25 Sep 2017

See also: IRC log


clapierre, janina, lisa, Roy, MichaelC, jasonjgw


<scribe> scribe: clapierre

Introductions and why we are interested in the work

Lisa: I co-chair the coga WG better a11y with cognative disabilities

Charles: Diagram Center/ Born Accessible at Benetech

Andy: I am a consultant, editor of user needs standard at SC35 on edge of becoming an ISO.
... model like a architecture for user needs 120 descriptions.
... get user needs on the map, they are ICT based. not all are content based. not all suited for WCAG, but some are.
... International picture we have user needs which could be useful in personalization. worked in many efforts. editor 24751
... user needs in ISO.

Janina chiar for looking at a11y concerns for any specification.

scribe: within the W3C. I am very interested in ARIA module should move fwd.
... Benetech and their projects, andy in their project, INDI UI
... CSS buy in as well.
... longterm work Personalization place in W3C spec where it makes sense.

Lisa: we are getting wide range of perspectives.

Jason: I work in many W3C groups, Janina, Lisa, Charles with Diagram Center.
... I work with Janina in Indi UI WG, amd what might be involved with for web applications, and TPAC last year media capabilities and extend to user needs and preferenes. how can we disclose those needs to web apps security concerns. how to achive this without skyrocketing costs for QA and testing.

Roy: I am from China
... I joined this as staff contact for W3C. I follow Micheal's work
... I hope I can help.

Supporting tools options (zakim, github, rssagent or github issues, googledocs, the wiki etc)

Lisa: great starting points.
... , supporting tool options for this TF. Issue pages, wiki, google docs? etc.
... . home page to have all our links. Option is GitHub which is common for W3C.
... wiki for a scratchpad. in COGA we used google dos. any comments?
... any preferences, github / wiki? Or GoogleDocs.

Janina: I am not comfortable with Google docs but that is just me.

Andy: I would rather not use Google Docs

Michael: Note: GitHub plays a different role for us. its a Revision control and formal deliverables.
... should ancillary edits be in this or some other place?
... What is useful for thinking through other types of edits? it can be done in GitHub, but in another location if it has to be migrated over and over.

Lisa: are we happy with wiki? its easy to edit make changes. if we avoid tables it is easier. for building ideas.

Charles: I am fine with a wiki.

Janina, other than tables, but its not my fav.

<Zakim> MichaelC_, you wanted to note their are two wiki options

<MichaelC_> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/_new

Michael: there are two wiki options, I haven't set up the W3C wiki. the Github wiki can be used more freely. might be easier for others, and there are user friendly than W3C wiki.

Lisa: any objections?

Andy: I think its important to poll his preference.

<lisa> jason are you ok with wiki and google docs?

Charles: I think Jason could handle himself in either GoogleDocs / wiki… but wouldn't want to speak on his behalf.

What the dosument could include - (user needs, semantics etc) - see https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/

Lisa: Charles and I will take this offline
... The specification itself this is our first draft.
... There is some success criteria where this document could provide techniques.
... a use case for people to complete those success criterial from WCAG 2.1
... what would we like to do? this has semantics, it does not define user needs.
... we have a proposal for User needs, it links to a document in section 4
... scope of work? define user needs? semantics? what do we feel as a group we would like to include in the scope for personalization.

Janina: I think top priority that the AIRA module, authored, we need this to move this fwd. this make its the top prospect.
... pick what Benetech, DAISY, Andy and around the user needs / specification efforts and who in W3C, like CSS media queries. those would be the top two things.
... this module is on an independent timeframe, but we want to bring this to a rec. we need to get this moved fwd.

Micheal: this is not yet tied to a specific release, and this could be a vocabulary and not a spec itself.

Janina, if its not AIRA what is the parent group

Micheal: current thinking that ARIA is still the main group, there might be a lightweight module supporting the vocabulary.

Jason: main priority to work out what the approach is to enable the web applications personalize able. How implementers to get it right etc. privacy concerns.
... W3C meeting idea media queries, or other technologies, provide mechanism individual needs and preferences and start experimenting what could be disclosed, from communities outside the W3C.

<lisa> im back

Andy: I support what Jason said.
... leaves a number of questions. great way to go. I want to do the wider pictures.
... there is a piece missing at a higher level, and I think we can do this and get it on the map.

Lisa: we do have an issue paper on this.

