Socialwg/2015-06-02-minutes

Attendees

Present: Arnaud, ben_thatmustbeme, Wendy, elf-pavlik, aaronpk, tantek, evanpro, dromasca, cwebber2, rhiaro, wilkie, Ann, bblfish, AdamB, tsyesika_, Sandro
Regrets: harry, sandro, jasnell
Chair: Arnaud
Scribe: ben_thatmustbeme

Arnaud: Audio part of the calls will use webex, at least for the forseeable future. W3C is investigating alternatives. but for now we will be using WebEx.
... By the end of the month we will have to switch over
... This is dependant on team contact to get the reservation set up. Some people may find it better. Some prefer the webex client sound quality / experience, etc.

<wseltzer> WebEx Best Practices notes

Arnaud: The biggest loss is that there is no integration with any bots that we have. We can still use Zakim for queue and trackbot, etc, but lose the ability to mute
... Most annoying is you do not have a list of participants.
... some linux systems have issues, etc. review link posted by wseltzer in chat.

<wseltzer> W3C email to chairs

Arnaud: We will follow up with team contact as to setting up reservation. Another annoying part is the conference code will change every week.

<Loqi> Tantekelik made 1 edit to Socialwg/2015-06-02 https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=84366&oldid=84365

AnnB: Thats surprising, we use webex and have a standard code

Arnaud: may be just lack of knowledge in setting it up thus far.

<cwebber2> so wait, will there be a SIP option?

<cwebber2> will this require installing proprietary software?

wseltzer: W3C is still working with WebEx team and says that recurring meetings should be able to use the same code.

AnnB: I have a standing meeting but I never schedule it, but it gives the ability to use the same code all the time.

<AnnB> I use "my" code for when I want to schedule random meetings

Arnaud: in any case, this is a heads up. we are nearing the deadline. We are free to switch whenever we are ready. Some WG have already switched.

cwebber2: will there be a phone line or SIP option?

<cwebber2> ok thanks

Arnaud: you can call either way. The client is fairly straight forward too. Client can even call you

<cwebber2> I try to avoid installing any proprietary software

<cwebber2> so it could be pretty problematic for me if that's the only way to participate

Arnaud: The client also shows who is making noise too.

<cwebber2> but if there's a phone or SIP option that will work

<wilkie> that's great for scribing wow

<wseltzer> cwebber2, you can also join by phone

<cwebber2> (though hopefully there's a SIP option for international users who are also concerned about such things?)

Arnaud: In the meeting I had, the host was not in the meeting, but our team contact will be our host and will have more control over the call.

<AnnB> wseltzer, if you guys need help figuring out some of these questions, I could ask our WebEx SMEs to help

<AnnB> of course, I presume Cisco is helping you

Arnaud: There is still a lot of mystery in the setup. As chair I wish I had more information.
... Moving on

Review Actions

<elf-pavlik> action-58

<trackbot> action-58 -- Pavlik elf to Setup tracking of candidate demos which showcase User Stories implementations -- due 2015-06-02 -- PENDINGREVIEW

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/58

<elf-pavlik> https://github.com/w3c-social/social-ucr#proposed-implementations

Arnaud: there is one activity marked as pending review by elf-pavlik

<elf-pavlik> close action-58

<trackbot> Closed action-58.

<tantek> elf-pavlik, was that part of your personal to-do items in Tracker?

Arnaud: elf just closed and has completed this action.

<elf-pavlik> i find it very relevant to the work here

<Arnaud> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/open

Arnaud: Not going to go through open actions 1 by 1. Does anyone want to declare victory on any of those?

<tantek> elf-pavlik, relevant to work here is insufficient, it must require involvement by the group, not just a personal action that's realted

Arnaud: Hearing none, lets move on.

<elf-pavlik> how to encourage collaboration on actions among group participants?

tantek: one thing that was discussed in IRC relating to action items, I would like to bring up using tracker for personal items. I suggest not cluttering tracker for personal items and only use it for actions that require the groups attention
... I wanted to raise that for clarification and to help minize time used

Arnaud: I totally support what tantek said. I realized a lot of the open actions are assigned to elf-pavlik. These actions should be assigned during meetings and not be used for own personal todo list.

<elf-pavlik> roger!

<elf-pavlik> i'll move them by next week

tantek: I agree, actions in tracker are actions assigned by the group

<tantek> thanks elf-pavlik

Arnaud: lets move on to raised issues.
... I believe we discussed this issue (issue-43) last week, why is it still open?

<bblfish_> issue-43?

<trackbot> issue-43 -- What if anything should as2 say about i-json? per https://www.w3.org/wiki/socialwg/2015-05-26#i-json_discussion -- raised

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/43

tantek: lacking a consensus last week, we left it raised.

