13:51:21 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #personalization
13:51:21 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/06/14-personalization-irc
13:51:23 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:51:23 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #personalization
13:51:25 <trackbot> Meeting: Personalization Task Force Teleconference
13:51:25 <trackbot> Date: 14 June 2021
13:52:26 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ Editor's note on action-destination-purpose (Matthew and John) -- Matthew sent the proposed editor's note  agenda+ TPAC planning agenda+ Summary and review of action items agenda+ Summary and review of issues
13:53:08 <Lionel_Wolberger> zakim, drop agenda 1
13:53:08 <Zakim> agendum 1, Editor's note on action-destination-purpose (Matthew and John) -- Matthew sent the proposed editor's note  agenda+ TPAC planning agenda+ Summary and review of action
13:53:11 <Zakim> ... items agenda+ Summary and review of issues, dropped
13:53:19 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda?
13:53:28 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ Editor's note on action-destination-purpose (Matthew and John) -- Matthew sent the proposed editor's note
13:53:32 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ TPAC planning
13:53:35 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ Summary and review of action items
13:53:37 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ Summary and review of issues
13:53:47 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda?
13:54:03 <Lionel_Wolberger> clear agenda
13:54:07 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda?
13:54:15 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ Editor's note on action-destination-purpose (Matthew and John) -- Matthew sent the proposed editor's note
13:54:19 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ TPAC planning
13:54:21 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ Summary and review of action items
13:54:24 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda+ Summary and review of issues
13:54:26 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda?
13:58:43 <becky> becky has joined #personalization
13:59:23 <JF> JF has joined #personalization
13:59:28 <JF> present+
13:59:33 <JF> agenda?
14:00:03 <CharlesL> CharlesL has joined #personalization
14:00:32 <CharlesL> present+
14:01:03 <becky> present+
14:01:20 <Matthew_Atkinson> Matthew_Atkinson has joined #personalization
14:01:24 <Matthew_Atkinson> present+
14:01:27 <Matthew_Atkinson> agenda?
14:03:07 <JF> scribe: JF
14:03:14 <JF> zakim, take up item 1
14:03:14 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Editor's note on action-destination-purpose (Matthew and John) -- Matthew sent the proposed editor's note" taken up [from Lionel_Wolberger]
14:05:43 <JF> MA: we've been working on this - refocus on providing the deliverables as expected and this is a work in progress.
14:06:02 <JF> ... seeking feedback and comments
14:06:41 <JF> This note outlines the different approaches, with code samples. Also includes a matrix with all of the options in one place (view)
14:07:03 <becky> https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Action-Destination-Purpose-Research-Questions
14:07:26 <becky> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jun/0011.html
14:07:58 <JF> LW: are these really Research Questions? Isn't this more seeking feedback?
14:08:15 <JF> MA: sure, what we call is less important than what we are seeking, which is more feedback
14:08:22 <CharlesL> q+
14:08:37 <JF> JS: likes "Request for Feedback" - implies that we want that feedback
14:08:58 <JF> BG: this is also to capture history, right? Historical data
14:09:05 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:09:33 <JF> LW: agree with Becky - this is a presentation of the topic
14:09:56 <JF> CL: fine with request for feedback. Want to note that changing the title changes the URL (wiki)
14:10:11 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:10:16 <JF> CL: this is the first time I've seen "meaning" - is this new?
14:10:24 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:10:30 <JF> ack ch
14:10:59 <JF> MA: when I did the demo page, this was one of the options. This is a proposal that would apply to a change of approach
14:11:26 <JF> so, "meaning" was a new concept - I added the name but open to suggestions
14:11:59 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:12:08 <JF> it's a step on the way - a less drastic approach (merging action and destination) - there is also another proposal that re-uses attributes that are in common
14:12:25 <becky> q+
14:12:31 <JF> CL: fine if this is just for illustration
14:12:33 <CharlesL> q+
14:12:50 <JF> MA: we can choose a different name if this is confusing. But we can certainly change it
14:12:53 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:12:54 <JF> ack MA
14:13:32 <Lionel_Wolberger> q+
14:13:40 <JF> BG: don't want to go down a rabbit hole.. if we already have purpose, why would we need meaning? So why (we will need an answer for that)
14:13:42 <becky> ack becky
14:13:44 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack becky
14:14:09 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:14:09 <JF> CL: the MathML working group is doing work on a proposed attribute "@intent"
14:14:23 <janina> q+
14:14:27 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:14:31 <JF> to be used in MathML - "what is this for in the mathematical equation?"
