16:59:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
16:59:25 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-social-irc
16:59:27 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:59:29 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be SOCL
16:59:29 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see T&S_SOCWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 1 minute
16:59:30 <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
16:59:30 <trackbot> Date: 31 March 2015
16:59:57 <cwebber2> eprodrom: oh, was pump.io originally called "activitypump"?
17:00:04 <eprodrom> yes
17:00:09 <cwebber2> and oshepherd's spec too right?
17:00:12 <eprodrom> Yes
17:00:15 <cwebber2> so that's two activitypumps
17:00:17 <cwebber2> confusing :)
17:00:28 <Arnaud> zakim, this is socl
17:00:29 <Zakim> ok, Arnaud; that matches T&S_SOCWG()1:00PM
17:00:39 <Arnaud> zakim, who's on the phone?
17:00:40 <Zakim> On the phone I see jasnell, Sandro, Arnaud
17:00:40 <Zakim> + +1.617.247.aaaa
17:00:59 <ben_thatmustbeme> Zakim, aaaa is me
17:00:59 <Zakim> +ben_thatmustbeme; got it
17:01:02 <Zakim> +??P4
17:01:07 <ben_thatmustbeme> Zakim, mute me
17:01:07 <Zakim> ben_thatmustbeme should now be muted
17:01:31 <Zakim> + +33.6.43.93.aabb
17:01:57 <Zakim> + +1.514.554.aacc
17:02:04 <eprodrom> Zakim, aacc is me
17:02:04 <Zakim> +eprodrom; got it
17:03:00 <bblfish> hi
17:03:04 <eprodrom> Ah!
17:03:07 <Zakim> +??P3
17:03:11 <tantek> zakim, ??p3 is me
17:03:11 <Zakim> +tantek; got it
17:03:20 <Loqi> tantek: elf-pavlik left you a message on 3/30 at 11:24am: do you see http://microformats.org/wiki/microformats2#combining_microformats similar to http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#embedding ? http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-03-30/line/1427739866728
17:03:23 <Arnaud> zakim, aabb is bblfish
17:03:23 <Zakim> +bblfish; got it
17:03:44 <cwebber2> SIP is once again not working here
17:03:46 <eprodrom> Arnaud: I'd like to volunteer to scribe
17:03:48 <cwebber2> though it is to other servers
17:03:48 <bblfish> not sure
17:03:55 <eprodrom> It's been a long time since I scribed
17:04:01 <elf-pavlik> eprodrom++
17:04:03 <Loqi> eprodrom has 10 karma
17:04:11 <cwebber2> it works on the fsf's sip server
17:04:14 <eprodrom> scribenick eprodrom
17:04:25 <eprodrom> scribenick: eprodrom
17:04:29 <cwebber2> I'll just dial in, as soon as my phone gets reception
17:04:30 <eprodrom> This time it's personal
17:04:33 <tantek> elf-pavlik: the microformats embedding in JSON results is based on microdata embedding in JSON, which predates the JSON-LD work. perhaps JSON-LD also copied microdata in that respect.
17:04:35 <elf-pavlik> agenda: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-31
17:04:49 <eprodrom> eprodrom has changed the topic to: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-31
17:05:12 <eprodrom> Arnaud: minutes of 10 March are still missing
17:05:27 <eprodrom> Arnaud: skip minutes of 10 March until updated by aaronpk
17:05:50 <tantek> note, aaronpk offered regrets in advance for today's telcon
17:05:50 <Zakim> +??P8
17:05:51 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Approval of Minutes of 24 March 2015 Teleconf
17:05:57 <Zakim> +Ann
17:05:58 <eprodrom> Arnaud: scribes should mark the topics to make it easier to add the minutes
17:05:58 <Tsyesika> Zakim: ??P8 is me
17:06:00 <elf-pavlik> +21
17:06:00 <eprodrom> +1
17:06:01 <jasnell> no objection
17:06:03 <Tsyesika> Zakim, ??P8 is me
17:06:03 <Zakim> +Tsyesika; got it
17:06:05 <Arnaud> RESOLVED: Approval of Minutes of 24 March 2015 Teleconf
17:06:08 <Tsyesika> Zakim, mute me
17:06:08 <Zakim> Tsyesika should now be muted
17:06:23 <eprodrom> Arnaud: We are also missing minutes from the F2F
17:06:36 <eprodrom> There was a problem with the IRC logs, hhalpin was going to sort it out
17:06:41 <tantek> do we at least have good IRC logs from the f2f?
