IRC log of registries on 2019-09-18
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 01:46:51 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #registries
- 01:46:51 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2019/09/18-registries-irc
- 01:46:56 [koalie]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 01:46:58 [koalie]
- koalie has changed the topic to: https://w3c.github.io/tpac-breakouts/sessions.html
- 01:47:08 [koalie]
- koalie has left #registries
- 02:05:35 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 03:35:12 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 04:21:16 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 04:22:10 [tantek]
- tantek has joined #registries
- 04:22:50 [tantek]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 04:30:19 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 05:33:59 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 05:36:22 [tantek]
- tantek has joined #registries
- 05:39:04 [tantek]
- RRSAgent, pointer?
- 05:39:04 [RRSAgent]
- See https://www.w3.org/2019/09/18-registries-irc#T05-39-04
- 07:15:19 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 07:21:49 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 07:34:24 [nigel]
- nigel has joined #registries
- 07:35:44 [tantek]
- tantek has joined #registries
- 08:00:07 [nigel_]
- nigel_ has joined #registries
- 08:31:21 [romain]
- romain has joined #registries
- 08:32:02 [dsinger]
- dsinger has joined #registries
- 08:32:45 [dsinger]
- present+ dsinger
- 08:33:41 [kaz]
- kaz has joined #registries
- 08:33:47 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #registries
- 08:33:47 [iclelland]
- iclelland has joined #registries
- 08:33:50 [romain]
- present+
- 08:33:55 [iclelland]
- present+
- 08:34:28 [JoeAndrieu]
- JoeAndrieu has joined #registries
- 08:34:39 [JoeAndrieu]
- present+
- 08:34:58 [manu]
- manu has joined #registries
- 08:34:59 [dsinger]
- https://www.w3.org/2019/Talks/TPAC/ac-registries/Overview.html#start
- 08:35:01 [nigel_]
- nigel_ has joined #registries
- 08:35:16 [manu]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 08:35:16 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/09/18-registries-minutes.html manu
- 08:35:30 [Travis]
- Travis has joined #registries
- 08:35:30 [yoshiroy]
- yoshiroy has joined #registries
- 08:35:31 [fantasai]
- fantasai has joined #registries
- 08:35:35 [kaz]
- present+ Kaz_Ashimura
- 08:35:46 [nigel]
- nigel has joined #registries
- 08:35:47 [manu]
- present+
- 08:35:53 [manu]
- rrsagent, make logs public
- 08:35:56 [Travis]
- Scribe: Travis
- 08:36:04 [manu]
- Meeting: Registries Breakout
- 08:36:07 [tantek]
- present+
- 08:36:10 [manu]
- rrsagent, draft minutes
- 08:36:10 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/09/18-registries-minutes.html manu
- 08:36:21 [nigel]
- present+ Nigel_Megitt
- 08:36:23 [nigel]
- Chair: David_Singer
- 08:36:30 [yoshiroy]
- present+ Yoshiro_Yoneya
- 08:38:17 [Travis]
- (dsinger presents slides on Registries) link?
- 08:39:30 [tantek]
- hmm I wouldn't expect this to fly because the reason we have so many ways of doing registries is to get rid of all this process / bureaucracy
- 08:39:43 [nigel]
- q+ to ask if informative text is allowed - isn't a registry simply a document?
- 08:39:50 [tantek]
- TBH this is even more onerous than IANA policies
- 08:39:58 [florian]
- URL to slides: https://www.w3.org/2019/Talks/TPAC/ac-registries/
- 08:40:12 [azaroth]
- azaroth has joined #registries
- 08:40:22 [azaroth]
- present+ Rob_Sanderson
- 08:41:41 [Travis]
- dsinger: so which things can you publish together.
- 08:42:01 [Travis]
- .. registry definitions, referencing documents, rules, etc...
- 08:42:41 [Travis]
- "W3C Registry" as a new kind of publication
- 08:42:50 [tantek]
- oh dear
- 08:43:29 [fantasai]
- tantek, not sure why you think it's more onerous than IANA; you could literally set up a form on a server somewhere that accepts submissions and publishes them directly into the registry on /TR via Echidna automatically
- 08:43:54 [fantasai]
- you probably want to do some spam-checking, but otherwise that's the minimum requirement
- 08:44:05 [Travis]
- dsinger: Finally ready to hear from the room!
