All right, it's three after the hour. I'll catch up with Tim when he gets a microphone. Let's go ahead and get started. Let's see if we're up to 18 people. All right, anything from the community that people would like to bring up? All right, moving forward. Nothing, no updates from the SDK call. We did not have one last week. We don't have one this week, but we do, we are, I'm sorry, we did have one last week. What did we talk about last week? Scott or Mark, do you guys remember? Were you to talk about something, anything worth mentioning? I can't remember what we talked about. Yes, we did have one last week and we talked a little bit about being able to get additional contributors onto the SDKs and perhaps look at having more commonality between the SDKs and looking at the go SDK as kind of the current gold standard for how to do transcoding between versions, et cetera. Yes, thank you. Any questions or comments from anybody? Okay, we will have a call next week as usual. I think it's every two weeks now with the current plan of going through Clemens PR around that SDK sort of primer doc that we have or SDK guidance doc that we have. And hopefully by then Scott will have his AI because he's gonna make a whole bunch of suggested edits there. So keep an eye out for that if you're interested in that piece of work. So regarding that Doug, so I did do a rewrite and the advice that I got was that I should start collecting users of SDKs so that we can figure out what people actually want. So we could pull people that are implementing, people that are integrating with SDKs and then people that are choosing to not integrate with the current SDKs and find the reasons why they are and are not using them. And then we can use that polling result to figure out what the SDKs should do. Makes a lot of sense. How are you planning on doing that polling just an email to the list or something different? Yeah, let me send an email out to the list to see. Unfortunately, you can't really collect all the people that don't use it, but go and find potential people that are using the SDKs and see what exactly they're looking for and what they're not looking for. Yep, okay. Tim, to your question in the chat, the SDK guidance doc, if it's not in the main repo, then it's probably still a part of Clemens PR. So you have to look at the PR. It's just part of the main repo. Oh, it's part of the main repo, okay. In that case, take a look at Clemens PR as well, down here in the bottom of the agenda, because it makes a whole bunch of modifications to it. I think between those two, you should have it. Yeah, it's certainly not posted anywhere obvious if you go looking for Cloud Events SDK. Really? So hold on just one quick thing, since you peeked my- Maybe I was just having a stupid phase, but I couldn't find it. Yeah, so hold on. I don't think it has a link. It's just a protocol SDK. You're right. Okay, I will fix that. I will modify this table here to include the SDK doc. Wait, I thought there was an SDK link. Scroll down. There's SDK. A proposal? Well, I guess that does kind of point to it. Yeah, okay. Okay. So there you go. But so my question for you guys is, would it be useful to include it in here in our list of documents as well? I don't mind doing a PR for that if you guys think it's worthwhile. Might as well. Yeah, I don't see any harm under additional documentation. I'll take the AI to do that. If nothing else, it makes us stand out a little more. Links are cheap, right? Sometimes, yeah. Add SDK doc to table and read me. Cool. All right. Thank you, Scott. Any other comments or questions about SDK stuff? Okay, cool. Moving forward then, in terms of going forward with incubator status, I believe we have two end users listed right now, so we need at least one more before we can consider going forward. So please get me your information. Clement, since you're on the call right now, you don't necessarily have the answer right now, but if you can think about any possible customers using your implementation of SDK as part of your gateway product, that one I think would qualify as well, I think. Yeah, I'll hand that to Bahram. Okay, cool. Thank you. All right. KubeCon San Diego, new updates there. I am planning on putting together a proposal. My current thought process is to have an intro and deep dive for Cod events, but then a single serverless working group session, since I don't think there's a lot to talk about for serverless and maybe turn that into another birds of a feather kind of session, because I found that in Barcelona, to be actually really interesting to get feedback from the community about why they're not using serverless and stuff like that. But anyway, like I said, I'll write up my proposal for you guys to consider, hopefully for next call. All right, so with that, any other topics before we jump to the PR review? All right, in that case, first up, remove map. Just double check, see if anybody's added here, anything recently? No, okay, so we only had a handful of people vote. So let me just quickly go through the list of eligible voters to see if they would like to either modify or add a vote. Roberto, did you want to change yours? Oh, I do not. Okay, Tim, for Amazon, do you want to vote on the removing map proposal? Oh, I didn't, I didn't think we had a vote. Actually, you do. I believe, unless I, hold on, now you got me all worried. I thought I understand the process. So if we disagree, you're probably right. Well, I'll double check later, but if you do a vote, would you like to vote? I would vote against if I were going, sorry, I would vote against map, whichever way that is. Okay, that means vote yes to remove map, okay. All right, Doug, do you want to vote? Yes, yes, yes, okay. Google voter on the phone call, IBM will vote yes. Vladimir, would you like to vote? Yes, I would vote to keep the one level of a map. Okay, that's what I figured, thank you. Yep, William, for Red Hat would you like to vote? Yep. And, is that a guess for voting or a yes for the vote? Oh, yes for voting, that's the vote. Okay, Christian, would you like to vote? I have to abstain on this one. Okay, that's fine. SAP, Klaus, are you on the call? Would you like to change your vote? I'm going to assume no unless it comes off mute. Mark, do you want to change your vote? Nope, I want to keep a yes. Okay, that's what I figured. Vlad, I don't see him on the call. No, he's not on the call. And Eric, I don't see him on the call. Okay, so we have 10 to one. Anybody see any way I messed up there before I even moved forward? Okay, just to clarify then, I'll get that in there. So it's 10 to one, so the PR passes. We will merge that PR. Any last minute comments or questions about the PR before we move on to the next one? All right, cool. Thank you guys for that. Let's see, next PR. This one's a relatively straightforward one from a textual perspective. All I'm proposing is to rename schema URL to be data schema URL because according to the current definition, it is just for the data attribute. So for consistency with the other attributes in particular content type and content encoding, those are prefixed with data. So we should make this one about data as well or prefixed with data to be perfectly clear that it's not about the entire cloud event itself. In fact, there was some confusion in last week's call about whether it applied to everything or just data. And we just get to the text itself to make it perfectly clear. Where is it? Did it hold on a sec? Why can't I find it? Speck Jason, speckin' it. Okay, yeah, so the textual description makes perfectly clear this is just about the data. So we're not changing the semantics, we're just changing the property name itself. Any questions or comments on this? Shorter is better. It's a toss up right between shortness versus guaranteed consistency and understanding, right? Yeah, normally I would object because I prefer to make a few changes this late in the game because it's always a pain to go back to your implementation but in this particular case, I think it's worth making this for one change. Yeah, let me ask a slightly different question. Is anybody actually using this property right now? Can you hear this? Are you, what do you do with it? We put the schema of the data. Okay. Do you actually use it? Do you actually verify it? It's for robots to consume on the other side. Okay. The intent is to be able to like auto-wire things together. For what it's worth, we at AWS do plan to use this. Okay, that's good to know. By the way, as a web architecture patent, shouldn't that be URI? Oh, you're killing me. Yes, we should be. Would we like to make that change as well at the same time? Okay, so let's take this one at a time. I know there were some comments about keeping it shorter but were those comments enough to actually object to the PR or was it just, geez, it'd be nice if it was shorter? Okay, not objecting. Thank you, Tim. What about you, Scott? How about rename it to schema? Oh, you're killing me, Scott. I like that. I do too, but the problem is you yourself, Scott, were the one who said on last week's call you thought it applied to everything. Well, I wasn't sure. It could, depending on how you use it. I mean, when I have an integer variable and a programming language, I don't put int on the name of it, right? On the end of it. I know, but then why don't we have data on the other ones, right? Because they conflict with the HTTP headers. So, okay. I'm trying to figure out whether you guys are just having fun or whether we actually want to take this series or not, because I personally am very bothered by the inconsistency, right? That's the entire reason I made it. It seemed really odd that we had the other two that start with data and then this that doesn't. So, what do you guys want to do? My vote's called schema. Anybody else want to speak up? If you call it schema that, sorry, go ahead. Oh, sorry, I just said I'm good with schema. Go ahead, Doug. If you call it schema, it's not implied in the name that it's intended to be a link to a definition. It almost assumes that you're including in that attribute the actual definition of the schema. Yeah, though, that's a good point. Yeah, that's an interesting point. I'm trying to figure out what do we, do we have any other properties that are references like that? See, it is interesting, right? Because things like source is technically relative URI or URL, one of the two, right? But we don't put URL in the name. So I'm hearing some people have a kidney for just schema. So that implies just dropping the URL part of it. Anybody else want to speak up? I think if we're going to rename it, we should add data there for consistency. And I think people got confused before because they thought it's the schema of everything, including cloud event and it's not. So that, I think your original intention of adding schema to it is still valid. But I agree on dropping the URL part. Okay, so what do people think about, I know Tim says he's okay with data schema. What other people think, Scott? Okay. But then there is the problem that was just mentioned a second ago that people will think the actual schema will be right there, as opposed to a reference to the schema. True, but we do define it as, well, yeah, I guess the string could mean the entire thing is. I mean, it's three letters, data schema URI seems fine to me.  