Arnaud: we had a short discussion last week. Are we in any better position this week?

tantek: james was strongly against it and a group of us supported him as it is an editor issue

Arnaud: existing software may not be able to produce ijson but I wish in issues like this we were a lot more clear about how we raise issues.
... someone should make a proposal that actually suggests a resolution, or a yes no answer

tantek: i agree, if you want to raise an issue, it should be to point out a blocker or you are stuck
... based on that criteria, we should reject this

Arnaud: if someone feels we should do something about ijson they should raise as a new issue

tantek: i feel it should come with a use-case too

<Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-43 as is, if anyone has a specific suggestion/proposal, they should raise a new issue explaining what it is, along with a use case

<tantek> +1

<ben_thatmustbeme>+1

<cwebber2> +1

<aaronpk> +1

<elf-pavlik> +1

<evanpro> +1

<elf-pavlik> http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-05-26/line/1432665126058

<rhiaro> +1

<AnnB> abstains

Arnaud: who raised this issue? also annoying when tracker does not have that data
... I will call it resolved

<Arnaud> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-43 as is, if anyone has a specific suggestion/proposal, they should raise a new issue explaining what it is, along with a use case

<AnnB> ben_thatmustbeme++

<Loqi> ben_thatmustbeme has 75 karma

<wseltzer> trackbot, close issue-43

<trackbot> Closed issue-43.

Arnaud: no other issues pending review
... not going to tackle open issues now, i suggest moving forward for now

social syntax

Arnaud: James is not on the call but he has updated the draft and sent the link tot he working group and suggest we just republish a new working draft
... He thinks that we have made significant progress and should publish it. It is just a way to communicate to the world what we are doing. and try to get broader attention to the draft
... Either people are happy to make the decision now, we can proceed, or we can take a week to prcoeed

evanpro: I think it makes sense to take some time to review, but i think about a week is enough time to review

<Zakim> tantek, you wanted to raise issue about removed examples - I don't think that edit reflects group consensus

<elf-pavlik> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/pull/121

tantek: I agree, there has be a lot of substantial edits, and we should update but the one concern i have is that he made a pretty big edit removing a lot of examples in syntaxes and i object to that edit
... I think the more people have various ways of approaching it, the better. He believes it is better to not have incorrect examples then to have some incorrect examples.

<rhiaro> but he removed the correct ones too

<elf-pavlik> action-26

<trackbot> action-26 -- Tantek Çelik to Review microformats examples in AS2.0 specs -- due 2015-03-17 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/26

Arnaud: he doesn't know microformats enough that he could correct them

tantek: he could have easily put warning label that noted ones that have not been reviewed. Perhaps a seperate document that shows all the exmples of various formats

<elf-pavlik> +1 sperate document for all non JSON(-LD) examples

<elf-pavlik> action-38

<trackbot> action-38 -- Evan Prodromou to Convert social api requirements to 2-10 user stories of 3-5 sentences each -- due 2015-02-10 -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/38

<rhiaro> I agree we shouldn't remove them altogether

tantek: the action for me on fixing the examples, they are getting incrementally getting completed. but i was hoping to continue and they have instead been all removed

<elf-pavlik> action-34

<trackbot> action-34 -- Pavlik elf to add explaination to the spec about multiple serializations used in examples -- due 2015-02-10 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/34

sandro: i do think removing them in the name of not having them be incorrect suggests an implicit decision that we are more likely to remove microformats, which we have not decided

Arnaud: anyone else? otherwise the plan is take some time to review and give everyone a week to review
... I was delighted to hear the w3c has come up with a tool to automate publishing

<wseltzer> Echidna, automatic publication system

Arnaud: does all the validation, sends emails, etc. but does require some preconfiguration. We will need help of team contacts for this

<Zakim> tantek, you wanted to make a proposal to help move forward with AS2 publication

wseltzer: i just put a link in the chat to the automatic publication process, but needs a group decision to migrate to it first

<tantek> PROPOSAL: revert change that removed microformats examples, and add a warning e.g. "This example needs review." to any microformats examples that have not been verified/fixed per action 26. Also others are welcome to help with action 26!

tantek: i wanted to raise the concern forward to revert the change that removed the examples and put in a warning on nonreviewed parts

<rhiaro> +1

<aaronpk> +1

<wilkie> +1

<tsyesika_> +1

<elf-pavlik> 0

<ben_thatmustbeme> +1

<evanpro> +1

<Arnaud> RESOLVED: revert change that removed microformats examples, and add a warning e.g. "This example needs review." to any microformats examples that have not been verified/fixed per action 26. Also others are welcome to help with action 26!

Arnaud: of course james is not here and he has to do the work

<elf-pavlik> tantek, can you make PR with rever and adding those warnings?