17:06:49 <cwebber2> I think mixed ones :)
17:06:49 <eprodrom> Next teleconference 4/7
17:06:59 <cwebber2> depends, was timbl talking? :)
17:07:02 <eprodrom> Arnaud: Next F2F in Paris in May
17:07:14 <eprodrom> Arnaud: Pending confirmation of location
17:07:19 <cwebber2> he talks so fast
17:07:25 <eprodrom> Arnaud: hhalpin confirmed INRIA for F2F
17:07:33 <eprodrom> Arnaud: new page for F2F meeting
17:07:53 <tantek> added myself to regrets for Paris F2F
17:08:02 <eprodrom> Arnaud: please add yourself to the sections for the Paris F2F
17:08:03 <eprodrom> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-05-04
17:08:11 <eprodrom> Arnaud: there is also a link to hotels
17:08:16 <Zakim> + +1.773.614.aadd
17:08:20 <eprodrom> W3C has negotiated a deal with the hotel
17:08:26 <cwebber2> Zakim, aadd is me
17:08:26 <Zakim> +cwebber2; got it
17:08:33 <eprodrom> Arnaud: it's not the best deal, but it is available
17:08:49 <eprodrom> Arnaud: breakfast is included. However, it is nonrefundable.
17:09:12 <eprodrom> Arnaud: takes about 30 minutes including walking and Metro from hotel to INRIA.
17:09:41 <eprodrom> Arnaud: Everyone will need to buy their own lunch.
17:09:53 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we'll continue to organize on the wiki page to develop an agenda.
17:10:03 <Loqi> Tantekelik made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-05-04]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83239&oldid=83221
17:10:07 <elf-pavlik> q+ re: formal process to open/close ISSUEs in W3C Tracker
17:10:13 <eprodrom> TOPIC: Tracking of Actions and Issues
17:10:23 <eprodrom> Arnaud: let's first look at the actions
17:10:33 <jasnell> q+
17:11:00 <eprodrom> q+
17:11:34 <tantek> most of the open actions look like things raised / assigned by group / one person to another person - not personal to do
17:11:40 <Arnaud> ack jasnell
17:11:52 <eprodrom> Arnaud: notes that using the issue tracker for a personal todo system is probably inappropriate but OK now
17:12:07 <elf-pavlik> !tell harry we need action-14 reloved
17:12:07 <eprodrom> jasnell: We need ISSUE-14 to be closed, Harry Halpin needs to complete
17:12:08 <Loqi> Ok, I'll tell them that when I see them next
17:12:16 <tantek> I'll note that action-26 has some progress since jasnell merged my first pull request for fixes to microformats examples, and I'm working on more fixes.
17:12:17 <eprodrom> jasnell: we're using a namespace that's not official
17:12:30 <tantek> definitely more coming! thanks!
17:12:31 <eprodrom> jasnell: We have had progress on action-26, microformats review
17:12:53 <eprodrom> jasnell: action-29, outreach has happened, no need to leave this still open.
17:13:09 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we can close action 29
17:13:29 <eprodrom> jasnell: I posted a notice to the mailing list about test suites
17:13:33 <elf-pavlik> issue-8
17:13:33 <trackbot> issue-8 -- Test suite for activity streams 2.0 -- open
17:13:33 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/8
17:13:44 <tantek> did I hear correctly that no one formerly from the open social org responded / decided to join Social Web WG?
17:13:49 <tantek> re: action-29
17:14:02 <Arnaud> ack eprodrom
17:14:21 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
17:14:24 <wilkie> Zakim, IPcaller is me
17:14:24 <Zakim> +wilkie; got it
17:14:46 <wilkie> hello sorry I'm late!!
17:15:01 <elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg#Implementations
17:15:08 <ben_thatmustbeme> elf-pavlik, does action-49 need to be in action tracking?
17:15:11 <eprodrom> eprodrom: I'd like to have a mechanism that does it automatically for different programming languages
17:15:38 <elf-pavlik> ben_thatmustbeme, on one published it during last F2F
17:16:03 <eprodrom> jasnell: action 50 and 57 could be combined
17:16:24 <elf-pavlik> eprodrom, look at tests in james repo
17:16:51 <eprodrom> eprodrom: are there automated example extraction tools?
17:17:04 <eprodrom> Arnaud: elf-pavlik, can action 50 and 57 be combined
17:17:37 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik: I will work with eprodrom to make the examples easier to use
17:17:50 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik: there are some scripts for extracting the examples already
17:17:53 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik++
17:17:55 <eprodrom> Thanks
17:17:56 <Loqi> elf-pavlik has 14 karma
17:18:18 <jasnell> q+
17:18:38 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we have a number of issues that have been raised that should be disposed of
17:18:42 <tantek> wow 18 raised issues
17:18:49 <eprodrom> TOPIC: Issues
17:18:53 <tantek> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/raised
17:18:58 <cwebber2> elf-pavlik: you're put down regrets for paris?  too bad :(
17:19:03 <cwebber2> I was hoping you and Tsyesika could meet!
17:19:10 <eprodrom> Arnaud: elf-pavlik and jasnell have both proposed issues to cover
17:19:11 <elf-pavlik> cwebber2, i participate!
17:19:25 <Arnaud> ack elf-pavlik
17:19:26 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss formal process to open/close ISSUEs in W3C Tracker
17:20:02 <Loqi> Abasset made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-05-04]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83240&oldid=83239
17:20:16 <tantek> q+ to prefer using github issues for any issues which are only about the AS spec.
