W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-annotation@w3.org > January 2016

Re: Meeting minutes, 2016-01-27

From: Frederick Hirsch <w3c@fjhirsch.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 17:08:40 -0500
Cc: W3C Public Annotation List <public-annotation@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D7AF99F1-F4E1-4B0C-8707-CED4777F9231@fjhirsch.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
correct link for minutes:  https://www.w3.org/2016/01/27-annotation-minutes.html

> On Jan 28, 2016, at 3:11 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Meeting minutes are here:
> 
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2016Jan/0185.html
> 
> Textual version below
> 
> Ivan
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704
> 
> 
> 
>   [1]W3C
> 
>      [1] http://www.w3.org/
> 
>              Web Annotation Working Group Teleconference
> 
> 27 Jan 2016
> 
>   See also: [2]IRC log
> 
>      [2] http://www.w3.org/2016/01/27-annotation-irc
> 
>   [3]Agenda
> 
>      [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-annotation/2016Jan/0185.html
> 
> Attendees
> 
>   Present
>          Ivan Herman, Frederick Hirsch, Rob Sandersion (azaroth),
>          Tim Cole, Benjamin Young (bigbluehat), Jacob Jett, Dough
>          Schepers (shepazu), Davis Salisbury, Paolo Ciccarese,
>          Ben De Meester (bjdmeest), Chris Birk, TB Dinesh,
>          Takeshi Kanai, Randall Leeds, Dan Whaley (dwhly)
> 
>   Regrets
>          Frederick Hirsch
> 
>   Chair
>          Rob Sanderson
> 
>   Scribe
>          dwhly, azaroth
> 
> Contents
> 
>     * [4]Topics
>         1. [5]Logistics
>         2. [6]I Annotate / F2F
>         3. [7]Issues
>         1. [8]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/87
>         2. [9]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/87
>         3. [10]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/107
>         4. [11]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/113
>         5. [12]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/119
>         6. [13]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/130
>     * [14]HTML Serialization
>     * [15]F2F registration
> 
>     [16]Summary of Action Items
> 
>     [17]Summary of Resolutions
>     __________________________________________________________
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Minutes of previous call are
>   approved
> 
>   <azaroth>
>   [18]https://www.w3.org/2016/01/20-annotation-minutes.html
> 
>     [18] https://www.w3.org/2016/01/20-annotation-minutes.html
> 
>   <csarven> I'm in another meeting. re: 5. "HTML Serialization" .
>   Just like to mention that,
>   [19]https://github.com/linkeddata/dokieli is entirely on
>   HTML+RDFa + OA (position quote selector, and
>   footnotes/references at the moment). Happy to give feedback or
>   spec that out as needed.
> 
>     [19] https://github.com/linkeddata/dokieli
> 
>   azaroth: review minutes, check results of doodle poll on a new
>   time
>   ... then walk through the six issues we have in front of us.
>   ... then 2x deferred discussion on HTML serialization
>   ... if time, then discussion of selectors
> 
>   azaroth: other than webex switch, any other announcements?
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Minutes of previous call are
>   approved
>   [20]https://www.w3.org/2016/01/20-annotation-minutes.html
> 
>     [20] https://www.w3.org/2016/01/20-annotation-minutes.html
> 
>   <azaroth> RESOLUTION: Minutes of previous call are approved
>   [21]https://www.w3.org/2016/01/20-annotation-minutes.html
> 
>     [21] https://www.w3.org/2016/01/20-annotation-minutes.html
> 
> Logistics
> 
>   <azaroth> Doodle link:
>   [22]http://doodle.com/poll/m25yrdi3fmne6src
> 
>     [22] http://doodle.com/poll/m25yrdi3fmne6src
> 
>   azaroth: Frederick has a conflict with this time, and thus we
>   need to select an alternate.
>   ... Doodle link: [23]http://doodle.com/poll/m25yrdi3fmne6src
>   ... the proposal is that starting next week, we can switch to
>   8am PT on Fridays.
>   ... any objections
> 
>     [23] http://doodle.com/poll/m25yrdi3fmne6src
> 
>   <dwhly> ... so moved! and approved.