<tantek> elf-pavlik: no, don't have time for that - jasnell can do a revert

Arnaud: this is why we have the approve the minutes from the last week, to allow people to object to the previous weeks proposals that they were not there for

tantek: I agree if he were here I do believe he would -1 this, but it should fall the the chairs to compell the editor to make the change needed

<cwebber2> 0

<cwebber2> I vote late ;)

<cwebber2> I think jasnell's feedback is valuable on this

<tantek> cwebber2: agreed - hence why I discussed with him first

<tantek> but I think we came to understand and agree to disagree :/

Arnaud: there was an email thread started after F2F in paris. Sandro raised a question on correcting vocabulary of Activity streams.

<aaronpk> i liked sandro's suggestion!

Arnaud: James is not here, I was hoping to make progress on this. I just want to make sure this issue doesn't go away

<elf-pavlik> some toughts on API Operations vs. Social Activities https://github.com/w3c-social/social-vocab/issues/12

Arnaud: I have asked sandro to raise this issue sooner rather than later. There was one question from james of what this has to do with activity streams, and not the protocol?

<tantek> but is IoT actually "social web"?

<tantek> I think this may go beyond our charter scope

sandro: activity streams becomes the protocol with activitypump, which is what brought it to my attention, but even without that, its framed in terms of things having happened. which makes perfect sense in terms of news, but odd when moving to other applications like internet of things. You can either it as the light turned on, or there is a state change and the light is now on. The model of "the state changed to this" becomes messy when dealing

with a thermometer for example

<tantek> thermometers aren't "social" :P

Arnaud: we'll have to take this back on when james is back on.

<Zakim> tantek, you wanted to say could we base this discussion on people and not things?

Arnaud: that was just one specific example, though not social, i could come up with one.

<AnnB> I agree @tantek that IOT is not 'social'. But I wonder if these concepts apply to how we (enterprise) want to use social for workflow management

<tsyesika_> AnnB: indeed

tantek: i think there is some merit to seperating it to "here is a list of posts" vs "here is how to CRUD posts"

<bengo> :)

sandro: do you check in at a location then check out? or just withdraw a check in? AS2 isn't clear on modeling these things.

<elf-pavlik> sandro, could you add it to https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/More_user_stories ?

<aaronpk> i would "check out" of a location by updating my checkin post with an end date

<elf-pavlik> or use for illustrating this topic one of existing stories https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/Sorting_user_stories

tantek: is that really social web or are you just treating that phone as a stream of information. My general request is that we try to avoid scope-creep in to internet of things. There are cases where it does occur like "listens" or "scrobbles" and I'd like to stick to examples like that and showing off exmples on sites like "last.fm has this"

sandro: for example what about deleting a post? is that a new post or just removing the existing post?

<sandro> elf-pavlik, no this doesn;'t need any new user stories

Arnaud: i think we should stop here, but this is a significant issue that we should look in to quickly before we move on too far

<elf-pavlik> sandro, "or use for illustrating this topic one of existing stories https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/Social_API/Sorting_user_stories"

<tantek> re: deleting a post - it's both a protocol for doing so (part of CRUD), but can and should also be indicated at the permalink of that post. see http://indiewebcamp.com/deleted for current thinking/solutions for that

<elf-pavlik> sandro, FYI https://github.com/w3c-social/social-ucr#proposed-implementations

AnnB: i agree with tantek on the scope-creep issue, but we in industry are interested in the activity management. is that outside of the scope?

tantek: I think as long as a person is doing it, its within our scope?

<bengo> I don't know how q+ works or the rules of teleconf, but if there are more folks than usual on here this may be a good time to share something I've been working on: http://livefyre.github.io/activity-vocabulary/ for the purposes of using like https://github.com/gobengo/dom-activity

Arnaud: its really just a matter of how we represent, its not a question of it being not able to be represented, just how

<tantek> now whether it should be in v1 or not - that's a different question - hence the user-stories focus

Social Syntax test suite

Arnaud: not going to say much, just wanted to point out we have a repo set up and I noticed there has not been any activity at all. IBM put a lot of time in to it, so I would like to encourage WG members to step up and getting involved with it.
... I don't know if anyone has anything else to say on this

social API

<Arnaud> https://github.com/w3c/activitystreams-testing

<Loqi> it'll be ok

<elf-pavlik> lets take Follow a Person vs. Subscribe to a Feed to async (github)

<elf-pavlik> sorry, trying skype today but it doesn't help :(

<evanpro> elf-pavlik++

<Loqi> elf-pavlik has 27 karma

<Loqi> it'll be ok

<evanpro> Seems fair here

<tantek> no objection

Arnaud: does anyone have anything to say about the social API point

<elf-pavlik> https://github.com/w3c-social/social-vocab/tree/master/activity/Subscribe

evanpro: I think elf is trying to clarify establishing a relationship of say "following a person" vs "following a feed" but perhaps we can take this issue to github repo for activity streams

coordination with IG

<melvster1> in implementing SWAT0 it was confusing what following meant, it would be good to have that clarified

<elf-pavlik> melvster1++

<Loqi> melvster1 has 2 karma

<tantek> +1 on merging IRC channels. Telcon topics take precedence in the channel.

