15:44:00 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #annotation
15:44:00 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/16-annotation-irc
15:44:02 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:44:02 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #annotation
15:44:04 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 2666
15:44:04 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
15:44:05 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
15:44:05 <trackbot> Date: 16 December 2016
15:44:26 <ivan> Agenda: http://www.w3.org/mid/013601d256ed$43ed78c0$cbc86a40$@illinois.edu
15:44:41 <ivan> ivan has changed the topic to: agenda 2016-12-16: http://www.w3.org/mid/013601d256ed$43ed78c0$cbc86a40$@illinois.edu
15:44:45 <ivan> Chair: Tim
15:45:38 <ivan> Regrets+ Rob, Frederick, Paolo, Dinesh
15:52:17 <TimCole> TimCole has joined #annotation
15:53:14 <ivan> Present+
15:55:02 <TimCole> Present+
15:57:02 <ShaneM> I will be along in a few
15:57:31 <TimCole> Regrets+ Rob_Sanderson
15:58:36 <Jacob> Jacob has joined #annotation
15:59:27 <TimCole> Regrets+ TB Dinesh
16:00:37 <tilgovi> tilgovi has joined #annotation
16:01:39 <tilgovi> present+ RandallLeeds
16:01:58 <ShaneM> present+ ShaneM
16:02:35 <TimCole> Regrets+ Frederick Hirsch
16:02:53 <Jacob> present+ Jacob+Jett
16:03:02 <Jacob> present+ Jacob_Jett
16:03:49 <TimCole> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Minutes of the previous call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/12/02-annotation-minutes.html
16:04:10 <TimCole> scribenick Jacob
16:04:17 <ivan> scribenick: Jacob
16:04:23 <Jacob> RESOLUTION: Minutes of the previous call are approved: https://www.w3.org/2016/12/02-annotation-minutes.html
16:04:39 <TimCole> Topic: PR Transition Request
16:04:55 <TimCole> https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/blob/gh-pages/admin/PRTransitionAdmin/PRTransitionRequest.md
16:05:00 <Jacob> TimCole: transition request was recently updated
16:05:00 <PaoloCiccarese> PaoloCiccarese has joined #annotation
16:05:08 <takeshi> takeshi has joined #annotation
16:05:15 <Jacob> ... check it if you haven't looked at it recently
16:05:43 <Jacob> ivan: PR will last 4~6 weeks
16:06:02 <Jacob> ... 28 days
16:06:22 <Jacob> TimCole: any concerns about dates if we go to PR on the 17th
16:06:55 <ivan> present+ takeshi
16:07:08 <PaoloCiccarese> present+ Paolo_Ciccarese
16:07:53 <ivan> q+
16:08:05 <ivan> q-
16:08:07 <Jacob> ... walking through the rest of the transition report
16:08:24 <Jacob> ivan: need a formal decision on the last at risk feature
16:08:39 <Jacob> ... sent a summary of its current situation just prior to this call
16:08:45 <ivan> There was one feature at risk, see
16:08:45 <ivan> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-annotation-vocab-20161122/
16:08:45 <ivan> "The use of the ActivityStreams terms are considered to be at-risk, pending [activitystreams-vocabulary] reaching Candidate Recommendation and, eventually, Recommendation. If this fails, the (few) terms used in the current document will be replaced by terms with a similar names and similar semantics, but in the namespace defined by this document."
16:08:46 <ivan> The vocabulary in question is now in (2nd)  CR:
16:08:46 <ivan> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/CR-activitystreams-vocabulary-20161215/
16:08:46 <ivan> The Social Web WG has also passed a resolution recently:
16:08:47 <ivan> "We consider the 12 AS2 terms used by WebAnnotations to be stable and will not substantively change their definitions from those in our 06 September 2016 CR. We expect to go to PR in Jan 2017 and see no likely impediments, given our plan to drop any vocabulary terms lacking 2 impls. We currently lack 2 impls of as:startIndex, but assume Anno can provide them."
16:08:47 <ivan> (see https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2016-12-06-minutes#resolution03)
16:08:47 <ivan> Based on this resolution, I propose that the the WG simply removes the 'at risk' label and publishes the document unchanged with a reference to the CR version of the activity stream vocabulary. It is expected that the two documents will get into sync by the time of the possible publication of the Recommendations.