> 
>   ivan: Tomorrow I'll change the webex entry
>   ... I hope it won't force me to change the password and
>   whatever
> 
>   shepazu: I just changed a telco for another group
>   ... it lets you just edit the entry to change the time without
>   the rest
> 
>   ivan: to be clear, we don't have a call on wednesday, but yes
>   to friday ... the 5th of February for the new schedule
> 
> I Annotate / F2F
> 
>   dwhly: Microsoft has agreed to host I Annotate in the atrium in
>   Berlin on Under der Linden, a very nice space
>   ... Giving it to us for free, which is a huge benefit. Normally
>   20k euros. Thanks to everyone, Ivan, Doug and Georg with the
>   connections were helpful
>   ... May 19 and 20th, Thursday and Friday, which implies the
>   days before are for the F2F
>   ... The afternoon of 17th, and all of the 18th for the F2F.
>   Georg has offered DFKI facility for it.
>   ... Slight conflict for the morning of the 17th, so 1.5 days
>   ... Also planning a hack day, but don't have a venue yet.
>   Randall has been helpful, but still looking for something for
>   around 40 people
>   ... If you're looking for travel support, let me know privately
>   ... Does not look like we'll get separate support from the
>   funders.
>   ... Means there'll need to be a reasonable fee, on the order of
>   100 euros maybe, to cover catering
>   ... So won't have a huge pot of travel money, but do let me
>   know and we'll see what we can do
> 
>   dwhly: We also put a coalition together called annotating all
>   knowledge, to bring annotations to scholarly content
>   ... Page with participants linked from our home page
>   ... Aim is to get the publishers and platforms to interoperate
>   ... Announcement is that there'll be a f2f of a large number of
>   them in April 17th, in Portland
>   ... Day before FORCE 2016 conference
>   ... Anyone interested are very welcome to attend, let me know
>   and we'll make sure you're included
> 
>   <azaroth> TimCole: Registration pages?
> 
>   <azaroth> dwhly: We made them yesterday, hope to send out early
>   next week to previous attendees
> 
>   <dwhly> TimCole: When are the registration pages going up
> 
>   <azaroth> ... F2F up to us to sort out
> 
>   <dwhly> TimCole: when is the F2F registration page going up
> 
>   <dwhly> shepazu: I'll do it today
> 
> Issues
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: issues, lets bang through them in 15 minutes
> 
> [24]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/86
> 
>     [24] https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/86
> 
>   <dwhly> ... there is a list of six issues. linked in
> 
>   <dwhly> ... [someone] suggested a list of tags that could be
>   added to the annotation
> 
>   <dwhly> ... there hasn't been a concrete proposal, so suggest
>   that we close the issue
> 
>   <dwhly> ... is there anyone that would like to champion and
>   make a proposal?
> 
>   <bigbluehat> close and move on
> 
>   <dwhly> ivan: what you did is something we should do in
>   general. if there's an issue that's discussed, but no one that
>   steps up, then we should either close or postpone
> 
>   <bigbluehat> +1 to ivan
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: +1
> 
>   <dwhly> ... proposed resolution, close #86
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Close #86, won't fix, pools of
>   tags on annotations
> 
>   <ivan> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> +1
> 
>   <TimCole> +1
> 
>   <shepazu> 0
> 
>   <Jacob> +1
> 
>   <bjdmeest> +1
> 
>   RESOLUTION: Close #86, won't fix, pools of tags on annotations
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: thank you ivan for closing
> 
> [25]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/87
> 
>     [25] https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/87
> 
>   <dwhly> ... next issue is #87
> 
>   <dwhly> ... which is embedding annotations in the target
>   document
> 
>   <ivan> +1
> 
>   <dwhly> ... proposal is that we postpone this one because it
>   ties to other topics like HTML serialization. won't close
>   outright, but won't work on it directly.
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Postpone issue #87, to work on
>   later as part of future HTML serialization work
> 
>   <ivan> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> +1
> 
>   <shepazu> +!
> 
>   <shepazu> +1
> 
>   <Jacob> +1
> 
>   RESOLUTION: Postpone issue #87, to work on later as part of
>   future HTML serialization work
> 
>   <csarven> +1
> 
>   <takeshi> +1
> 
>   <bjdmeest> +1
> 
> [26]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/107
> 
>     [26] https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/107
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: issue 107, opened by bigbluehat, on behalf of
>   takeshi
> 
>   <dwhly> ... we need a way to select more than just the textual
>   content in HTML, for example if you wanted to annotate i [image
>   heart] ny
> 
>   <dwhly> ... currently not possible to include the heart. good
>   issue.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... reason to close is that it's been split out into
>   separate issues.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... it seems like there's nothing more to do, will be
>   addressed with issues to come.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... any objections?
> 
>   <dwhly> bigbluehat: lets iterate on the next batch of
>   selectors. lets close it.
