IRC log of poe on 2016-11-14

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:08:20 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #poe
12:08:20 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/11/14-poe-irc
12:08:22 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
12:08:22 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #poe
12:08:24 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be
12:08:24 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
12:08:25 [trackbot]
Meeting: Permissions and Obligations Expression Working Group Teleconference
12:08:25 [trackbot]
Date: 14 November 2016
12:08:33 [benws1114]
benws1114 has joined #poe
12:08:39 [renato]
Agenda: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Meetings:Telecon20161114
12:08:49 [renato]
chair: renato
12:08:57 [renato]
RRSAgent, make logs public
12:23:10 [James]
James has joined #poe
12:24:14 [James]
present+ james
12:26:18 [renato]
Regrets: Phil
12:26:26 [renato]
present+ renato
12:28:44 [michaelS]
michaelS has joined #poe
12:29:37 [ivan]
present+
12:29:50 [michaelS]
present+ michaelS
12:30:27 [Serena]
Serena has joined #poe
12:31:55 [Brian_Ulicny]
Brian_Ulicny has joined #poe
12:32:09 [Brian_Ulicny]
present+
12:32:37 [victor]
victor has joined #poe
12:33:19 [renato]
Scribe volunteer?
12:33:24 [benws1114]
present+
12:33:42 [victor]
present+ victor
12:33:49 [Brian_Ulicny]
Brian to scribe
12:34:15 [renato]
Approve: https://www.w3.org/2016/11/07-poe-minutes.html
12:34:17 [Serena]
present+ Serena
12:34:30 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: Motion to approve minutes?
12:34:33 [michaelS]
scribe: Brian_Ulicny
12:34:53 [Brian_Ulicny]
Silence taken as resolution to accept minutes.
12:35:35 [sabrina]
sabrina has joined #poe
12:35:42 [sabrina]
present+ sabrina
12:35:42 [Brian_Ulicny]
Book Industry group has answered our questions and updated Google Docs doc.
12:35:56 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Has everyone seen it?"
12:36:18 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Let's look at the comments in the Word doc dated Nov 5"
12:36:40 [Brian_Ulicny]
"let's go through those"
12:37:13 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Requirement 28.2: weren't sure what display of a work for discovery purposes meant"
12:37:46 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Was about displaying snippets of a work in search or other preview texts (Amazon Look Inside the Book)"
12:38:14 [Brian_Ulicny]
"So this is not a new requirement. Supported already."
12:38:27 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Anyone think otherwise?"
12:38:31 [Brian_Ulicny]
No responses.
12:39:03 [Brian_Ulicny]
"next one is UC 29: about chunks -- chunk A is part of chunk B"
12:39:20 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Bill says it would be useful to support inheritance."
12:39:42 [Brian_Ulicny]
"We support policy inheritance, not asset inheritance, currently"
12:40:36 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Next one talks about not having to repeat inheritance constraints"
12:41:16 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Next comment is about chunk context. Different constraints in different chunk contexts"
12:41:40 [James]
question+
12:41:50 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Won't help when one asset is part of another asset"
12:41:50 [James]
q+
12:43:00 [Brian_Ulicny]
James: "Tree model of an asset tree used in a different project quickly got very unwieldy."
12:44:15 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "My view is that it might be better to manage the leaves than to manage the tree of assets"
12:45:12 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Re 29.4: Identifiers - Using DOIs and ISBNs instead of URIs. Those are impossible for us."
12:45:48 [Brian_Ulicny]
Ivan: "Can use a URN version of a DOI and an ISBN is possible. But not the non-URI version"
12:45:53 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "Agreed"
12:46:46 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Re 30.2: Associating permissions with a group of articles - a subscription model is how we interpreted it. They mean something different."
12:47:21 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Party A and Party B associate different permissions with the same products."
12:47:40 [Brian_Ulicny]
"We'd just express two different policies with the same target."
12:48:09 [Brian_Ulicny]
Brian: "Is this to do with resolving policy conflicts?"
12:48:22 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "Really couldn't tell."
12:49:29 [Brian_Ulicny]
"From our point of view, an abstract product is denoted by a URI. Policy applies to that thing, abstract or not."
12:50:02 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Next one: at one point do royalties apply?"
12:50:48 [victor]
This can also be applied to other media (excerpts of videos, resolution of images, etc.).
12:50:52 [Brian_Ulicny]
"used to have a constraint like this in Open Mobile Alliance on seconds played to inform previewing video."
12:51:52 [Brian_Ulicny]
Ivan: "His example is not a matter of time. Reading 2 pages is not a matter of time."
12:52:08 [benws1114]
q+
12:52:13 [Brian_Ulicny]
"To describe what they need is very complex."
12:52:44 [Brian_Ulicny]
BenWS: "a lot this sounds profile-specific."
12:53:01 [James]
James has joined #poe
12:53:17 [James]
present+
12:53:20 [James]
q-
12:53:21 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "Bill's next on is UC 33"
12:53:23 [benws1114]
q-
12:53:38 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Nothing new"
12:54:22 [Brian_Ulicny]
"That's all of Bill's comments."
