<scribe> scribe: becky

<LisaSeemanKest> scribe: becky

LS: concerned that many extensions are getting disabled due to security concerns.
... this is a concern for implementors; need to make browsers aware of AT use cases
... hoping Janina will take this up but also get Judy involved

JF: agree is an APA issue; another avenue might be AC forum; in past had to create extensions first to get browsers interested in new tech/features
... but now browsers are reversing course - need to provide a path forward for implementors trying to get assistive tech better supported

JS: agree it needs to be an APA topic

i18n issue

LS: I will bring it up to google, asks Janina to bring up to Judy; invite interested parties to a meeting

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MLxmFg__4RBXhkYzEZwTSyMW7B-xBZMgrp2FsV3nrEU/edit

Review introduction - Content Module

LS: JF provided google docs with content document changes - let's review
... 1.4 use cases and requirements - req. has been moved to wiki page; use cases are in the explainer - need to update links and provide updated text

<LisaSeemanKest> usecases in our Explainer for Personalization Wiki. the requiments are extracted to the requirments wiki page

JS: I think that is backwards - provides suggestion captured by Lisa above - use cases come before requirements

<LisaSeemanKest> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MLxmFg__4RBXhkYzEZwTSyMW7B-xBZMgrp2FsV3nrEU/edit

JS: all agree issues with google docs - need to capture changes in the minutes

JF: I did editorial work - there are a few blocks that we need to discuss and edit

<LisaSeemanKest> change =usecases in our Explainer for Personalization Wiki. the requirements are extracted to the requirements wiki page

JS: brief discussion on process

LS: 2 issues - how are we editing docs (github is not appropriate for all members)

CL: stuggling with all of the changes that have been made to google doc; will be very difficult to merge

JF: that is why I started in Word - it is open format/standard;
... was asked to move it into google docs last week

LS: did not intend that - meant in the framework of COGA
... send the word doc with changes as an attachment to group mail

JF: I may not have all the changes - to move to google docs had to accept changes

SS: offers way to see changes in google docs

CL: we can see JF edits since he pasted into google

JF: areas we need to discuss are at the end of the google doc
... we need to clarify 3.4.1
... I made edits - spelling, punctuation, etc. Made notes about we need to discuss

LS: suggest removing editors note about context in 3.4.1?

JS and JF concur

RESOLUTION: dump ed note in 3.4.1

CL: will make changes in google docs right now - and move them into github

JF: we have code examples with no code details - see example 7 - it indicates stock ticker but no code that
... provides code that represents a stock ticker. Example 8 has similar issue,

BG: I had trouble determining which example goes with which description

CL: may be easier to distinguish when put into github - it will be marked and styled as code

JF: we have resolved the issue around 3.4.1 and would like to review def. of symbol as well

<LisaSeemanKest> exaple heading. then text. then code

LS: want to rearrange order of example; want example heading, then description, then the code throughout the doc

CL and JF will get together to review github process

<scribe> ACTION: John and Charles to get the changes into github by June 29

<trackbot> Created ACTION-63 - And charles to get the changes into github by june 29 [on John Foliot - due 2020-06-29].

JS: did JF incorporate Janina's changes into abstract and intro

JF: no those are not in doc under discussion

JS: just need to merge my branch

<Roy> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/pull/154

Roy: will take care of that, asks Lisa to approve

JS: changes that we discussed in previous meeting are in that branch that Roy will merge

<scribe> ACTION: John and Charles to remove editor's note from 3.4.1 of the content module and rearrange the examples to be ordered by heading, then description, then the code throughout the doc june 29

<trackbot> Created ACTION-64 - And charles to remove editor's note from 3.4.1 of the content module and rearrange the examples to be ordered by heading, then description, then the code throughout the doc june 29 [on John Foliot - due 2020-06-29].

CL: still need to add code examples to 7 and 8

LS: will defer above to after doc is in github
... no volunteer - hopefully someone will have more time in a week or two
... also need to make change above in section 1.4 use cases and requirements

CL: on vacation all of next week

LS: next item is responding to I18N - want the document finished first so will push off to next week
... we can't get to CfC until we fix the examples - would be great if someone could tackle those

This is scribe.perl Revision of Date 
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: JF becky CharlesL Roy LisaSeemanKest
Found Scribe: becky
Found Scribe: becky
Inferring ScribeNick: becky

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

Found Date: 22 Jun 2020
People with action items: charles john

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.)