<sgoto> hey all

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> hey sam!

<scribe> scribe: JF

CL: Looking at the matrix, and it seems we're narrowing down to 2 possible mechanisms

the first is aui-attributes, and the other is to use a microsyntax

pros and cons to both: aui seems easier to author, but larger number of attributes to learn and integrate

A single attribute may be easier to parse, but harder to authro due to the complexity of the syntax

CL: need to be sure everyone understands the differences, and to see if there is a concensus

LS: AUI may be easier for implementations, but not necessarily for browsers. it will likely start out with a more community-focused effort (hackathons, etc.)
... we have a small collection of AT now, so we'll likely need browsser extensions (etc.) early on

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> aui - action

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> (purpose = " undo critical"

LS: currently very pro AUI method, seems to be the most flexible

however James Neuther (SP) feels the biggest cost will be in performance due to re-rendering

(James Nurthern @ Adobe?)

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> div[class*="test"]

<clapierre> James is the aria- cochair with Jonie

But there seems to be a mechanism to use CSS selectors

LS: is Becky and Sam understanding the two current options
... not sure if the second option will support everything

CL: at first was wondering where 3 options came from... as the microsyntax may not support all of the use-cases, maybe we need more than just one attribute

or if there is a performance hit

going from 1 to 2 or 3 may be a second discussion

CL reight now do we go with aui-* or do with go with "purpose" + microsyntax

BG: not so concerned about complexity of microsyntax, it seems easy enough to parse

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> <p pourpose = " easylang(this is a long easy to understand discrpiton, with 3 sentences.) numner free(this is a a discrpiton with=ch aviods number, with 4 sentences.) other critical"

People wo'll start hacking at this will likely start small and then grow. One reason why I like the microsyntax

CL: curious to hear from Sam before we take a straw vote

SG: this still seems somewhat abstract - no strong opinons either way

CL: some people I've spoken with don't think it's a big deal to parse the microsyntax, curious to hear Sam's thoughtsw

SG: hard to answer without actual use-cases, but at this time don't think parsing will be that difficult
... somewhat concerned about [inaudible]
... spent a lot of time trying to annotate forms, and never found a good solution that worked well

seeing this in context - like in a form - would give me a better idea, and help me understand a bit more

SG: but inthe abstract, both seem to be fine

CL: we are missing ... Janina, Thadeus, Sharron... wqe can do a straw poll, and then take it to our mailing list

LS: if we can resolve it and then post a CfC on the list

CL: do you want to do it all on the list for a permanent record
... should we take a straw poll now?

CL if you prefer the aui-* option use +1, if neutral use 0, opposed use -1

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> +1 aui

LS: is the microsyntax with potentially multiple possible attributes

CL: if we need to later we can, but start with 1

<Becka11y> 0

-1 to aui-*

<clapierre> +1 micro syntax

<clapierre> 0 aui

<sgoto> i don't feel strongly either way

+1 to microsyntax

<Becka11y> +1 micro syntax

CB: can live with AUI, but prefer microsyntax

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> <p pourpose = " easylang(this is a long easy to understand discrpiton, with 3 sentences.) numner free(this is a a discrpiton with=ch aviods number, with 4 sentences.) other critical"

LS: can live with microsyntax, as long as everything isn't all crammed into one

but have concern with some of the potential use-case - concerned it will be confusing

it's an overloaded concept, different things being jammed into one

Not sure what the microsyntax will look like. Also concerned about author error

example of Contact us, and it being added to a region, not the actual link

the more you overload, the greater chance of author-error

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> actionundo

LS: unless you make each term seperate

huge amount of spelling

doubled the amount of load we're adding - will bloat the p[age

CL: so you think using aui-* will help authors, but the negative is that we'll have so many attributes

the fewer the attributes, the less "permission" we need to seek if we want to add more

but I can see how the aui-* method may be easier on authros

JF: strongly disagree that one method is easier to author than the other, we have no imperical evidence to prove that

BG: we need to consider whether one is easier for HTML to adopt - if yues, which one?

my feeling is that the single one may be, but it does require a large set of pairs

may be something to discuss with web platform group

CL: yes, but we don't want to wait that long

LS: can we reach out to them?