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Close #107, as it will be solved
>   by new selectors
> 
>   <TimCole> +1
> 
>   <Jacob> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> +1
> 
>   <ivan> +1
> 
>   <takeshi> +1
> 
>   RESOLUTION: Close #107, as it will be solved by new selectors
> 
>   <tilgovi> +1
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: done.
> 
> [27]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/113
> 
>     [27] https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/113
> 
>   <dwhly> ... next one is shepazu's issue 113
> 
>   <dwhly> ... we should work through motivations and work through
>   them with user-agent behaviors.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... proposal is that we won't do this because we lack
>   the time and it doesn't really add anything. doug are you ok
>   with closing it, or can you work on it.
> 
>   <dwhly> shepazu: i'd prefer not to close, lets postpone. i
>   think there are other ways we can express it, could be worked
>   into a spec, perhaps not this one.
> 
>   <bigbluehat> propose to re-open if they arrive and are willing
>   to work on it
> 
>   <dwhly> ... as to who could work on it. the guy from europeana
>   could follow up on it. i'd like to see if they're still
>   interested. that's still ongoing.
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: proposal is to postpone.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... ok to postpone.
> 
>   <dwhly> ivan: i have no problem postponing, but have the
>   impression that the discussion that happened diverged from what
>   doug started with, and we need to realize this.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... the discussion i see with rafael and europeana is
>   going in a direction that's different than dougs.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... what i thought doug was suggesting was that we have
>   a more disciplined way to add more motivations.
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Postpone #113, until we have
>   further time and people willing to move it forwards
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i don't think we should go in the other direction.
> 
>   <TimCole> +1
> 
>   <PaoloCiccarese> +1
> 
>   <Jacob> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> +1
> 
>   <shepazu> +1
> 
>   <tilgovi> +1
> 
>   RESOLUTION: Postpone #113, until we have further time and
>   people willing to move it forwards
> 
>   <bigbluehat> +1
> 
>   <ivan> +1
> 
> [28]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/119
> 
>     [28] https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/119
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: next one is doug's as well. issue 119, around
>   having groups in the annotation model as opposed to the
>   protocol.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... again the discussion was also quite rich around
>   audience and access control, which we know is important but
>   separately covered.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... having access control specced in the model was not
>   good.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... proposal is that we close 119 because it's covered
>   by existing proposal for different components.
> 
>   <dwhly> shepazu: i don't think this is about access control, I
>   think it's about indicating.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... nick or someone from H. should weigh in.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i'd prefer to postpone.
> 
>   <PaoloCiccarese> I believe the same Doug
> 
>   <tilgovi> +q
> 
>   <dwhly> timcole: i agree with what doug's saying, we do have
>   the same thing in other issues. i want to avoid access in
>   authorization.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... maybe we need a longer discussion with all the
>   right people on the call.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... if we don't have the right model for audience then
>   we won't get the right adopters.
> 
>   <dwhly> tilgovi: i'm not quite sure i follow. not in favor of
>   specifying access control in the model.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i think this could be taken care of by existing
>   things like tags.
> 
>   <dwhly> PaoloCiccarese: We will need group models, with
>   subgroups, etc. How is a third party system understanding.
> 
>   <dwhly> ivan: i propose we postpone
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Postpone #119 for further
>   discussion and proposals needed
> 
>   <TimCole> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> +1
> 
>   RESOLUTION: Postpone #119 for further discussion and proposals
>   needed
> 
>   <Jacob> +1
> 
>   <ivan> +1
> 
>   <PaoloCiccarese> +1
> 
> [29]https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/130
> 
>     [29] https://github.com/w3c/web-annotation/issues/130
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: next one is 130. at the moment, we use nick,
>   because nick is kind of old-fashioned, so we've used account.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... but there's also an "account" so there could be
>   confusion.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... do people think we should use something else?
> 
>   <dwhly> ... no one bit, happy to close
> 
>   <dwhly> propose we close
> 
>   <dwhly> paolociccarese: can you explain your concern
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: there is a property account, and also nick
> 
>   <dwhly> ... we use account in the json-ld context for foaf-nick
> 
>   <dwhly> ... so if someone wanted to use account, that would be
>   a problem
> 
>   <tilgovi> Anyone want to propose something else?
> 
>   <azaroth> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Close #130, not our concern
> 
>   <ivan> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> +1
> 
>   RESOLUTION: Close #130, not our concern
> 
>   <Jacob> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> "account": "azaroth"
> 
>   <TimCole> +1
> 
>   <azaroth> "foaf:account" : {"@id" :
>   "twitter.com/users/azaroth42"}
> 
>   <dwhly> paolociccarese: i think its fine
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: lets call it closed
> 
>   <PaoloCiccarese> +1
> 
> HTML Serialization
> 
>   <dwhly> ... as a suggestion: where do we want to get to by the
>   end of the charter.