Arnaud: AnnB asked about merging IRC channels, the concern is congestion during meetings

<elf-pavlik> +1 merge IRC channels

AnnB: It has come up informally here and there, but not everyone has weighed in on this issue
... it does seem to me and the IG that it would be valueable to merge the channels. during IG meetings it inhibits the WG from chatting at that time

<AdamB> were there issues with patent policy and also tracking of actions, meetings etc?

<tantek> no

AnnB: my alternative suggesting was to keep the IG channel for only meetings, but didn't want to just move everyone over here without WG approval

Arnaud: was there an issue with trackbot?

<elf-pavlik> we can try just moving and if people find 1h weekly call an issue we can move calls to #socialig as needed

AnnB: this becomes moot if we are moving tracking to github

<tantek> is there a list of all resolutions?

Arnaud: not sure I agree, but if the IG keeps meeting on their own channel that isn't an issue.

<cwebber2> I'm fine with it

Arnaud: How do people feel on this

<elf-pavlik> +1 merge IRC channels (adjust use of two as needed if problems appear)

tantek: we had this conversation already and why is it coming up again?
... we hit issues and they hit an issue and just stayed on their own channel

<Zakim> wseltzer, you wanted to note IP issues on "contribution"

<evanpro> "As they say in Portland..." ha!

<wilkie> I'm going to be in portland for a week in June! I've never been there before :)

wseltzer: just a reminder that the question of who can participate in discussions is seperate from the need to keep the patent commitments clear. Contributions to the spec need to be limited to those who are members or invited experts.

Arnaud: I believe this is no different than contributions from the mailing list

<tantek> isn't this orthogonal becauase anyone can be on IRC on any channel?

<AnnB> PROPOSE: let IG members hang out in WG #social channel; but scribe the IG meetings in #socialig

<cwebber2> no objection

AnnB: wseltzer, we thought that might be fine since all of our member in the IG are invited experts, but that is different

Arnaud: does anyone object

<Arnaud> RESOLVED: let IG members hang out in WG #social channel; but scribe the IG meetings in #socialig

<tantek> but ok

Arnaud: this is consistent with previous issue on it

<evanpro> Thanks Arnaud !

<wilkie> thanks

<cwebber2> ben_thatmustbeme++

<Loqi> ben_thatmustbeme has 76 karma

<cwebber2> thanks for scribing

<aaronpk> ben_thatmustbeme: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Scribes

<wilkie> ben_thatmustbeme++

<Loqi> ben_thatmustbeme has 77 karma

) just glad my audio didn't cut out this time, it has in the past

which is why i hesitate to scribe

<Arnaud> it's too bad because you're a great scribe :)

I used to practice speed typing by trying to transcribe songs in real time

<tantek> ben_thatmustbeme++ for scribing!

<Loqi> ben_thatmustbeme has 78 karma

<bengo> if there are more folks than usual on here this may be a good time to share something I've been working on: http://livefyre.github.io/activity-vocabulary/ for the purposes of using like https://github.com/gobengo/dom-activity.

I believe you need to end the meeting before i get minutes

<AnnB> wow, Ben .. cool

<bengo> It's real-world extension of current draft of AS Vocabulary

<Arnaud> songs in real time? that sounds like a challenge indeed!

<Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.140 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/06/02 18:04:22 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/Hering/Hearing/
Succeeded: s/notes/minutes/
Found ScribeNick: ben_thatmustbeme
Found Scribe: ben_thatmustbeme
Inferring ScribeNick: ben_thatmustbeme
Default Present: Arnaud, +1.401.305.aaaa, ben_thatmustbeme, Wendy, elf-pavlik, aaronpk, +1.773.614.aabb, tantek, +1.514.554.aacc, evanpro, dromasca, cwebber2, rhiaro, wilkie, Ann, +1.314.777.aadd, bblfish, AdamB, tsyesika_, Sandro
Present: Arnaud +1.401.305.aaaa ben_thatmustbeme Wendy elf-pavlik aaronpk +1.773.614.aabb tantek +1.514.554.aacc evanpro dromasca cwebber2 rhiaro wilkie Ann +1.314.777.aadd bblfish AdamB tsyesika_ Sandro
Regrets: harry sandro jasnell

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 02 Jun 2015
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/06/02-social-minutes.html
People with action items:

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]

Socialwg/2015-06-02-minutes

Attendees

Contents

minutes from previous meeting

Zakim being decomissioned

Switch to WebEx Coming up