16:01:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #social
16:01:42 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2017/11/22-social-irc
16:01:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
16:01:44 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #social
16:01:46 <trackbot> Meeting: Social Web Working Group Teleconference
16:01:46 <trackbot> Date: 22 November 2017
16:01:51 <cwebber2> present+
16:01:52 <puckipedia> present+
16:01:54 <sandro> present+
16:02:02 <nightpool> present+
16:02:14 <melody> present+
16:02:30 <melody> i haven't
16:02:46 <melody> how does that work
16:04:19 <melody> i'm a little nervous about that  but i'll do my best
16:04:25 <Loqi> :D
16:04:30 <cwebber2> scribenick: melody
16:05:04 <h> h has joined #social
16:05:10 <cwebber2> https://www.w3.org/wiki/SocialCG/2017-11-22
16:05:22 <melody> should i be capturing this sort of boilerplate convo?
16:07:01 <sandro> +1 puckipedia !
16:07:07 <cwebber2> https://activitypub.rocks/implementation-report/
16:07:19 <melody> cwebber2: activitypub is moving to PR which means that activitypub is as we see it ready to become a standard, but is waiting on management to approve it as a standard
16:07:29 <melody> i'm really bad at scribing i'm sorry
16:07:45 <sandro> I was just thinking how well you're doing, melody !
16:08:03 <sandro> s/management/management and the W3C Membership/
16:08:48 <nightpool> i'll take a look when I get a chance
16:08:52 <aaronpk> https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/138 and https://github.com/w3c/websub/issues/146 are the two issues
16:08:53 <Loqi> [aaronpk] #138 different hub for same topic if denied
16:08:54 <melody> aaronpk: with websub we've processed a bunch of feedback from the PR period, there are now two outstanding issues we need community feedback from -- it would be fantastic to get feedback from anybody  using websub, i'll drop a link in the channel, and it'd be great to get input from the mastodon side, as it's critical to moving on to the next step of the spec
16:10:05 <melody> i'm not sure if that's gonna be easier for me
16:10:27 <cwebber2> https://github.com/swicg/general/issues/22
16:10:27 <Loqi> [cwebber] #22 Publishing which extensions are used by a server
16:10:27 <melody> cwebber2: we're onto the final item of the agenda which is publishing which extensions are used by a server
16:11:12 <melody> cwebber2: if you want to be able to send some sort of message  and be sure the other side actually knows how to handle that  message
16:11:57 <melody> ... we  have a certain amount of extension built into the spec already as general extension mechanisms
16:13:26 <melody> ... but you can imagine we have a social karma extension and if we want to treat that on both sides as a transaction, and you would want to know if the other side will handle it
16:13:44 <melody> i missed some middle here
16:14:35 <aaronpk> q+
16:15:52 <cwebber2> ack aaronpk
16:17:08 <nightpool> aaronpk: can you give a more concrete example of how this doesn't solve the problem even if it *feels* like it does?
16:17:13 <sandro> +1 aaronpk this is an antipattern; thinking about fallbacks is good
16:17:25 <nightpool> I agree but it feels like it can be more strongly worded.
16:17:57 <nightpool> q+ to other failure
16:18:04 <melody> aaronpk: this has been tried before but testing for extensions hasn't really worked well, it just looks like it solves a problem but doesn't actually, usually better to think of fallback behavior
16:18:35 <cwebber2> ack nightpool
16:18:35 <Zakim> nightpool, you wanted to other failure
16:18:43 <aaronpk> lol zakim
16:18:49 <nightpool> text-only b/c i just woke up, so maybe someone can relay?
16:18:53 <melody> cwebber2: this might be more important when you are expecting an acknowledgement to a certain kind of message and are suprrised when one never arrives
16:19:07 <nightpool> But this is important for other types of failures as well
16:19:17 <nightpool> what if you try to pay someone, but their server went offline?
16:19:17 <Loqi> http://meme.loqi.me/m/4rYhi14h.jpg
16:19:35 <nightpool> We solved this for Follows with explicit Accepts and Rejects
16:19:51 <nightpool> So extensions which need confirmation should have explicit confirmation.
16:20:00 <nightpool> I don't think the problem needs to be any more complex then that.
16:20:06 <nightpool> Unless there's something else I'm missing?
16:20:14 <nightpool> fin.