14:14:34 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack CharlesL
14:15:24 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack Lionel_Wolberger
14:15:25 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:15:45 <JF> LW: introducing a new word has kicked off new discussion - suggest instead "action-destination" instead of "meaning"
14:16:04 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:16:08 <CharlesL> q+
14:16:08 <JF> MA: 1) this is a placeholder, 2) contemplated that but it makes it a long attribute name
14:16:11 <JF> Q+
14:16:44 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack Matthew_Atkinson
14:16:49 <JF> MA: to Charles... re: @intent - interesting. Considered it, but it is a common term already, so we need to be mindful of that.
14:17:12 <JF> JS: Noted that MathML was working on @intent as well - interesting.
14:17:40 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:17:41 <JF> to the extent that we can re-use... that may be useful. Is MathML looking at a prefixed set of attributes?
14:17:51 <JF> CL: no it would be part of the MathML spec
14:17:54 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack janina
14:18:17 <JF> ack JF
14:19:13 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack JF
14:19:14 <Lionel_Wolberger> q/
14:19:39 <JF> JF: -1 to "@action-destination" - too long. We could note that @meaning = @action+@destination
14:19:42 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:19:47 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:19:53 <JF> Ack CL
14:20:01 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack CharlesL
14:20:07 <becky> q+
14:20:08 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:20:09 <JF> CL: how will we cross link this? Note that it's just a wiki page today
14:20:35 <JF> MA: the idea is to link to the wiki page from the Editor's Note
14:21:23 <JF> ...tried to keep this as neutral as possible - without showing a preference to one or the other
14:21:50 <JF> but I do understand that this may actually introduce more confusion
14:21:51 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:22:02 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack Matthew_Atkinson
14:22:08 <JF> if @meaning isn't working we can perhaps come up with something else?
14:22:20 <JF> Q+
14:22:25 <janina> Proposed Ed Note: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021Jun/0011.html
14:22:30 <Lionel_Wolberger> q/
14:22:31 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:23:02 <JF> BG: only concern is I don't recall us deciding to merge this. Feel like we haven't discussed this as a group
14:23:08 <becky> ack becky
14:23:10 <JF> ack b
14:23:11 <janina> +1 tro Becky that this is new
14:23:11 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack becky
14:23:27 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:23:27 <JF> LW: we can take that as a consideration, but we have discussed this
14:23:43 <Lionel_Wolberger> q+
14:24:23 <becky> q+
14:24:27 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack JF
14:25:10 <JF> JF: we have discussed this before. As I recall, the idea is to continue with the original 3, and note in the Working Draft that these are some open quesions
14:25:57 <JF> LW: what are next steps, and should we have this as a public conversation. There is some resistance to continued discussion
14:26:58 <JF> LW: looking to create some concensus. we could add a note that ActionDestination (or some other notation) is an open idea
14:27:04 <JF> Don;t want to get hung up on terms
14:27:46 <JF> LW: understand why @meaning becomes a problem, so perhaps using camelcase or hyphenated term
14:28:09 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack Lionel_Wolberger
14:28:10 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:28:41 <JF> BG: concern is that we are going to CR - if we have 3 different proposals, we're going to lose time
14:28:47 <janina> q+
14:28:54 <JF> we had 2 proposals, now it seems we have 3
14:29:18 <JF> BG: we were going to have 1 or 3, now this is a new proposal (2)
14:29:19 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:29:29 <JF> suggests that we haven't discussed this a lot
14:29:42 <JF> but this seems to be opening up the discussion even more - root of concern
14:29:42 <becky> ack becky
14:29:52 <JF> Q+
14:30:14 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:30:26 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:30:26 <JF> BG: so, are we introducing more confusion?
14:30:51 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:30:54 <JF> this seems we're not making it clear - it was pick one or the other, now it's pick one of three
14:31:31 <JF> BG: less concerned on what we call it - the concern is that there is now 3 different approaches
14:32:09 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:33:55 <Lionel_Wolberger> scribe: Lionel_Wolberger
14:34:22 <Lionel_Wolberger> JF: this was driven by a realization that action and destination were often confused, or not reliably distinguishable
14:34:27 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:34:33 <JF> ack JF
14:35:24 <JF> JS: want to underscore the context - if we are just updating the Working Draft not too bad. But if this is for CR then that introduces more concern
14:35:41 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:35:48 <JF> JS: now hearing a question - what is being proposed here? 2 alternative approaches or 3?
