<thaddeus> +present

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> trying to join!

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> scribe: sharon

Lisa: Last week discussed condensing things and having it sortable. Does everyone agree the table is useful?

Becky: Agreed
... What do you mean by sort? Is it ascending or descending?

Janina: We may not defined what we would sort on.

Becky: You mean a value under action and what's a destination?

Lisa: Will wait for Charles since it was his idea and he's not here today.

Janina: We need a key of some kind to allow machine sorting.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Protoypes-with-data-dash

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> data-

Lisa: Discussed with Leone to try implementation with data-.
... Agreed to use it since it was in HTML. We can make our own attribute values.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Protoypes-with-data-dash

Lisa: Spent time making examples of different things. The ones that might be the easiest. Part of the action item was to look into data-.
... Does everyone understand why we were going with data-? Any questions?
... We don't really need the browser for anything because we may start out with extensions. People might migrate it people are actually using it.
... Started looking at data- design for token values. data- is meant to be for attributes made by the web site owner. Caused another discussion because we are going against the spec.
... Allows an owner to create an attribute without conflicts. We also discussed that we could use it for prototyping. But we already have prototypes and they are ready for beta.

<Becka11y> q

Janina: May not agree and we need a follow on conversation. We may have a disagreement on what constitutes a prototype. Part of the argument is that if we show viability and there is clash to show the viability of a custom attribute. We haven't made the case yet for why we need a custom attribute. We need to keep the conversation going. We need major implementations for data-.

Becky: Agrees with Janina based on the email thread.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> The point of initially using data-*, which developers own, is to figure out what the right model is and to show some kind of prototype: not intended to be deployed at web scale.

Janina: An early adopter would not have an issue moving to a custom attribute.
... We are using the term "prototype" differently and we need a wider conversation.

Lisa: We know it will definitely change if we use data-. The idea standardizing it goes against data- model.

Thaddeus: If something needs to change in the DOM data- won't do that. data- doesn't do anything unless its in CSS or JS. Charles sent an email that we are definitely using data-. We need to settle on an approach. User agent does not acknowledge data-.

Lisa: Would like to take a poll. Janina is right in the history and context. We will work on data- unless we run into a problem because of how its defined.

Janina: Part of what she is saying is that we have a different definition and we do not know how its defined. We need clarification.

Lisa: 1) We have a problem and need more info. 2) We think its OK and continue to prototype. Part of the action was to learn more about data-.
... Do we carry on prototyping or ask for more clarification?

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> The point of initially using data-*, which developers own, is to figure out what the right model is and to show some kind of prototype: not intended to be deployed at web scale.

Janina: There is 2 terms. Are we reading the spec correctly and how extensive of a prototype do we need. I think another conversation is in order.

Becky: Was thinking about the comment as writing a spec. The prototyping was done as they went and then proved the concept. We don't want to write a spec with data-. May need to postpone writing the spec.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to discuss incubation, vocabulary vs implementation, TR expectations

<thaddeus> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn/HTML/Howto/Use_data_attributes

Michael: We structured the spec to be independent of implementation. We only discuss it in the explainer which is none normative. We can continue to work on the vocabulary. It makes sense to use data- for experimentation. It is not something we are specifying. We are incubating and using data- for now.

<thaddeus> data-* attributes allow us to store extra information on standard, semantic HTML elements without other hacks such as non-standard attributes, extra properties on DOM, or Node.setUserData().

Lisa: Does not see the point. We could use the attributes we've been using if we know we won't stick with it. Expecting people to build an AT knowing the implementation will have to change is huge risk.
... Why anyone invest in something they know will change.

Janina: Is still objecting to a vote. The reason is politics and stay in development that will have main stream up take. If we are looking for wider adoption we need a wider community. This is the mechanism they said to use.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say implementation expectations for both content and tools can´t be set prior to Rec

Michael: Until a document goes to candidate recommendation it is not a spec. We can not recommend it is used in a main stream way.

Lisa: We need 2 independent implementations for CR.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> +1 We think its OK and continue to prototype.

Michael: Advantage of data- it will pass a validator. aui would not pass a validator. data- makes it clear they won't be permanent.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> -1 we need to clarif things with webepp

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> 0

<thaddeus> +1

<Becka11y> +1

<stevelee> +1

<janina> ~1

<MichaelC> +1

+1

<janina> +1

Lisa: Agreement we are prototyping with data-

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Protoypes-with-data-dash

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> data-alt-numberfree="most"

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> <h1 data-alt-easylang="form to ask for money if you have a disability or if you are ill">Disability claims under CD 356 / US </h1>

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> <label data-purpose-field="name"

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> <label data-field="name">

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> <label data-purpose="Name">

Lisa: alt is a numberfree alternative.Taking other attributes and making different ways we can do it. If we are talking about field and attribute there are different alternatives people had.

Becky: What will it look like when we remove data. How do we narrow it down to 3?

Lisa: It was a proposal, can we do it with 3. We can't with the current set of use cases since they are used differently.
... We look at what people are using and it becomes the attribute.

Janina: What will we do with the audio attribute? We had caption and described video as an alternative. We may be in a similar situation.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> data-purpose="fieldName"

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> data-purpose-field="name">

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> data-field="name"

Lisa: Which one do we prefer and that is a real discussion to see if we can merge it together without people making mistakes.
... These were the 3 choices we made for design.
... If you can think of better designs that would be great.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> syntax from https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/rewrite-prototype/content/index.html

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
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 thaddeus Becka11y stevelee LisaSeemanKestenbaum MichaelC
Found Scribe: sharon
Inferring ScribeNick: Sharon

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 18 Mar 2019
People with action items: 

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


WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


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.)