17:20:25 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we have two issue trackers, Github and W3C
17:20:52 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we should use Github for minor editorial issues, W3C for issues that should be decided by the WG
17:20:52 <tantek> q+ to also note that I thought we left choice of issue tracking venue up to editor
17:20:56 <elf-pavlik> Arnaud++
17:20:58 <Loqi> Arnaud has 9 karma
17:21:24 <Arnaud> ack jasnell
17:21:45 <eprodrom> Arnaud: It's a heavier process, but official
17:21:59 <eprodrom> jasnell: ISSUE 4, 7, 20, 23 could be safely closed
17:22:03 <elf-pavlik> -1
17:22:05 <tantek> -1
17:22:13 <eprodrom> jasnell: implicit typing can be closed, until there's a proposal
17:22:21 <tantek> why is there both an open action and issue on that?
17:22:35 <tantek> wait I'm confused why are we discussion open vs. raised issues?
17:22:36 <eprodrom> jasnell: pre-JSON-LD syntax is addressed in the spec, ISSUE-7
17:22:40 <tantek> neither 4 nor 7 are "raised"
17:23:14 <elf-pavlik> q+ re: -1 on closing issues which don't have clear resulution *in notes*
17:23:30 <jasnell> my apologies. I missed the part that we were focusing on raised
17:23:39 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we should decide whether raised issues should be closed or opened
17:23:57 <eprodrom> q+
17:24:00 <cwebber2> one protocol per child
17:24:28 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we've suffered from too many discussion protocols
17:24:35 <Arnaud> ack tantek
17:24:35 <Zakim> tantek, you wanted to prefer using github issues for any issues which are only about the AS spec. and to also note that I thought we left choice of issue tracking venue up to
17:24:38 <Zakim> ... editor
17:24:51 <cwebber2> elf-pavlik: (btw I see my mistake, I misread participants as regrets :))
17:25:02 <cwebber2> (I blame browser scroll behavior!)
17:25:10 <eprodrom> tantek: for issues related to a spec, we should defer to the issue tracking mechanism that the spec editor prefers
17:25:40 <jasnell> q+
17:25:46 <Arnaud> ack elf-pavlik
17:25:48 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss -1 on closing issues which don't have clear resulution *in notes*
17:26:15 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik: some of the issues that jasnell proposed to close don't have information, so we can't resolve them.
17:26:18 <tantek> it's not closing if it's not open
17:26:24 <tantek> it's *rejecting*
17:26:40 <tantek> if an issue lacks specific links then yes we should reject
17:26:49 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik: we didn't clarify whether some issues with vocabulary should be handled at the WG level
17:27:07 <ben_thatmustbeme> i would agree, if there isn't any explanation, it can always be resubmitted with more information
17:27:10 <eprodrom> Arnaud: I disagree. It's up to the WG to decide on issues of vocabulary.
17:27:15 <tantek> Zakim, who is here?
17:27:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see jasnell, Sandro, Arnaud, ben_thatmustbeme (muted), elf-pavlik, bblfish, eprodrom, tantek, Tsyesika (muted), Ann, cwebber2, wilkie
17:27:17 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, elf-pavlik, jasnell, eprodrom, AnnB, rhiaro, tantek, cwebber2, stevenroose, bblfish, ben_thatmustbeme, sandro, Tsyesika, JakeHart, bret, mattl,
17:27:17 <Zakim> ... bigbluehat, wilkie, nickstenn, aaronpk, ElijahLynn, dwhly, Arnaud, Loqi, KevinMarks, wseltzer, trackbot, shepazu
17:27:20 <eprodrom> Arnaud: it doesn't have to be done in the call, can be done offline.
17:27:31 <Arnaud> ack eprodrom
17:27:35 <jasnell> tantek: to the point about where the issues are being raised... it hasn't been clear that folks are actually using the github issue or looking at issues with the spec issue itself. I raised the issues on the w3c tracker to raise the visibility that there are specific spec issues that ought to be addressed
17:27:55 <jasnell> I'd much rather be dealing with specific spec issues than continually discussing process
17:28:07 <tantek> jasnell, if you want you can add specific github issues to telcon agendas. no need to go through tracker overhead.
17:28:13 <jasnell> so far, we've spent 30 minutes talking largely about process
17:28:14 <elf-pavlik> +1 tantek
17:28:18 <eprodrom> eprodrom: when do issues and actions factor into our acceptance?
17:28:29 <tantek> jasnell, I'm trying to make less process work for you :/
17:28:30 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we have to document when we are ready to go to the next step
17:28:33 <elf-pavlik> we have agenda wiki page where we can link to gh issues
17:28:55 <jasnell> I'd love it if we could talk about the specific issues now
17:28:59 <eprodrom> Arnaud: We need to show our issues as being all closed when we go to candidate recommendation
17:29:28 <tantek> we should reject as invalid any raised issue that we deem to be lacking sufficient information to understand / process (e.g. lacking links to specific part of spec, or specific example, etc.)