Data URI, I'm not sure what you mean by that, Tim. You could have a data. Data is a perfectly valid URI scheme which says, you know, it's right here. You say data colon and then the schema right there. I guess. Okay, let me ask you this question. Not having the three letters URI or URL in there. How big of a concern is that for people? Let's take these one at a time. Tim says no concern. I know there's, Christophe, how big of a concern was it for you since you were just mentioning it? Because we don't have URI or any other types on any other properties. Yeah, I'm fine either way, whether we have it or not. But I think if we change it, then we should add data. That's more the side I'm falling on. But it's also not a really hard requirement. All right, okay, so thank you, Wayne. Okay, so is there anybody on the call who thinks we should add URI or URL to the end or keep it in this case, I guess? Okay. I think we should keep it, but I don't feel very strongly. Okay, so we have a lukewarm yes to keeping it. Anybody else? Okay, one lukewarm yes to keeping it.  Now, in terms of schema versus data schema, is there anybody like to voice an opinion when we're the other on that? I know some people already said for consistency, having data. I think it's a wash. I mean, data schema is in fact more precise, but anybody who works with these things is gonna understand pretty quickly what it means, but. Okay, Scott says plus one data schema. Anybody else want to chime in here? Okay, I'm not sure how to interpret the silence on this one. I'd like to hear some more people. Christophe, I think you said you wanted data there. Let me pick on someone else who refused to speak last time, Ginger. You can't have a high column this time. I knew that was gonna happen. I don't ever, I don't use it. So I don't feel like I have voting rights. You know that's BS. You know you have voting rights. Most people aren't using it, in my opinion. So come on. I don't have an opinion. I'm sorry. Okay, that's fine. Okay, I'm seeing more and more police people for plus one in the chat for data schema. So let me be bold here and make a proposal for me going back and modifying the PR to be data schema post-op. No three letters at the end. Any objections to that? Okay, Klaus had an interesting comment in there about whether it's a URI or a URL. I suspect it probably is a URI and I don't mind changing the text to say that. Well actually it just said a link. So I could change that to URI. Would everybody like me to make that change? Scott at least says yes. Okay. Do we have URI as a type yet? I mean, that's... Absolutely, we do have a relative URI. Do we? We have a relative URI. Do we have an absolute URI? There you go. Well we have URI reference, which is sort of... Well it is already a URI reference. It's just called URL, which is technically confusing. So it's already a URI reference. I thought we want to make it only URI without reference part. We should keep it a URI reference to not introduce a new type and you can make a URI URL with your URI reference. Exactly, but then it's no change. If I was to keep the word link in there would that upset anybody? Well that implies that it's resolvable. That's true. That is true. That is very true, Scott. So imagine why somebody would want to use a URI but they might, you know, I mean... So that's not a link. I think Microsoft uses basically a hash into the known place that stores schema and you're supposed to append this to the registry to go and pull the schema out. Is that right, Clemens? I don't know what you're referring to. Oh, okay, sorry. So, okay, I got confused earlier. Were you guys saying that this should be just URI reference? I'm a little negative on URI reference because I think using relative URI references in here would probably be a bad practice. I would agree. Yeah. Doesn't the first three characters of the link indicate what type it is so you don't have to specify it in the, or constrain it in the document? Then it would be URI. Yeah. URI reference. To URI if it's okay. URI allows things like dot slash foo and that assumes you know what the base is which in general I have a process and you don't. Well, if we change this to just URI we probably have to introduce the URI type, don't we? Yeah, but that doesn't hurt, does it? It doesn't hurt, no, but just add more text. Sure. That's the nature of adding things. Thank you. I missed that, yeah. Okay. So, okay, I think, okay, I'm not gonna push to necessarily merge this this week but it seems like the current proposal is to change this to data schema and change this to URI and add the URI type to our type mapping or type the section, whatever the hell it's called. Is that the proposal? Okay, post one for Kristoff. Anybody, everybody okay with that? Anybody object to that general direction and I'll modify the PR? Okay, let's see. So, let's do data schema, URI. And add URI to type section. All right, anything else on that one if you wanna mention? I'm sure we could rattle more if we really tried. I'm so proud that I abstained from the naming discussion. Very good. All right, moving forward. This was another one of mine. Yes, that is very true, Cohen. All right. So, this one was, let's see what I do here. So, I added some stuff to the primer to talk about string values. I don't know actually what I said here, hold on a minute. Oh, this is talking about being smart in our string values. In particular, when we start talking about serializing them and things like HTTP headers and stuff, yeah, you may be able to use some really funky characters, like new lines and stuff like that, but it's just gonna make life harder for people and that's not the point of this. The point of this is interop. So, try to be smart in your choices there. I do also talk about URI reference values in here. I talk about in particular why we allow them to be really as small as things like just home, even though we would prefer things to be more descriptive like that, but we wanted to be really, really flexible. Talk a little bit about why we don't have a base URI in there, but the other chain that's normative that I wanted to really point out was, in, let's see what property is this, in source and in schema URL. I said they basically must be not empty URI references. Basically, obviously to avoid just empty string there. My rationale for this was because an empty string to me is about as useful as the property not being there at all, but if it's a required property, it makes no sense to allow it to be empty string. It's just, it's completely useless. So, in that particular case, if we're gonna require the property, it seems like it has to be not empty to be of some value whatsoever. Likewise, if you're gonna include a schema URL at all in there, or I'm sorry, data schema at all in there, then you might as well make it a non-empty value. Otherwise, don't even bother putting the property in there. It makes no sense to have an empty string. That was my rationale behind those two things. Any comments? Any objection to the PR? If you'll want more time to review, I think it's been out there for about two weeks. I think the non-empty is good stuff. The language about which characters to use doesn't really seem useful to me. I mean, if what you're really saying is, stay on ASCII, then say, stay on ASCII.  So I'm just not sure if that's useful. Yeah, this is, so we have a few problems in terms of, so character encodings can be very tricky. And there seems to be a silent agreement amongst people everywhere that UTF-8 is kind of cool, even in places where it's not allowed. So you see UTF-8 floating around in HTTP header values, which are strictly ASCII seven-bit. And I've tried to stay away from policing that here as well because being lenient is not all that terrible. But if we want to make a statement about this, then this is why I'm a little nervous about this one. If you want to make a statement about this, then the only way to make this line up with the existing standards that we are mapping to is that we have to restrict this to seven-bit ASCII because that's the only character set that HTTP allows for headers. And so therefore we then are effectively for HTTP binary mode, that's what we would be constrained by. So keep in mind a couple of things. This is just in the primer, this is not normative. And my intention was not to necessarily restrict things any further because I didn't want to preclude someone from using things like Unicode and stuff like that if they really wanted to. And it made sense in their environment. But what are you saying here? What I was basically trying to say, whether it's set it properly or not, was basically choose appropriate strings, right?  This isn't about edge case testing, this is about interop. So yes, you can use- Is it umlaut okay? What? Is it umlaut okay? I don't know. It depends on your use case, right? But for example, Evan has a PR where the whole bunch of really interesting strings. And they're all technically valid, I believe. Oh. But, no? No, no, that's okay, go ahead. Yeah, and they're all technically valid, but it seems kind of silly to go out of your way to use strings like that if people may not be able to process them correctly. And I was just trying to give some guidance that says, yes, you can do a whole bunch of weird stuff, but this is about interop. So be smart in what you do. That's all I was trying to say. If you think it's useless, I don't mind removing it. But if you're Korean, then none of the Korean characters look weird. Right, exactly. Yeah, I think it's binary.  