scribe, becka11y

<scribe> scribe: Becka11y

Charles: Introduces Sam

Sgoto: work at google in Chrome group doing standards - mostly Javascript standards; has worked on conversatinal interfaces; works on a11y and mostly assistance in Chrome

Charles: DIAGRAM centre is hosting a code sprint June 9&10 - will send Sam info

JF: met Sam at TPAC, asked him to join because he has experience with metadata and has good insights on implementation and using at scale.
... very excited to have Sam working with us
... John Foliot - works at deque has been actively working on WCAG 2.1 and involved in 1.3.4 and 1.3.5 SC which is about adding metadata to controls - and thus has become interested in personalization. excited to become more actively involved in the group

<clapierre> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/83726/2018-04_p13n/

Charles: last week we discussed moving this personalization group out of ARIA into APA working group. Both groups are renewing charter so we need to make a decision soon; Most in group seem to think move to APA is good idea, Lisa prefers staying in ARIA. There is a survey on the topic

Michael: members of APA, ARIA and personalization groups please vote. Open through Friday, April 20. This survey will inform the upcoming charter updates

Charles: is there enough time for charter updates?

Michael: both groups have draft charters so timing is tight but not impossible

zakin, next item

Charles: made a pull request for his item

<Thaddeus> I can have that today-tomorrow

<Thaddeus> q

Charles: Thaddeus task was to review privacy implications
... pull request has been processed

<Thaddeus> I was out for a bit and can finish by tomorrow

Charles: 20 open issues - Joannie raised a number last week which is good

Becky: still has help

Sharon: was supposed to work on issues but hasn’t had a chance

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

Charles: url to issues list

Michael: we should assign issues so we know who is responsible

Charles: we did assign #4 to Thaddeus
... Becky has #1
... Michael has #3,

updates (Homework from 3 weeks ago)

Whats needed to get the other modules ready for FPWD.

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

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

Charles: this is the explainer document; currently only 1 module, we need at least 2. next adaptable help and then adaptable tools
... Need to look in section 3 - help and support are there more items to address?
... seems like there is a fair amount of content with examples, should we review this offline and see if there are sections to improve?
... 3.4 alternative, has no values section -

JF: it seems we are proposing several new attributes and that scares me because there is a large learning curve. Are these standa alone attributes or are they values for existing attributes

Michael: this is part of the whole meta data question, believes we should look as these as terms for now

JF: am concerned about sheer volume - how do these terms differ, some seem too similar
... concerned with values

Michael: feature is a value

JF: but concerned about taking these back to developers

Charles: 9 main areas within help and support - perhaps we could potentiall combine some of them but not all, numbers free, for example stands on its own separate from some of the others

JF: looking at numberfree - described as alternative text so what makes it a separate attribute rather than a value or function

Michael: regardless of how applied to metadata there is going to be a property - value pair to the vocabulary; we shouldn’t let the use of attributes in the archhitecture shouldn’t distract us

Charles: What do we need to resolve before going to FPWD?

Michael: prefer some obvious cleanup first but JF raised valid points. We can do the cleanup by filing issues

JF: happy to jump in but stlll strugging to understand the big picture, seems like driving to a solution based on attributes. Thinks we should be working more abstractly

Michael: at the moment if it has a heading it is a property, if it is below that, itis a value
... suggest kill the value and keep the property or vice versa as a starting point

Becky: I think cleaning up help is my action item but I am not clear what is required

Charles: suggest we need to ask Lisa about the goal

Michael: it should probably be COGA task force rather than relying solely on Lisa
... suggest, attempt a cleanup and then send it to task force to see if we removed anything important

Charles: worried that we don’t know where to start; agree with JF that it seems reasonable to combine items that seem similar

JF: seems we are struggling with granularity; many feel very similar but were originally proposed as similar
... some of this feels like leftover from original thrust of making these aria attributes; if we are working on a metadata vocabulary we seem to already have broken this up into different types of personalization - is that the right approach?
... we seem to still be using a hyphenated-attribute approach but think we need to be more focused on vocabulary; realize that I am new to group but here others on the call who are also struggling

Thaddeus: One approach is to step back and look at doc and figure out what we think we are tryng to say. Have people report back
... not everyone in COGA was involved in personalization aspect
... agree with JF that if we don’t agree on architecture we will have difficulty going forward

Michael: does the lack of architecuture prevent us from moving forward

JF: we seem to focus on implementation when we shouldn’t be - concerned too many new properties

Michael: we are proposing properties - they may be exposed as attributes. But vocabulary doesn’t force that; our examples admittedly do focus on attributes but it doesn’t have to be that way

JF: then why do we have 3 modules if it is one vocabulary. seems we are looking at different implementations based on modules

Charles: don’t believe that separate modules was for different technologies, was just a way to break up the work

Michael: has been discussion on whether or not per. fits into ARIA - general consensus has been that it doesn’t but Michael believes that some of the modules may fit into ARIA.

Charles: perhaps it is the examples that is throwing everyone off - would it be better to remove them and just have the vocabulary

<Thaddeus> +1

JF; thinks focus on vocabulary is the best solution; agree part of the problem is hinting at the solution and may distract from understanding the issue fully

Charles: if we do add examples we need to add more that one

Michael: should address the examples that look like we are creating attributes - but we haven’t made the decision that we are/are not creating attributes

JF: still struggling with what looks like lots and lots of attributes

Michael: if we replace the word attributes with properties - perhaps that is the case. MIchael’s view is that they are not attributes.
... that is a good reason for modules - to get at least the simple ones out and not overwhelm with too many at once

Charles: need to figure out next steps
... would like us each to take a bird’s eye view of document and give feedback on what we think the group is doing

<JF> +1 to Thad - if this group is confused, good luck selling it forward

Thaddeus: hear’s members being confused and we need to start resolving that

Charles: was a good discussion, appreciate everyone’s input
... reminder to fill out survey

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/Diagramm/DIAGRAM/
Succeeded: s/Mike/Michael/
Succeeded: s/still be using a metadata approach/still be using a hyphenated-attribute approach/
Present: clapierre Thaddeus Becka11y JF Roy_ MichaelC sgoto Sharon
Regrets: Lisa_Seeman-Kestenbaum
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: 

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.)