<LisaSeemanKest> agenda explainer https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/132

<LisaSeemanKest> agenda what we need to do next! https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki#module-1-and-the-explainer

<scribe> Scribe: JF

what we need to do next! https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki#module-1-and-the-explainer

LS: forwarded draft to APA for wider review
... on timeline, there is a proposal for CR

Needs to be done in 3 weeks (end of January)

might slip, but hopefully not too much

we need to review explainer, need security review, and there may be issues. This is for the First module and Explainer

CL: TAG filed an issue - we need to make some changes based on feedback from TAG

LS: already on agenda
... are there any other issues we need to address before CR?
... another impending deadline is a how to do a scalable implementations

Another deadline is for Module 2 - wide review scheduled for April

LS: but we should focus on first things first

JF: remember that march = CSUN as well - lost time

Will do some task assignment before end of call

explainer https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/132

LS: but are we all in agreement that we need to work on these 2 items first?

*agreement*

LS: Charles has opened an issue re: Explainer

there may be one response - can we add content from our wiki?

Can the Explainer point to the wiki

JF: don't think we can point to wikis - add wiki content to explainer
... suspect that Explainer will be published as a Note (likely in /TR space)

LS: there is so much story to tell... not sure if adding it all to

Explainer would work

BG: Agrees that content cannot be publicly editable - more of an archive

LS: Do we add an appendix to the requirements document?

BG: do you mean the Explainer?

JS: it is reasonab le that wse want it to be a "good read" and not too complicated

LS: somebody will need to write the executive summary, AND pull the stuff from the wiki for the Appendix

What is needed is editorial control so that when it is finalized, it is also stable

LS: suggests a) Explainer, b) Requirements Document (which includes the Appendix), and then the Explainer can reference the Requirements Documents

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

BG: Do we have a requirements document now?

LS: we do, but we tend to be using the wiki more at this time
... there are also use-cases in the wiki, so we probably need to add that to the requirements document now

BG: we have a lot of editors now

LS: do we need to move the use-cases too?

+!

+1

JF: can we update the Explainer (Note) over time?

JS: b elieves so

BG: so we only need to move the use-cases for the first module?

*general agreement*

LS: 3 tasks: 1) a Summary for Explainer with the different options we rejected (with link to Appendix), 2) write the Appendix (takes content from wiki), why we made decisions we made,

3) go through Module 1 and add use-cases to wiki

CL: I can take on Task 3, suspect that Lisa should write first draft for Task 1

<LisaSeemanKest> ACTION: charles to add the usecases from the wiki into requirments also add editors note to the other section(

<trackbot> Created ACTION-28 - Add the usecases from the wiki into requirments also add editors note to the other section( [on Charles LaPierre - due 2020-01-13].

LS: (also add editor's notes to other sections)

<LisaSeemanKest> ACTION: lisa to do exectiv summary of imilemtion

<trackbot> Created ACTION-29 - Do exectiv summary of implementation [on Lisa Seeman-Kestenbaum - due 2020-01-13].

BG: potentially can do this - want to ensure I am clear on task
... we want to take discussion and previous explorations that are in the wiki now, with the goal to add it to the final document. But we can do the editorial clean-up in the wiki for now

CL: to be clear - will do cleanup in the wiki, and then once we are finalized we can do a copy and paste to the Exp;lainer

LS: presume it will be a new page in the wiki?

<LisaSeemanKest> ACTION: becky make draft of impelemtion options to be an appandenix in the requirments doc (draft can be in a new page in the wiki)

BG: yes

<trackbot> Created ACTION-30 - Make draft of impelemtion options to be an appandenix in the requirments doc (draft can be in a new page in the wiki) [on Becky Gibson - due 2020-01-13].

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/132

BG: "what we considered, and why we went with what we went with..."

CL: explanation on why not aria-*, but data-* (example)

ACTION on JF to write-up Non-Goals due Jan 13, 2020

<trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/personalization/track/users>.

ACTION on Foliot to write up Non-Goals due Jan 13 2020

<trackbot> Error finding 'on'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/personalization/track/users>.

<Roy_> ACTION: JF to write-up Non-Goals due Jan 13, 2020

<trackbot> Created ACTION-31 - Write-up non-goals due jan 13, 2020 [on John Foliot - due 2020-01-13].

ACTION JF to write-up Non-Goals due Jan 13 2020

<trackbot> Created ACTION-32 - Write-up non-goals due jan 13 2020 [on John Foliot - due 2020-01-13].

* discussion about stake-holders

LS: anyone prepared to write up stake-holders?

CL: seems like Lisa needs to take that

security review

<scribe> ACTION: Lisa to write-up Stakeholders content too

<trackbot> Created ACTION-33 - Write-up stakeholders content too [on Lisa Seeman-Kestenbaum - due 2020-01-13].

<LisaSeemanKest> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2020Jan/0000.html

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/131

JF: thinks that this won't *just* be client side - discussion on proxy-servers

<CharlesL> Security Audit 2.1 - add authenticated proxy server

<CharlesL> scenerio.

JF: Security around forms: i.e. symbols provide alternative "labels", and has nothing to do with data collection

CL: security issue is, via proxy server, that you now need to use symbols (i.e. Private identifying information)

LS: those who are using a proxy-server... it would identify at-risk users

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

JF: proxy-servers are under control of offering service - responsibility rests with them

LS: 2 tasks left - add labels to all issues (most have, later ones don't), and starting to respond to questions

<LisaSeemanKest> action, sharon lable issues not lable and maybe answer some of them

ACTION Sharron to label issues and start to reply (when possible) or bring back issues

<trackbot> Error finding 'Sharron'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/task-forces/personalization/track/users>.

ACTION Sharon to label issues and start to reply (when possible) or bring back issues

<trackbot> Created ACTION-34 - Label issues and start to reply (when possible) or bring back issues [on Sharon Snider - due 2020-01-13].

JF: we need to resolve CSUN ASAP

trackbot, end meeting

<CharlesL> I will make another crack at the security audit with this new information about proxy server

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
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/dealdine/deadline/
Succeeded: s/imilemtion/implementation/
Default Present: CharlesL, JF, janina, sharon, !
Present: CharlesL JF janina sharon !
Found Scribe: JF
Inferring ScribeNick: JF

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

Found Date: 06 Jan 2020
People with action items: becky charles draft impelemtion jf lisa make of options

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.)