12:55:14 [Brian_Ulicny]
Next item: Exit criteria
12:55:31 [Brian_Ulicny]
"How are we going to support the vocabulary of terms?"
12:56:13 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Found some examples from annotations working group, etc."
12:56:45 [Brian_Ulicny]
"All describe things with different levels of specificity"
12:57:04 [Brian_Ulicny]
"We need to determine our exit criteria."
12:57:13 [renato]
http://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/
12:57:19 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Our vocab spec"
12:57:27 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Section 4 includes everything."
12:57:50 [Serena]
Serena has left #poe
12:57:55 [Brian_Ulicny]
"One thing we could do is split Section 4 into a core vocabulary"
12:58:31 [victor]
(I support this first option)
12:58:44 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Another section, 5, common vocabulary for the rest."
12:59:33 [victor]
(these terms do not need to be "non-normative")
12:59:41 [ivan]
q+
12:59:43 [Brian_Ulicny]
"So then we don't have to force implementers to implement everything"
12:59:52 [smyles]
smyles has joined #poe
13:00:15 [Brian_Ulicny]
Ivan: "perhaps talking about exit criteria is premature."
13:00:40 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Better to ask: what is a conformant usage and a conformant implementation"
13:02:12 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Are there pieces of code that do this?"
13:02:47 [Brian_Ulicny]
"So I could say that a conformant implementation must be able to produce all the classes and properties of the core vocabularies"
13:03:29 [Brian_Ulicny]
"That is a conformant implementation. If there are at least two of these, this is an exit criterion."
13:03:39 [victor]
(I would say conformance is about actions. There is (or there is not) a conformant behaviour)
13:04:44 [Brian_Ulicny]
Ivan: "If IPTC uses these vocabularies in its own environment, then this is a proof of the utility? of the standard"
13:05:44 [Brian_Ulicny]
Victor: "Conformance consists of a set of tests."
13:06:19 [Brian_Ulicny]
"The algorithm must exhibit some behavior."
13:07:13 [victor]
(https://hypothes.is/)
13:07:35 [Brian_Ulicny]
Ivan: "we do not specify the user interface. Must produce some structures, which they dump and we determine whether those structures conform or not."
13:08:37 [Brian_Ulicny]
Hypothes.is is an annotation engine that implements the annotation standard Ivan mentioned as an example.
13:09:26 [renato]
Survey: https://docs.zoho.com/sheet/ropen.do?rid=0atbh53daf7b68efb4d39846bf1ff465369ba
13:09:43 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "Next item, is a survey. TOC from vocabulary."
13:09:58 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Which of these have you implemented or plan to implement?"
13:10:12 [Brian_Ulicny]
"This will give us a good idea of what's core and what's not."
13:10:34 [Brian_Ulicny]
"If everyone is happy with this survey, then let's send it out to implementers."
13:10:37 [benws1114]
q+
13:10:51 [sabrina]
good idea: +1 from my side....
13:10:52 [ivan]
q-
13:11:37 [Brian_Ulicny]
BenWS: "Some items will be in a gray area -- not clearly on path to implementation."
13:12:13 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "How about Yes/No/Maybe?"
13:12:23 [Brian_Ulicny]
"for plan to implement?"
13:12:39 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "OK. I'll send out."
13:13:58 [Brian_Ulicny]
Next item: "F2F meeting"
13:14:08 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Phil to send out poll on options."
13:14:43 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Madrid and NYC the two options"
13:14:51 [benws1114]
My appologies - have to join another call
13:15:11 [Brian_Ulicny]
Next item: "Constraint call?"
13:15:25 [victor]
+1 to join a constraint call
13:15:25 [Brian_Ulicny]
"have an additional call to focus on constraints?"
13:15:42 [renato]
https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+sort%3Aupdated-desc
13:15:46 [Brian_Ulicny]
"This seems to have the bulk of requirements."
13:15:56 [Brian_Ulicny]
"See Github list."
13:16:06 [Brian_Ulicny]
"First 5 are all about constraints"
13:16:12 [Brian_Ulicny]
"So let's tackle them"
13:16:23 [Brian_Ulicny]
"OK?"
13:16:51 [James]
James has joined #poe
13:17:04 [Brian_Ulicny]
"Ivan can only do a call tomorrow."
13:17:13 [victor]
+1
13:17:53 [victor]
11GMT would be great for me too
13:18:17 [sabrina]
Sure.....
13:20:05 [Brian_Ulicny]
OK. Same time tomorrow.
13:21:27 [victor]
:)
13:22:18 [Brian_Ulicny]
Renato: "Any last business? No. Then please read Github issues for tomorrow"
13:22:23 [Brian_Ulicny]
C Utomorrow
13:22:37 [renato]
RRSAgent, make logs public
13:22:54 [ivan]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:22:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/14-poe-minutes.html ivan
13:23:07 [ivan]
trackbot, end telcon
13:23:07 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
13:23:07 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been james, renato, ivan, michaelS, Brian_Ulicny, benws, victor, Serena, sabrina
13:23:15 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
13:23:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/11/14-poe-minutes.html trackbot
13:23:16 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
13:23:16 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items