17:29:32 <eprodrom> Arnaud: Much of this has to do with documenting that we've done our homework
17:29:36 <tantek> hopefully that will encourage raising of more well documented issues
17:29:48 <eprodrom> Arnaud: but it can be on Github or W3C Tracker
17:29:59 <tantek> we should not duplicate github issues into tracker
17:30:01 <Loqi> Rhiaro made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-05-04]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83241&oldid=83240
17:30:18 <jasnell> q?
17:30:19 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we should document on the wiki that issues should go into Github
17:30:22 <tantek> spec already links to where its issues are tracked!
17:30:32 <Arnaud> ack jasnell
17:30:56 <eprodrom> +1
17:30:59 <eprodrom> Sounds good
17:31:05 <cwebber2> +1
17:31:07 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1
17:31:22 <bblfish> issue-18?
17:31:22 <trackbot> issue-18 -- We need to know if there are any other products in this space and if there are any dependencies between ldp and opensocial planned in the future? -- raised
17:31:22 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/18
17:31:40 <eprodrom> jasnell: reviewing issue 18, not sure there's value. It's rather vague.
17:31:49 <cwebber2> I would assume not if opensocial isn't really happneing anymore
17:31:52 <eprodrom> Arnaud: hhalpin has an action to clarify issue 18
17:32:03 <bblfish> issue-19?
17:32:03 <trackbot> issue-19 -- WG communication channel explosion -- raised
17:32:03 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/19
17:32:05 <elf-pavlik> Erik not on a call
17:32:12 <bblfish> which one?
17:32:28 <eprodrom> jasnell: issue-20 on text sequences: no existing implementations are doing it, no user stories require it
17:32:29 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-19, out of scope
17:32:36 <elf-pavlik> -1 Erik not on a call
17:32:40 <bblfish> issue-20
17:32:40 <trackbot> issue-20 -- Represent Collections using JSON Text Sequences (RFC 7464) -- raised
17:32:40 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/20
17:32:41 <ben_thatmustbeme> s/Close/Reject
17:32:44 <elf-pavlik> -1 Erik not on a call
17:32:45 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-20, out of scope
17:33:02 <tantek> suggest we reject 18 due to non-participation of open social people
17:33:13 <tantek> +1 on rejecting issue-20
17:33:38 <tantek> +1 on accepting (opening) issue-22
17:33:41 <eprodrom> jasnell: issue-22 is very general
17:33:50 <bblfish> issue-22
17:33:50 <trackbot> issue-22 -- Need to get data on implementor interest on specific features of the as spec -- raised
17:33:50 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/22
17:34:02 <tantek> this is the larger problem of scope / size / feature set of AS
17:34:10 <elf-pavlik> or harry during F2F
17:34:22 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1 to reject 22
17:35:15 <eprodrom> tantek: This issue is about what we should put at-risk
17:35:24 <eprodrom> q?
17:35:26 <eprodrom> q+
17:36:02 <eprodrom> tantek: I'm trying to slim down the spec so we can get it accepted
17:36:03 <Arnaud> ack eprodrom
17:36:07 <elf-pavlik> +1 issue-22 becomes ACTION on tantek :)
17:36:13 <jasnell> I think we deal with the issue best by looking a specific items
17:36:16 <tantek> lol elf-pavlik
17:36:41 <elf-pavlik> +1 to reject issue 22 for lack of description!
17:36:42 <tantek> q+ if processors are only doing general mapping, then we should drop specific actions
17:36:54 <tantek> q+ to say if processors are only doing general mapping, then we should drop specific actions
17:37:10 <KevinMarks> should we reach out to gnip and echo? they are big AS users so would have data on what is expressed
17:37:15 <jasnell> q?
17:37:19 <jasnell> q+
17:37:23 <Arnaud> ack tantek
17:37:23 <Zakim> tantek, you wanted to say if processors are only doing general mapping, then we should drop specific actions
17:37:40 <Zakim> +??P12
17:37:45 <eprodrom> eprodrom: hard to do in the AS 2.0 process since most implementations are going to be general
17:37:46 <bret> Zakim, ??P12 is me
17:37:46 <Zakim> +bret; got it
17:37:51 <bret> Zakim, mute me
17:37:51 <Zakim> bret should now be muted
17:38:17 <eprodrom> tantek: I'm concerned that we don't have any implementations besides test ones
17:38:25 <Arnaud> ack jasnell
17:38:33 <eprodrom> tantek: if implementations will be general, why have a vocabulary?
17:38:59 <eprodrom> jasnell: we have the core and the vocabulary
17:39:04 <tantek> I think elf-pavlik has done some work on specific vocabulary vs. user-stories?
