W3C

- DRAFT -

Personalization Task Force Teleconference

16 Nov 2020

Attendees

Present
CharlesL, becky, Lisa, Roy, Janina
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
becky

Contents


<LisaSeemanKest> clear agenda

<LisaSeemanKest> regrets, sharon

<LisaSeemanKest> ok

<LisaSeemanKest> no one else has joined yet anyway

action review: https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/actions

<scribe> scribe: becky

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

<LisaSeemanKest> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2020Nov/att-0010/00-part

LS: Sharon drafted response to TAG

BG: she mentioned we need Michael to review

<LisaSeemanKest> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2020Nov/att-0010/00-part

<LisaSeemanKest> are we happy with it

<LisaSeemanKest> +1

LS: are we happy with this draft to do to the TAG (just edits from discussion last week)

<janina> +0 Don't recall what I read when I read it

CL: some funky characters in first main paragraph

LS: I will fix

BG: actually 2 places - see also the paragraph about microformats

<LisaSeemanKest> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2020Nov/0015.html

BG: I don't think the list of cognitive issues was trimmed to only reference module 1 issues

LS: agree, it is not the latest version that got edited for typos; need to update
... will update and resend to the list

<LisaSeemanKest> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2020Nov/0011.html

LS: next todo is to reference the BCI numbers. see change to editor's note

BG: we were advised to put in the reference and then "management" will repond if this is not sufficient.

CL: be careful about the links in the email - they are not full; need to copy and paste.

<LisaSeemanKest> after publications should be after publication

LS: are we comfortable with this? Just need someone to make this change

<LisaSeemanKest> chage in the document

<LisaSeemanKest> +1

+1

<CharlesL> +1

<LisaSeemanKest> janina is ok too

Roy: I will make the change to replace the editor's note that is currently there

LS: next todo is the redline of the explainer that Janina was going to review

JS: I need more time - will provide the edits for the TR version

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues?page=1&q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen

LS: next todo - check for open issues that we need to address
... have some issues still open - some are feature requests; how do we handle issues still open?

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/150

LS: that was just spam - closed

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/149

LS: the definition of critical should include a bullet point; believe we discussed, I created and am happy to close

<LisaSeemanKest> 148 was for images

LS: issue 148 was for images, I wrote and am okay to close

<CharlesL> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/148

<CharlesL> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/147

LS: issue #147 add "distressing" as a distraction; believe we had a discussion and group turned down but I can't find in the minutes

BG: browsers scan for some of this; and how to define - what is distressing for some people may not be distressing to others

LS: was; distressing: Content that may distress some users such as content with a violent, graphic or non-consensual sexual aspect. Is that too vague?

JS: not too specific but it changes based on culture; there are no hard and fast rules - have to make a judgement
... don't want to stake the 1.0 version on this type of subjective judgement
... strongly suggest deferring

BG: I also prefer to defer

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/139

BG: we need Roy to update so these links get added to the Resources section

Roy: I have not completed, yet

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/135

LS: #135 overlap of accname and roles; JF did respond;

JS: okay to close since we did respond

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/133

BG: this is the initial I18N review - it was broken into several sub issues all of which we have addressed

JS: close this one

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

LS: ping self review privacy checker
... JF responded and issue opener was satisfied

BG: close

LS: mozilla one we want to keep open - #128
... it references implementation

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/125

LS: Cleanup in modules to match updated auto-complete harmonization

CL: we did this, okay to close

LS: ignoring #90 and 91 - they are about the tools module
... feature request about trigger warning, #89 and 88 - marked as feature request
... rest are 2018

JS: we need to at least address them

LS: relates to implementation discussion #84 someone suggested webannotations
... we did add web annotations to the chart - close
... issue 83 from JF - To be inter-operable, our definitions need to be normative

JS: we have stumbled over this in HTML

LS: the short sentences example is not in module 1

BG: but that is just one example, someone should probably review module 1 closely for examples

JS: let's not dive in this one today

BG: I believe we still need to review before closing
... need to wait until JF comes back into the group

<LisaSeemanKest> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/78

LS: #80 is about the tools module - deferring for now

<CharlesL> Personalization Semantics is a series of technical specifications that provide the element-level attributes and values which enable user agents and helper-applications to adapt content to an individual user's needs. It relies on author-supplied page and element level metadata in order to achieve individualized personalization.

<CharlesL> Personalization Semantics currently consists of three modules: Content, Help, and Support Tools. The specification defined in this document is the Personalization Semantics Content Module—the first of the Personalization Semantics Modules series.

LS: #78 questions if we are overloading the word semantics to also encompass visual elements?
... suggest someone to draft a response - I will do that
... next few are about implementation from Sam; we did give various implementations a thorough review but never drafted a response
... #72,73, 76, 77 all are around implementations

CL: believe we can close #73 since we did add to the comparison page

Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version (CVS log)
$Date: 2020/11/16 16:00:49 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the 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 becky Lisa Roy Janina
Found Scribe: becky
Inferring ScribeNick: becky

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

Found Date: 16 Nov 2020
People with action items: 

WARNING: Possible internal error: join/leave lines remaining: 
        <LisaSeemanKest> no one else has joined yet anyway



WARNING: Possible internal error: join/leave lines remaining: 
        <LisaSeemanKest> no one else has joined yet anyway



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]