to server and server to server # 17:04 rhiaro But server to server additionally specifies targeting (ie. deciding who to send to which isn't in LDN) annbass joined the channel
# 17:08 tsyesika indeed, i'm actually reaaally happy to see this, the LDN document which i read back when rhiaro first brought it up seemed like a good more general version of wht we're doing in AP # 17:08 tsyesika glad we're now linking in the relevant parts, it reads well. I should go re-read LDN but i liked my first read of it # 17:08 cwebber2 this will allow us to clearly distinguish between pub and sub parts but without me feeling like I will run out of time # 17:09 cwebber2 and will allow us to have the generalized federation as part of another document # 17:09 cwebber2 while keeping our own specific things (esp side effects) # 17:09 rhiaro I'm hopeful that AP Delivery being a specific version of LDN will also help AP systems to at minimum exchange notifications with broader LDP-based systems # 17:09 tsyesika i'm also glad we're sticking with one spec, two would have been fine but my preference is on one, i think it will make things easier to manage both for us and also be easier to understand for the reader it not being split into a bunch of documents # 17:09 csarven Extra ++ if AP is comfortable with these based on technical clarification and dedicating resources # 17:10 cwebber2 csarven, not totally clear on what that means but I think yes? :) # 17:10 annbass sounds like you guys are converging on a good plan! # 17:10 cwebber2 tsyesika, ah yes one thing we need to discuss that happened on the last call # 17:11 cwebber2 tsyesika, so we had discussed switching from primarily the application/activity+json to the more general json-ld version with a profile # 17:12 cwebber2 and then that makes it clear with AP, but adds no extra work for LDP type folks # 17:12 cwebber2 and since nobody is using application/activity+json yet, it's not like we have to get old implementations to fix it # 17:13 cwebber2 it would simplify interop dramatically and wouldn't really lose anything IMO # 17:13 tsyesika yep, all for it, seems like no work for us for better interop # 17:14 csarven cwebber2 If it matters, the LD folks are strongly in favour of the profile approach. From the LDN's perspective, we wanted ot at least acknowledge the (dis)advantages to AS2's new mime type. It is part of the reason we thought that SWP may be best place to address that. However, if AP goes ahead with the profile approach, that'd probably be better for implementations since there is only one treatment of the content-type. # 17:14 csarven s/LD folks/LD community 'in general' - and not exclusive LD folks from SWWG # 17:15 cwebber2 csarven, yes, I followed the tumultuous github threads ;) # 17:17 rhiaro PROPOSAL: Keep AP and ASub as one document, with reference to LDN in ASub melvster joined the channel
# 17:17 rhiaro RESOLVED: Keep AP and ASub as one document, with reference to LDN in ASub # 17:20 cwebber2 I guess one more thing that needs to be done then is to separate the pub and sub sections in AP # 17:20 csarven cwebber2 ARe you okay to alias inbox to whatever LDN ends up using for ns? # 17:21 cwebber2 csarven, though I think if it *is* possible to get both LDN inbox and rest of AP terms to be added to AS namespace # 17:21 cwebber2 but I guess that will require policy changes or somethin :) # 17:24 rhiaro yeah so LDN can talk about ldp:inbox, but if AP implementers use as:inbox and that is aliased to ldp:inbox in the json-ld context, it all works out the same in the end # 17:24 rhiaro So AP implementers don't have to care about ldp:inbox and ldp implementers don't have to care about as:inbox # 17:25 cwebber2 one nice thing about the mimetype is that you could then infer a json-ld context # 17:26 cwebber2 is something like that possible with profiles? I'm guessing not? # 17:26 cwebber2 but what would happen to LDP things that were ignorant of that # 17:26 rhiaro So the scenario is: an AP sender sends a notification without an @context, but with the profile, to an LDP receiver # 17:28 rhiaro Or more generally: if you have a JSON blob without an @context, but with a profile in the media type, can you use that profile as the @context? # 17:28 csarven If no context, I suspect that it is JSON-LD expanded? # 17:28 rhiaro okay, not expanded and no context, but with profile # 17:29 rhiaro I'm not entirely sure if profile is meant for this. I feel like maybe, but we need to consult an expert # 17:29 csarven profile can be anything. it is not specified as long as the semantics don't change by including it. # 17:29 csarven if you remove the profile, it should still make sense # 17:31 csarven cwebber2: Sorry, right, compacted. Whatever gives the full URI =) # 17:31 cwebber2 csarven, compacted is the human readable, without the full URI :) # 17:32 cwebber2 csarven, so the goal of using the activitystreams mimetype # 17:32 csarven If you don't have context and there is no full URI, those keys are just arbitrary strings # 17:32 cwebber2 csarven, was so that if a "dumb" participant sends documents, you know how to infer a context # 17:32 rhiaro that's why we're trying to figure out if profile can tell you how to expand the strings # 17:32 csarven OK, but the semantics shouldn't change is what @profile is saying # 17:33 rhiaro So I figure that if profile == inferred @context, the semantics aren't actually changing # 17:33 csarven What's the "semantics" if there is no context and no full URI? # 17:33 rhiaro there's agreement between sender and receiver, via the profile # 17:34 cwebber2 implies doing a default context with the document loader :) # 17:35 cwebber2 so that dummy user who just sent json and had no idea what that @context thing was could still be interpreted # 17:37 cwebber2 what we could do is one of those "liberal in what you accept but conservative in what you produce" things # 17:37 cwebber2 by always providing the "@context" but say "consumers SHOULD process with an implied context" in a non-normative section, giving clarity on how to accept content from people who don't quite do the right thing # 17:38 csarven And if you don't have context or a full URI in there, I'm not sure if that does. Unless I'm misinterpreting something here. # 17:41 melvster thinks that creating specs on the imagined behaviour of 'dumb' participants is the road to hell ... simply put in the @context or it's a bug, same with any other omitted field ... # 17:43 cwebber2 at the very least, we can switch to providing an @context in all examples.... # 17:43 rhiaro like chris said, the liberal-in-what-you-accept thing is probably still good # 17:43 rhiaro but yeah, we should put @context in examples as a good start # 17:45 csarven Just to be clear: I'm not 100% sure about it, so just raising it for caution. # 17:47 csarven And.. I'm okay with the robustness approach. Is that SWP territory? # 17:47 rhiaro Okay, I think we have enough to be going on with with AP. Anyone else have anything to add? # 17:48 rhiaro csarven: possibly, or it might be some carefully negotiated combination of AP and LDN (or all of the above) # 17:49 rhiaro Okay, then wrapping up. I'll dump this chat on the wiki page. # 17:49 Zakim As of this point the attendees have been (no one) jasnell_ joined the channel
# 18:07 ben_thatmustbeme just a point of order, i'm not sure you can "officially" resolve anything in an informal meeting # 19:49 Zakim excuses himself; his presence no longer seems to be needed # 20:03 rhiaro Okay Loqi, you're getting out of hand. Time for a timeout. wilkie joined the channel
@cmal_PP #Micropub standard publication #API just became a W3 CANDIDATE RECOMMENDATION. Implement it today! https://www.w3.org/TR/micropub/ #Indieweb (twitter.com/_/status/765559198713257992)
RRSAgent logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/08/16-social-irc
rhiaro So this morning cwebber2 and I refactored AP Notifications and Delivery to Targeting and Delivery, with the LDN reference: http://rhiaro.github.io/activitypub/#targeting-and-delivery
csarven cwebber2 If it matters, the LD folks are strongly in favour of the profile approach. From the LDN's perspective, we wanted ot at least acknowledge the (dis)advantages to AS2's new mime type. It is part of the reason we thought that SWP may be best place to address that. However, if AP goes ahead with the profile approach, that'd probably be better for implementations since there is only one treatment of the content-type.
cwebber2 so, I'm going to go through https://github.com/w3c-social/activitypub/pull/75 and merge it
ben_thatmustbeme just a point of order, i'm not sure you can "officially" resolve anything in an informal meeting