17:39:15 <tantek> I vaguely remember seeing a wiki edit about that
17:39:20 <elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialig/Vocabulary_TF/Mapping_API_User_Stories_to_Vocabulary_terms
17:39:20 <eprodrom> jasnell: vocabulary is more focused on API
17:39:31 <elf-pavlik> IG has Use Case TF and Vocabulary TF
17:39:35 <tantek> thanks elf-pavlik that's a good start
17:39:53 <eprodrom> jasnell: we need to map user stories to what the API is actually going to do
17:40:03 <Loqi> Cwebber2 made 1 edit to [[Socialwg/2015-05-04]] https://www.w3.org/wiki/index.php?diff=83242&oldid=83241
17:40:08 <eprodrom> jasnell: and identify the minimal set that matches those user stories
17:40:09 <tantek> jasnell, I'm ok with letting you drop anything (per editor discretion) you think should be dropped :)
17:40:42 <tantek> sounds like jasnell is proposing an action on himself as a way of closing 22
17:40:47 <eprodrom> jasnell: I think we can close issue-22 if we can reconcile types in the vocabulary while we're going through the user stories
17:41:03 <bblfish> q+
17:41:12 <elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialig/Vocabulary_TF/Mapping_API_User_Stories_to_Vocabulary_terms
17:41:19 <eprodrom> Arnaud: jasnell is already going through the spec for this
17:41:21 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
17:41:26 <tantek> then we don't need a specific action
17:41:35 <tantek> trust jasnell to edit and track his own actions
17:41:45 <tantek> no need to micromanage
17:41:49 <tantek> thanks jasnell
17:41:54 <eprodrom> bblfish: start working on the api, then come back and find what's not used
17:42:07 <jasnell> no objection
17:42:12 <eprodrom> PROPOSED: close issue-22
17:42:19 <elf-pavlik> +1 for no description
17:42:19 <jasnell> q+
17:42:20 <tantek> +1 to reject 22
17:42:24 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: close issue-22
17:42:31 <Arnaud> ack jasnell
17:42:44 <eprodrom> jasnell: issue-23, backwards compatibility is already handled in the current spec
17:42:56 <eprodrom> jasnell: issue doesn't discuss why the current text is not adequate
17:43:03 <tantek> reject issue-23 due to lack of specific backcompat problem
17:43:05 <elf-pavlik> +1 close it for no description and duplicate of issue-7
17:43:06 <Zakim> +??P13
17:43:07 <ben_thatmustbeme> reject issue-23
17:43:07 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we also have issue-7
17:43:11 <Tsyesika> Zakim, ??P13 is me
17:43:11 <Zakim> +Tsyesika; got it
17:43:14 <Tsyesika> sorry about that
17:43:15 <tantek> spec already has a section on backcompat
17:43:18 <Tsyesika> Zakim, mute me
17:43:18 <Zakim> Tsyesika was already muted, Tsyesika
17:43:23 <eprodrom> PROPOSED: close issue-23
17:43:25 <tantek> +1 reject 23 insufficient information
17:43:28 <elf-pavlik> close 23
17:43:31 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1 to reject-23
17:43:32 <eprodrom> +1
17:43:42 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: close issue-23
17:44:04 <elf-pavlik> API
17:44:05 <bblfish> Issue-2$?
17:44:05 <trackbot> Issue-2 -- What namespace should the Activity Streams 2.0 specification use? -- closed
17:44:05 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/2
17:44:09 <bblfish> Issue-24?
17:44:09 <trackbot> Issue-24 -- Do we put requirement on supporting static websites? -- raised
17:44:09 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/24
17:44:19 <eprodrom> jasnell: issue-24, is this related to AS2.0?
17:44:20 <elf-pavlik> q+ re issue-24
17:44:38 <eprodrom> tantek: I thought that issue-24 was covered at F2F
17:44:54 <bblfish> q?
17:45:01 <bblfish> q+
17:45:01 <eprodrom> tantek: anything we develop for API must support static web sites
17:45:03 <eprodrom> q+
17:45:06 <Arnaud> ack elf-pavlik
17:45:07 <Zakim> elf-pavlik, you wanted to discuss issue-24
17:45:13 <jasnell> recommend closing issue-24
17:45:28 <sandro> Not sure what was meant by "accepted".    I don't agree this is a confirmed requirement.
