<Thaddeus> +present

<scribe> scribe: becka11y

<Thaddeus> I joined

<clapierre> I joined APA as well

Janina: topic is join APA - everyone needs to rejoin due to approval of new charter; your AC rep also needs to approve you - you may need to remind them

Charles: you don’t have to leave ARIA to join (or rejoin) APA

JF: are you saying we have to join ARIA because is a joint task force

Charles: clarify you don’t have to be a member of ARIA but you also do not have to leave ARIA in order to join APA

<janina> https://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/83907/join

Charles: joining APA does not require personalization folks to attend every meeting of APA

Janina: confirms; has started on agenda for TPAC; concerning technologies; will try to schedule with web platforms group for joint times; looking at Monday but that has issues trying to get time with publications; but APA does have some overlap with Publications

Review each module and decided on the next steps and schedule for the next publications

charles: last publication was in March; released the explainer and content module as updated working drafts; looking to release next version

<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/

Charles: reviewed the issues with label of explainer - there were only 3; #69 and #70 discussed on the list - some issue with doc links; that only occurs in the March version because there were no public drafts; should be fixed once we have first public WD of those modules

Michael: need to double check at publication time. Assign to Roy
... need to point to something - add a note to these issues to double check at publication time

Charles: assign #69 and #70 to Roy
... Becky made a pull request - does it effect explainer?

<clapierre> Prior art, comparison and trade-offs of taxonomy used in Adaptable Content Module #74

I don’t believe so - I did not address #74

charles: Sam filed this issue looking for more resources in the explainer
... Thaddeus added references in the comparison document but it is not in the explainer

Thaddeus: action item was to add the references so we could review / discuss; expected Sam to review
... believes the best place to ask questions concerning issues is to comment within the issue; Have commented but there has been no response

Charles: yes the approach of raising question in the issues usually works but this group hasn’t been as active in the issues

Michael: there is a link in the respository to be notified of changes to issues; we need people to review the issues; these walk-throughs in the calls help to build up that practice

Charles: requests that everyone watch this repository; For #74 would like to ask Sam to look further into this

Thaddeus: did research when added them into the comparison document so can do this if necessary

Charles: Comparison info is going to be added into the Explainer document - does this have to happen before the next version of the explainer is published?

Thaddeus: we never came to consensus about the implementation options we discussed

JF: can we make a formal agenda item to formally review the comparisons

<scribe> ACTION: add extended discussion of issue #74 to next week’s agenda

<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/content/index.html

Charles: next module to publish/update is the content module
... 17 open issues for content module

I addressed some today

Addressed #1, 44,45, 68

#1 was just typos - many have already been fixed

<clapierre> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/68

one was just an example from JF; another was a fairly big edit to simplification (44 and 45)

Charles; let’s discuss #68

all other values applied to data that you would put into a field; section did not

Charles: was the intent to group the information type - personal info; address
... so might put this on a div surrounding a set of related controls

JF: want to generalize the information being input
... example is shipping address - it may or may not be a home address; sectioning around the data is related to person so want to personalize that

Charles: get clarification from Lisa that what we have discussed is the intent of section. If so we need to add more clarification. So update the issue with these questions

JF: we are going to have to develop a vocabulary around this; but there may be additional items that are specific to certain tasks - grades for universities, etc. We need to identify at least the top 5 - 10
... asks if there is any research around these types of groupings? some common ones - gender; home,shipping,billing;

Thaddeus: we might look at scheme.org and the ones that Sam referenced in issue #74
... isn’t aware of any resources/research in coga around this issue, will look and report back

I will remove that from the pull request and just update the issue

charles: issue #33

<clapierre> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/33

charles: aria-function is not defined but is used in a example

issue #36

<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/content/index.html#use_case_interoperable_symbols

<clapierre> and

<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/content/index.html#symbol-explanation

Charles: check for consistency and accuracy of symbol definition
... not sure of specific action for this issue - does anyone have ideas?
... table #36 move onto #42
... understand that these symbols are pre-defined and issues is asking how can we make these meet WCAG requirements
... would need to see examples - may depend upon the background colors, etc;

Whose responsibility is that?

JF: responsibility would be the user’s if they may have overridden the content default styles
... there are standard sets of symbols; who defines which ones are used and how they interact with the content;
... may need some specific requirements for symbols - double border; with white and black so fit anywhere

Charles: has created some icons that can work on a black or a white background due to use of double border and black and white colors

<janina> Janina says "black on black works fine for me--and it's perfectly secure!" <snarky grin>

Charles: how to address? require symbols to provide dark and light background and content author would indicate which was needed?
... needs further discussion

Janina: this is related to long standing issues around CSS and dealing with background / foreground

JF: there is a CSS attribute called inverse that no one supports

Janina: asked Lisa to help get CSS contrast issue correctly logged into our issue tracker

<Thaddeus> Thanks

how to add Thaddeus as present?

thaddeus: present+

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152  of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Present: janina Becka11y JF Roy clapierre MichaelC
Regrets: Lisa
Found Scribe: becka11y
Inferring ScribeNick: Becka11y

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 74 add discussion extended issue of

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)