sharon: Noting that effective immediately Lionel will be Co-Facilitator with Sharon. Lisa has stepped down.
Update on the draft document for action-destination-purpose that will be referenced with an editors note (Matthew and John)
jf: Recalls issue is whether or not to merge attributes
jf: We worked on use cases, possible duplication?
jf: States goal as getting as many of our attributes as possible into HTML without a prefix
janina: Recalls that group decision had been to go with prefixed only
jf: Disappointed, but issue is the same
janina: Agree re the issue
jf: Matthew and I landed on that "these are research questions."
jf: Goal is to get feedback both from authoring and implementation
jf: Can we ask RQTF
<Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel scribing: 2 considerations in going to RQTF
<Lionel_Wolberger> ... They tend not to look at disambiguation.
<Lionel_Wolberger> ... They tend to support a literature-review focus, what has worked and what has not worked in the literature
<Lionel_Wolberger> ... Also RQTF is loaded recently.
<Lionel_Wolberger> ... Activity in XAUR, Captcha, Sync tolerances.... Loaded.
matthew: Notes he's sent email pointing to wiki
<JF> Document in G-Docs: https://
matthew: includes proposed Ed Note to request feedback
matthew: Notes that would work for RQTF
<JF> All code examples in a single large table: https://
matthew: Not all the right formatting yet
Action: JF to add content to our wiki
<Lionel_Wolberger> Tells Matthew: I do not have access to the Google Doc
<trackbot> Error creating an ACTION: could not connect to Tracker. Please mail <email@example.com> with details about what happened.
lionel: Not clear about going to rQTF, though I like the direction of going for feedback
Lionel_Wolberger: Notes conference submission to point to our work
<Lionel_Wolberger> Sharing my paper proposal is for this conference, https://
jf: Agrees with Lionel on broadest agreement
jf: Recalls "white paper" is probably not right title, so it's how we ended up on "Research Questions."
jf: OK if RQTF can't, but it seemed colleagual to ask
jf: Wonders whether we want this resolved before CR.
jf: Goal is to get a decision before we're too far in the process to easily adapt to a change
jf: Notes that he and Matthew looked at this with code examples
<Matthew_Atkinson> I emailed the doc (which features the big table at the end) to the list: https://
Matthew_Atkinson: Requests post to wiki
jf: Can do
janina: The early implementations were clearly drafts
… will a second CR be too late?
… this CR will be enough for WHAT-WG to give us a prefix
JF: Matt's code examples surface the issue very clearly
<janina> jf: Notes Matthew's code all about making life easier for authoring
<janina> sharon: Believes we have agreed to get the paper into the wiki, and we'll look at Ed Note wording and close on it next week?
<janina> sharon: So, we probably all need a little time to get this done
<janina> jf: Will post today
<janina> jf: Offers to add candidate Ed Note in github repo as well
<janina> sharon: Sure
Action: add Editor's note to Module 1 that points to Research Questions wiki page
<trackbot> Error finding 'add'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://
i18n issue #144 (Review response) - https://
github.com/ w3c/ personalization-semantics/ issues/ 144
Action: JF to add Editor's note to Module 1 that points to Research Questions wiki page
<trackbot> Created ACTION-87 - Add editor's note to module 1 that points to research questions wiki page [on John Foliot - due 2021-06-14].
<janina> sharon: Notes Addison responded on github issue
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: When?
<janina> sharon: 12 days ago as of now
<janina> sharon: A long response
<janina> sharon: Notes also response from Richard of I18N
<janina> sharon: i18n unclear as to what the resolution is
<janina> sharon: reads some of the github
<janina> [i18n concerned whether direction matters]
<janina> sharon: Notes Richard has additional questions
<janina> sharon: Richard suggests graphics in specs to show what users will see
<janina> sharon: Also reads Richard's concern about Bliss syntax across i18n contexts
<janina> jf: Believe Richard has drilled into a good question
<janina> jf: Believe we'll need eventually to rely on AI
<janina> jf: Maybe we don't have all the naswers because Bliss doesn't have them all
<janina> jf: Bliss not always thea one to one translation
<janina> CharlesL: We always said we're not translating
Lionel found this on a Blisssymbol Canada blog, "he Hebrew language is written from right to left and, after much discussion and deliberation with the people in Canada and others from different parts of the world, it was decided to write the Blissymbols being used in Israel from right to left to correspond to the written language.""