CL: yes, we could, a variation of the email sent to James N. for their feedback

lay out the potetnial options and get their feedback

LS: my comments are based on three different examples of people trying to implement in hackathons, etc.

when we had one attribute (but not microsyntax) they got it wrong, but when they were seperated they got it better

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> <p pourpose = " easylang(this is a long easy to understand discrpiton, with 3 sentences.) numner free(this is a a discrpiton with=ch aviods number, with 4 sentences.) other critical"

LS: concerned about long strings of text for easylang and numbersfree
... that's a can't live with scenario (using an id and idref)
... this seems to be adding too much

CL: wasn't suggesting that we go that way

BG: I was thinking that the option of using an idref could work
... it could be confusing when we have long strings, no matter where or how we add them

+1 to Becky

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> purpose="easylang:("4 paragraphs") numberfree:("4 paragraphs") simplification:critical " versus aui-easylang="4 sentences" aui-numberfree="4 sentences" simplification="critical"

CL: you may also want to sytlize that text: having that associated with an ID may have some benefit as well

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> look at the number of bugs

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask what the difference would be between purpose="easylang:("4 paragraphs")" versus aui-easylang="4 sentences" and to

LS: the advantage is... if you look at it to parse it, you are missing a colon or something, then I may get it wrong

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> purpose="easylang:("4 paragraphs") numberfree:("4 paragraphs") simplification:critical " versus aui-easylang="4 sentences" aui-numberfree="4 sentences" simplification="critical"

if the author makes a mistake, it will break

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask if we have any data on hand authoring versus WYSIWYG authoring...

LS: we may not have enough evicense, but we do have some evidence. If this was overload, people make mistakes (seen 3 examples)
... I write code by hand. I know that I will mess up using the microsyntax
... disagree with WYSIWYG editting - for example Dreamweaver...

these tools are popular - millions using them today

we're not going to get this into the tools right away - so we will rely on hand-authoring to get this implemented to day

so if we wait for authoring tools, we'll never get critical mass

LS: we won't get a good user experience, and we won't get a good authoring experience

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> im not talking about large clients. i am talking about c=schools

CL: we're over time. Next steps?
... hot topic, but we need to cmoe up with a solution

LS: we need a survey

CL: out to whom? just this groupo, the APA as well, others?

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> aui- . onle microsyntax. three microsyntax

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> becky prefers three

<LisaSeemanKestenbaum> (mistake)

BG: preference is single attribute with microsyntax

SG: don't have sufficient data to make a final decision
... how many users have you polled to make the decision, how many instances do we have of people trying
... in front of me if I had 6 different user-case scenarios, I'd have more data to analyze. but at this time, I remain neutral

neutral to both, as I lack data

CL: so in our survey, we need to show 3 different examples

SG: yes, but even 3 isn't enough. We need as many use-cases as posible where we expect this to be used

then we can write down how that would look like and work

LS: does anyone else think we need 6 uses cases to make a difference?

SG: if we had some examples, I'd love to look at them

CL: we don;t have very formal examples - but we could pick some examples and attempt to code it up

SG: what criteria are you using to judge either option?

is it personal taste? experience?

BG: we need to wrap today

but would like to hear the answer - next week?

trackbot, end meeting

oh now...

*no*

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.153  of Date: 2018/09/19 14:40:21  
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/pourse/purpose/
Succeeded: s/cureious/curious/
Succeeded: s/metyhjod/method/
Present: JF clapierre LisaSeemanKestenbaum sgoto Becky
Found Scribe: JF
Inferring ScribeNick: JF

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


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: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


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.)