I don't know of any interim conditions. Yeah, that's, I agree. And so UTF-8 has become the way how you do these things and since if nobody treats things in a special way, if you stick UTF-8, it's an HTTP header and then you also read it out of the HTTP stack and nobody looks at it as ASCII, then it kind of works. Okay, so let me ask this question. Would you prefer if I just dropped that entire section on string values? Would be better for me, I think. I don't have any objection. Because it's like you're appropriate and you say certain characters could be problematic. Well, there's a whole class of characters that people use regularly because that's their language that could be problematic for others because they're outside of 7Badaski. I guess that I have no objection. I was just trying to provide some guidance if it was useful, if it's not useful, I have no problem with removing it. I feel like UTF-8 has to be the standard. That's what people use now. And we have to guide people on how to encode stuff into HTTP headers that don't support UTF-8. Yeah, but the HTTP team has already given, like HTTP, two, three, they haven't given up on that fight. And they said the only way to go is 7Badaski. So it's hard to go and override them. That spells time. I mean, we might decide as a consequence of this to say that extensions have to be 7Badaski since there seems to be a strong feeling that they should be encodable in HTTP headers. It would make me grumpy, but it would be the same thing to do, I guess. Well, it seems like if we wanted to head down that path, we're talking about a normative change here as opposed to just something in the primer, right? But obviously, once you get into the data payload, you can't have anything by UTF-8 there, seriously. So is someone, does someone feel strongly enough about this to actually make a PR to update the spec to require UTF-8? In the... I'll volunteer to do a quick PR on this one. Okay, if you guys want to, that's fine. Okay, so let me, I'm not hearing any objection to dropping that string value section. Is there value in the URI reference section? Technically, home is a valid URI reference according to the spec, right? Oh yeah, you can use it. And it made me perfect sense of some environments, but there's lots of questions in terms of, you know, whether people should or not. And I was just trying to find some guidance here. It says, you know, if you're in a closed environment, you know, on-prem, public, private network kind of stuff, then home may make perfect sense. And I kind of force you to do an entire long URL just because we think it's best practice. But if you're going to the internet, then yeah, full URL makes more sense. So do we have references to source field or are there others? I have to go back and double check whether there's another one. I know that source. Let's figure out the one. I think type is a reverse DNS. I think source might be the only URL I have to double check. We have source and the schema URI, which now changes. Yeah, so I think it might just be source. I don't know, is this worthy of keeping or dumping? I'm not sure how to interpret the silence. We sometimes risk primer fatigue from new users. Like if this document gets too long, people aren't going to look at it. Well, to be honest, I would think most people aren't going to look at it at all. They're going to look at the spec. And the only reason they would ever look at the primer is if they actually cared enough to understand the background, which is the whole purpose of the primer. That's the way I tend to look at it. Oh, the primer is to prime you for the spec. Yeah, if you want to know the history. I don't know. What do you guys think? I was just trying to be helpful, but if it's not helpful, then I don't mind removing it. My counter proposal will maybe be to use in the regular spec on the source attribute, say, if you intend or if you expect that your event is being used publicly to make sure it's not a relative URI one sentence. And that's a clear, clear guidance. I kind of like that better. Any comments on that? Okay, since it's my PR, I'll take that suggestion so that I think what I'm hearing is kill the string section, kill the URL reference section, add a sentence to the spec per Kristoff's comment. And I'm assuming you guys are okay with this non-empty stuff down here? Yeah. Yeah. Okay, a quick question for you. On Kristoff's suggested sentence, would you guys expect that to be a normative sentence like with a should or just non-normative guidance? In other words, do you want a should in there or not, a capital should? I'm gonna pick on you Kristoff, since it was your idea. Well, I don't know. No one's going to really enforce it. Well, yeah, maybe a should is good, yeah. Okay. Okay, I'll make those changes, internet. Okay, cool. Anything else on that one, can we move on? All right, now to the main show. Data PR. Unfortunately, I don't see James on the internet. I'll fix it. Okay, Clemens, would you like to emphasize the word briefly, talk to this one in terms of why you think this PR should be adopted instead of James's PR? And if possible, try to be as unbiased as possible in talking about his PR. I know it's hard everybody's biased about their own babies, but try. So these two PRs effectively capture the same rule set. They're just mostly structured differently. And there are a few things that I put in here in the, I'm talking about the normative section. So this is just the explanation. So this is the primary section of what we're looking at right now. Here's that piece that I just structured differently. In James PR, he starts out with talking about the other types, and then he puts the rules for the binary and for strings. He puts them kind of in the bullets that are at the bottom of the attribute. So basically just restructured that text. And then as I was writing that, I found a few additional little nits that I added that James didn't add. The rules that I think is the same. So what we had confusion arose, and this is a long discussion, so I'm trying to keep it brief and you guys can go and look at the discussion if you are not caught up on it. But about the rules of content type as it relates to the content of the data field. And so this is describing what data content type the rules for data content type. So it must be set for binary content and then it must have an accurate media type. Accurate media type then also means that the field, the data field must then follow that media type, which means if the media type is whatever image JPEG, then the data field must contain the binary. If there's no media type available for that, then you can also use an octet stream. If you have a string, then you should set it. And that much should describe the text format if you don't have like including application text. There, James had a rule in his PR where he says it must be text slash star, which obviously doesn't capture popular text formats as application XML, for instance. And then I make a specific rule if the character encoding is not UTF-8. So I'm already referencing UTF-8 here. So I'm already assuming, even though we don't have a rule about UTF-8 that everything is UTF-8, or one of its subsets, or if the character encoding of the overall event diverges. So if you encode your event in Epsidic, if you want to do that, then if that's divergent, then the character encoding must be declared and then the text is encoded as binary, which means if you want to carry some code page that is incompatible with the code page of the event per se, then it's a binary, it's not a string. And then the last rule is then effectively, you can set it for any of the other types, but then effectively it's encoded at the, according to the rules of the event format. And then for, so that's the rules that I basically said. Mostly it's bringing clarity for binary and for string and how the relationship is of data content type to data. All right. Now, on last week's call, we had several people, unfortunately I don't remember who their names were, promised that they would actually go off and read both PRs so they can comment on it. Anybody want to raise their hand? Anybody want to comment at all? I really want to pick on somebody but I don't know if I should pick on. Klaus, you're coming off mute. Yes, yes. Finally, unmuting worked. So I tried before and didn't work. So I asked it already, I think in the other PR where this was actually copied, I think. If the attribute is omitted, so let's say it's then transmitted via HTTP binary and then it comes over as the application JSON. You can't. There's a rule at the bottom that says for using the binary mode of any transport binding it must be declared. Oh, okay. So that's a hole we had that was pretty glaring is that because when you use the binary mode the event format actually no longer applies because there we have clear rules for how the attributes map to headers and how the body effectively maps to the entity body which means the event format no longer applies. And if the event format no longer applies well then the only way you can go declare a body is by using content type of the surrounding envelope and that's requiring you to, so you have to have that field. You have to have that data. Yeah. I think that's pretty much what I wanted to point out, yeah. But if, I mean, a producer does not always, I mean, no which modes will be used by intermediaries, so. Yeah, then the intermediary can't switch to binary. It's that's, if it has an event and the event doesn't have a declaration that it can't do that. Of course, if the event is all fully contained and self-contained in JSON, right? The intermediary can go and break those things apart and it can go and take the body, the JSON body and just then carry that in the binary mode and declare it as application JSON. That's something that it can do. So Tim had a question. He said he's not sure what quote, projecting an event onto transport frame, end quote means. Wanna collaborate on that? I guess my comment is, I think what we're really saying here is that there is a particular scenario in which you must provide the data content type. Yes. And I think there's probably a shorter way to say it.  Yes, so the binary mode, the data content type must be declared. I think that is the difficulty is that we have this, so despite introducing this binary mode came with all kinds of interesting repercussions. For those of you who don't have the chat handy, Mark is afraid we'll have to ship a decoder into the translate Clemens' text. This is me securing, it's healthy knowledge. We're shortened to say the data content type attribute must be supplied in the event that X was like a couple of phrases describing what X is. I think that could satisfactorily replace. Well, that's the things that we do here, right? The attribute must be set, should be set, it may be set. And it's not there. I don't think we need this much text to describe the scenario where it must be set. Okay, so. Great. This is funny. So the obvious solution to that criticism is to have someone offer alternative text. That's right. Is someone going to take the pen and try to write some shorter text? I believe these are the rules that we need. Let's go this way. And then I have some inline examples. For instance, like an event might initially be published at the bottom, right? That is an example. Then I have the story with the character encodings that's, no, no, there's also a normative rule there. So I can see cutting a little bit of text, but everything else. Let me suggest this though. Without getting to whether the text is too verbose or not, what do people think about the direction that Clemens is headed here? Is there anything technically incorrect or people disagree with with the text here? Okay, because if the issue is simply Clemens is just too verbose, I would like to suggest that we vote on whether we approve this PR and then implicitly close the other PR and anybody who wants to propose shorter text can offer up a follow on PR to shorten