<janina> CharlesL: If we have the symbols, we facilitate symbolic communication in lang X
<janina> CharlesL: Perhaps a note in our spec that we're not translating, just representing using symbols within a lang
<janina> CharlesL: Also suggest we ask Bliss how to respond on this
<janina> +1 to asking Bliss
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Have been looking, unsure whether Bliss has consensus around this
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: We're just specifying where there are symbols
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to clarify what we are using from Bliss
<janina> jf: We're transformation, not translation
<janina> Or maybe "transliteration?"
<janina> jf: Notes each symbol expresses a concept plus identifier as our taxonomy
<janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Wondering whether we can isolate ourselves -- what's essential
<janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Do we need to say re directionality?
janina: We can acknowledge that there are gaps (as pointed out by i18n), but often,
… in accessibility, there are gaps, but putting something (flawed) out there is better than nothing.
… Suggesting having a conversation with them about that
<JF> +1 to Janina - don't let perfect be the enemy of good
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Asking jf would isolation also isolate us from the space/comma issue we recently looked at?
<janina> jf: Don't think so
<janina> jf: Believe we ended up with space
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: So is related?
<janina> jf: Reason for numeric identifier
<janina> jf: Best choice and IPR unencumbered
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: we're defining a personalization metatag, now we're getting buried by details; can we say there is a coherent personalization message there?
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Not sure, but wondering
<janina> CharlesL: Let's say we had "cup of tea" and also "a b c" symbols ...
<janina> CharlesL: If I'm now in Country X which is right to left, the page should display "c b a" right? I would know what.
<janina> CharlesL: So, I'm not sure it's our issue
janina: There is a precedence order here: the language of the page has precedence over the language of the personalization tags and values
<janina> janina: Suggests Charles has a solid idea--there's a precedence order here, and the web page needs to get the i18n right before personalization transformations are applied
<janina> jf: Symbols will follow native lang of doc. We don't do translation
janina: It is highly dependent on the page that you pull up. You might be physically in China, but reading a Hebrew page-- the page's rules are followed
JF: We expect the peronalization attribute to respect the lang attribute of the host page
<janina> sharon: recalls similar conversation last year
<janina> sharon: reads from Lisa's comments ...
<JF> Draft: our specification does not anticipate translation, but rather transformation. It is expected that the transformation tool (word to symbol) respects the language specified by the content author (using @lang)
<janina> sharon: Also reads from Becky's comments ...
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to suggest we invite them to one of our calls to finally resolve this question
janina: We agree with i18n that this stuff MATTERS.
<CharlesL> +1 to inviting i18N here
<janina> jf: Agrees that invite to call may help
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: +1 on this approach
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Still a bit stuck on the alt text -- what happens?
<janina> Lionel_Wolberger: whoever translates the page needs to deal with i18n
Lionel: an example, given an HTML page with a lang value of "english". A process translates the page into "Hebrew." This proces would translate any 'alt' tags as well
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-1 - Https://
Lionel: we see our situation as similar to this example. We are in violent agreement that the 'lang' of the page takes precedence and dictates how to interpret or render the linguistic elements on the page
… Peronalization tags should be handled similarly.
<janina> sharon: Recalls being tasks to diff last working draft vs editor's draft
<janina> sharon: looks like none of our chages made it into the WD
<JF> +1, that appears correct Sharon
<JF> We've never updated the Working Draft
<janina> jf: Offers to help!
<janina> sharon: Think I've noted, so will go and do the ones I found
<janina> jf: Have also caught a few, but never done a diff
<janina> jf: Believe both the module and the explainer have redline edits that need updating
Action: JF to do redline review of Modules 2 & 3
<trackbot> Created ACTION-88 - Do redline review of modules 2 & 3 [on John Foliot - due 2021-06-14].
Lionel to Sharon -- back on the Zoom for planning?