16:09:13 <Jacob> ... bottom line is in the last part
16:09:27 <Jacob> ... activity streams will likely be in PR just about the same time as us
16:09:54 <Jacob> ... is ok to refer to their CR; by the time we publish our PR everything will be in sync
16:10:41 <Jacob> TimCole: text mentions a concern about 2 implementations of start index
16:11:01 <Jacob> ivan: we have implementations of those features that they can reuse for their CR
16:11:31 <Jacob> ... they need to tell us how they are reporting their results
16:13:01 <ivan> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: remove the 'at risk' feature from the vocabulary on the AS vocabulary elements and publish the document otherwise unchanged
16:13:08 <ivan> +1
16:13:11 <TimCole> +!
16:13:11 <Jacob> +1
16:13:12 <PaoloCiccarese> +1
16:13:13 <tilgovi> +1
16:13:14 <ShaneM> +1
16:13:14 <takeshi> +1
16:13:20 <Jacob> RESOLUTION: remove the 'at risk' feature from the vocabulary on the AS vocabulary elements and publish the document otherwise unchanged
16:14:46 <TimCole> https://www.w3.org/annotation/errata/
16:14:49 <Jacob> TimCole: had an email exchange with Rob & Paolo as co-chairs of existing anno CG
16:15:00 <Jacob> ... CG will take charge of the errata
16:15:14 <Jacob> ... github repo will be maintained
16:15:49 <Jacob> ... will keep the community discussion going, check validity of errata, and develop new features
16:16:06 <Jacob> ... will need to announce this to the CG at some point in time
16:16:15 <TimCole> Topic: Test Reports
16:16:18 <TimCole>  https://w3c.github.io/test-results/annotation-vocab/all.html
16:17:18 <Jacob> ShaneM: manual tests that correspond with our existing tests so that someone could go through and recreate the tests on their own
16:17:34 <Jacob> ... ru = ruby test and py = python test
16:17:47 <ivan> +1
16:17:49 <Jacob> TimCole: satisfactory to everyone?
16:17:53 <TimCole> https://w3c.github.io/test-results/annotation-protocol/all.html
16:18:19 <Jacob> ShaneM: still no final results from Europeana
16:18:30 <Jacob> ... assume that there is enough data in there despite that
16:19:09 <Jacob> TimCole: here there are a couple of SHOULDs that aren't required for the protocol
16:20:01 <Jacob> ... the exit criteria for CR show that all of the tests pass, no need for a mapping
16:20:08 <TimCole> https://w3c.github.io/test-results/annotation-model/all.html
16:20:29 <Jacob> ... big change to model test was the addition of an explanation at the top
16:20:51 <Jacob> ... and the addition of a table that maps from the exit criteria to the test
16:21:15 <Jacob> ... as of this morning, 2+ implementations of everything except specific resource as a body
16:21:28 <Jacob> ... have an implementation of this that we will be uploading on our end
16:22:35 <Jacob> ... have many additional tests for things not actually linked to exit criteria
16:22:42 <Jacob> ... any concerns, questions, or issues?
16:23:46 <ivan> +1
16:23:49 <ivan> q+
16:24:09 <TimCole> ack ivan
16:24:33 <Jacob> ivan: highlighting that testing for collections are special
16:24:45 <Jacob> ... part of model but are used by the servers and protocol
16:24:53 <Jacob> ... conceptually part of the protocol testing
16:25:06 <Jacob> ... that is why they appear in a separate section here
16:25:16 <Jacob> ... with fewer implementations
16:25:54 <Jacob> ... maybe adding an extra bullet will help emphasize this difference
16:26:06 <Jacob> TimCole: will add an additional bullet
16:26:15 <ivan> present+ bigbluehat
16:27:05 <Jacob> ... other than Pundit, we have a lot of features implemented
16:27:44 <Jacob> ... must make an editorial fix for bodyValue (i.e., the String Body)
16:27:58 <Jacob> ... actually have 2 implementations so don't have to take it out of the text
16:28:08 <Jacob> ... however Rob already made an appendix for it
16:28:19 <Jacob> ... so now have both text for it and an appendix
16:28:27 <Jacob> ... so will need to strike the appendix
16:28:44 <Jacob> ivan: need to strike but not an urgent matter
16:28:54 <Jacob> ... will add some text noting editorial changes
16:29:16 <Jacob> TimCole the implementations using bodyValue is EF and KN
16:29:51 <Jacob> ivan: any changes need to be recorded in the document's change section
16:30:14 <Jacob> TimCole: so the editors will fix and record in the change log but doesn't need to be done before Tuesday
16:31:04 <Jacob> ... if folks are comfortable with where we are with the transition request
16:31:24 <Jacob> ... so are ready vote, assuming no new issues arise before Tuesday
16:31:27 <Jacob> any remarks?
