14:19:50 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #personalization
14:19:50 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/02/01-personalization-irc
14:19:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:19:52 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #personalization
14:19:54 <trackbot> Meeting: Personalization Task Force Teleconference
14:19:54 <trackbot> Date: 01 February 2021
14:20:22 <sharon> agenda?
14:21:06 <sharon> agenda+ Review draft to I18N (Lisa) - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jan/0017.html in response to issue 145 - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/145
14:21:46 <sharon> agenda+ Draft response to issue 76 (John)
14:22:17 <sharon> Charter for APA (due end of the month) - https://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/charter-2021/charter.html
14:22:26 <sharon> agenda+ Charter for APA (due end of the month) - https://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/charter-2021/charter.html
14:22:40 <sharon> agenda+ Review other remaining Actions - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/actions
14:22:47 <sharon> agenda?
14:51:23 <janina> janina has joined #personalization
14:58:12 <CharlesL> CharlesL has joined #personalization
14:59:11 <LionelW> LionelW has joined #personalization
15:01:19 <becky> becky has joined #personalization
15:01:32 <LisaSeemanKest> LisaSeemanKest has joined #personalization
15:02:08 <LisaSeemanKest> present+
15:02:29 <CharlesL> present+
15:04:14 <sharon> scribe: Lionel
15:04:20 <LionelW> present+
15:04:34 <LisaSeemanKest> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/Teleconference_cheat_sheet
15:04:45 <CharlesL> scribe: LionelW
15:05:05 <becky> present+
15:06:05 <LionelW> Reminder to all: autocomplete is working, start typing a person's name and their full alias will auto-complete.
15:06:11 <JF> JF has joined #personalization
15:06:15 <JF> Present+
15:06:19 <JF> agenda?
15:06:29 <LionelW> Agenda: Item #1 Review draft to I18N (Lisa)
15:06:45 <LisaSeemanKest> -https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jan/0017.html
15:06:55 <janina> present+
15:07:58 <JF> Q+
15:08:05 <CharlesL> zakim, take up item 1
15:08:05 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Review draft to I18N (Lisa) - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jan/0017.html in response to issue 145 -
15:08:06 <LionelW> Sharon: This is in response to 145 (which has joined with 144)
15:08:07 <Zakim> ... https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/145 -- taken up [from sharon]
15:08:37 <sharon> ack JF
15:09:12 <LionelW> John: The purpose of the spec is to create machine readable tags
15:09:41 <LionelW> ... the spec should be agnostic to the language of the content. Content is person to person, the spec stipulates machine to machine communication.
15:09:52 <LionelW> ... What is the answer?
15:10:07 <becky> q+
15:10:25 <LionelW> Lisa: Add an editor's note saying: we are supplying syntax for only the purpose of the element. Authors should be aware that the default formats are specified in language date and time specifications [XXXX]. When using a format that is not the default, authors should ensure it is specified. For example, by using [XXX].
15:10:46 <LionelW> ... The editor's note sends the reader to the proper specification
15:10:59 <LionelW> ... If a18n is OK with this, done. If not, then we need a call.
15:11:07 <janina> q+
15:11:34 <LionelW> ... XXX is defined as relevant different Lang, Date and time semantics and specifications for different locations , and XXX is the default specifications.)
15:11:51 <LionelW> ... Let a18n tell us the right specification.
15:11:54 <sharon> ack becky
15:12:15 <LionelW> Becky: Agree.
15:12:45 <LionelW> ... John says we must be machine readable. We only said, 'date/time'. If you need to know how to express date/time you need the right specification.
15:13:06 <LisaSeemanKest> q+
15:13:39 <LionelW> John: Example: I cannot write simplified chinese, but I can write the coding language, the markup, e.g. <table>
15:14:09 <CharlesL> I agree with John and Becky
15:14:23 <sharon> ack janina
15:14:26 <LionelW> Janina: agrees with John and Becky
15:14:45 <JF> Our "CODE" is language agnostic
15:14:58 <sharon> ack LisaSeemanKest
15:14:59 <LionelW> ... we defer to a18n for which particular specification to point to
15:15:16 <JF> Q+ to ask how and where (and why)
15:16:32 <sharon> ack JF
15:16:32 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask how and where (and why)
15:16:55 <becky> q+ issue is really that we are referencing a list - they want by reference
15:17:07 <becky> q?
15:17:10 <becky> q+
15:17:18 <LionelW> John: I do not see a good place to put this note. In fact, putting the note drags us down a 'rabbit-hole'
15:18:10 <sharon> ack becky
15:18:33 <LionelW> becky: Why didn't they object to WCAG 2.1, which added things as values?