- 08:44:08 [tantek]
- "you could" but no one has. I'd rather see examples of success than a hypothetical untested process proposal for registries
- 08:44:28 [Travis]
- nigel: definition of registries looked like data... but is it a document?
- 08:44:37 [Travis]
- .. does the intro say "this is a registry" etc.
- 08:44:38 [manu]
- q+ to talk about CCG registries, who gets to update, how are things maintained?
- 08:44:54 [tantek]
- what's CCG?
- 08:45:11 [Travis]
- dsinger: illustrates an example merging the rules + data
- 08:45:27 [Travis]
- .. updates can occur if you obey the rules in the rule section
- 08:45:29 [manu]
- https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-method-registry/#the-registry
- 08:45:31 [fantasai]
- dsinger projects https://www.w3.org/TR/timing-entrytypes-registry/
- 08:45:36 [Travis]
- nigel: Is this a new state between informative and normative?
- 08:45:54 [Travis]
- dsinger: Can't we just publish as a REC? Others say, no a new thing... don't care either way.
- 08:46:09 [Travis]
- .. want to ensure whatever we do has had community review.
- 08:46:27 [manu]
- https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-extension-registry/#the-registry
- 08:46:27 [Travis]
- .. I think REC track does that well. Exclusion opp. is empty, but that's harmless.
- 08:46:38 [tantek]
- q?
- 08:46:38 [Travis]
- florian: to publish all parts separately... then...
- 08:46:46 [Travis]
- .. various parts need different process
- 08:46:53 [nigel]
- ack n
- 08:46:53 [Zakim]
- nigel, you wanted to ask if informative text is allowed - isn't a registry simply a document?
- 08:46:55 [manu]
- q+ tobias
- 08:46:55 [Travis]
- .. if we require them all in a REC, then we have a REC process already!
- 08:46:57 [tantek]
- dsinger we need queue management of q+ vs mics
- 08:46:59 [Travis]
- .. I prefer balance.
- 08:47:14 [Travis]
- .. Rules + Registry together AND both inside a sepc.
- 08:47:31 [Travis]
- .. Don't think it makes sense so publish the rules from the data.
- 08:47:41 [Travis]
- dsinger: Well, the largest registry does it that way...
- 08:47:49 [Travis]
- florian: it's subjective.
- 08:48:14 [Travis]
- .. if allow it in the spec, need a rule to allow content of the table to be updated in place.
- 08:48:47 [Travis]
- .. many of the rules are there to suppport patent rules...
- 08:48:58 [Travis]
- .. we can then adapt our process to match
- 08:49:05 [dsinger]
- q?
- 08:49:22 [Travis]
- yoshiro: IANA is biggest registry... why not use IANA for the registry?
- 08:50:13 [Travis]
- .. they have proceedure already defined. Process could be applied in W3C too. Reuse is good practice.
- 08:50:39 [Travis]
- florian: W3C does not have to manage all registries in the world. Often W3C does normative references...
- 08:51:12 [Travis]
- .. for people that want to do a registry at W3C we don't have a good answer.
- 08:51:34 [Travis]
- dsinger: We *could* ride along on IANA and have them help us...
- 08:51:45 [Travis]
- .. but seems like a formalization problem (not that we don't know how to do it)
- 08:51:59 [Travis]
- joshiro: can be a discussion between SDOs.
- 08:52:02 [tantek]
- q?
- 08:52:06 [dsinger]
- ack manu
- 08:52:06 [Zakim]
- manu, you wanted to talk about CCG registries, who gets to update, how are things maintained?
- 08:52:14 [Travis]
- manu: CCG currently has a set of informal registires
- 08:52:34 [Travis]
- .. extensions to VC spec. WG had to figure out who would manage
- 08:53:00 [Travis]
- .. Decided that CCG (since it would continue to exist) would manage the registry
- 08:53:05 [Travis]
- .. same in several other examples.
- 08:53:13 [Travis]
- .. so CCG now has a bunch of registries.
- 08:53:22 [Travis]
- .. But process I see looks quite heavyweight
- 08:53:32 [Travis]
- .. Turns out we have 32 new DIDs
- 08:53:37 [Travis]
- .. every week!
- 08:53:39 [romain]
- romain has left #registries
- 08:53:44 [Travis]
- .. would be quite a burden!
- 08:53:46 [romain]
- romain has joined #registries
- 08:53:56 [Travis]
- dsinger: To add a new row is as lightweight as you define.