this puppy down. But I don't think it'd be necessarily fair to Clemens to hold up his PR for alternative text that no one seems to be volunteering for at this point in time. Comments on that? Maybe, I think the cruisin' of the text is too long is maybe a bit unfair, but maybe just the logic is too complex. Like maybe the simplest rule will be it just required end of story or maybe quite there will be, if it's JSON, you can omit it. In all other cases, you have to submit it or something along the lines of that. We'll be in charge of that. Yeah, but there are good reasons to omit it because if you have an event that is self-contained and it just has a data attribute and that contains a map, that's fine. And that actually transcodes really well from JSON into Avro into whatever, into Brodebuff into all the different formats because we have an abstract thing that is a map. And we just dropped that out. But if you want to have the fidelity of the type system of any of those, like you like the Avro type system because you want to have a date be a date or you want to have a decimal be a decimal and you want to carry that, you don't want to lose it, then it's perfectly legitimate to go and bolt it down to Avro and say the body must be Avro but you transcode the rest of the event into JSON because that turns out to be what your intermediary can go and parse. So that's, I mean, there's, yes, you can make it simpler but then you also are trading features. Yeah, that's what I'm saying personally, I'm okay with trading those features. So, Christoph, I'm not 100% sure what you're advocating. Are you advocating that there's a way to just shorten it or are you actually concerned about the actual sort of normative language in there? I mean, okay, so maybe I should take a step back and say that for me, I'm mostly concerned about JSON and I just wouldn't care so much about the other formats. Well, for me, it seems like a lot of things to follow where it's sometimes the most, sometimes the short, yeah. So I think a clearer ruling, yeah, it's not so bad. That's what I'm trying to say. Okay, okay, so I think there's, there is fair amount of consensus that people would like a smaller amount of text. And I'm not even sure Cummins is necessarily against that, he just doesn't know how to do it himself. So is there somebody willing to volunteer to offer alternative text in its place? I can take it right out, if it's the reason you can omit it, otherwise you can't. I'm sorry, Christoph, are you saying you volunteer to take a stab at it? Yeah, I would propose a different set of rules or a set of rules that will also shorten the text. Of course they will, but we're losing things with that. And that's the, having always mandating the data content type loses the ability to easily go and transcode the structure. Well, we just dropped the map, that's just the vote we had, so the map is gone. No, no, the map is only gone for context attributes, but not for the data attribute. Okay, the data attribute, the data attribute can contain a map and can contain maps of maps. And so it can go in and it contains, it can contain structured data. And that structured data can right now, as the rules are, can be going in using JSON and then you deserialize it into whatever your in-memory type system is. And then you can go and serialize it back out into Avro and it will transcode because we have those rules. Once you mandate the data content type, you no longer have that. Which means you forcing the data content type on everything, you lose transcoding. And I don't want to lose transcoding. I want to be able to go and take a JSON object and be able to render that out into message pack or Seaborr, pick up the Seaborr thing and then render it out using Avro for storage. I want to be able to do that. And if I set the data content type, then I'm forcing through all those various steps, the data to be exactly of a particular encoding, which means then it's carried binary in all the other types of encodings. So in the worst case, I'm having a super compact thing like Avro or message pack or Seaborr, but since I've declared application JSON, I'm carrying the JSON text inside of that thing. That's a consequence of forcing is that's why those rules are there. Okay, I get, I mean, okay, what's your point? Why can't you also change the content type along with changing the format because JSON will be then forcing you to keep using it? Yeah, because then you're modifying the event. Yeah, okay. Because you can't tell whether you're using JSON because the other party you're talking to, right? The consumers of those events, because you already know that they expect JSON and that's why you're forcing JSON or whether you are using that just because there's no other way to express it because there's a must rule here. So I'd like to pick on Mark for a sec because Mark, after your joke comment there about the decoder ring, you talked about whether you basically thought people could actually implement this sufficiently. Is that a concern about sort of the technical direction that Clemens is going or just the wording that he chose? I think it's the wording that has been chosen while correct might lead people down different paths to implementation that make conflict with the intention. In other words, give this to two different people and they try to implement, implement code around it. They may make radically different decisions on how to implement. So I'm trying to weigh whether the spec should stay the same and really what my primary issue is around the primer and how that's laid out in terms of how to decode something. Interesting. Okay, because we're gonna focus on the spec. Well, when you have something normative like this, it's somewhat straightforward but it could still be confusing to people trying to decode that normative text. Yeah. Okay, so we're running a little on time here. As I said, I'm not hearing anybody necessarily raising their hand, volunteering to do a whole lot of work and there's a rewriting here. And I think that says a lot. But at the same time, I'm also not hearing people necessarily disagree with the technical direction itself. And so I'm still kind of of the mindset that says, let the PR through assuming people are okay with it. And if someone wants to take the pen to rewrite stuff, I don't think Clemens would object to it as long as it still meets the technical criteria that he thinks is necessary, because that's his PR. So, and because if we hold up this PR right now, my very large ask would be if we hold up this PR then someone has to volunteer to not only take the pen to rewrite it, but do so by Tuesday of next week. Because I really wanted to get this one resolved. And in order for us to vote on something next week, it has to be rewritten and out there by end of day Tuesday. And I have my very serious doubts that that's gonna happen. So in order to not force someone to rush it, I'd rather say, let's let the PR through now. That way you people who want to try to rewrite it, they can take their time to rewrite it, holding out too long, but at least they're not rushed by a four day deadline kind of thing or five day, whatever along it is, five day deadline. And we always accept and follow on PRs to modify this text as necessary. Nothing set in stone yet. What do people think? I need more than silence this time. Christoph, would you be okay with that? Unless you want to volunteer for a change by Tuesday. I don't want to complicate things. If other people think I should do that, I can do it, but I'm not trying to force the discussion on it. So if no one agrees with me, I just drop it. That's okay. Well, I'm not sure it's so much people agree or disagree. It's, enough people do have some concerns about the, the, the reverse city of the text. The question is whether you think you'll have sufficient time to, to do an alternate proposal, possibly talk to Clemens offline to make sure you didn't miss something and that kind of stuff and get it there by Tuesday or whether you'd like to have more time. I think I can do it by Tuesday. Clemens, you okay with that? Sure. Okay. But I would like to force a vote on Tuesday, next week's call, cause both these PRs have been out there for a while and it's been a real challenge to get people to, to read them cause they're non-trivial, but we do need to get this behind us. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Christoph. Okay. With that, we only have three minutes left. I don't, I make some comments on Evan's PR. So we really can't talk much about that. And I did make a PR about modifying the governance stock. Please take a look at that when you get a chance. I think it's relatively minor, but please take a look. It's about people going out of leave of absence. I'd like to try to get that one in there sooner rather than later, just to get things behind us. All right. With that, are there any of the topics people would like to bring up on the call? So, so Doug, what's respect to the leave of absence? Does that beg the question as to whether we should discuss the voting rights in general? We definitely can. Does somebody want to- There have been other people that brought up whether this is the right governance or not. Yep. Yeah. We can definitely look for a different voting structure. We just need someone to do a PR with a proposal, to be honest. That's all it takes. I personally have been, I have thought about this several times in the past, and I have yet to come up with one that I thought allowed for the, to allow for the way this group seems to work, which is a lot of back and forth happens on the calls through comments and GitHub and stuff, and that doesn't necessarily show itself, or people's participation isn't necessarily shown through direct PRs themselves, right? For example, Clemens will open up to here like this one, and people will go back and forth on it, they'll make suggested text edits, and they won't necessarily be represented in a PR account, and I think that's a little bit unfair. That's why we have what we have. But if someone has an alternative, suggest it, I just don't know what it is. Okay. I think it might be worthwhile that we put on to the agenda just discussing whether we think this is the governance he's working for us. Okay. I can have that. I know that there's a PR that I'm suggesting there. I think it's just good to have a healthy conversation around it. Okay. That works. Sorry, I saw those two as being kind of intermixed. Yeah, no, they are. Yeah, because we don't need to keep track of attendance or if we have a different voting system, you're right. Okay, I'll, and we can talk about that in the future. Cool. Any other topics since we're at the top of the hour? Okay, did I miss anybody on the agenda for our attendee list? I think I got everybody. All right, cool. In that case, we are done. Thank you guys very much. We made it through almost the entire agenda. Cool. And we'll talk again next week. Thank you. Bye guys. Bye.


Hi and welcome to the session. Let's work out the following question. The question says, a tent is in the shape of a right circular cylinder up to a height of 3 meter and conical above it. The total height of the tent is 13.5 meter and radius of base is 14 meter. Finally cost of cloth required to make the tent at the rate of rupees 80 per square meter. So let us start with the solution to this question. First of all let this be the tent. It is this is the right circular cylinder up to a height of 3 meter and conical above it. This is 10.5 meter because the question says the height of this entire that is A0 dash is 13.5 meter. Now radius of the base is 14 meter. We have to find the cost of cloth required to make the tent at the rate of rupees 80 per square meter. So let small r be the radius of cylinder that is 14 meter and let h be the height of the cylinder that is 3 meter. These are for the cylinders. Therefore we can say that the curved surface area of the cylinder say C1 be equal to 2 pi r h. We simply put in the values here and we get 2 into 22 by 7 multiplied by 14 multiplied by 3. This gives us 264 meter square. Now we see that radius of cone v r1 that is equal to 14 meter and height of the cone v h1 that is equal to 10.5 meter. Therefore the slant height will be l1 that is equal to square root of r1 square plus h1 square that is equal to square root of 14 square plus 10.5 the whole square. That is equal to square root of 196 plus 110.25 or 110.25 and this is equal to 17.5 meter. Therefore the curved surface area of cone vc2 that is equal to pi into r1 into l1 that is equal to 22 by 7 into 14 into 17.5 and that is equal to 770 meter square. So we see that the total surface area of the tent is equal to curved surface area of cylinder plus curved surface area of the cone. That is equal to 264 plus 770 that is equal to 1034 meter square. Now cost of 1 meter square cloth for tent is equal to rupees 80. Therefore cost of 1034 meter square cloth for tent is equal to rupees 180 it is rupees 80 multiplied by 1034 that is equal to 82720. That is rupees 82720. So our answer to this question is rupees 82720. So I hope that you understood the solution and enjoyed the session. Have a good day.


What's going on everyone? Sam here with late in sports cards and I'm ripping one box of 2021 Panini Chronicles football for Brendan C. So good luck Brendan. See what we got in here. Chronicles has been hitting pretty hard today in terms of QB autos so hope that we can continue that man that'd be awesome. Empty. Here we go. Two autos, one mem per box. See what we got in here. Yeah this is a fun personal product for sure. We've got Butch Johnson on the Invincible Autographs that is numbered 18 of 25 for the Cowboys. Nice one there on the Butch Johnson. Don't see too much of him. Got Davis Mills Rookie, Sam Ellinger, T-Law Rookie, Kyle Pitts, and Derek Carr on the acetate. Next pack. A-Rod Taylor-Heineke base. Got Trevor Lawrence on the Flux Silver base that's pretty nice right there. Trey Lance Rookie, Kenneth Gainwell on the Gridiron Kings Rookie. Terrace Marshall Jr. Purple that is numbered 5 of 49. See if I can get that to focus. Kind of see it on the bottom there. Nice one there. Mack Jones on the Legacy Rookie. There you go. Givante Williams, Clear Vision. I believe six packs in this Luca. Six packs. Next pack. That feeling. Dawson Knox base. Second auto is going to go to the box that is 54 of 99. Kyle Trask on the Caramel Royale Auto. Nice QB hit there for you Brendan. Not too shabby. Got Kellan Mann on the Luminance. Travis Etienne Panini. Antonio Gibson that's numbered to 399 on the Chronicles Redfoil. A little bit of a color match there. Pretty cool. Got Devonta Smith on the Prism Black. Not numbered. And that's what's Patrick behind that on the Playoff Acetate. And Godwin on the base. Nice. Got a Chronicles Josh Allen patch card. 13 of 25. Very nice. Congrats on that one there Brendan. Gotta imagine that's one of the better vets you could hit in this product. Four color on that one as well. That is Player Warn too. There you go. Nice Allen. Grats on that one man. Got Kenan Wangwu. Pat Fryermuth. Eli Mitchell in Book on the Flux Base. And Mahomes on the Acetate behind that. LaVisca Chinnalt and Lamar. Got Rashad Bateman on the Score Silver Rookie. Nico Collins base. Rashad Bateman on the Gridiron Kings base. Kellan Mann Purple Prism Black that's to 199. Color match on that one. 41 of 199. Nice hit there. QB again. Another Mann right behind it. It's time to score base. And Terrace Marshall Jr. on the back. Clear vision. And last pack of the break here. Good luck. Got Danny Dimes. Nick Chubb. Matt Jones on the Chronicles base. Rookie. Fleepe Franks. Kyle Pitts on the Penini Rookie. Fleepe Franks 54 of 99. Gridiron Kings. There you go. Nice. Justin Fields on the Prism Black. That's not numbered. Nice Prism Black Fields there. And Big Palm. Josh Palmer to end the break. That is going to do it for your break there, Brendan. Congrats on all the hits man. We'll get those right out to you. Thank you again.


I will come on to World Cup stuff in a bit, but before that I want to know, I know it's a team game, but what's it like to be the guy to score the promotion clinching goal? Yes, a surreal feeling. Obviously prior to that I broke my foot and had to have surgery on my foot, so as soon as I did that I knew my timeframe for the games coming back would have been short. So I wanted to make a big impression as possible and for me to score that goal and to have that moment and celebrate with the lads and it's a feeling I'll never forget. Do you get mobbed every time you set foot in Bournemouth Town Centre? I wouldn't say mobbed, but it's nice to see the reaction from the fans for moments like that. You've scored plenty of goals throughout your career, but have you ever managed a hat-trick like you did in May and June? No, I'd say that was probably the sweetest one. That was an amazing moment for a person that's had my background in football and where I've come from and where I've started and where I've now got to, for me to have that moment and to have that in my career is a moment I'll never forget. I feel like I've worked relentlessly hard for those moments and now it's about keeping going and making the most of it. Do you mind looking back, telling us about your journey, because we're so used to seeing what's become a traditional academy into first team story. Your course was the other end of the spectrum, wasn't it? It was, so it won't bore you to death with it. I started in non-league, essentially made it to Joval in the championship, spent two seasons there, then I went out to Norway, didn't have the most successful time there and then found myself back in non-league. So that was a real eye-opening experience, thinking I've ruined my chance and for me at that moment in time I had to work harder than I've ever worked and I think that put me in a great place and knowing that I had that fire inside me to keep going and I wanted more from myself.  I've essentially made it back into the football league and from then it's just been an up trajectory because I've carried that mindset and that work ethic along with me the whole way. Having made it into the championship, why did it go wrong? It's kind of tough, I think I struggled with a couple of injuries at first because maybe I wasn't accustomed to the load of training and games but coming away from that, Joval was a squad that maybe shouldn't have been there at the time. We weren't blessed with the big budgets that all the other teams were in that league and I know that says nothing about how you should perform but we have essentially got relegated and it was a tough season but I think a lot of the players took a lot from that season. I couldn't really put it down now. Maybe I was young, naive and lacked experience and maybe awareness of what I needed to bring myself and I feel like mentally and physically I've worked hard from that stage to improve on all aspects. Not many British players head off to Norway that impressive to take yourself out of that comfort zone. What was your thinking behind it? You said it wasn't the greatest time but what did you take from it? I took everything from it. I think once you get to a point where you've made a sacrifice of going somewhere and you know that it can go one or two ways. I wouldn't say make or break but it was genuinely that. I had to do well out there and ultimately I didn't and for me to say that I learnt that I had to take responsibility for myself and how I wanted to go about my career and what I wanted from my career. On the football inside I may have failed but on a personal note it made me hungrier than ever and it gave me a real ambition to really not let things pass by me. I wanted to make the most of a football career because I was lucky to be in that place from the start and for me to obviously get my second chance in the EFL once I did return. I wasn't going to let it pass by me this time. I remember a particular moment where you looked in the mirror at a work with yourself or spoke to someone who said come on you've got a real chance here. You need to change this and change that. Was there a sliding doors moment? I'd probably say there was multiple. Obviously having the start into my professional career that I did didn't help. I've always had a lot of confidence in myself but once you go through a lot of setbacks and a lot of failures you kind of a lot of doubt creeps in. I think from that stage it was almost, I wouldn't say maybe something just clicked in me saying I had to be more aware and I had to have more of a mental capacity for this all kind of stuff and I had to improve on that side. For me from that personally I had to improve my mental side. I read countless books, I saw countless people to improve on that side of my game and I knew physically I could improve. I worked on everything and just trying to be the best version of myself. It was just down to a moment that something just clicked and I thought I've got to make most of this. I'd say I've always had that in my mind from the start. As a young lad you always dream of playing in the Premier League, playing at a World Cup and I think it's always stuck with me. I believe a lot in destiny and my Jenny believed my destiny was to be a footballer and regardless of what kind of walk of life I was living before I became a footballer I always knew if I worked hard enough I could get there. I needed a slice of luck. There's a lot of luck involved in football and Troy City gave me that slice of luck that I needed for a platform to show what I could do. The rest is history I guess. If it had been a Hollywood story of course you'd have had the setback after around Norway and then it would all be upward from there. Was it the Gillingham game? Do you mind telling me about that? Obviously I had a skull fracture which wasn't a nice year so the Gillingham game. Obviously prior to doing that I was doing well in the Barnsey team and essentially we got promoted that year anyway so it was always nice. It was a massive scare for myself, for my family to go through such a period on an up trajectory to come back down almost to reality of where that if I could maybe play football again. It was a tough one to take and obviously at the time I was doing well and the team was flying and I think there was a lot of uncertainty around that for me. I had to spend a lot of time at home doing nothing because I had to obviously recover and just let things settle. I think going through those moments only make you stronger and I saw countless consultants and medical professions to give me the go ahead and once I got the go ahead it was four systems go again. It really was. The first game back and the first time the ball goes up in the air, how did you approach it? I was another moment where I had to, I can't necessarily remember the game but I remember coming on as a sub and the first thing I knew was a goal kick. It was coming to me and I was just thinking before the ball was even kicked. This is kind of the moment that's going to define the rest of my career. It's either I give this my all or I don't and then I think if I couldn't give that moment everything a lot would have passed me by in my career and I wouldn't have been at this moment right now. Who's to say that? It's the case but as soon as I saw the ball go up and it was coming my way I thought to myself I've got to go 100% and nothing and I jumped and headed the ball and the crowd gave me a big cheer and that was it. Fantastic. I know footballers don't like looking back so thanks for talking this through. In these moments when you do look back do you allow yourself a pat on the back? Do you allow yourself to feel pride in how you've approached it and what you've achieved? I do in certain occasions but it's not often that I look back. I think for me I'm a very humble and grounded lad and I know what I've done to get to this point and obviously where I've come from. But for me now my sole focus is forward. I've got so much I want to achieve in football and I'm on the path and I believe no one can stop me and that's the way I feel about my life and football. I give everything to this and some could say it's a lot but I love what I do and obviously being from the side of football where I've come from this is everything to me and I've put so much into it and I want to make the most of everything. I won't let it pass my way back. And while you're talking we're seeing some guys who've come through the academy era of coming in and out and there's these pampered youngsters who have everything on a plate. Are there ever times when they're moaning in the dressing room that their boots aren't warm enough or the food isn't quite what they're after and you sort of stand up and let me just tell you a story? Yeah there's been plenty of moments like that and I love to have that side to me. I've been lucky enough to share dressings with players who have not quite had the same story but come from similar stories to me. I believe it's a special place to be in because you were never expected to be here and you're here on sheer determination and hard work and persistence and you haven't necessarily come through an academy where they've had everything put on a plate for them. They've essentially been travelled here and there and everything's been accustomed for them to succeed and worse you look at my side of it I've had to work hard and play football on the side of that and it's obviously a lot harder than I would say. Sometimes you look at these lads and think they've got the world on their shoulders already and there's so much potential that they could achieve and sometimes it maybe just needs a push or a little bit of a humbling to keep them on track. Now not necessarily now so we had like a work rotation so most of the days I'd be getting up at five o'clock, going to the gym, opening up at six o'clock, letting everyone in at half six and then I'd finish maybe three o'clock. Straight after three o'clock I'd do a session in the gym and then around five o'clock I'd leave if I had a training day. I'd leave for Toro which was at least an hour and a half away. Maybe get there for seven, come back and it'd be eleven o'clock and then I'd go again the next morning. Those were the kind of relentless hours and you had to do but I knew I had to do that. I knew I had to work hard if I wanted to achieve and it was tough but once you have a passion and a love for something you're willing to do that. Especially having come through all that what did it mean to you to not have to wait too long to score on your Premier League debut because a lot of players have to wait a long time for their first Premier League between debut and the first goal so what did that mean for you scoring on your Premier League debut? It meant everything. I felt like it was, I think I say this a lot but it was like a combination of all the hard work and the graft I've put in to get me to this point and for me to score on my debut. I just felt all I needed was an opportunity. I just needed one sight on goal. I have bundles of confidence in myself and as soon as I knew that ball got crossed in and I knew I was in a position to head of that ball I knew it was a goal straight away and for me to get that so early in Premier League football is amazing and something that I took great confidence from.  Does this all just feel normal now or are there times when little memories just sort of float in and you break out in a big grin? I'll be honest, it all feels normal but I do sometimes have those moments where I think God I've managed to get here. It's amazing but like I said before I'm a very ambitious person and I don't like to get distracted by stuff that would not naturally take my attention away from what I want to achieve but sometimes it's good to look back and you know almost redirect yourself and to think like yeah I can keep going like I've managed to get this far this what can stop me now and you know like I said I've had countless people count me out from my career you know said I'd never reach the Premier League I've never go to a World Cup and maybe they would have been right but I didn't let them be right in my own head and I made sure that what I wanted to achieve I put my full focus and dedication and my life to get to this point.


OTAN, Outreach and Technical Assistance Network. Good morning everyone. We are the D-LAC team from Campbell Adult and Community Education. We are part of the Campbell High School District. And these are my team members. Where are you? Next slide, Jill. Oh, it's stuck again like yesterday. Okay, there it goes. Jill Morrissey. I was an ESL teacher. My name is Jill Morris. I'm a student at West San Jose. I'm a teacher at North Kantred ESL, High-Set and Flex. In fact, Jill also teaches Flex and Archana. That's me. And I teach a high-set class. Our school serves West San Jose, Campbell and the surrounding areas. And we offer classes in multiple locations. In areas of community education, career education, ABE, ASC and five levels of ESL. Will the next slide please? Yeah, we started off, back again please. Jill? It's doing what it did for the other day. It's jumping on its own. We have to start over. No, it's like on its own thing here for some reason. Oh no. We started off with our mission. Of course, I can't read my mission right now, but I can tell you that our population in our school runs basically, let's see, if I think about our population, we're about 50% Hispanic and 20 to 25% Asian descent. So we have quite a varied group of students that we're dealing with. Interestingly, in that population we have about 65% of our students are ESL students, and about 20% of our students are our high school diploma students. Here we go. In the pandemic, we were looking at a population of around 1800 students enrolled in all of our various programs that are China listed. And now during the pandemic, we've noticed and we checked with the administration, we're looking at about 45% drop in population and enrollment. That's substantial. For us, that's very, very substantial. And of course, that really hurts in moving forward. What are we going to do next year to recuperate that population. We're looking for next year you see our school year outlook 2021 2022, we are more than likely going to move towards a hybrid model where we will have two days in class and of instruction and two days via zoom instruction. So it's, it's going to be a big shift for all of our teachers. This is going to be something school wide that will be implemented this on this onset of blended learning but it's not just going to be one or two classes it's probably going to be throughout the entire program. We are also envisioning a virtual classroom environment thing we found that it was a very positively received 100% online classes. So that's one of the other options that we're looking at is offering online classes next semester as well, either through our flex distance learning program where students are meeting up with their teacher one day a week, or through a zoom environment like we currently are doing on to the next slide before it jumps. So we found that online class like everyone else is a safe place to learn and grow. It was quite an adventure in the spring as we switched quickly into the online platform. It was daunting. It was scary. And then, oh boy, it learned it turned out we're not this is not going to disappear. So we needed to make plans for the fall. And we had a great team in place, just really, or well organized all hands on deck. We created an online boot camp program to get the students ready with technology and just any barriers that were there to we overcame the barriers so that we could begin the school year on solid ground. But then it became clear that we needed to grow deeper. There's so much information out there. How do we choose what programs what apps are best. We needed to deepen our roots. So as the pandemic set in it became clear online teaching was here to stay. And we were, we realized that we needed to just expand and grow deeper. That was our challenge and hallelujah we had a wonderful solution. The D lack Academy was ready to begin their third cohort. And we wanted to take advantage of that opportunity like you all, and we applied and we knew this would be a great solution to helping our agency. Make a plan, grow deeper and get some professional development. So we had wonderful support starting with D lack and and as I mentioned all the professional development and conferences, networking, everything we did as a large group, and working together with our own team on the online course with the company with the, the modal course that we did really helped us wrap our minds around everything that is involved in creating an online functioning online program. And Otan challenged us to put a lot of things into practice. And also the other conferences and webinars that we did we received a lot of help through Otan. As we were looking at canvas help and they go right there our coach Francisca made the connections and then we had our own, you know, Melinda come in and Diana and folks helping us out with moving forward with some of the technology that we were scared about. Okay, and then the other thing was our special coach coaching with Francisca and the other teams that were part of Francisca's group, we just learned so much from each other. A lot of encouragement, just being vulnerable sharing our weaknesses and just the encouragement as I said just really was invaluable. So we really benefited from these areas of the back. Thank you everyone. Like Jill said, we've benefited a lot from OTAN and D like our coach Francisca has been a great resource. She brings with her years of experience in adult education. And this helped us reach out to other agencies as we were narrowing down our site plan. Our fellow D lackers have also been super helpful, patient supportive, answering all of our questions. We had a meeting with Susan Rush, the day