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