Social Web Working Group Teleconference

05 Apr 2016

Attendees

Present: annbass, aaronpk, Arnaud, cwebber, Karli, wilkie, shevski, bengo, rhiaro, sandro
Regrets: tantek, evanpro, jasnell
Chair: Arnaud
Scribe: annbass_

cwebber2: context: earlier we removed all "un___" words (eg undo, unfollow, ...)
... then tyesika and I realized some complexity ..
... if you had a "create" then you'd have to wrap the "undo" around the "create"
... problem is that you might have to dig too far back into history to find the "create"
... actually .. it's not "create", bcuz undoing a create is a "delete"
... maybe undoing a "follow" is better example
... not sure how to represent in AS
... challenge is to figure out how we do things in ActivityPub
... AS allows you to specify multiple types

<cwebber2> the challenge is you have to dig up the original activity to wrap it with undo

(annbass asks cwebber to amplify in minutes)

<cwebber2> unless you could wrap [undo, like]

<cwebber2> etc

arnaud: jasnell wants a concrete proposal on this
... sounds like cwebber has a proposal .. could you add that to github?

cwebber: yes, but how to handle? should we close this one and add a new one? or ... ??

bengo: sounds like an undo on an activity that I can't find .. I'd be ok to receive a 404 or message that it can't be processed for some reason

cwebber: are people OK with combining types?

bengo: I'd be curious what jasnell thinks

cwebber: yes .. I'll put something in github

arnaud: sounds like a good plan
... any other comments on #301?

<bengo> https://github.com/jasnell/w3c-socialwg-activitystreams/issues/292

arnaud: next: #292
... cwebber, can you describe this? you were in the discussion
... jasnell told me, he doesn't think there is a problem on this
... AS vocabulary already supports everything needed.. if it's something else, he'd want a concrete proposal

cwebber: I'm still confused; did he clarify how he thinks everything is already supported?

bengo: I'm not really up-to-date, but I tend to agree with Jasnell's last point (in github discussion)

cwebber: when I fetch an object, how do I get <time it was done>?

bengo: to me, if something is deleted, why does it still show up

cwebber: I'm not asking that; I want to know when the thing was deleted
... I don't think this should hold things up, but not clear

bengo: duality between metadata in JSON vs metadata in HTTP

<KevinMarks> replicating a tombstone over a post is safer than relying on it to be deleted

arnaud: in thread, jasnell is sugg you get a 404

cwebber: trying to read quickly ..
... he also doesn't specify the time thing

arnaud: he does 2 things: deletes object, but also adds "updated, with time stamp"

cwebber: if you're pulling things from a collection of activities, that makes sense
... yes, works for me
... I didn't understand how the timestamp works for foreign object (?)
... I'm fine to close it

<wilkie> that seems ok

arnaud: conclusion: cwebber accepts jasnell's proposal
... ok, sounds like we can close #292
... quite close to being done with this
... leave AS for today
... moving on.. hoping for test suite update, but Evan not here
... aaronpk -- a couple issues with WebMention, for which you want feedback

aaronpk: we talked about them last week, but just didn't have time to resolve and mark 'closed'

arnaud: ok, sounds good
... any other topics to bring up?
... hearing nothing, we'll close the meeting
... OK, thanks ..

bye

<shevski> thank you Arnaud & annbass :)

<wilkie> thanks

<wilkie> annbass++

<Loqi> annbass has 1 karma

<Arnaud> trackbot, end meeting

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Approve Minutes of 2016-03-29

[End of minutes]

Socialwg/2016-04-05-minutes

Social Web Working Group Teleconference

05 Apr 2016

Attendees

Contents

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions