. . .
15:09:55 GJR: a lot of mashups will be served with DIVs or as DIVs
15:09:58 . . .
15:10:32 TH: can use DIV to cover a large section of modified text; too much use of SPAN and DIV --
15:10:57 RM: easier to think that i need new paragraph and property of P added and add other info with RDFa in the paragraph
15:11:17 TH: only problem is more than one attribute needed: who did it; what was changed?
15:11:21 RM: have that in RDFa
15:11:26 GJR: agree
15:11:35 TH: how expressed on specific element, such as P
15:12:03 TH: does RDFa have something that says this is what was, this is what new paragraph is; need more info than just "this has been changesd
15:12:29 RM: much easier to use INS and DEL -- simple binary straightforward
15:12:50 GJR: no problem with INS and DEL, but think need MOD
15:13:28 TH: inline, use MOD with attribute to state how modified; want to avoid using attributes only for this so authors are tempted to use SPAN and DIV to indicate; INS and DEL or MOD fine with me
15:13:45 GJR: understand and appreciate caution
15:14:30 TH: MOD gets complicated - this is added this is deleted; MOD needs 2 sets of data -- what was, and what is; if can do with RDFa, fine, but don't think need that much complexity
15:14:59 GJR: MOD springs from the diffuclty i have always when attempting to parse auarally a DIFF docuemnt
15:15:22 GJR: was successful in getting the W3C DIFF generator to use INS and DEL instead of SPAN
15:16:03 GJR: for spelling or grammar change do you really want to have both the deleted and inserted text even though 90% of content is same?
15:16:48 TH: would say yes, based on fact that CSS word-wrap property -- MS suggests as arbitrary break point; in some languages, that can change contents -- can't do unless have dictionary in UA
15:17:22 TH: spelling change in document very subtle, but can completely change meaning of paragraph, would like to know what is there -- especially if something there, referred to and chaanged again
15:17:53 GJR: one strategy for that is to use the global @src to point to the earlier wording in an earlier draft for minor edits
15:18:21 TH: almost agree there -- INS and DEL or MOD are not set up for complicated document history
15:18:51 TH: agree with idea - use INS and DEL add history by linking to it, need to say this isn't a regular @src but a link to the history
15:19:14 TH: MOD with @src would be handled differently than on other elements
15:19:21 RM: number of different themes
15:19:21 I will.
I will not.
15:19:21 I will.
15:19:21 I will.I will not.
15:19:21 I will.
15:19:53 RM: INS and DEL, INS, DEL and MOD, or just MOD -- MOD alone not sufficient
15:20:07 RM: rather mark add this delete that
15:20:40 RM: MOD or @chg don't know what was there before, just know changed; don't have situation if have binary INS and DEL
15:21:01 RM: integrated and deleted in one place with INS and DEL, but not with MOD
15:21:21 TH: RM's example very good; like to have revision handling mechanism spelt out
15:21:34 RM: process of change -- delete or add things -- that's how keyboards work
15:22:10 GJR: what about changing spelling of one word
15:22:32 RM: old word should be deleted and new word should be added -- not change in letter, but in word
15:22:56 GJR: i'm thinking about the hell that it is trying to keep up with DIFF markings especially on wiki pages
15:23:20 GJR: course of last resort for sanity's sake is document source
15:23:39 RM: marking up changes as much a part of good design as anything else, can be done badly or can be done well
15:24:56 TH: DIFF documents very binary -- markup what taken out and what is put in; if have long piece of code or content to make sense in context, wouldn't work if each UA read paragraph, then stopped in the middle and says a word 2 times; but no more helpful if have to read paragraph twice
15:25:40 RM: i would like it to read what i've got and there has been a change -- don't want to see diff marks in many cases -- choice by user -- show me the history, what has changed --
15:25:55 RM: sympathize if have to use TTS to read a DIFF marked document
15:26:48 GJR: strategy used to process a DIFF document aurally is an ad hoc use of a screen reader's "skim" feature, in which one can set basic font characteristic parameters so that only content that meets a specific criterion is spoken
15:27:20 GJR: but in essense, that means that one is actually processing the content multiple times to extract what one would like to be able to parse in one go
15:28:17 GJR: screen reader bug is can only recognize a limited pallate of color names, only Orca gives change to filter by color codes
15:28:31 dogdig
15:28:31 doig
15:28:31 dog
15:28:37 RM: what would we consider good practice
15:28:52 RM: how to deal with questions: many means of doing this
15:29:33 dog
15:30:00 RM: all of the above examples are possible, but what is easiest to author, read, listen to
15:30:39 RM: prefer first method - inserted correction and marked incorrect spelling with DEL
15:30:49 RM: should be dealing with words, phrases paragraphs
15:31:06 TH: prefer DEL before INS
15:31:30 TH: if have screen reader can filter it to ignore DEL
15:31:37 digdog
15:32:23 GJR: that would work, and in addition if there was a cue from the AT that text is marked as INS, then a user could stop, and query for the characteriscs of content that is marked DEL to get context
15:33:06 GJR: in flow of reading would want to suppress that, but still needs to be available to user on user request/query
15:33:24 RM: still leaves question -- what happens when in middle of words
15:33:57 GJR: have sympathy for word, phrase limitation
15:35:22 GJR: would like to avoid internal use of modidifier element inside a word to encase a single letter or group of letters
15:35:35 TH: agreement there
15:36:12 proposed resolved: modified text must be at least a word?
15:36:46 TH: speech browser should look for modified attribute on section or paragraph and skip according to user preference
15:37:27 RM: suggest that GJR attempt to write up where we've got to at end of discussion as proposal for discussion next week
15:37:33 RM: much easier to work with examples
15:38:26 ACTION: GJR - send summation of discussion (this is what we need from language point of view and good practices bad practices) with examples
15:38:26 Created ACTION-50 - - send summation of discussion (this is what we need from language point of view and good practices bad practices) with examples [on Gregory Rosmaita - due 2009-02-18].
15:39:04 RM: short time left -- markus, could you talk with us about M12n and XHTML family
15:39:17 TOPIC: Modularization and the XHTML Family
15:39:55 MG: overarching theme: take XHTML m12n in a direction which caters more for language designers than it has done before; allow ability to express sub-sets of complliance modules being imported
15:40:14 MG: stumble upon idea working in DAISY context with XHTML modules, but believe has generic value
15:40:31 MG: changing scope of m12n in way that expands potential audience of framework
15:41:17 MG: embryonic idea is that there is a way of restricting sub-set-ability so not to allow content models that are distortions; conssistency of functionality
15:41:57 MG: discussed with Shane over phone; one approach: have abstract definitions which are currently tabular, add a column to show module where sub-setting is allowed
15:42:18 MG: need to try out concretely to ascertian how and if it works and most effective and balanced solution
15:43:08 RM: reasonable thing to do; come across this difficulty when OMA trying to create profile using legacy module -- did anyway even though m12n framework doesn't allow -- technically not valid, but pragmatically workable
15:43:40 MG: DAISY would do the same -- utilize XHTML module sets as language author; number of compliance grammers needs to grow by embracing this way of using it as well
15:44:15 RM: grammar is small part of it; number of documents which will be valid against super-set will be greatly increased; grammars only a means to an end to create documents
15:44:30 MG: risk is UAs being developed that cater only to sub-set
15:44:46 RM: already in situation where UA devs support only bits in which they are interested already
15:44:59 MG: fait accompli, true, just don't want to make worse
15:45:19 RM: reached end of time for today
15:45:23 RM: any burning issues?
15:45:38 GJR: will alert the WG results of ARIA LC vote
15:45:50 RM: i will be on holiday next week, steven will probably chair
15:45:55 TH: regrets for next week
15:45:56 -mgylling
15:45:57 -Roland
15:46:02 -Tina
15:46:03 -Gregory_Rosmaita
15:46:03 IA_XHTML2()9:45AM has ended
15:46:05 Attendees were Roland, Gregory_Rosmaita, mgylling, +0468645aaaa, +0468645aabb, Tina
15:46:07 rrsagent, make minutes
15:46:07 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
15:46:41 present- +0468645aaa, +0468645aabb
15:46:47 rrsagent, make minutes
15:46:47 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
15:47:22 present- +0468645aaaa
15:47:26 rrsagent, make minutes
15:47:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
15:47:34 ADJOURN
15:47:38 rrsagent, make minutes
15:47:38 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
15:47:59 regrets+ Steven_Pemberton
15:48:02 rrsagent, make minutes
15:48:02 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
15:49:23 zakim, please part
15:49:23 Zakim has left #xhtml
15:50:51 Roland has left #xhtml
15:56:18 s/send summation of discussion (this is what we need from language point of view and good practices bad practices) with examples/send summation of modification markup discussion (this is what we need from a declarative markup point of view, a natural language point of view, and propose good practices and bad practices) with examples
15:56:23 rrsagent, make minutes
15:56:23 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-minutes.html oedipus
15:56:54 rrsagent, please part
15:56:54 I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-actions.rdf :
15:56:54 ACTION: GJR - ensure that XHTML Vocab Document in sync with ARIA 1.0 Last Call draft are in sync [1]
15:56:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-irc#T14-55-49
15:56:54 ACTION: GJR - send summation of discussion (this is what we need from language point of view and good practices bad practices) with examples [2]
15:56:54 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/11-xhtml-irc#T15-38-26