<scribe> scribe: CharlesL
<LisaSeemanKest> scribe: charlesL
Lisa: will take some time taking up some actions, restructuring of explainer in response to TAG. John was going to work with what Lisa started.
Janina: I think we need to keep moving, sounds like John is busy.
Lisa: John can edit things once we lay out the initial redesign.
<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/restructure-of-the-explainer
Lisa: Becky & Charles oK?
Charles & Becky: Yes.
<LisaSeemanKest> TAGs comments at https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/476
Lisa: first asked us to stick to
their template, but we don't need a Stakeholder section, and
Vocabulary section are not needed.
... , No boilerplate needed. Concrete examples, but they wanted
more and clear sub-headings, want screenshots, mockup and
screenshots and we have it we have the demos.
... , technology summary considered alternatives, not sure what
authoring is doing in the list. User needs described.
... , I took their boilerplate and stuck things in. More in
User needs and more todo items in the wiki.
... , what do people think?
Becky: I think its long, but they are asking for all this maybe its oK to be long and have more examples.
Lisa: my proposal better to be working off something, we need to edit it and stuff that is not explaining what we are doing to help newbies to this work.
<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/restructure-of-the-explainer
Becky: I don't have extra cycles right now as we lost a member of our team unexpectedly.
Lisa: I will reach out to Sharon
and John to see if they can look at this to edit this document
to make it clearer to make what we are working on for those not
familiar to our specification.
... , Charles should write an introductory email to CAST
members cc: Lisa & Michael. about our Personalization
TF.
... , Lisa has some other folks to send out a recruiting email
to folks who may be interested.
... , we have a resolution we should move fwd with it. I will
do screen shots and will ask John and Sharon to do some editing
to make the document easier to understand
... I18N has created separated issues for us to address
individually.
... , Janina when do we need to address all these issues? at
the end of CR or before?
Janina: Not sure which probably CR. If any are problematic we should have a conversation with them soon.
Roy: Before CR, if we want to wait to PR we may need to talk to them.
Lisa: Becky/Charles can you take a look at.
Becky: Unicode seems like an easy, we just need to say Not an Issue.
Janina: aren't they in an issue
tracker?
... , they are one of the horizontal review, i18N runs it this
way, so what we have been doing with APA comes from i18n, so
tracking via github, we can do a NOP/close the issue, and we
can track that way. If they are still concerned they can reopen
the issue.
<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/133
Janina: , trying to make all these Horizontal reviews the same way.
Lisa: A Phillips broke them up.
draft response has been looked at.
... , Becky do you want to carry on with i18n where these
comments are and where we need to follow up.
<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues
Becky: Yes, but being able to find things in the w3c.
Lisa: he responded and added a Tag i18N need Resolution.f
Becky: Ok that makes it easy to find.
Janina: we are learning this as well in the APA.
Lisa: Becky you created two new issue #138, #139 (those are responses)
Becky: section-*** we do reference those but we are using the WCAG 2.1, I was going to make the change and put in a PR. I put it as an issue so that we can all agree on this. we need to state this in our spec. because WCAG2.1 did not contain section-*** this close an issue with Joanie and close and issue on our spec. We did discuss in last week or the week before.
Lisa: can we agree on this?
Becky: I think we did agree on this on the last call.
Lisa: we can close this and add
an action
... , issue #138 once we make the change to the spec by
removing section-*** and linking to WCAG2.1 autofill
... , Added a label to issues #138 & #139 we kinda know
what we need to do, just need to do it.
... , "Action Required" is the new Label in GitHub.
... PING has a question.
... , #131 - Lisa will comment, our spec does not include
storying the user preferences
<LisaSeemanKest> the third party is the user agent. our specification does not include storing the user preferences.
<LisaSeemanKest> Revealing personal preference information to third-party scripts exposes a fingerprinting surface. Are all personal preferences exposed to third parties or is it limited to the changes that the user is requesting from the third party?
<LisaSeemanKest> (his question
<LisaSeemanKest> add this to the explainer
<LisaSeemanKest> as out of scope?
Charles: from #131 2.15. Does this specification have a "Security Considerations" and "Privacy Considerations" section? No, we will bring this up and reference the following:
Janina: I think this needs to be added as an appendix at the end. There are similar discussions for discoverability maybe invite Josh O'Connor, it can be an evil thing that this information can be both evil/good "Research questions".
Lisa: we are not storing information, but what the UA know that they have personalization preferences.
Becky: a site with a lot of special personalized accommodations, could be used to determine those who use this site may have cognitive disabilities potentially.
<LisaSeemanKest> the third party is the user agent. our specification does not include storing the user preferences. We are not exposing or collecting their preferences. We leave that to the user agent.
<LisaSeemanKest> Do you feel we need a section or appendix on security considerations? Such as inferring that people may have a cognitive disability because they use a site which is more adaptable by user agents
Lisa: inferring that a person may have a cognitive disability if they use a particular site or not.
Janina: could facilitate the ability to infer a disability.
<LisaSeemanKest> Such as by facilitate the inference that people may have a cognitive disability - because they use a site which is more adaptable by user agents.
May facilitate the inference that users have a cognitive disability - because they use a site which is more adaptable by user agents.
Janina: if you want an intro, we can add Josh to join us for 1/2 hour to discuss this topic.
Lisa: I can reach out and invite to Josh O'Connor to attend our meeting to discuss Privacy & Security to add a section to our spec.
Janina: Yes thats the process, we
are doing the same thing in the APA for other groups
specs.
... , need to eat our own dog-food :)
Lisa: Thaddeus, #88 & #89 change of happening is low going into another moduel.
s/modulel/module
scribe: , have a distraction value, "loud noise" "Ping
" flashing light", could add a new term "distressing" violet act / sexual act etc… we could just have them all removed…
<LisaSeemanKest> distressing: Content that may distress some users such as content with a violent, graphic or non-consensual sexual aspect.
Janina: I think we do want to do it at some point, but before we recreate the wheel we should look at how browsers already do this, setting for that maybe parental control, how do they do it already.
Lisa: BBC this clip contains
material that could be distressing to some viewers.
... , warning itself can have a negative effect, that it could
trigger the negative effect just saying that this content may
be distressing reminds the user of the issue they had.
... , this is why I didn't bother going into what the issues
may be it is generalized that anything that could be considered
distressing to avoid determining what are the specific issues
which could be distressing. (violence, shooting, sexual,
etc..)
Becky: when I look for images I
am searching for "free images" I don't get in appropriate
images that there may be relying on tags, or AI etc.
... , I don't explicitly say to avoid that content never the
less it doesn't show up by default.
<LisaSeemanKest> ACTION: lisa how do google filter ditesning content, do they on tag?
<trackbot> Created ACTION-52 - How do google filter ditesning content, do they on tag? [on Lisa Seeman-Kestenbaum - due 2020-04-20].
Becky: windows seems to have a content filter.
trackbot, end meeting
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) FAILED: s/modulel/module/ Default Present: CharlesL, janina, JF, becky, sharon, Roy, Lisa, LisaSeemanKest Present: CharlesL janina JF becky sharon Roy Lisa LisaSeemanKest Regrets: Sharon Found Scribe: CharlesL Found Scribe: charlesL Inferring ScribeNick: CharlesL Found Date: 13 Apr 2020 People with action items: lisa 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]