15:19:14 <LionelW> ... It seems, they want us to use HTML, which is fine. But the non-Gregorian calendar systems is another issue.
15:19:46 <JF> ACTION: JF to draft a response to i18n
15:19:46 <trackbot> Created ACTION-77 - Draft a response to i18n [on John Foliot - due 2021-02-08].
15:21:03 <CharlesL> zakim, take up item 2
15:21:03 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Draft response to issue 76 (John) -- taken up [from sharon]
15:21:07 <JF> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/76
15:21:55 <LionelW> Sharon: Looks closed and done.
15:22:40 <LionelW> John: It seems that people and engineers do not really understand what we are trying to do.
15:22:52 <LionelW> ... education and outreach partnership with __ would be helpful
15:23:15 <LionelW> ... Education and Outreach (E&O)
15:23:31 <LionelW> ... to communicate what we are trying to do.
15:23:57 <LionelW> to johm, yes we hear them all
15:24:31 <CharlesL> agenda?
15:24:54 <LionelW> Janina: We get a complaint, the name of the TF also possibly misleads, 'personalization' doesn't fully and accurately communicate
15:25:21 <CharlesL> zakim, next item
15:25:21 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Review draft to I18N (Lisa) - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jan/0017.html in response to issue 145 -
15:25:24 <Zakim> ... https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/145 -- taken up [from sharon]
15:25:38 <CharlesL> zakim, take up item 3
15:25:38 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Charter for APA (due end of the month) - https://raw.githack.com/w3c/apa/charter-2021/charter.html -- taken up [from sharon]
15:25:57 <LionelW> Becky: Add another non-normative one?
15:26:17 <LionelW> Janina: We don't have to be too specific about non-normative, it's the normative that needs to be well-named
15:27:18 <LionelW> Janina: We encountered, 'does our QTF need to be specific about the areas that it will look into?" and the research group found it can do whatever non-normative documents support the grup's scope
15:27:28 <LionelW> ... so we do not need to be too specific about the non-normative
15:27:47 <LionelW> ... so charter is not a main concern and can be closed.
15:28:39 <LionelW> Janina: Lisa, take a look at COGA status, it is a candidate for being dropped.
15:30:22 <LionelW> zakim, next item
15:30:22 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Review draft to I18N (Lisa) - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jan/0017.html in response to issue 145 -
15:30:24 <Zakim> ... https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/145 -- taken up [from sharon]
15:30:25 <LionelW> zakim, next item
15:30:25 <Zakim> agendum 1 was just opened, LionelW
15:30:34 <LionelW> zakim, close item 1
15:30:34 <Zakim> agendum 1, Review draft to I18N (Lisa) - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jan/0017.html in response to issue 145 -
15:30:36 <Zakim> ... https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/145, closed
15:30:36 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:30:36 <Zakim> 4. Review other remaining Actions - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/actions [from sharon]
15:30:38 <LionelW> zakim, next item
15:30:38 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Review other remaining Actions - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/actions -- taken up [from sharon]
15:31:56 <LionelW> Sharon: can we clarify the action item, "CFC on WD of Explainer"
15:33:25 <LionelW> ... Is someone working on, "add to tr explainer - user needs from email to atg" ? Is that tag (not atg)?
15:34:15 <LionelW> Sharon: John reaching out to Steve?
15:34:29 <LionelW> John: Not a great time right now for Steve (personal issues)
15:34:42 <LionelW> Sharon: look over other open issues?
15:35:58 <LionelW> Sharon: The rel attribute
15:36:11 <sharon> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/172
15:36:39 <LionelW> Issue #172: There seems to be some overlap between the destination attribute and the existing rel attribute. What would be the difference between data-destination="help" and rel="help"? Would authors be encouraged to use both?
15:36:53 <LionelW> John: rel is short for, 'related to'
15:37:16 <LionelW> ... so there is not much difference between these two, just as aria-label is really deep down the same as alt
15:37:31 <LionelW> ... current tooling is not taking advantage of destination
15:37:36 <LisaSeemanKest> fyi, i have a request from implemtor, so we should probably respond to that
15:37:51 <LionelW> Janina: I agree, this sounds right
15:38:19 <LionelW> Sharon: So John will respond, after double-checking 'rel' making sure it can take string text, while we are using a fixed taxonomy.