14:36:10 <JF> worry that we add those questions to a CR document - maybe just update the working draft for now
14:36:18 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack janina
14:36:29 <JF> JS: important that we are clear on this before we go to CR
14:37:06 <JF> MA: not looking to delay things. Just want to ask that once final edits are completed, really implore that you look at the table (matrix) at the bottom
14:37:11 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:37:22 <JF> shows the implications (as we understand them today) of the different approaches
14:37:47 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:37:54 <JF> MA: trying to make it clear that we propose to continue as is, but also want to anticipate some feedback
14:38:05 <JF> Q+
14:38:10 <JF> ack Ma
14:38:26 <JF> MA: review of the matrix will help
14:38:27 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack Matthew_Atkinson
14:38:55 <JF> LW: clarification of edits
14:39:30 <JF> LW: We have a useful document, we are engaging with this
14:39:40 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:40:33 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:40:58 <JF> JF: suggests moving matrix to top of document (the TL;DR as it were)
14:41:11 <JF> BG: noting scrolling issue in Chrome
14:42:25 <JF> [discussion: the table/matrix is an embedded content with markdown]
14:44:03 <JF> LW: 3 attributes (Action/Destination/Purpose) or 1, now we might have a 3rd option (Action+Destination/Purpose)
14:44:35 <becky> q+
14:44:37 <JF> LW: we need a 'name' for the combined Action/Destination - can use hyphen, CamelCase, or something else
14:45:37 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:46:10 <Lionel_Wolberger> +1
14:46:22 <Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel agrees with Becky, adding meaning is confusing
14:48:02 <Matthew_Atkinson> I'm OK with changing my "@purpose (for action-destination) and @meaning (for form controls)" example to "@action-destination and @purpose" as that's clearer.
14:49:35 <JF> [discussion]
14:50:37 <JF> LW; we can have Mathew do some cleanup - confusion around @meaning (and resultant discussion)
14:50:45 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+ to confirm revisions needed (there are three I think)
14:50:52 <becky> ack bec
14:50:55 <JF> LW: so we need to have the author(s) do some edits
14:50:56 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:51:07 <JF> ack JK
14:51:08 <Lionel_Wolberger> ack JF
14:51:35 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:52:07 <JF> JF: proposes that Matthew makes some edits, shares the changes via email (and some other cleanup ideas)
14:52:16 <Lionel_Wolberger> +1 table on top
14:52:31 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:52:56 <JF> ack Ma
14:52:56 <Zakim> Matthew_Atkinson, you wanted to confirm revisions needed (there are three I think)
14:54:16 <JF> LW: so Matthew will make the edits, we should all read that once he's done (will send out an email) so that we can finalize next week
14:54:39 <JF> LW: [discussion on scrolling table in wiki]
14:54:49 <JF> BG: what if we do it in HTML markup
14:54:52 <JF> +1 BEcky
14:55:26 <JF> s/do it in HTML markup/do it in markdown
14:55:49 <JF> BG: wil take a stab at it
14:56:10 <JF> BG: it's a tedious process
14:56:53 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:57:02 <JF> MA: will try doing this via a conversion process - will communicate with Becky if he needs help
14:57:10 <JF> BG: it's only the one table that fails
14:57:50 <JF> MA: rendering the data in a table is useful
14:58:19 <JF> -1 to an appendix to a linked note
14:58:31 <JF> Q+
14:59:01 <JF> JS: we will need to continue the discussion of the name of the page - important!
14:59:10 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
14:59:26 <becky> scribe: becky
15:00:28 <becky> LW: want to change the name sooner rather than later but Janina believes we should discuss the name next week
15:01:14 <becky> Janina: want to make sure the name is set before share with the public
15:01:21 <Roy_> Roy_ has joined #personalization
15:01:27 <becky> rrsagent, make minutes
15:01:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/06/14-personalization-minutes.html becky
15:02:22 <becky> zakim, end meeting
15:02:22 <Zakim> I don't understand 'end meeting', becky
15:02:35 <becky> zakim, close meeting
15:02:35 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close meeting', becky
15:02:39 <becky> rrsagent, bye
15:02:39 <RRSAgent> I see no action items