17:45:32 <cwebber2> I don't think we should
17:45:34 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik: I raised this issue because we should decide if it was accepted
17:45:37 <cwebber2> -1
17:45:42 <cwebber2> how could a static site work with an api
17:45:55 <tantek> cwebber2 several work with micropub *today*
17:45:58 <tantek> that's the point
17:46:08 <tantek> we've figured out how to make static sites work with an API
17:46:09 <eprodrom> Arnaud: please mark issues as API, AS 2.0, or Federation
17:46:13 <jasnell> +1 to closing it
17:46:28 <cwebber2> tantek: I'd be interested in finding out how :)
17:46:33 <eprodrom> q+
17:46:43 <eprodrom> jasnell: API should be agnostic
17:46:45 <tantek> jasnell: API should be agnostic as to whether website is static or not
17:46:47 <cwebber2> I'm a bit worried
17:46:48 <bret> I publish consumable social data with a static website currently
17:46:51 <tantek> jasnell: API should be able to support it
17:47:03 <cwebber2> we have 10 minutes left and I think there's a lot left on the agenda, and we've mostly communicated about communicating so far in this meeting
17:47:10 <bblfish> The issue should define what a static web site is
17:47:13 <eprodrom> elf-pavlik: AS2.0 requires content negotiation at least
17:47:15 <Arnaud> PROPOSED: Close ISSUE-24, there is no special requirement on static sites
17:47:24 <eprodrom> +1
17:47:25 <sandro> +1
17:47:27 <jasnell> +1 to close it
17:47:32 <tantek> -1 keep it open because clearly we disagree
17:47:37 <cwebber2> +1 close it
17:47:38 <sandro> requirement *for*
17:47:42 <tantek> thus it is an issue
17:47:57 <tantek> jasnell and myself think API should support static sites
17:48:06 <jasnell> tantek: perhaps the issue needs to be better clarified
17:48:08 <tantek> wheras elf-pavlik (and others?) don't
17:48:10 <eprodrom> q+
17:48:57 <eprodrom> tantek: if we disagree, we should open the issue
17:49:02 <elf-pavlik> -1 we need to clarify our position
17:49:11 <Arnaud> ack bblfish
17:49:11 <eprodrom> Arnaud: elf-pavlik can close an issue he has raised
17:49:29 <tantek> bblfish here is definition of a static website: https://indiewebcamp.com/static-site
17:49:37 <tantek> which is linked from the issue
17:49:39 <elf-pavlik> adding to issue as note
17:49:39 <tantek> issue-24
17:49:39 <trackbot> issue-24 -- Do we put requirement on supporting static websites? -- raised
17:49:39 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/24
17:49:40 <eprodrom> bblfish: if we use the proposal, we should define a static web site
17:49:45 <ben_thatmustbeme> There is clearly more discussion needed here, issue should be opened
17:49:51 <ben_thatmustbeme> +1 to open
17:49:52 <jasnell> ok, if there's disagreement, I'll change mine to a -1 to closing it. +1 to opening the issue so it can be discussed further
17:50:04 <eprodrom> +1 to open
17:50:05 <Arnaud> q?
17:50:10 <Arnaud> ack eprodrom
17:50:25 <elf-pavlik> delegation
17:50:30 <elf-pavlik> +1 open
17:50:38 <tantek> eprodrom: I find it hard to understand how we could have an API that was read-only that was useful
17:50:39 <eprodrom> PROPOSED: open issue-24
17:50:50 <eprodrom> RESOLVED: open issue-24
17:50:58 <ben_thatmustbeme> delegation, using follow-your-nose would indeed allow static sites
17:51:08 <tantek> oh boy. definitely think this deserves opening
17:51:13 <elf-pavlik> issue-21
17:51:13 <trackbot> issue-21 -- Role of JSON-LD and RDF -- closed
17:51:13 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/issues/21
17:51:25 <cwebber2> +q
17:51:27 <elf-pavlik> <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2015/03/17-social-irc#T18-15-09
17:51:27 <elf-pavlik> <rhiaro> RESOLVED: Close ISSUE-21 re-affirming we'll use JSON-LD as in the current draft, with a normative context, and let people bring up sub-issues
17:51:38 <harry> harry has joined #social
17:51:44 <cwebber2> elf-pavlik: ++
17:51:50 <eprodrom> q+
17:51:58 <tantek> elf-pavlik, but this is about *API*, not AS
17:52:04 <harry> hi everyone, I'm at Google and can't talk, but can answer questions in IRC.
17:52:05 <Arnaud> ack cwebber2
17:52:11 <harry> Apologies for the excessive travelling in the last two weeks
17:52:14 <Loqi> harry: elf-pavlik left you a message 40 minutes ago: we need action-14 reloved http://socialwg.indiewebcamp.com/irc/social/2015-03-31/line/1427821927462
17:52:16 <eprodrom> jasnell: with issue-25, we have only one syntax to ship, so it's not clear why we'd use multiple syntaxes
17:52:31 <eprodrom> cwebber2: will we get to any other agenda items?