<lisa> https://w3c.github.io/coga/issue-papers/personalization-preferences.html

Lisa: lets talk about 3 pieces.
... 1. semantics
... 2. Architecture
... 3. User needs
... and standardize. Janina's first point semantics need to get out faster part of AIRA group 1st deliverable.
... the Architecture would be secondary piece, authoring best practices.
... then user needs will take us longer. semantics need to go first because of WCAG

Janina: I am opposed to start with an architectural approach. this group is not a continuation of IndiUI.
... We got stuck, meanwhile the coga people started a ARIA module, its low hanging. there are implementations it has the oppertunity to become a W3C rec.
... I think we need to be focused on getting that a W3C rec.
... I don't think we need to go to the architecture. we need to look at User needs with Benetech, DAISY. etc. that is where we should focus our attention. the overall architecture will be very difficult to achieve.
... I think that is a distraction.

Lisa: I pospose : semantics, low hanging get this to CR. then look at user needs section, and then we revisit if there is something we need to look at for architecture.

Janina: do we want to use Media Queries? MQ is offered to us a year ago. if that is useful then we should looik at user needs available and see if MQ will work for us.
... at the time we thought that was a home run. we should take advantage..

Lisa: look at semantics first.
... there are a lot of resources of user needs and describing them.

Janina: I am not concerned on what we put up for our document, but what can we pick from these existing documents.

<lisa> …priority 1. semantics

<lisa> ....priority 2. user needs

<lisa> ....priority 3 user needs do they map to media queries what can we pick from where, do we need to look at architectures

Jason: I agree with Janina and looking at MQ and other ways which are really closely related to our needs.

<lisa> …priority 1. semantics

<lisa> ....priority 2. user needs : a,collect and b, allow to standardize in interoprable way user needs do they map to media queries what can we pick from where,

<lisa> ....priority 3 do we need to look at architectures beyond what we have

Lisa: do we have consensus on these priorities?


<lisa> andy +1

<lisa> +1

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to speak against starting on overall architecthural approach

<lisa> media quieres is CSS, that is realy good news

Janina: IMPORTANT, MQ is a CSS specification. success in CSS for this personalization.

Michael: MQ could meet a lot of our needs, but not all. we should not tie exclusively to MQ.

<AndyHeath> +1 for MQ as a starting point

<lisa> …priority 1. semantics

<lisa> ....priority 1.2 . user needs : a,collect and b, allow to standardize in interoprable way user needs do they map to media queries what can we pick from where,

<lisa> ....priority 2 do we need to look at architectures beyond what we have

Michael: Priorities: yes its a priority to bring Personalization semantics, but identifying User needs is usually the first step. we need some parallel effort with understanding we will get User needs.

Janina: question, can we do that with reference to FC35.

Andy: Its going to be an international standard, its out for comment, trying to get a readable version for web. but has 120 needs. with Guide 71. principals/goals which these needs are under.
... I want to add that we need to write down those descriptions and mapping those and referencing, and not just SC35 stuff fairly highlevel view.

<lisa> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/user-settings

<MichaelC> http://w3c.github.io/apa/fast/#inventory-user-needs

<lisa> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/table.html

Michael: I agree with Andy / Janina, we need to reference user needs and the COGA gap analysis. parallel in APA Framework accessible technologies, with user needs
... we can decide what user needs we are meeting.
... lets not get bogged down in User Need.

Lisa: COGA the gap analysis an what the spec maps to what user need. that is our starting point but there are missing pieces.
... we were making these tables of User needs / semantics. may not be complete but a starting point.

Janina: Charles to help us with developing this. wiki for all these pointers in place. if we are going to move something to a W3C spec. but we need to explain what problem we are addressing.

Lisa: every item in this will map to a specific user needs.

<lisa> ACTION: charles and lisa to set up a wiki page collect userneeds sources [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/25-personalization-minutes.html#action01]

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

Lisa: the actions we haven't decided on yet, looking at we have already and what we need to cull or write it differently so it can be a vocabulary. can everyone look at this and see if we should move it to a vocab. and what should we remove if anything.
... so we can get this out as a rec quickly.

<lisa> changes to doc: include: culling, restuction i - in part a vocab

Lisa: can we restructure as a vocabulary.
... move this discussion on the list.

Micheal: we should move this to the mailing list. we may want to schedule a recurring call but use the mailing list.

Lisa: I think we decided this was the best time.
... lets add next week on agenda on weekly / biweekly and addressing of the restructuring of the document.

<lisa> https://beta.doodle.com/poll/uw32kkyziiz2tiue

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: charles and lisa to set up a wiki page collect userneeds sources [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/25-personalization-minutes.html#action01]

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.152 (CVS log)
$Date: 2017/09/25 18:08:39 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
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)

Succeeded: s/Roy/Andy/
Succeeded: s/cahrles/charles/
Present: clapierre janina lisa Roy MichaelC jasonjgw
Regrets: gregg
Found Scribe: clapierre
Inferring ScribeNick: clapierre

WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting

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

Got date from IRC log name: 25 Sep 2017
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/09/25-personalization-minutes.html
People with action items: charles lisa

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

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]