after Thanksgiving, and Christina Hyatt over the winter break. Porter's Gallup Strengths assessment helped us to understand our team strengths. My teammate Lars is great with writing and Jill came up with this beautiful slide presentation. We've been focusing on and encouraging our strengths and moving forward as a team in setting goals and piloting our site plan. Our discussions during our weekly meeting with Francisca, Santa Clara team and Pittsburgh team have been rewarding. We have shared learning practices, resources and understanding issues, which otherwise we would not even have thought about. And this has helped us look into the future. In this past few months, we have all grown as individuals and as a team, setting a culture for change and learning while maturely handing conflicts and respecting individual ideas. Over to you, Lars. Okay, well. One of the things that we get from the ideal one on one course is the is the panorama of existing programs out there. And the possibilities. I mean, when we first started our class with destiny, I kind of felt like these fingers running into these grooves I felt like I was getting my fingers caught in everything that was running. I didn't really know what was available what was out there. And the ideal one on one course gave you that vision of all of what is existing, and all of what are the different avenues that are that are that are out there, plus all of the considerations on some of the considerations such as for for distance learning and expanded orientation for distance learning was something that I never really thought about initially, and the the class opened up all of these, these ideas that we had to consider the the some of the things with Dr. Dr. Porter. I felt like gave me the ability to hand off things because I always wanted to be that person that was involved in in everything that was moving. But a lot of things I didn't really want to do. And Dr. Porter gave me the ability to simply say hey, I don't want to do this. It's not my strength, and I could give it off to somebody else and other people could do those things and that was okay.  So I thought in my mind. Continue to the next slide please. Right so ultimately, we were able to come up with our plan our vision. So just did a nutshell I won't go down to each one because we are going to focus on them and the next few slides, but our main goal was to participate in the Leadership Academy, so that we can research and plan and and develop our tech plan. So we were very comfortable in Google Classroom, but our district offers canvas. So this is a great opportunity to explore the benefits of canvas and see if we like canvas. So we thought this would be a great project to do. So we, we hope to be the team that assists and trains our faculty and staff as we transition into canvas and take on some other projects. Our first project as I mentioned is at midterm report here is we are ready to move into canvas many of you are doing canvas but, as I mentioned earlier it was like a daunting thing for us at first. So we really got a lot of support to D lax so we're ready now we're ready to pilot canvas. We've divided up our pilot into our three strengths. Our China is handling the high set area since she teaches adult Ed Lars teaches intermediate low in ESL so he has developed a canvas model for that, and I teach advanced ESL. So that's where we placed our focus, and we are starting next week for our pilots to do our pilots are China. Yes, we are piloting canvas. Next week in my high set class. The, in my high set class we primarily use as tech as the test prep material, and if we have had a great success with it. It was, it, you know we took some time to figure out how to integrate as tech into. We decided that you know we I had to link as tech to canvas as as tech in itself is an LMS. So on the next slide you will see my canvas homepage, which is pretty simple and easy for students to follow. We have just three or four tabs and links for the zoom and you know all the resources that we use. Basically keeping it super simple. The idea is we want students to be familiar with canvas, as it will help that it will be easy and help them for transition to Community College. The focus here is for our students to be successful beyond adult school, and we hope that you know, familiarizing them with canvas will keep get them ready for future. This is a synchronous math lesson every day as part of our daily class routine, and I will be adding math worksheets and supplemental material through the course of the school year and forever, you know all the other subjects will be primarily doing as tech as a prep material. The canvas course can be used either in person hybrid or for remote learning. That was the idea when we developed this particular canvas course over to you Lars. Yeah, what I'm looking at in in in my class is. Moving on to the next slide. What I'm looking at my next slide in my next in my canvas program is trying to integrate as much as possible. And there I am hanging from the Campbell water tower. I'm going to integrate ventures as much as possible into into canvas so I'm going through page by page with the with the ventures. Book ventures three book, and trying to get it as interactive as possible within canvas so that we can either use it as a, a in class resource. I can either use it as a student's book at the time, or use it off zoom wise and then I can still interact with students with those same pages using the canvas. So if you take a look at the next page, you'll see that what I've done is I've created a teacher made slide member from the Tdls program I was talking about teacher made. Well this is a teacher made slide that has an actual screenshot from the textbook with the fill in the blank that students can fill in the fill in while they're in a zoom class and I can actually monitor live as they are filling filling it in. So at the bottom of the page you can't see this here on the screenshot but on the bottom of the page there's also a button for the audio so that students can actually check their work with the audio recording of the entire dialogue. So it's that kind of integration that I'm trying to create so that students can either use the material via zoom, or we can use the book in class physically in class. So it's a seamless use of the, the material. Advanced class. My focus is on the future five advanced ESL curriculum. And like Lars it's a lot of building on there is no shell available at this time that I know of. So it's just creating it the best to my ability. I also focused on my homepage for canvas. I thought I would create buttons and just link. Just the basics of what I want my students to use. And so I created my banner and the buttons, and I'm not live on this but each button like the zoom link the email. I have a book club where I have a library of books that the students can select a book it takes them directly to that application discussion homework I'm going backwards here and then today's lesson of vocabulary that would be my focus for my my group, but other students may want to select their own buttons, their own focus for their canvas classroom. So that's what we're working on is just sort of developing a scene how it goes. So the second project that we're I know we're really tight on time. Second project that we're looking at is making a canvas module, something called case connect. Yeah, here is we're taking a very successful orientation boot camp program that we've been doing right now via Google slides via zoom have one minute left. Okay, and putting it online into canvas, so that we can be teaching canvas as well as other tech orientation. Keep going. Okay, our third project is the teacher resource center, which we plan to deploy in spring 2022. The resource center will be a toolbox just like in the picture, with everything the teachers and staff need from information about the school the contact information, the courses offered we're also thinking about dual enrollment. So information about dual enrollment, and all the support services be offered for our students. Next slide Jill. This is it in a nutshell up to the midterm we started with DLAC training we moved on to ideal, growing our roots deep into the course and experiencing TDLS coach meetings and canvas pilot may midterm.


Okay, Hawaii Volcanoes National Park below the East Rift Kilauea. This is the lava headed for the sea It is 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit or so. This is the innards of the earth turning inside out building new land That we're sitting on right now, and this is way cool because it's so hot You just can't imagine what this is like below us It is it is fountening into the sea and jetting up great bursts of steam new land being born This is geology in action. This is the real thing The the breeze blowing over us is a little bit sulfurous. It's a little bit warm We're going to get out of here fairly quickly, but we're having a lot of fun. I wish you could be here with us This is an amazing amazing


For those of you who don't have a root-seller or a basement like me, here's a solution for you. I had this completely buried and it has eroded a little bit, but it's not something I'm trying to hide. This is where I put my root-seller. This is a small one, a 30 gallon over here. I have my 55 gallon. What these drums will do is, things that are sitting on the bottom, like jars of fermented vegetables or other canned goods or your roots or whatever, things sitting on the bottom won't freeze. The ground stays a constant 60 degrees temperature throughout the year. Again, I had this buried a little bit better and I'll come out here and bury some more because this is on the hillside. It gets a lot of rain and washes around there, but this is a 55 gallon drum. I'll take off this band and I'll show you my root-seller. Now I have pea gravel on the bottom just as a weight because what happens is these holes that you dig here, if they fill up with water, your barrel will float up and come right out of there. If it's empty, it doesn't have a lot of weight in it. So I put pea gravel on the bottom just as a ballast, just to wet it down. Now this white cannon here is not necessary. I just put it in here because I'm not using much of this space right now. Other things I'm fermenting right now here in the fall are still in the house fermenting. Here are a couple of things that I did put down here. Some fermented vegetables, zucchini squash, broccoli and garlic and you know what else. Just fermenting in brine. But anyway, so when I need more room, I'll probably take out this white garbage can. It was just convenient to bring these out here. Now I'll have this root-seller filled up to the ground, perhaps with the jars. And then I'll bury this a little bit better to help the temperature and cover it with leaves just to help insulate it over the winter when it gets really, really cold. But I'll wait until I put my other jars in there before I do that. There you go. Anybody can have a root-seller who has some ground where they can dig a hole to bury a 5-gallon drum or a 30-gallon drum over there.  Digging down that deep with a shovel if you have a backhoe or can hire someone to do it. Okay, let's secure my root-seller again. I'll put this band back on there and lock her down, which is probably going to be a two-hand job. So I'll go ahead and end this video now. There's the Survival Docks root-seller. This is Survival Dock reminding you to be prepared or be prepared to be fleeced.


