<scribe> scribe: becka11y

CL: have completed my action items

<CharlesL> ACTION-21: Will change distraction advertisement to offer and update the description.

<trackbot> Notes added to ACTION-21 Will change distraction advertisement to offer and update the description..

CL: actions 21-25 have been completed

<CharlesL> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/rewrite-prototype/content/index.html#values

CL: follow link above - sort by value; distraction-chat has been updated
... auto-updating has been updated

<CharlesL> Information that is presented in parallel with other content and updates frequently with or without user interaction, unless the auto-updating is part of an activity where it is essential.

JF: where are we making the distinction that this is essential? Who is responsible? This is a design pattern, one we see frequently - should just assume it is essential?

CL: any issue removing “is essential” from auto-updating?

JF: auto-updating is deemed to be a distraction for some users; assuming it is essential - what do we envision happening - if it is essential can it be removed?

CL: perhaps move the location - always presented to the user in a certain area of the page

JF: tagging a content that is a distraction; it is auto-updating -but what can we do about it? It seems user should be able to disable the auto-updating but that could break functionality?

CL: could hide it

BG: not all auto-updating is essential - timer could update every second but user could prefer it every minute

CL; there are different opportunities; need to give the developer that chance to identify

JF: are we expecting content author to provide an accommodation or just to tag it and then we expect an AT to handle removing the distraction; do we consider user interaction an auto update (example: adding another item to a shopping cart and price updates)

JS: is important to understand who does the modification? Issue with auto-updating; example: shopping site search, it adds additional items and more get added as I scroll; I examine than decide a previous one is what I really want - but, then I can’t find it anymore; how is this sort of distraction handled

JF: ... sounds like the problem of auto-updating feeds - as I scroll down more content is added (example: Facebook); I am struggling with the “then what” part - how is auto-updating handled?

JS: design pattern of auto-updating you can’t always swipe backwards to find the previous contents

JF: not sure how that relates to auto-updating; As author I have tagged this but I don’t understand who provides the functionality to change - who provides that functionality? 3rd party or is it the content owner?

JS: perhaps this is an issue with aria-live? live updating is definitely disruptive if you are screen reader user

<JF> When content is marked with aria-live and aria-alert, then they've already "tagged" the content as content that auto-updates

JL: is an issue for coga users that don’t have the benefit of the “cure” that aria-live provides (via screen reader)

<JF> so not sure why we need a second mechanism for that

CL: need Lisa for this conversation; need to provide guidance on how a 3rd party might use (but not a requirement)

JS: aria-live - screen reader figures it out after the content has been tagged

JF: aria-alert has switch between assertive and polite; the content is already being marked up to indicate that it is updating; perhaps we don’t need another tag

CL: is aria-live similar enough that we should combine the two? perhaps we just need to call out the similarities; we are already calling out input focus; perhaps we tied this to aria-live and give people who are not using screen readers the benefit

JF: there is an agreement that aria does nothing to the user interface - by design

JS: we are revisiting that history - by design ARIA does not affect the user interface

CL: can we remove that auto-updating is essential?

JS: we need to include Lisa in that decision

CL: also updated a few examples as part of action items
... added 2 new examples to auto-updating: stock ticker and countdown timer

distractions

<CharlesL> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2019Nov/0011.html

CL: refer to email link above
... last week we took up offer/advertisement, message, and chat

JF: offer also has open ended essential clause

CL: we need to revisit the use of “is essential” clause

JF: with essential clause people will just say that the functionality is essential and then will do nothing

<CharlesL> distraction

<CharlesL> message

<CharlesL> Communication sent to or left for the user.

<CharlesL> This needs better clarification. Is this a message that is added into the user interface or something that is not essential that is displayed within the static interface? Perhaps removal of a static message of this type would fall under simplification? Although these types of message blocks can also be a distraction. A message that gets added to a user interface would be data-distraction=“message auto-updating” if it updates

<CharlesL> more than once. 

JF: we seem to have multiple items that refer to the same thing; auto-updating/message - overlay/popup - how are these different
... are we creating the list for technology or outcomes

JS: this is definitely what we need to consider - outcome vs technology

JF: concerned that the list is becoming too long and won’t be implemented or used properly

JS: Lisa is our pipeline to COGA - which is where this is coming from; we won’t get to a resolution by ourselves

CL: perhaps we can combine some of these as suggested

JS: have that issue today - many things render differently in various browsers

JF: people will struggle with the nuances - need to better define and constrain

CL: need Lisa’s input
... let’s look at the explainer; I need to do security audit before we go to TAG;

 explainer

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

CL: also need to make sure everyone reviews and that it serves the correct purpose
... reviewing hierarchy of explainer...

BG: I reviewed it this morning; I thought the structure and content was sufficient; some links within implementation wiki (that was referenced from explainer) were broken

JF: already see an issue with bullet about advertisements and separating from content; have to be careful as many websites rely on advertisements to keep the lights on (make sufficient income to fund the website)

CL; need to work with the advertisers so they understand that they will lose some set of users if they don’t provide accommodations for those users

JF: we need to be careful to specify that content creators MUST do these items - if so it will never be taken up or go anywhere

CL: so you are suggesting that moving the advertisement bullet point is in our best interest?

JF: no, needs wordsmithing to be less intimidating

JS: agree, there are cases where you might want to find the advertisement

JF: differentiate 3rd party content from authored content

CL: need to clarify what is “native” and what is from 3rd party

JF: need to get away from the word “advertisement”

CL; asks JF to review that bullet point and come up with alternative wording; look for additional items that might be problemmatic

SS: will also review

Happy Thanksgiving to all the US folks!

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)

Succeeded: s/agenda- item3//
Present: CharlesL janina JF Becka11y Sharon roy
Regrets: Lisa
Found Scribe: becka11y
Inferring ScribeNick: Becka11y
Found Date: 25 Nov 2019
People with action items: 

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.)