16:20:14 <melody> q+
16:20:22 <cwebber2> ack melody
16:20:26 <cwebber2> scribenick: cwebber2
16:21:34 <sandro> q+
16:21:44 <cwebber2> melody: I just wanted to add that one of the things that testing for extensions would allow you to do is not attempt delivery at all if a server does not support a specific extension, which could be important as a type of fallback behavior which could be important as a security-intensive thing if the server does not support whatever you're trying to publish
16:22:30 <cwebber2> melody: for example, if you're transmitting some sort of sensitive information that you wouldn't want it to display as just an arbitrary message that you don't want displayed explicitly if not handled, it may be better not to transmit at all
16:22:34 <cwebber2> scribenick: melody
16:22:41 <cwebber2> q+ to reply to nightpool
16:22:45 <cwebber2> ack sandro
16:23:43 <nightpool> +1 to sandro--just requiring a property on actors already covers everything this proposal could do
16:24:25 <cwebber2> ack cwebber
16:24:25 <Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to reply to nightpool
16:24:30 <melody> sandro: mastodon had this failure mode with private messages before activitypub, JSON-LD extension mechanism covers everything this proposal could do
16:25:24 <melody> cwebber2: the explicit ack might be important anyway because if you do a federated add to a collection and the collection isn't owned by your server we don't have any mechanism to have any sense of whether the add happened, only a request to add
16:26:01 <melody> ... if i see that a request to add a photo to a shared curated album i don't actually know whether it happened i only see the request
16:26:25 <cwebber2> q?
16:26:35 <melody> i'm sorry i missed that last bit
16:27:01 <nightpool> cwebber2 I think sandro's point was a little stronger then you summarized it
16:27:03 <cwebber2> cwebber2: maybe accept/reject are good enough for an ack/nack but maybe we want something else?
16:27:37 <nightpool> In that an "extension" endpoint is a complete subset to having a property, with that *same uri* that just says "true"
16:28:06 <cwebber2> q?
16:28:26 <nightpool> We could probably move to a resolution to close this issue given it sounds like we have consensus?
16:28:26 <melody> cwebber2: i agree we probably don't want to add another layer of indirection at this point
16:28:39 <nightpool> Ah, sorry puckipedia was still typing that when you spoke up
16:29:25 <melody> puckipedia: a while back we mentioned we might have a server actor for server-wide information, maybe for some extensions we can make sure that they are on the server actor
16:30:00 <melody> cwebber2: if we go the direction of adding properties, there's no reason you couldn't use them on the server actor in that way
16:30:13 <nightpool> there was a github issue.
16:30:17 <aaronpk> sandro++
16:30:18 <Loqi> sandro has 52 karma in this channel (59 overall)
16:30:25 <nightpool> and vague conversation w/ the glich-soc people
16:30:40 <melody> sandro: was there an actual problem somebody was having that prompted this issue?
16:30:42 <nightpool> let me see if I can scare it up
16:31:29 <melody> cwebber2: yes, but have not described it
16:31:58 <nightpool> https://mst3k.interlinked.me/@Elizafox/1517781 is the thread
16:32:00 <Loqi> [Eliza 「SHITPOST 2 U」 KSC] Is there any way with ActivityPub to discover what features a target server supports?
16:32:04 <nightpool> https://github.com/swicg/general/issues/22 is the issue under discusion
16:32:05 <Loqi> [cwebber] #22 Publishing which extensions are used by a server
16:33:05 <melody> cwebber2: are we ready to close the issue?
16:33:51 <melody> sandro: yes, we can point to these minutes and explain that it doesn't seem useful for the use cases so far
16:33:58 <nightpool> C2S is maybe a point here we haven't brought up yet?
16:34:11 <xmpp-social> [ajordan] Oh yikes completely forgot about the telecon... oops
16:34:15 <xmpp-social> [ajordan] And I gotta pack now :/
16:34:19 <xmpp-social> [ajordan] Have fun though!
16:34:26 <nightpool> reading this thread/and the tagentially related glitch-soc issue by surinna https://github.com/glitch-soc/mastodon/issues/123
16:34:27 <Loqi> [ekiru] #123 Expose some description of functionality supported by the instance in the API
16:36:19 <melody> cwebber2: the mechanism we're discussing seems to work just as well for client to server
16:36:21 <nightpool> Right, that makes sense. Thanks.
16:36:37 <melody> sandro: the client would just have to know where to look
16:36:53 <nightpool> to be clear: this is the glitch fork, not the mastodon project
16:37:15 <nightpool> ah yes. the "spam" filter
16:37:24 <nightpool> sandro++
16:37:24 <Loqi> sandro has 53 karma in this channel (60 overall)
16:37:39 <cwebber2> q?
16:39:07 <tantek> tantek has joined #social
16:43:16 <nightpool> https://cybre.space/about/more
16:43:56 <nightpool> https://octodon.social/about/more is another example
16:44:36 <cwebber2> topic: account migration WIP on mastodon
16:44:41 <melody> should i start scribing again?
16:45:05 <nightpool> https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/5746
16:45:06 <Loqi> [Gargron] #5746 Profile redirect notes
16:46:21 <melody> nightpool: we have a new property on actors that say "this user has moved to this location" which is just displayed and does a soft redirect and the mastodon web UI  disables the follow button
16:46:44 <tantek> present+
16:46:47 <cwebber2> https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/5746#pullrequestreview-77611085
16:47:28 <melody> cwebber2: i noticed that moved to was added to the AS namespace so this is a good time to talk about our extension process
16:48:29 <tantek> q?