Maybe next week, the Department of Education can make laws about littering. Dylan Schumacher, Citadel Defense. Now, before we go over to the whiteboard here and kind of catch you up on the moratorium on rent collection that the CDC has put out and really dive in depth to the depths of depravity and insanity, I wanted to take a moment to just point out the really blatantly obvious. The federal government has made it illegal to collect money from people who live on your property. I'd like to say that again, because I think it's pretty self-evident how insane it is, the federal government has made it illegal for you to collect money from people who voluntarily choose to live on your property. That is absolutely insane. The federal government has outlawed your business.  Now, we're gonna talk about the process by which they did that and how that's insane, but even if, hypothetically speaking, Congress voted on and passed a law and the president signed it into law and the Supreme Court came in and said, yep, you can make that illegal. That would still be insane. That would still be illegal and wrong. One of the things in this country we have is the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The pursuit of happiness has to do with business venture and developing the property. We have rights to property. Property rights are foundational to the American system of government and to the American way of life. And the federal government has communistically trampled right over your very real property rights because they feel like it.  They lost their job because the government made it illegal for them to go to work. So the government has come in, caused a mess, destroyed the entire economy and then come in for round two of destruction and said, oh yeah, because of the pandemic you can't collect rent. I know that we told them they couldn't go to work. I know that we wouldn't allow them to make money. I know that we're using your tax dollars to pay the money to stay home and not go to work but they still can't pay you money. That's what the federal government has done. It is absolutely insane that the federal government has made it illegal for you to collect money for people who voluntarily choose to live on your property. They have made thieves out of millions of people by allowing them to live rent free on people's property. It violates the most basic rights we have in this country.  Those are probably the top two rights, right? The right to worship whatever God you want. The first and second amendment basically. And then right behind that we have property rights which are absolutely foundational to the constitution, to our understanding of how this republic is supposed to work and without them we're back to warlords and might makes right. So let's go over to the whiteboard now and really dive into just how absolutely depraved and ridiculous this is. So let's talk about the rent moratorium. Rent moratorium here has just been extended by the CDC. To catch you up, the rent moratorium was initially issued I believe back in September of 2020 by the CDC who was then under President Trump. It was illegal then, it's illegal now, we'll get to that. Then in July, the Supreme Court heard the case which they should have and they decided in a five four vote to uphold the rent moratorium. Brent Kavanaugh, the deciding vote in that case, decided you know what, this is unconstitutional. However, it's gonna expire soon so we'll just let it go. And now of course we find ourselves in a situation where that has been extended until mid October. And if you think it's gonna end there, well I'm not quite sure what to tell you. So the rent moratorium which carries a penalty of a year in jail and $100,000 fine for evicting someone from your property who doesn't pay their rent because they were impacted by coronavirus or whatever is a big problem. We'll talk a little bit about that. But first of all, let's talk about how we get this edict and where it comes from, shall we? So down here you have the rent moratorium edict. This is the problem that we currently find ourselves in. Now this was sent out by the CDC. The CDC was established in 1946 on order to combat malaria and other infectious diseases and take care of things like that. So they're headquartered out of Atlanta and have been since the beginning. Now the CDC falls under the United States Public Health Service. The United States Public Health Service is a group of agencies like the CDC that fall under the Human Health and Services Department, the Department of Human Health and Services. The Human Health and Services Department, are you confused yet, reports to the president. Now some of you are smarter than the rest of us and you immediately see what the problem is and why this is very, very bad. So for those of you who aren't as smart as some of us, you might need a little reminder about how the United States Republic works, right? We are a republic and not a democracy and we have three branches of government. They are not co-equal in power. However, they are three distinct branches of government. So you have the judiciary branch, the executive branch under the president and the legislative branch, right? You have Congress, the Supreme Court and then the president, which this really should say executive up here but you get the idea. Those are your three branches of government. The most powerful of the three branches of government as designed and enshrined in the Constitution is the legislative branch. They have the power to levy taxes. They have the power to declare war and they have the power to write laws. They have multiple powers that the other branches do not possess and with good reason. Congress is elected directly from the people. The people directly choose their representatives to go to Congress and represent them. So therefore it is the largest body in our government and it also again has the most power as constitutionally written. The legislative branch makes laws. No other branch of government makes laws, not the president, not the judiciary. No other branch of government is supposed to make laws. What has happened over time is that other branches of government have stolen this power from Congress which makes the entire system untenable in the long term. The issue here is that not only is the president who is one person making a law, however you have multiple levels of bureaucracy by people that are paid with your tax dollars that are not elected, not appointed and simply hired by the president or one of his underlings in order to have their job. So you have zero representation or voting or legal recourse for someone down the bureaucracy chain making a law.  Not just laws about diseases or sicknesses or whatever, they are issuing laws about rent. If the CDC can make laws that are not voted on by Congress, not debated in both houses, not signed into law by the president, then laws have no meaning anymore. Literally anyone could make a law. I can sit in my house and write something on a piece of paper and declare it to be a law if the CDC can make laws.  The executive branch does not make laws. The judiciary branch is not supposed to make laws but that's a different video. Instead the legislative branch is supposed to make laws and it's intentionally difficult for the legislative branch to make laws. So that the idea of course is that the laws are well thought through, they're not made in a fit of passion but rather they have large support and they are reasoned and thought through. They're not simply something that is just pulled out of thin air because it seems like a good idea at the time. That's how the system is designed to work. And at this point we have wholly and utterly ignored the system entirely and said some random bureaucracy way down the chain can all of a sudden make federal law that applies to everybody in the United States. If you're not quite grasping how incredibly dangerous that is, again I don't know how to explain that any clearer. If any government bureaucracy can write something on a piece of paper and now it's just a law then there are no such thing as laws anymore. We have wholly abandoned the system of how we are to govern ourselves and at this point might makes right. Why can the CDC write it on a piece of paper and make a law and I can't because they have more men with guns than I do in order to back it up. That really is what it boils down to. To really understand how convoluted this is and how this gets worse, you need to understand where this executive branch and all this bureaucracy came from. In 1939, Congress passed the Reorganization Act of 1939. This created the FSA. The FSA stands for I believe the Federal Security Administration if I am correct. And the problem is this created the executive office of the president. It created all of the permanent structures that now reside under the president. Currently there are 1800 staff that are not appointed, not elected, simply hired that work as part of the permanent government and are considered nonpartisan. These are the people that operate the staff of the president's office. So presidents come in and come out but this is what we call the deep state. This is the permanent part of the government that just stays and continues to grow and thrive. Again, remember large government and liberty, individual liberty are incompatible. You cannot have them both at the same time. The larger one gets, the more the other will diminish. In 1953, you have the Reorganization Plan number one under Eisenhower. What this does is effectively eliminate the FSA and replace it with the Department of Health and Human Services. At that time it was named something else. I think it included the term the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. I'm looking at my notes here to confirm that. And then the Department of Health, Education and Welfare in 1979 splits out to get the Department of Education. Has there been a more failed or useless government organization in the Department of Education? I'm just saying. And then in 1995, they also split out the Social Security Administration. So again, the problem here is that way back in 1939, you have the legislative branch, perhaps unknowingly at the time, probably knowingly ceding substantial power to the executive branch, creating this entire bureaucratic mess that has resulted in some random health organization deciding whether or not you can collect rent from your renters. Now if you're to say, Dylan, who cares? They're just renters. It's not that many people, you know, surely they can afford it. They obviously own property, whatever. What you need to remember is that property costs money to maintain. And you have turned an entire class of people who provide a very important service of renting property so that people have places to live into a slave class. Now there are two ways that's gonna go when those people can't own that property anymore. They'll default on their loans, go into bankruptcy and now we have a bunch of people going into bankruptcy. They'll sell it to some larger corporation who will then of course become a large, we'll just call them feudal lord in America which causes its whole host of other problems. Or my favorite option, plan C, C for communism is the government will take it over and they'll of course now be able to provide your rent. Then when people are further and more dependent on the government, you of course have less rights because you can't challenge the government because they provide everything you need. And then just to top it all off as I mentioned earlier you have the Supreme Court screaming into the rescue to say that hey, it's okay that this government organization who is not the legislative branch makes laws. That's totally okay for them to make up a federal law even though they have zero authority under the executive branch to do so, zero authority as a health organization to do so. It's okay if they do that because it's only temporary. It's just two weeks to slow the spread, right? I hope that this has been helpful to you. I hope that it's helped you understand that the authority, and I put that in quotes here, that the CDC is claiming that they stand on is absolutely zero. They have zero authority to make laws whatsoever. Even the Supreme Court agreed that it's unconstitutional but it's gonna expire so it's okay. If we are going to allow random government organizations to just create laws out of thin air when they have no authority to do so then this nation is at its end. The next phase is that when we all realize the authority is illegitimate and I'm not quite sure what happens then but I don't think it's gonna be very good. Do brave deeds and endure.