15:38:55 <LionelW> Becky: MDN says rel does have fixed values, see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Attributes/rel
15:39:32 <LionelW> John: Hmmm, if an author uses both, we will need a conflict resolution path. Comparing again to aria, there is a clear order of preference
15:39:57 <LionelW> ... so we will need to specify here, which has the stronger semantics and over-rides. So here, data-destination should over-ride rel=
15:40:13 <LionelW> Becky: Think also of 'pervious' and 'next'
15:41:49 <LionelW> Janina: 'alt' remains a broad purpose tag, 'aria' is devoted today to screen readers. (not the original intention)
15:43:44 <LionelW> Sharon: Look at module 1 and module 2
15:45:22 <CharlesL> q+
15:46:04 <LionelW> John: Need some more research
15:46:37 <sharon> ack CharlesL
15:46:39 <LionelW> Becky: Note that rel is context sensitive and functions differently depending on element (anchor, ...)
15:47:02 <JF> ACTION: JF to research @rel versus @action and @destination and report back to TF
15:47:03 <trackbot> Created ACTION-78 - Research @rel versus @action and @destination and report back to tf [on John Foliot - due 2021-02-08].
15:47:13 <LionelW> Charles: What is their list for rel? Is ours even needed anymore?
15:47:28 <LionelW> John: Remember, even though alt was pre-existing, we added ARIA
15:47:31 <LisaSeemanKest_> LisaSeemanKest_ has joined #personalization
15:47:54 <LionelW> Lisa: We were thinking that rel would be limited to only certain elements.
15:48:11 <LionelW> ... suggest we expand it (liks with tab-index and ARIA) or do it ourselves.
15:48:35 <LisaSeemanKest_> need to step away
15:48:57 <LisaSeemanKest_> should be back in a minuet
15:49:34 <LionelW> John: Also, rel seems to be little-used (like kbd)
15:49:51 <LionelW> Sharon: Agenda:
15:49:52 <sharon> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/170
15:51:53 <JF> JF reclaims his comment: @rel is used *ALL THE TIME* to link stylesheets to documents
15:52:38 <LionelW> Becky: (discussion of reduced motion, distraction values)
15:53:52 <LionelW> Lionel: Clarify content module 1, 2, 3 please.
15:54:17 <JF> https://www.w3.org/TR/personalization-semantics-1.0/#modules
15:54:26 <LionelW> Charles: Link from the explainer
15:54:27 <LionelW> +1
15:54:34 <sharon> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/160
15:56:09 <LionelW> Sharon: To read it, "In building design we have the concept of marking an accessible route. Is this something you have been considered within the web space? ....
15:56:18 <LionelW> Janina: Sounds like WCAG 3 performance scoping.
15:56:34 <LionelW> John: The goals are close if not the same.
15:56:48 <LionelW> ... our rubric is, "given three paths, which is the most effective path.
15:57:03 <LionelW> ... "take path three, do steps 1,2,3,4,5
15:57:13 <LionelW> Janina: But, "accessible for who?" is the question
15:57:36 <LionelW> Becky: reminder, she wrote "worth discussing even if the end decision is not to pursue it."
15:57:52 <LionelW> ... we can respond, we plan to revisit this when we work on add'l modules
15:58:02 <LionelW> John: and invite rachael!
15:59:12 <CharlesL> CharlesL has left #personalization
15:59:19 <becky> rrsagent, make minutes
15:59:19 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/02/01-personalization-minutes.html becky
16:00:29 <LionelW> rrsagent, publish minutes
16:00:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/02/01-personalization-minutes.html LionelW
16:01:04 <LionelW> zakim, end meeting
16:01:04 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been LisaSeemanKest, CharlesL, LionelW, becky, JF, janina
16:01:06 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:01:06 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/02/01-personalization-minutes.html Zakim
16:01:09 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, LionelW; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
16:01:13 <Zakim> Zakim has left #personalization
16:01:30 <LionelW> bye
16:01:40 <LionelW> zakim, bye
16:01:58 <LionelW> rrsagent, dismiss
16:01:58 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'dismiss', LionelW.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:02:04 <LionelW> rrsagent, goodbye
16:02:04 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'goodbye', LionelW.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:02:06 <LionelW> rrsagent, close
16:02:06 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'close', LionelW.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
16:02:09 <LionelW> rrsagent, bye
16:02:09 <RRSAgent> I see 2 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2021/02/01-personalization-actions.rdf :
16:02:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: JF to draft a response to i18n [1]
16:02:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/02/01-personalization-irc#T15-19-46
16:02:09 <RRSAgent> ACTION: JF to research @rel versus @action and @destination and report back to TF [2]
16:02:09 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/02/01-personalization-irc#T15-47-02