17:52:42 <harry> My feeling is only ship JSON-based syntax, but URL-based encoding is a URL formation question, and so would count as something to ship
17:52:48 <tantek> jasnell, see above, this issue about is about *API* specifically, not AS (which "has only one syntax to ship")
17:52:51 <elf-pavlik> Arnaud: people should be careful and very specific about issues they raise
17:52:59 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we should be careful with the issues we raise, and have a proposed resolution
17:53:04 <harry> HTML-based syntaxes (ala microformats2) have I believe the ability to be transformed to JSON programmatically
17:53:07 <tantek> propose opening issue 25
17:53:08 <jasnell> tantek: understood, just need to figure out the minimal requirement here
17:53:14 <harry> (would need tantek to step in to clarify)
17:53:17 <eprodrom> Arnaud: I have proposed at the F2F to do 1.5h meetings
17:53:24 <tantek> jasnell, method to minimum requirement may mean a smaller syntax
17:53:30 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we can't progress unless we close issues
17:53:31 <AnnB> +1 on extending call, at least sometimes
17:53:35 <jasnell> proposal: we extend this call 30 minutes
17:53:37 <tantek> +1 on extending call
17:53:41 <elf-pavlik> +1 extending
17:53:48 <tantek> for next week
17:53:50 <eprodrom> I have a 2PM call, so I'll need someone to take over for me.
17:53:56 <cwebber2> I'd be happy extending, but
17:54:04 <cwebber2> I really wanted eprodrom to be on the stuff for the activitypump stuff :P
17:54:08 <cwebber2> if he can't make it
17:54:11 <cwebber2> we'll have to do next week
17:54:12 <AnnB> maybe announce for next time that it'll be an extended call?  so people can plan it into their calendars
17:54:13 <tantek> Arnaud, to be fair, we've had a backlog of raised issues for weeks
17:54:22 <eprodrom> cwebber2: can we defer until next?
17:54:29 <wilkie> eprodrom: I can do take over if necessary
17:54:31 <cwebber2> eprodrom: we can totally defer :)
17:54:41 <eprodrom> Arnaud: we are having a hard time with this group because of lots of different channels
17:54:43 <tantek> eprodrom, proposal is to extend call NEXT week
17:54:46 <Arnaud> q?
17:54:48 <cwebber2> Arnaud: you are doing a great job btw, thanks
17:54:51 <AnnB> you're doing a GREAT job, Arnaud
17:54:52 <Tsyesika> I don't think extensions are always needed, maybe just try and get through things a bit quicker
17:54:52 <Arnaud> ack cwebber2
17:54:52 <harry> I think we have only 3 channels: IRC, wiki, email
17:54:55 <jasnell> +1 to an extended call next week
17:54:56 <eprodrom> tantek: let's extend the call next week
17:54:57 <elf-pavlik> Arnaud++
17:54:57 <cwebber2> -1q
17:54:58 <harry> everything else is not a channel
17:54:58 <Loqi> Arnaud has 10 karma
17:54:58 <cwebber2> -q
17:54:59 <Arnaud> ack cwebber
17:55:04 <sandro> +1 extended calls, starting next week
17:55:04 <cwebber2> I'm done already :)
17:55:07 <Tsyesika> it seems like we spent 10 minutes on if we should use github or tracker
17:55:08 <Arnaud> ack eprodrom
17:55:14 <jasnell> q+
17:55:19 <Arnaud> ack jasnell
17:55:22 <elf-pavlik> eprodrom++
17:55:24 <Loqi> eprodrom has 11 karma
17:55:25 <AnnB> eprodrom might need help chairing, if it's a longer meeting
17:55:26 <tantek> PROPOSAL: 1.5 hr telcon next week
17:55:35 <AnnB> make it 2, tantek
17:55:37 <elf-pavlik> +1
17:55:50 <AnnB> can always end early if everyone gets too tired
17:56:00 <eprodrom> jasnell: it would be good if the conversation could be raised on the wiki where everyone could respond
17:56:26 <jasnell> I can't be on IRC all the time
17:56:38 <elf-pavlik> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-31#Tracking_of_Actions_and_Issues
17:56:56 <elf-pavlik> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-socialweb/2015Mar/0230.html
17:56:57 <eprodrom> Arnaud: make specific proposals on the mailing list, to make these happen
17:57:08 <tantek> can we start with 1.5?
17:57:12 <eprodrom> wilkie: if you could take over here I'd appreciate it
17:57:24 <elf-pavlik> +1000 *more work prior to the meeting*
17:57:24 <wilkie> will do
17:57:34 <cwebber2> can I make a proposal for doing less meeting/communication time about communication time, or is that meta
17:57:36 <eprodrom> scribenick: wilkie
17:57:38 <cwebber2> are we at risk of meta-recursion
17:57:43 <ben_thatmustbeme> more work prior to the meeting is indeed important
17:57:46 <eprodrom> Thanks all, sorry for the quick cut-out
17:57:47 <Tsyesika> cwebber2++
17:57:49 <Loqi> cwebber2 has 24 karma
17:57:50 <Zakim> -eprodrom
17:57:52 <wilkie> Arnaud: people need to pay attention and respond to the issues
17:57:58 <ben_thatmustbeme> still have an open proposal
17:58:00 <harry> My feeling is to really think before bringing up issues, we bring them up often when they are pseudo-issues or clearly out of scope
17:58:04 <wilkie> tantek: I propose we do end the call
17:58:06 <elf-pavlik> and work more *prior* to the meeting
17:58:07 <Zakim> -bblfish
17:58:10 <harry> I would defer some of these issues to the editor
17:58:11 <bblfish> got to go
17:58:13 <wilkie> Arnaud: I agree. is there anything else or do we call it a day now?