- 08:54:13 [Travis]
- .. We won't put requirements on the rules... we just want you to follow the rules that you had approved.
- 08:54:36 [Travis]
- fantasai: You can assign a custodian... you could link it to a form submit button, etc.
- 08:54:53 [Travis]
- dsinger: As long as it's fully acceptable to the community.
- 08:55:09 [Travis]
- .. The WG can setup the level of review that is necessary or appropriate.
- 08:55:23 [Travis]
- manu: The CCG made a process to put the rule definition inline in the document.
- 08:55:39 [Travis]
- .. Rules and values are together in one document.
- 08:55:52 [JoeAndrieu]
- q+ drummond
- 08:55:55 [Travis]
- tantek: Also got an impression that the process would be heavy!
- 08:56:07 [JoeAndrieu]
- q+
- 08:56:33 [Travis]
- .. have seen many registries go to other places because they say a heavy process and decided not to go there (so created their own registry)
- 08:56:39 [Travis]
- .. happy with what I just heard.
- 08:56:58 [Travis]
- dsinger: So far, havent come up with anything we think needs to be required in the rules for a registry.
- 08:57:47 [Travis]
- dsinger: If you Github or something else, you just need to make sure the published values go into TR/ (W3C)
- 08:58:18 [Travis]
- tantek: That may need more explanation... pushing something to TR/ seems like a big barrier.
- 08:58:47 [Travis]
- fantasai: we have an auto publishing thing (Euchidna)? This makes it easier..
- 08:58:54 [dsinger]
- q?
- 08:59:00 [tantek]
- Echidna is still VERY confusing
- 08:59:05 [tantek]
- and the setup is definitely not easy
- 08:59:06 [Travis]
- .. you could set that up to work for your registry.
- 08:59:06 [kaz]
- s/Euchidna/Echidna/
- 08:59:47 [Travis]
- tantek: Please provide the example for how to do this!!! Don't make it someone else's job to discover it.
- 09:00:08 [Travis]
- dsinger: Have asked, what does publishing to TR/ get you?
- 09:00:18 [Travis]
- tantek: I'm not asking to see the benefits...
- 09:00:25 [Travis]
- dsinger: Let me try...
- 09:00:33 [Travis]
- .. Formal URL, not Github
- 09:00:53 [Travis]
- .. Backed up (redundant) w/history
- 09:01:04 [Travis]
- .. Copies only happen if you obeyed the rules...
- 09:01:11 [Travis]
- .. if the copy is automatic, then...?
- 09:01:45 [Travis]
- tantek: Github is just fine for folks outside of this room (vs. w3.org)
- 09:01:52 [JoeAndrieu]
- q?
- 09:01:56 [JoeAndrieu]
- ack tobias
- 09:02:20 [nigel]
- q+ to ask who
- 09:02:22 [Travis]
- tobias: thoughts... should verifiable credentials be split out? what do you think
- 09:02:50 [Travis]
- dsinger: Have a large registry that is broken up in multiple tables, but it is a single registry... can be as complex as possible.
- 09:02:59 [kaz]
- q+
- 09:03:15 [Travis]
- Robert: Exclusions... simplest I can imagine is a 3-value registry.
- 09:03:30 [Travis]
- .. what if they change one of the values to mean something totally different?
- 09:03:40 [Travis]
- .. if the registry value changes, what happens
- 09:03:42 [Travis]
- ?
- 09:04:02 [Travis]
- dsinger: A rule should be created--that you can or probably CANNOT change the meaning of existing values.
- 09:04:24 [Travis]
- Robert: is there a mechanism to redirect values of a registry into another document...
- 09:04:37 [Travis]
- dsinger: As long as its defined as a registry, multiple can refer to it...
- 09:05:06 [Travis]
- fantasai: Example: 5 specs want to have a dir prop that has these values in the registry... you reference it.
- 09:05:18 [Travis]
- .. If you want to auto-import the values into the document, you write a script for that.
- 09:05:32 [Travis]
- Robert: Transclusion...
- 09:06:06 [Travis]
- fantasai: Can't change documents in-place... if you copy from another document, you'll need to make a copy of your own document....
- 09:06:45 [Travis]
- Robert: you just want to link to the registry values, but not have to scroll down to teh value section...
- 09:06:51 [Travis]
- fantasai: we have <link> :-)
- 09:07:14 [Travis]
- dsinger: If it's in the spec, then the spec will get frequent changes, but they only come from updates to the table.