> 
>   <dwhly> timcole: question in my mind is: what do people on the
>   call mean by html serialization
> 
>   <dwhly> ... 1. we have a json-ld serialization by default
> 
>   <dwhly> ... 2. turtle
> 
>   <dwhly> ... 3. microformats
> 
>   <dwhly> ... they could do that but we could provide some
>   guidance
> 
>   <PaoloCiccarese> 4. RDF/a
> 
>   <dwhly> .... that's a bigger thing to bite off, might be
>   critical for adoption
> 
>   <dwhly> paolociccarese: some time ago, we played with some
>   things
> 
>   <dwhly> ... first level would be nice to have guidelines
> 
>   <dwhly> shepazu: solution i'm looking at doesn't ask rdfa
> 
>   <dwhly> ... don't know if this can be done.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i'm going to try this summer to start a spec for
>   html serialization and see if there's interst
> 
>   <dwhly> ... we could start, not sure we'll finish
> 
>   <dwhly> ivan: getting back to what tim said
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i'm looking for use cases
> 
>   <dwhly> ... in between what tim said
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i could see importance of html format even if
>   target is somewhere else
> 
>   <dwhly> ... an annotation system could put that into the dom in
>   a dynamic manner
> 
>   <dwhly> ... then someone could use CSS to style
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i wouldn't even put tim's resrtiction in
> 
>   <dwhly> ... rdfa or something else, i don't know
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: +1 to ivan, having a set of use cases would be
>   valuable
> 
>   <dwhly> ... before diving in to rdfa, html, etc.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... stakeholders, adopters, whaat are we trying to
>   solve
> 
>   <dwhly> timcole: agree on use cases, also in terms of
>   formatting.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... my suggestion is that when it comes time, we may
>   have to do this 2x
> 
>   <dwhly> ... if we get rechartered, might have to pursue longer
>   term soltion
> 
>   <dwhly> ... agree w/ doug. i'd propose what rob is suggesting.
> 
>   <dwhly> ... use cases, how to meet them.
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: seems good. anyone else?
> 
>   <dwhly> ... lets make a gh issue with the broad set of things
> 
>   <dwhly> ... include this discussion
> 
>   <dwhly> ... this is not going to block CR or other processes
> 
>   <dwhly> ... tim can u do
> 
>   <dwhly> timcole: tomorrow
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: there is a serialization tag
> 
>   <dwhly> shepazu: f2f registration
> 
> F2F registration
> 
>   <shepazu> Registration poll:
>   [30]https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/73180/anno-f2f-berlin-2016/
> 
>     [30] https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/73180/anno-f2f-berlin-2016/
> 
>   <shepazu> F2F wiki page:
>   [31]https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Meetings/F2F_Berlin_2016
> 
>     [31] https://www.w3.org/annotation/wiki/Meetings/F2F_Berlin_2016
> 
>   <dwhly> ... i have created a poll, pls answer
> 
>   <dwhly> ...that. is. all.
> 
>   <dwhly> azaroth: top of the hour, lets rejoin next friday
> 
>   <dwhly> BYE
> 
>   <ivan> bye
> 
>   <azaroth> Thanks to Dan for scribing!
> 
>   <ivan> trackbot, end telcon
> 
> Summary of Resolutions
> 
>    1. [32]Close #86, won't fix, pools of tags on annotations
>    2. [33]Postpone issue #87, to work on later as part of future
>       HTML serialization work
>    3. [34]Close #107, as it will be solved by new selectors
>    4. [35]Postpone #113, until we have further time and people
>       willing to move it forwards
>    5. [36]Postpone #119 for further discussion and proposals
>       needed
>    6. [37]Close #130, not our concern
> 
>   [End of minutes]
>     __________________________________________________________
> 
> 
>    Minutes formatted by David Booth's [38]scribe.perl version
>    1.144 ([39]CVS log)
>    $Date: 2016/01/28 08:10:27 $
> 
>     [38] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
>     [39] http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/2002/scribe/
> 
> 
> 

regards, Frederick

Frederick Hirsch
Chair, W3C Device APIs WG (DAP)

www.fjhirsch.com
@fjhirsch
Received on Sunday, 31 January 2016 22:09:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:54:43 UTC