<MichaelC> present=

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> just calling in

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Comparison-of-ways-to-use-vocabulary-in-content

timetable

<sgoto> at an airport, so will be dropping out anytime :)

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

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> scribe: tink

<scribe> scribe: Léonie

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

LS: Wanted to review timetables.
... The wiki has the timetable we committed to.
... We need a serious WD of the Explainer by October 2018.
... Plus an early WD of Modules 2 and 3.
... The timetable is designed to fit into the 3 year APA charter.
... Does this sound reasonable?

<Thaddeus> yes

LW: This timetable is based on us continuing the current approach?

LS: No.

LW: But if we decide to take a different approach that would take more time.

MC: We should try to meet the timeline even if we change direction.

JS: Agreed.

LS: ARIA is considered HTML compatible, and we could take a similar approach here.

LW: If we did, one blocker would be the prefixed attributes, which we wouldn't incorporate into HTML and/or an HTML extension.

MC: That's a feature not a bug!

LW: Agreed.

MC: We may also publish with the prefixed attributs, then lter look at an HTML cmpatible format.

JS: We haven't baked results into the charter, just our work.

LS: Ok, so any problems with the next set of WD updates in July?
... For modules 1, 2, 3, and te Explainer.

JS: This is still in the ARIA WG for the moment, so I'm hesitant to confidently say yes or no.
... But suggest we ask ARIA WG for standing permission to publish interim drafts.

+1

<Thaddeus> +1

<Thaddeus> Thad C.

TC: +1

<sgoto> boarding plane now, omw to nyc for tc39. see you all next week.

LS: The Explainer needs updating.
... Also the implementation questions.
... Can anyone help with the introduction?
... Not many people on the call today, so we can ask later.
... Last thing, is the call next week. It's Memorial day.
... Sugest we postpone the call.

thaddues progress

TC: No major changes.
... Cleaned up the typos people pointed out.
... The rest is easy to do in a few minutes.
... Is there work I'm missing other than that?

LS: Did you talk with Janina about alternative implementations?

TC: That's in progress.
... Did you mean existing implementations?

LS: Yes

TC: I'm on that, will report when I have something to cover.
... I had a PR for some changes, but though someone objected to the PR so I withdrew it.

LS: It was an offlist discussion and I wanted to move it on-list.

TC: Ok. I can reissue the PRs again.

LS: Next steps are reissue the PRs, then discuss the example changes JF wanted.

JS: We decided to keep the examples and include disclaimers to make it clear they are not normative.

LS: We wanted to look at whether this was a ood model.
... And look at what is already out there, if anything, and whether it is standardised.
... Can you help with that Thaddius?

TC: I can.

LS: Becky had written an email.
... But is not on the call to discuss.
... Her open action is on the Tools document.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://rawgit.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/new-format-for-help-module/help/index.html

LS: We reordered the content to put the use cases first.
... But not all got moved, so the rest need to be moved now.
... The first thing we want to do is to decide whether we have all the values in the vocabulary?
... We can change them if we want.
... But the task is to determine whether the vocabulary is complete.
... We should get a WD out, then circulate that for feedback on the completeness of the vocabulary.

TC: Did we work with the Coga TF?

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://github.com/w3c/coga/blob/master/issue-papers/graded-help.html

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://github.com/w3c/coga/blob/master/issue-papers/graded-help.html

LS: We did.
... Sound ok?

<Thaddeus> +1

+1

LS: We could either go through open issues and assign them, or start thinking about implementation?
... Not sure we have nenough people to go through the issues.

updates in the implementation issues.

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Comparison-of-ways-to-use-vocabulary-in-content

LS: Michael, did you add the other issues?

MC: Not yet.
... Will try to catch up with Sam.

<Thaddeus> I believe Sam opened an issue on this as well

LS: Trying to remember when we discussed them.

MC: Sam has made some more fleshed out proposals today.

LS: Ok, wht to do with the comments from last time?

MC: I can try to find them.

<Thaddeus> is this helpful https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/74

<Thaddeus> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/77

<Thaddeus> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/76

<Thaddeus> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/73

LS: We need to look at whether implementations support our use cases.
... Or whether any one approach will let us do everything we want to do.
... For now suggest we adjourn.

<Thaddeus> thank you

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/TB: +1/TC: +1/
Succeeded: s/tough/though/
Present: janina MichaelC Léonie Thaddeus Roy LisaSeemanKestenbaum sgoto
Regrets: becky charles
Found Scribe: tink
Inferring ScribeNick: tink
Found Scribe: Léonie
Scribes: tink, Léonie

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: 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.)