- 09:07:23 [fantasai]
- s/<link>/<a href=...>/
- 09:07:36 [Travis]
- florian: If it's used by multiple specs, then just have (missed it)
- 09:07:53 [Travis]
- dsinger: Make the rules the least-restrictive as possible, and then see what happens (that's my style)
- 09:07:58 [Travis]
- .. others prefer more structure.
- 09:08:15 [Travis]
- .. If you're going to have 3 values, just put in the document!
- 09:08:34 [Travis]
- nigel: You should be careful about those values changing.. maybe that shouldn't be a registry
- 09:08:44 [Travis]
- dsinger: if its a small set of values...
- 09:09:10 [Travis]
- nigel: What if the WG might stop existing... and there are updates?
- 09:09:15 [azaroth_]
- azaroth_ has joined #registries
- 09:09:30 [Travis]
- dsinger: Might be cautious to add a rule that says the WG should do the update...
- 09:09:50 [Travis]
- florian: Can indicate who should do the update (can be CG, somewhere else..)
- 09:10:06 [Travis]
- nigel: So, you'll need to get permission for whomever will maintain the registry.
- 09:10:14 [Travis]
- .. that should probably be a rule.
- 09:10:44 [Travis]
- .. if it says "the team" might update the registry, and it gets a lot of new values, then don't annoy the team. (get permission first)
- 09:11:09 [Travis]
- Drummond: Hi folks!
- 09:11:14 [Travis]
- .. I'm in DID
- 09:11:25 [Travis]
- .. A 'registry' in DID is a database
- 09:11:31 [Travis]
- .. it's a read/write thing
- 09:11:41 [Travis]
- .. I'm sharing a perspective here.
- 09:11:57 [Travis]
- .. Just want to let you know this was pretty confusing when I walked in!
- 09:12:09 [Travis]
- .. Devs will want to write software against the values in the registry.
- 09:12:37 [Travis]
- florian: We don't need to have registries that can only be read by humans. Could be made machine-readable...
- 09:13:01 [Travis]
- .. Examples: you might publish both human and machine readable version
- 09:13:06 [tantek]
- My other database is a <table>
- 09:13:06 [Travis]
- .. or one or the other.
- 09:13:48 [Travis]
- dsinger: The spec could point to the Github repo... the machine version can point to the other location.
- 09:14:08 [Travis]
- .. want to ensure this fits within the community's needs.
- 09:14:48 [Travis]
- Drummond: There could be more dynamic registries.. could be process overload!
- 09:15:10 [Travis]
- florian: Not sure if we need to run software services to handle things. It's just a file we need to publish.
- 09:15:22 [Travis]
- .. We can maintain a file on a server. That's cool.
- 09:15:35 [Travis]
- .. Don't put it in MySQL Lite 2.3.a
- 09:16:08 [Travis]
- fantasai: No reason not to [also] publish your registry elsewhere in a more usable form
- 09:16:32 [Travis]
- dsinger: Am familiar with systems that only provide a search/lookup system. That's probably not going to work.
- 09:16:32 [tantek]
- browsers can display the HTML spec, browser can display your registry as an HTML <table>
- 09:16:44 [Travis]
- florian: It really must exist in some form of linear format to be OK.
- 09:17:04 [manu]
- q?
- 09:17:14 [nigel]
- ack nigel
- 09:17:14 [Zakim]
- nigel, you wanted to ask who
- 09:17:28 [nigel]
- ack drummond
- 09:17:40 [Travis]
- drummond: My point, many things that are registres are usually database (with programmatic access).
- 09:17:51 [Travis]
- .. would love to see W3C move toward programmable web.
- 09:17:55 [Travis]
- .. it's a dream!
- 09:18:01 [kaz]
- -> https://www.w3.org/TR/emotion-voc/ EmotionML vocabulary Note
- 09:18:02 [nigel]
- ack kaz
- 09:18:13 [Travis]
- Kazuyuki: Example of a registry above
- 09:18:33 [Travis]
- .. group was closed, and the registry not maintained.
- 09:18:43 [azaroth_]
- Another example from a couple years ago: https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#motivation-and-purpose
- 09:18:49 [Travis]
- .. we need to think about who will maintain it when it's setup.
- 09:19:01 [Travis]
- florian: Two downsides with W3C Note.
