Meeting minutes
go through the actions left to get to CR at actions <https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/actions >
<janina> http://
Roy: I replied to the email..
Lisa: we should send the link.
Roy: patent policy 2020
<Roy> https://
Roy: latest link
Roy: I will handle this
Lisa: Janina, you were going t draft a responce on media queries
Sharon: I did send that out
Janina: so that should be closed
Lisa: adding the examples should be closed as well right Becky?
Becky: there is a link in email to raw git.
<becky> https://
Lisa: are we happy with this?
Lisa: John you were going to draft a response to #76
John: I haven't done that yet, its an old issue and may have been addressed.
Lisa: I think there are 3 other issues but should be easy.
… links to the explainer needs updating
… then we should be ready for CFC
… open issue with WCAG group about data-
… sorry WHATWG
Janina: we definitely do need to do that a replacement for data-
John: yes we need to approach them.
Janina: I need to send a message to Anna about personalization and point to a github issue on this.
… that would be an APA thing to do.
<JF> Q to ask the unpopular question - what if they don't want to give us a prefix?
Janina: draft it on list, short response stating that we followed 3.6.2.2 and did the right thing.
do we want to do module 2 etc
recruiting and implementations
John: we have a proof of concept demos and we go to WHATWG and they tell us we don't have enough demos. Do we have a plan B?
Janina: we have to have a better answer. Publishing may have to be our savior here
Lisa: we can't ask for implementation when we are just a Working Draft.
Janina: what about textbooks Thorium?
Lisa: getting people to develop again and a gain aui- then data- etc…
Janina: should be easy to search / replace, there are tools to handle a whole folder of files.
John: I appreciated aui- the TAG told us to do data- but W3C but HTML now is in WHATWG to give us the prefix.. our story is we need to get this nailed down now.. but what do we do if WHATWG does not want to play ball?
Janina: Someone may have to take it on the chin, but if we can do a run end game to not give them the option to not support us.
Lisa: we need to approach whoever we can think of to support our work in some implementation.
Janina: especially something in main stream tools.
Lisa: could be 2 weeks from CR with data- with the statement that data- will may well be replaced
… then people can start working on open source implementations…
Janina: the point of CR the point is to find out issues with implementations.
Lisa: initial 10 min discussion on who can can approach and get some interest.
… small jobs left to do.
… start thinking of who we want to approach and recruit new people to this TF
… I did approach Google without much luck. they liked it but didn't seem to be the next thing for them to do.
… I mentioned it to Microsoft who did seem interested so could go back to them.
Janina: that would be just as good as Google.
John: what is it? just Module 1? or all 3?
Lisa: just module 1
John: so MS showed interest in module 1.
<becky> personalization video link: https://
Lisa: go round the table and see who we think may be interested even with long shots.
…
Charles: Yes I can bring this up to the Publication WG / A11Y TF for publishing. may need help to promote this
Lisa: Yes happy to help and we also have the video to help.
Janina: Roy can you add the videos of personalization / pronunciation to our webpages.
Roy: Yes I can do that for personalization and pronunciation TF web pages.
Janina: I can bring this up with Peter Korn / Amazon
… I will do that but we have other fish to fry.
Lisa: btw it doesn't have to be for the entire site, maybe just an accessibility page, or contact us page.
Janina: there are over 2million 3rd party sites, so there may be places to do this.
… blindness some of the sites are also available perkins school for the blind could redirect to Amazon. there may be others. inside the Amazon ecosystem.
Lisa: any other?
Janina: maybe something with the EU new a11y coming done the pipe.
Lisa: was deque intersted?
John: not really when I was there. Steve Fokner with TPG may be interested, contrast checker… I could reach out to Steve.
Becky: he is now their chief Technology Officer.
Action: JF to reach out to Steve Faulkner re: tooling for PoC
<trackbot> Created ACTION-76 - Reach out to steve faulkner re: tooling for poc [on John Foliot - due 2021-01-11].
Becky: I can reach out to Jan McSorley at Pearson
Sharon: I can talk to Mary Jo. at IBM
Charles: I can see about adding some to DIAGRAM Center / Bookshare maybe even Imageshare.
… but would need a plan on what to change for maybe the contact us page or a11y page etc.
Lisa: I can help with that plan on what is some critical items we would want to personalize
… we can start off quite simple, just 1 button to tweak the settings etc.
… if they are interested in implemented the may be interested in joining us as well.
… anyone we can recruit?
Charles: What about CAST they have that OSEP grant dealing with personalization
John: has anyone spoken with Greg Vanderhiden
Lisa: Steve Lee?
… I think he made it through Brexit deal and still part of the W3C.
Becky: we should discuss the charter for the next 3 years
do we want to do module 2 etc
Becky: Michael wants us to use the template to come up with tech deliverables.
Lisa: we can try to get another Module 2 CR?
<becky> apa charter draft: https://
Janina: finish Module 1 taking it to TR, we may need to make changes to 1.0 maybe a 1.1 or even 2.0 if its substantial changes
… I think module 2 or 3 we could switch the order.
Lisa: another working draft of module 3, get module 2 to CR. we could try to get that in
… but is this group interested in working on the new modules.
Janina: if we can get the technological solutions with WCAG requiring so of this would be better.
Lisa: we don't have on our list about user settings.
Janina: configuring their UA
John: it may be if/else statement for user preference
… browser extension, proxy service etc.
… authenticated user with a profile, depends on the tooling we are looking at, symbols define a symbol set, or is it all on the content author.
Lisa: do we want to standardize that somewhere the user request?
Janina: maybe
John: strong best practice.
… maybe a (RFC 2119) *SHOULD* for users able to define their own symbol sets if implemented by a content author.
Lisa: get module 1 through the entire process,
Janina: best practices would be Note track
John: what ever we put down we need to deliver it.
Becky: we under delivered on this one we didn't get to CR. I like the list we just need to deliver those.
… over delivering is fine we just need to be careful.
Lisa: making another WD of M3 should be easy.
… we really want to get M2 off the ground, we as a group to participate in that.
Janina: I think we need some recruiting.
… we can only make our best guess.
Becky: there is wording that we *MAY* get to CR
… and going through WHAT-WG once should be easier
Janina: COGA identified requirements.
Lisa: I will send to list so folks can think about wording
… Module 1 and best practice may be enough.