16:48:34 <nightpool> Given that none of the CG members that aren't part of other working groups can use the wiki, i'm still somewhat -1 on using it for extensions.
16:48:35 <melody> cwebber2: we talked about letting implementers take the lead and try out changes before we decide whether to add something officially to AS
16:49:02 <cwebber2> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams_extensions
16:49:29 <melody> sandro: could also add them on a provisional basis
16:50:03 <melody> cwebber2: it seems less provisional if a major implementer releases something while it was in the spec
16:50:14 <tantek> what does "Provisional" mean? that's the problem here IMO
16:50:57 <tantek> q+ to note we should name any "phases" by what they mean in practice, rather than an abstract term IMO
16:51:14 <cwebber2> ack tantek
16:51:14 <Zakim> tantek, you wanted to note we should name any "phases" by what they mean in practice, rather than an abstract term IMO
16:51:21 <melody> sandro: we could make a wiki for the community  group since almost anyone can join
16:52:08 <cwebber2> q+ to suggest a github repo
16:52:57 <melody> tantek: recommend against a  community-group-specific wiki, when the group ends, it's hard to transition things  and nobody has made it work in practice
16:55:38 <nightpool> or having an "implemented" group or something
16:55:41 <cwebber2> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Activity_Streams_extensions#Proposed_extensions
16:57:38 <melody> cwebber2: so right now there's no mechanism for moving an extension away from "proposed"
16:58:21 <nightpool> +1 to extend
16:58:26 <cwebber2> +1
16:58:36 <melody> +1 to extend
16:58:37 <sandro> +1 ten minutes
17:00:20 <melody> cwebber2: Given that people can't edit the wiki, propose we move the extension process into a github repository, people  can use pull requests on a markdown document to contribute and discuss
17:00:45 <melody> sandro: we could convert the existing document to markdown
17:01:08 <melody> cwebber2: i don't think we need all the core stuff, we could  do a document with just the extension info
17:01:58 <melody> sandro: wouldn't it be easier if there was only one place to look up vocabulary?
17:02:13 <nightpool> q+
17:02:42 <melody> cwebber2: might be a lot to read through
17:03:06 <melody> cwebber2: which repository should we use? ActivityPub, New Repo, ActivityStreams?
17:03:29 <cwebber2> ack cwebber
17:03:29 <Zakim> cwebber, you wanted to suggest a github repo
17:03:31 <cwebber2> ack nightpool
17:04:16 <melody> cwebber2: going to create new repo
17:05:42 <melody> nightpool: there may be vocabulary that we haven't thought through in a fully general context, liked moved to
17:06:20 <melody> nightpool: if we make a new repository it should be for general activitypub extensions not just activitystreams
17:06:50 <melody> i missed scribing some discussion about activitypub technically being an extension of activitystreams, so activitypub extensions are all activitystreams extensions
17:08:01 <cwebber2> topic: movedTo
17:08:02 <melody> nightpool: having seperate documents gives more room for adding historical information, context, and rationale
17:09:28 <tantek> oh boy, AP is much more than an AS2 extension
17:09:29 <tantek> AS2 extensions were intended to be vocab only IIRC
17:09:35 <tantek> and AP introduces tons of features / protocols etc. above & beyond AS2 - it's a new spec
17:10:08 <melody> nightpool: movedTo is a first step towards migration, just the first, easiest, simplest thing out there,  when you want to move  you specify the actor you want to move to, the actor provides a confirmation
17:10:28 <melody> sandro: so this does not automatically move subscriptions/etc
17:10:57 <tantek> I'm worried that a partial solution to migration may actually slow down or block a more complete solution that moves subscriptions etc.
17:11:15 <tantek> I realize perfect is the enemy of good and all that
17:11:18 <melody> cwebber2: there was some talk of using a move activity to do the migration and subscriptions
17:11:30 <h> h has joined #social
17:11:33 <tantek> but in this case I feel it may actually be counterproductive
17:12:37 <nightpool> cwebber2++
17:12:37 <Loqi> cwebber2 has 106 karma
17:12:40 <aaronpk> cwebber2++
17:12:40 <Loqi> cwebber2 has 107 karma
17:12:44 <cwebber2> melody++
17:12:44 <Loqi> melody has 1 karma
17:12:52 <cwebber2> trackbot, end meeting
17:12:52 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:12:52 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been cwebber, puckipedia, sandro, nightpool, melody, tantek
17:13:00 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:13:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2017/11/22-social-minutes.html trackbot
17:13:01 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
17:13:01 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
17:13:03 <nightpool> tantek: I understand that, but this is a first step for mastodon's implementation.