Personalization Task Force Teleconference -- 27 Jan 2020

<Becka11y> scribe: becka11y

LS: We are published our wide review draft of explainer; need to get it out there; need to discuss overlap between our group and COGA; can also discuss i18n if time
... let’s start with overlap of COGA success criteria and WCAG

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DPtCqWHjrhj3QZ4afsqzmWDd-zMSf39RsMqSpR2QGCg/edit#heading=h.ej41yvbs80dk

Rachel: overlap is essential controls - now called hidden controls

Lisa: lisa reads from document at url above

becky: how is this different from labels

rachel: purpose is that controls are visible for people with cognitive difficulties. If a control is needed to complete a task, you can find this easily / always visible or can be made permanently visible

becky: is there a broken example?

rachel: webex - you have to hover over toolbar to find controls, another is editing - you have to hover over to find edit button

<Rachael> Examples at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lUh2ZsQXRlC_S2gtJE5mMSIHEwB1K2gBBc0VL3hL4Yk/edit

Lisa: youtube is another example - you have to hover over video to find play and other controls

Janina: is there anything in this SC about consistent naming?

Rachel: doesn’t fall under this one - it is about visual persistence

Lisa: user agent should be able to find it for you
... one mechanisms for technique is data-critical

JF: we need 2 implementations

Lisa: we have 2 but don’t know status of Firefox one; we need to know what is needed
... need to reach out to those implementors and make sure is available when needed

charles: simplification critical - we don’t mention in our info that it must be visible on the screen - do we need to address or is having it in WCAG sufficient
... we have our chrome version and there is a version for Firefox that we hope to have refined - have discussed with the dev. and he is willing to make improvements

Janina: we can’t lose track of deadlines, let’s review.

Lisa: we have deadines on our wiki

Rachel: track deadlines with Allistair but I will remain on conversation

<LisaSeemanKest> ACTION: lisa check with alister the deadlines work

<trackbot> Created ACTION-35 - Check with alister the deadlines work [on Lisa Seeman-Kestenbaum - due 2020-02-03].

Lisa: current wording is that SC is met if control can be programmatically determined that it is important OR if always visible. Thus data-simplification=critica

<janina> Argh, sorry!

JF: nothing gets dropped if we publish a WCAG version - it will still be worked on for next release; we are already getting pushed back on 1.3.5; If we keep adding SC to push for people to do more we will continue to get push back
... WCAG 2.2 is scheduled by summer; we are rushing to support this new SC but am concerned it isn’t well supported

Lisa: we are supporting WCAG

JF: are we going to be fully baked by March?

<Rachael> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/project

<scribe> scribe: disussions about when WCAG 2.2 will be published

JF: 2020 is next identified date

Janina: yes, but we know that these sllip - we can’t just give up based on a possible date
... we understand that SC are marked at risk

Lisa: dates from Rachel (URI above) look okay - our deadline is April

Janina: 2 independent are required when you exit CR - the request for implementations goes out with CR announcement

<JF> WCAG 2.2: February 2020: First Public Working Draft of the new standard May 2020: WCAG 2.2 Candidate Recommendation November 2020: WCAG 2.2 Recommendation

Janina: we are the same concept of consistent representation of a feature which is the same as consistent naming in the SC;
... so perhaps we should be under new label SC as well

Rachel: posted new SC at URI above

<JF> AG WG Chareter: https://www.w3.org/2019/12/ag-charter

Lisa: are we a technique for that SC as well?

Rachel: suggest we discuss with the group developing that SC - I’ll track down the right people
... this hidden controls SC is still very much in the air/risky for 2.2

Janina: we are doing our best to support this SC

<LisaSeemanKest> that the function of the control can be programmatically determined

Lisa: we can add the function of control can be programmatically determined; either has data-simpification set as critical or data-purpose equals “action” for example play
... UA can decide that purpose is important and must always be visible; this can be one technique

<Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask if we will also be in REc status by then?

