<Thaddeus> +present
<scribe> scribe: becka11y
<Thaddeus> I joined
<clapierre> I joined APA as well
Janina: topic is join APA - everyone needs to rejoin due to approval of new charter; your AC rep also needs to approve you - you may need to remind them
Charles: you don’t have to leave ARIA to join (or rejoin) APA
JF: are you saying we have to join ARIA because is a joint task force
Charles: clarify you don’t have to be a member of ARIA but you also do not have to leave ARIA in order to join APA
<janina> https://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/83907/join
Charles: joining APA does not require personalization folks to attend every meeting of APA
Janina: confirms; has started on agenda for TPAC; concerning technologies; will try to schedule with web platforms group for joint times; looking at Monday but that has issues trying to get time with publications; but APA does have some overlap with Publications
charles: last publication was in March; released the explainer and content module as updated working drafts; looking to release next version
<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/
Charles: reviewed the issues with label of explainer - there were only 3; #69 and #70 discussed on the list - some issue with doc links; that only occurs in the March version because there were no public drafts; should be fixed once we have first public WD of those modules
Michael: need to double check at
publication time. Assign to Roy
... need to point to something - add a note to these issues to
double check at publication time
Charles: assign #69 and #70 to
Roy
... Becky made a pull request - does it effect explainer?
<clapierre> Prior art, comparison and trade-offs of taxonomy used in Adaptable Content Module #74
I don’t believe so - I did not address #74
charles: Sam filed this issue
looking for more resources in the explainer
... Thaddeus added references in the comparison document but it
is not in the explainer
Thaddeus: action item was to add
the references so we could review / discuss; expected Sam to
review
... believes the best place to ask questions concerning issues
is to comment within the issue; Have commented but there has
been no response
Charles: yes the approach of raising question in the issues usually works but this group hasn’t been as active in the issues
Michael: there is a link in the respository to be notified of changes to issues; we need people to review the issues; these walk-throughs in the calls help to build up that practice
Charles: requests that everyone watch this repository; For #74 would like to ask Sam to look further into this
Thaddeus: did research when added them into the comparison document so can do this if necessary
Charles: Comparison info is going to be added into the Explainer document - does this have to happen before the next version of the explainer is published?
Thaddeus: we never came to consensus about the implementation options we discussed
JF: can we make a formal agenda item to formally review the comparisons
<scribe> ACTION: add extended discussion of issue #74 to next week’s agenda
<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/content/index.html
Charles: next module to
publish/update is the content module
... 17 open issues for content module
I addressed some today
Addressed #1, 44,45, 68
#1 was just typos - many have already been fixed
<clapierre> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/68
one was just an example from JF; another was a fairly big edit to simplification (44 and 45)
Charles; let’s discuss #68
all other values applied to data that you would put into a field; section did not
Charles: was the intent to group
the information type - personal info; address
... so might put this on a div surrounding a set of related
controls
JF: want to generalize the
information being input
... example is shipping address - it may or may not be a home
address; sectioning around the data is related to person so
want to personalize that
Charles: get clarification from Lisa that what we have discussed is the intent of section. If so we need to add more clarification. So update the issue with these questions
JF: we are going to have to
develop a vocabulary around this; but there may be additional
items that are specific to certain tasks - grades for
universities, etc. We need to identify at least the top 5 -
10
... asks if there is any research around these types of
groupings? some common ones - gender;
home,shipping,billing;
Thaddeus: we might look at
scheme.org and the ones that Sam referenced in issue #74
... isn’t aware of any resources/research in coga around this
issue, will look and report back
I will remove that from the pull request and just update the issue
charles: issue #33
<clapierre> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/33
charles: aria-function is not defined but is used in a example
issue #36
<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/content/index.html#use_case_interoperable_symbols
<clapierre> and
<clapierre> https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/content/index.html#symbol-explanation
Charles: check for consistency
and accuracy of symbol definition
... not sure of specific action for this issue - does anyone
have ideas?
... table #36 move onto #42
... understand that these symbols are pre-defined and issues is
asking how can we make these meet WCAG requirements
... would need to see examples - may depend upon the background
colors, etc;
Whose responsibility is that?
JF: responsibility would be the
user’s if they may have overridden the content default
styles
... there are standard sets of symbols; who defines which ones
are used and how they interact with the content;
... may need some specific requirements for symbols - double
border; with white and black so fit anywhere
Charles: has created some icons that can work on a black or a white background due to use of double border and black and white colors
<janina> Janina says "black on black works fine for me--and it's perfectly secure!" <snarky grin>
Charles: how to address? require
symbols to provide dark and light background and content author
would indicate which was needed?
... needs further discussion
Janina: this is related to long standing issues around CSS and dealing with background / foreground
JF: there is a CSS attribute called inverse that no one supports
Janina: asked Lisa to help get CSS contrast issue correctly logged into our issue tracker
<Thaddeus> Thanks
how to add Thaddeus as present?
thaddeus: present+
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) Present: janina Becka11y JF Roy clapierre MichaelC Regrets: Lisa 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: 74 add discussion extended issue of 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.)[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]