- 09:19:04 [nigel]
- TTWG has also used WG Notes for registries
- 09:19:20 [Travis]
- .. You write rules for the update
- 09:19:30 [nigel]
- TTWG Update policy is that WG Consensus is required
- 09:19:32 [Travis]
- .. Don't want to be able to update the rules in a doc update!
- 09:19:45 [dsinger]
- q?
- 09:19:49 [nigel]
- ack JoeAndrieu
- 09:20:03 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: This is GREAT!!! Where were you before!!!???
- 09:20:34 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: I second Tantek's concern about publishing to a TR... bumped into process issues.
- 09:20:54 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: Now that I've done it, I know, but please make it better for the future!
- 09:21:03 [Travis]
- fantasai: Yeah... first time's the hardest.
- 09:21:24 [Travis]
- florian: There are multiple steps.. there's the process AND the tooling.
- 09:21:30 [Travis]
- .. need documentation, etc.
- 09:21:39 [Travis]
- .. focus here is on governance
- 09:21:50 [kaz]
- s|it's set up|it's setup (as Nigel also mentioned) in addition to the style/mechanism of the possible registry|
- 09:21:55 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: wiki mentions a lightweight group that's not a CG or WG...
- 09:22:03 [Travis]
- .. would love to see this explored.
- 09:22:15 [Travis]
- .. don't see our group have the moral authority to handle the registries
- 09:22:35 [Travis]
- dsinger: need guideance on what to say about how the registries get changed. A review expert? Review group?
- 09:22:58 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: have already changed the registry.. not just data, but also rule sets
- 09:23:08 [Travis]
- .. don't want to do that in CCG.
- 09:23:20 [Travis]
- florian: Sometime the registry is just used to avoid collisions.
- 09:23:34 [Travis]
- .. in which case, anyone could do it! Very little process is needed.
- 09:23:49 [Travis]
- .. might be interesting to formalize the patterns.
- 09:24:03 [Travis]
- dsinger: also want to avoid duplicate meanings.
- 09:24:11 [Travis]
- .. requires checking by a human
- 09:24:25 [dsinger]
- q?
- 09:24:32 [Travis]
- .. might need to be an expert in the team
- 09:24:37 [tantek]
- Zakim, close the queue
- 09:24:37 [Zakim]
- ok, tantek, the speaker queue is closed
- 09:24:49 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: had a problem with name-grabs and had to deal with that.
- 09:25:04 [tantek]
- RRSagent, make minutes
- 09:25:04 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/09/18-registries-minutes.html tantek
- 09:25:20 [Travis]
- florian: Just want to make sure that changing the rules gets as much review as when they were established
- 09:25:38 [Travis]
- dsinger: Are we done? I've learned a lot.
- 09:25:44 [Travis]
- .. next steps:
- 09:25:59 [Travis]
- .. create formal process text and get your feedback.
- 09:26:27 [Travis]
- .. these folks who've done "proto-registries" can help provide good feedback.
- 09:26:49 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: Let's work together to do the transition to grandfather existing registries?
- 09:27:05 [Travis]
- iclelland: On structural changes...
- 09:27:14 [Travis]
- .. if I want to delete a column
- 09:27:27 [Travis]
- .. what would the rules be like to do this? Esp. if it might be referenced?
- 09:27:55 [Travis]
- dsinger: sounds like: I want to change the registry rules. Will need to delete community approval; chance for review
- 09:28:15 [Travis]
- nigel: Should be good practice never to delete anything from a registry; just mark it as deleted.
- 09:28:28 [Travis]
- .. prevents re-capturing the name for something else.
- 09:28:37 [Travis]
- dsinger: That's good practice!
- 09:28:58 [tantek]
- tombstoning ☠️
- 09:29:10 [Travis]
- JoeAndrieu: Pattern that might not be supported: in progress draft but using a registry?
- 09:29:22 [Travis]
- dsinger: At some point you need to finalize the registry.
- 09:29:51 [Travis]
- .. I want to write this in the process, then to the CG process to allow them to do this...
- 09:30:26 [tantek]
- RRSAgent, make minutes
- 09:30:26 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2019/09/18-registries-minutes.html tantek
- 09:31:27 [iclelland]
- iclelland has joined #registries
- 09:31:45 [nigel]
- nigel has joined #registries
- 09:33:20 [yoshiroy]
- yoshiroy has left #registries