<LisaSeemanKest_> clear agenda

<LisaSeemanKest_> scribe: CharlesL

<LisaSeemanKest_> next item

lisa: whats the next steps with WHAT-WG. Janina were you going to draft an issue on prefix?

Janina: we are in touch with WCAG I cced you on an email. I cced you and Sharon.
... , we are waiting for the next step response.
... , not on the list, but its sent.

Lisa: Time frame?

Janina: TPAC for personalization and pronunciation TF's.

Lisa: when is TPAC dates for the dates of these meetings.

Janina: there is a google calendar but the meetings haven't been scheduled yet

<becky> https://calendar.google.com/calendar/u/0/embed?src=c_0qf6nepl12m1b0r8qlgtgdaqog@group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York&pli=1

Janina: , some issues with the link it seems
... TPAC week of Oct 12th is joint meeting.
... , our work on the week of the 26th will be relatively light.
... , there are 2 weeks this year for TPAC.
... , with a week not TPAC between the 12th and the 26th.

<becky> TPAC page: https://www.w3.org/2020/10/TPAC/

Janina: , no meetings yet for Personalization but we are working on it.
... , Chris Wilson said he will meet with us
... , last thursday, and we will follow up

<LisaSeemanKest_> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35125/TPAC2020/

Lisa: Registration for TPAC.

<LisaSeemanKest_> next item

Janina: important to register. its free.

<LisaSeemanKest_> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/explainer-and-requirments-sep-2020/requirements/index.html

Lisa: requirements, I made a branch.
... , everyone comfortable with this as the next WD?

Janina: I haven't read it.

Becky: same

Janina: Roy is not avavailable until later this week.

Lisa: not much of an abstract.

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

Lisa: , previous version had lots of issues, editors notes etc. It wasn't really part of a requirements document.
... , we made a wiki version for TAG.
... , it was much briefer without the bookmarks.
... , not everything like use cases as well.
... , since we had this in TR space so moving the Wiki version into the TR space document.
... , changed it from wiki to HTML.
... , and I put in links.
... , without changing the text, minor stuff but really moved what was in the wiki into the TR requirements space.
... , no need for editor notes, and we now reference the explainer for use cases etc.
... , so we need a new working draft, so we could change it approve it. what do we need now?

Janina: nothing, we don't need the requirements at CR only at PR

Lisa: so instead of pointing to the wiki we can point to the new WD of requirements.

Janina: Do we need to now do an copy edit review
... , say by thursday morning?

Becky: you changed the structure significantly.
... , I am trying to understanding the requirements document itself.

Janina: you want to move this CR and you want it proposed recommendation, show me what requirements it fulfills.

<LisaSeemanKest_> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Requirements

Lisa: this is now like the wiki version, which is much shorter without all the editors notes, use-cases etc.

Janina: what we once published was too detailed, so we started a new one for TAG on the Wiki and what you have now in the Branch is the Wiki version.
... , is this OK Becky now?

Becky: Yes this is much clearer now.
... , only issue I see there is a link in this document which takes me to GitHub.
... , Vocabulary structure takes me to github issues

Lisa: Sections 3/4 I left it from the original version, we don't have that in the wiki. So we can end there after section 2 but vocabulary structure and host language we may want to keep? so thats why. We can either remove it or edit it more.
... , should I add a paragraph here on these.

Becky: is Vocabulary structure really a requirement?

Lisa: we could make it a requirement.

Janina: this is where we would list out the vocabularies and links out to the more details. why is vocabulary a requirement?

<LisaSeemanKest_> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Comparison-of-ways-to-use-vocabulary-in-content

Janina: , not sure we need this.
... , decision we made last week is that we require a reserved prefix and all our vocabulary will be constrained by this reserved prefix.

Lisa: link on host languages. requirements on the host language, support for user agents, usable by authors , but not sure its worth mentioning that. maybe a section on other considerations. in implementations there has been many other considerations.

<becky> https://w3c.github.io/aria/requirements/aria-requirements.html - ARIA requirements

Janina: I think we are repeating standard stuff here.

Lisa: so should we take out these new sections 3&4?

Janina: exploring this and I need to read this first.

Becky: let me find 1.0 requirements

Lisa: I looked at the WCAG requirements, and they didn't say what problem they are trying to solve.
... , its probably better to say less than more.

Janina: I agree
... , clear about why we say what we say.

Lisa: proposes take out sections 3&4 which are primarily editors notes.
... , resend to the list and see if there are any objections.

charles: I made changes to the original requirements document on the issue that was given to me last week.

Lisa: I accepted those last week.
... , I will make a new pull request for my changes now.
... , do we need to do a CFC?
... , so internal pronunciation TF cfc by Thursday on this new Wiki version for the TR requirements document

<LisaSeemanKest_> go for a cfc until thursday just for the taskforce - on the requirments at https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/explainer-and-requirments-sep-2020/requirements/index.html

<LisaSeemanKest_> +1

<janina> +1

<becky> +1

+1

<LisaSeemanKest_> next item

<sharon> +1

Becky: I was to fix 155, and sent it to the list. we need start/up and down and update left/right to be logical positioning

<becky> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issue155/content/index.html#values

Lisa: was it a pull request?

Becky: I wanted folks to review it.
... , I changed those values. start/end, left/right up/down.
... , "left" based on logical positioning.
... , so maybe left/right should be absolute positioning and next/previous for logical positioning.

Lisa: physical positioning not logical.

Becky: does everyone agree?

Charles: Yes

Lisa: up/down physical positioning

Becky: or up/down in a tree / hierarchy.

Lisa: arrow less means left ,note that logical implication will change based on the language of the page. (next/previous)
... , direction of the page.

<LisaSeemanKest_> (Note that the logical implication may depend on the dirction of the page. If the logic is important , use next or prevoise))

Becky: you want that on left/right.

Janina: that is very good. so we get people to draw the correct inferences from our documentation.

Becky: and we leave next/previous along.

Lisa: Yes.

Becky: what about up/down?

Janina: thats the hard one.
... , not sure what to do for that. Is it important for i18n?

Lisa: no, only left/right next/previous.
... we added up/down because it was missing. start/end as well

Becky: I will add these comments, and send to the list to be approved.
... , it was noted in the issue up/down. css terminology would be start/end

<LisaSeemanKest_> next item

Janina: I saw you were making changes, are you done and should I dive in?

<LisaSeemanKest_> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2020Sep/0017.html

Lisa: no we have explainer in Github and another Wiki version.

Becky: I left some some stuff out which we discussed.

Lisa: when I was reviewing the public explainer I saw it had typos wording changes, and looked in the Tag/wiki one we corrected them in that version, because we needed it sooner. I was concerned about updating every paragraph. I gave 3 examples. they weren't just editorial.

Becky: were you looking at the latest version in a pull request? You were changing the Tag version? which one?

Lisa: I was ment to edit the public version where Becky's version. abstract is fine.
... , might be easier to copy these over leave the abstract version and copy over the others.

Becky: that seems you are undoing everything I did.

Lisa: this is why I stopped, we have a mess.

Janina: if the tag explainer is good.

Becky: missing the stakeholder section from Michael.

Janina: that is a priority and more important right now.

Lisa: maybe sort this out in a coordination call, and will send out the requirements email and don't forget about Josh video.

<LisaSeemanKest_> rssagent, publish minuets

<LisaSeemanKest_> rssagent, publish minutes

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: CharlesL LisaSeemanKest_ sharon Janina Becky
Found Scribe: CharlesL
Inferring ScribeNick: CharlesL

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


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

Found Date: 21 Sep 2020
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.)