16:31:58 <TimCole> Proposed Resolution: Provided no new issue comes up on or before the 20th, the WG requests the Director to move 3 Web Annotation CRs to Proposed Rec Status.
16:32:13 <Jacob> +1
16:32:13 <ivan> +1
16:32:15 <TimCole> +1
16:32:18 <ShaneM> +1
16:32:19 <takeshi> +1
16:32:22 <PaoloCiccarese> +1
16:32:37 <bigbluehat> +1
16:32:37 <ivan> Voted by email positively: Rob, Dinesh, Frederick,
16:32:56 <ShaneM> zakim, who is here?
16:32:56 <Zakim> Present: ivan, TimCole, RandallLeeds, ShaneM, Jacob+Jett, Jacob_Jett, takeshi, Paolo_Ciccarese, !, bigbluehat
16:32:58 <Zakim> On IRC I see takeshi, PaoloCiccarese, tilgovi, Jacob, TimCole, Zakim, RRSAgent, shepazu, ivan, dwhly, snorge, nickstenn, timeless, rhiaro, ben_thatmustbeme, oshepherd, aaronpk,
16:32:58 <Zakim> ... bigbluehat, csarven, ShaneM, trackbot
16:33:22 <Jacob> Resolution: Provided no new issue comes up on or before the 20th, the WG requests the Director to move 3 Web Annotation CRs to Proposed Rec Status.
16:34:18 <Jacob> ivan: just so everyone knows, Tim and I agreed that he will send the transition request to the director on Wednesday
16:34:31 <Jacob> ... have a transition call scheduled for 6-January
16:34:36 <PaoloCiccarese> Ben De Meester just voted +1 by email
16:34:51 <Jacob> ... the directors are trying to make the process easier
16:35:04 <Jacob> ... that is why the TR is so detailed
16:35:22 <Jacob> ... so they may approve by email, then no need for transition call
16:35:59 <Jacob> ... would be good to have most or all of the final editorial work done by the 6th
16:36:13 <Jacob> TimCole: what happens during the PR phase
16:36:14 <ShaneM> q+ to make a blatant solicitation
16:36:47 <Jacob> ivan: AC must vote, we are not allowed to make any changes beyond minor editorial changes (e.g., to fix spelling mistakes)
16:37:03 <Jacob> ... everyone in group must have their institution vote
16:37:16 <Jacob> ... ask other members to vote
16:37:22 <TimCole> ack Shane
16:37:22 <Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to make a blatant solicitation
16:38:33 <bigbluehat> safe to say we wouldn't have "made it" without ShaneM and Spec-Ops.io
16:38:34 <bigbluehat> honest
16:39:03 <Jacob> TimCole: suggest no further meetings this calendar year
16:39:26 <Jacob> ... available to chair a WG call on the 6th
16:39:44 <Jacob> ... may be useful in case anything comes up that we can address before the 17th
16:39:46 <ivan> +1
16:39:46 <Jacob> +1
16:39:48 <TimCole> +1
16:39:48 <takeshi> +1
16:39:51 <PaoloCiccarese> +1
16:39:53 <ShaneM> +1 - also transition call is on my calendar
16:39:54 <bigbluehat> +0 ...I won't make it... (travel)
16:40:21 <Jacob> ... suggest that we go forward with a WG call on the 6th
16:40:27 <Jacob> ... decide then on additional calls
16:41:02 <Jacob> ... only work that will be ongoing is putting polish on notes, e.g., the html note, etc.
16:41:44 <Jacob> ... adjourne
16:42:10 <ivan> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:42:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/16-annotation-minutes.html ivan
16:42:36 <ivan> trackbot, end telcon
16:42:36 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:42:36 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been ivan, TimCole, RandallLeeds, ShaneM, Jacob+Jett, Jacob_Jett, takeshi, Paolo_Ciccarese, !, bigbluehat
16:42:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:42:44 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/16-annotation-minutes.html trackbot
16:42:45 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:42:45 <RRSAgent> I see no action items