17:58:14 <harry> as github comments
17:58:34 <wilkie> jasnell: the next item is very specific and may be very in depth, it may be best to postpone discussion
17:58:44 <cwebber2> Arnaud: how can we help as community members
17:58:45 <cwebber2> ?
17:58:47 <wilkie> Arnaud: ok. we need to be, as a group, more effective at addressing this
17:58:48 <cwebber2> to keep things on board?
17:59:00 <elf-pavlik> let's continue over mailing list and IRC with https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-03-31#Defining_and_documenting_WG_workflows ?
17:59:08 <Zakim> -Sandro
17:59:12 <Zakim> -Tsyesika.a
17:59:17 <tantek> thanks eprodrom, wilkie for scribing
17:59:20 <wilkie> Arnaud: let's call it a day. thank you evan for scribing. thanks for joining. let's try to get together and make progress.
17:59:24 <Zakim> -jasnell
17:59:26 <elf-pavlik> Arnaud++
17:59:27 <Loqi> Arnaud has 11 karma
17:59:28 <Zakim> -tantek
17:59:30 <Zakim> -Ann
17:59:30 <Zakim> -Arnaud
17:59:32 <Zakim> -ben_thatmustbeme
17:59:33 <Zakim> -wilkie
17:59:48 <Zakim> -cwebber2
18:00:00 <Zakim> -bret
18:00:12 <Zakim> -elf-pavlik
18:03:31 <elf-pavlik> action-52
18:03:31 <trackbot> action-52 -- Harry Halpin to Discuss re github -- due 2015-03-25 -- OPEN
18:03:31 <trackbot> http://www.w3.org/Social/track/actions/52
18:03:34 <elf-pavlik> harry, ?
18:03:48 <harry> yep, we can move things over, but I don't run the W3C github, Robin Berjon does.
18:03:55 <harry> I'll ask him to setup a /social space for each of our specs
18:04:21 <elf-pavlik> he can create a team there
18:04:35 <elf-pavlik> and then we can move existing or create new repositories
18:04:43 <harry> Yep, who wants to be on that github team?
18:05:13 <elf-pavlik> jasnell, can you imagine moving some of the ISSUEs from W3C tracker to github? we will encourage everyone to engage there but will cut on this time consuming process
18:05:31 <elf-pavlik> harry, all WG and IG members with github accounts
18:05:42 <harry> ok, I'll send an email asking for these on a wiki list
18:05:45 <jasnell> it's going to be just as time consuming. It doesn't matter where the issues are recorded if folks aren't looking at them and discussing them
18:06:09 <elf-pavlik> jasnell, i agree that we need to give each other feedback
18:06:19 <elf-pavlik> but W3C tracker ISSUE just adds overhead
18:06:23 <elf-pavlik> let's at lest use ACTION
18:06:25 <jasnell> and it needs to come from more than just the same very small number of people
18:06:31 <elf-pavlik> so we don't have this formal PROPOSE open PROPOSE close
18:06:47 <tantek> those are all just shortcuts for trackbot to edit tracker
18:06:58 <tantek> they're in theory supposed to help
18:06:59 <jasnell> and it needs to be focused on specific technical issues rather than high level data modeling and process type questions. We need to start dealing with specifics or we are wasting time
18:07:05 <elf-pavlik> http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc
18:07:32 <elf-pavlik> harry, jasnell do you joine IG call tomorrow? ping AnnB
18:07:36 <harry> yep
18:08:05 <jasnell> I have a standing conflict for that time slot that I'm unable to get out of
18:08:07 <elf-pavlik> i thouight we do more specific vocab stuff there
18:08:23 <elf-pavlik> jasnell, will you join us in Paris for F2F3 ?
18:08:34 <elf-pavlik> we also have pool to change IG telecon time
18:09:36 <tantek> elf-pavlik: I don't expect IG to make any progress on any specific vocab stuff - as that needs to be more implementation interest driven
18:09:39 <jasnell> it's not clear if I'll be able to make it to Paris yet. There's a bit of a personal scheduling conflict for me that week. I won't know for another couple of weeks
18:09:44 <tantek> and implementers are focused in/on the WG
18:10:08 <Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting
18:10:08 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
18:10:08 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been jasnell, Sandro, Arnaud, +1.617.247.aaaa, ben_thatmustbeme, elf-pavlik, +33.6.43.93.aabb, +1.514.554.aacc, eprodrom, tantek, bblfish, Ann,
18:10:11 <Zakim> ... Tsyesika, +1.773.614.aadd, cwebber2, wilkie, bret
18:10:16 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:10:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/03/31-social-minutes.html trackbot
18:10:17 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
18:10:17 <RRSAgent> I see no action items