JF: timeline for WCAG 2.2 FPWD is Feb; CR is May; final is November, 2020

<JF> AG WG Chareter: https://www.w3.org/2019/12/ag-charter

Lisa: Rachel’s dates (from website) are different - but will defer to the charter (whichi is what JF quoted)

JF: we are going to use data- to get implementation experience; want the data- prefix to ultimately be dropped

Lisa: we would like it to become part of HTML

JF: our initial goal was that data-purporse and data-importance will just become new attributes - purpose, importance - it seems we are moving away from that
... am concerned about that

<JF> my point exactly Charles

charles: can WCAG go to rec. based on an experimentatal implementation? Need to answer that

<LisaSeemanKest> ackch

<Zakim> janina, you wanted to discuss data-

Janina: this changes nothing - we are in WCAG with an at risk label; we are there with data- implementation, if we can’t use that because it is experimental, then this will get dropped

Lisa: thus we do need wide review of our draft;
... if data- is such a liabiity that it can’t get into WCAG then we have to work harder to get a permanent replacement

<JF> we were recommended by TAG and "webPlat " (aka HTML5) to start with using data-*

<JF> get the implementation exeprience, and then we'll go to the next step

<CharlesL> won't they see this when we go to wide review?

Janina: getting permanent support we will need to reach out to other groups - WHAT, WICG

Lisa: overlaps between COGA and this group is video and triggers (which is not in our current module)

<JF> Custom data attributes are intended to store custom data, state, annotations, and similar, private to the page or application, for which there are no more appropriate attributes or elements.

Lisa: alternative content for video - Rachel please explain

<JF> These attributes are not intended for use by software that is not known to the administrators of the site that uses the attributes. For generic extensions that are to be used by multiple independent tools, either this specification should be extended to provide the feature explicitly, or a technology like microdata should be used (with a standardized vocabulary).

<JF> source: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/dom.html#embedding-custom-non-visible-data-with-the-data-*-attributes

Rachel: COGA needs alternative content to explain emotional content - proposing a new track to cover this

Lisa: some people want the content in different modalities -some people want document, checklist, or video

<JF> adding a new @kind to the <track> element needs to go to WHAT WG

Lisa: triggers also came out when working on paper on mental health; being able to identify loud, violent, etc. content that might trigger PTSD or other condition. Where does this fit? believe this group can help with this problem

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G9SJSiAT-SYDVNxBfwOe7A6VPqsmX4Ua0QT7-NrfQTA/edit#heading=h.uf4tmgrjcioj

Janina: we could rev up the maur to include some of these use cases - there is ability to support different tracks within the spec (for blind, for COGA, etc)

Lisa: need to dicuss dissemination; we published yesterday - need to get the right group of people looking at these docs.
... we need a blog post and a wiki page to track groups we want to review

Janina: severa steps to getting out blog post - have to go through Shawn; want it to get wider review and on w3c.org

<LisaSeemanKest> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2020Jan/0046.html

Janina: did ask everyone to review the draft of the blog post; still need review from Judy - hoping for publication on Thursday

Becky: should we call it something more descriptive than just section 3.1?

Janina: agreed; we need to think about that; no need to hold up the blog draft review for this
... this blog will also go to WAI IG and we then need to send it further

Lisa: make a wiki page to track who we have reached out to
... must make sure we get AAC users to review

<LisaSeemanKest> ACTION: lisa to make wiki page for dessimination

<trackbot> Created ACTION-36 - Make wiki page for dessimination [on Lisa Seeman-Kestenbaum - due 2020-02-03].

<CharlesL> we will get that uri this Thursday

Janina: there is still one missing final URI within the draft post - hopefully that will get published by Thursday and we will have final URI

<LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/TR/personalization-semantics-1.0/

Janina: the URI under discussion is the requirements document FPWD

<CharlesL> agreed

Janina: if that slips, we can pull that URI from the blog post as explainer and module are most important to get out

Lisa: good discussion and better understanding of data- and implications of using as temp solution

- DRAFT -

Personalization Task Force Teleconference

27 Jan 2020

Attendees

Contents

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

Scribe.perl diagnostic output