W3C

– DRAFT –
Adapt Weekly Teleconference

09 jan 2024

Attendees

Present
Abhinav, Lionel_Wolberger, matatk
Regrets
-
Chair
-
Scribe
janina, Lionel_Wolberger

Meeting minutes

<gb> CLOSED Pull Request 2 fixing typo (by dret)

<gb> CLOSED Issue 3 Avoid human text in attributes (by michael-n-cooper) [i18n-tracker] [action required]

Welcome to 2024! Administratrivia

Lionel_Wolberger: Welcomes all back from our year end break!

[We note meetings on Tuesday neatly avoid U.S. (and other Monday) hollidays!]

Continue the concept definition discussion

Concept #2, Our word for 'symbol': adapt-symbol?

<gb> CLOSED Pull Request 2 fixing typo (by dret)

<gb> CLOSED Issue 3 Avoid human text in attributes (by michael-n-cooper) [i18n-tracker] [action required]

Vocabulary for the WKU scope

Lionel_Wolberger: Suggests recap of where we are

matatk: can do

matatk: we have draft explainer; wku is one of several mechanisa

matatk: Need to get our explainer PR form

matatk: We also have several issue threads

matatk: We agreed to work on the issues where they're raised

matatk: Currently, we're still exploring goals, definitions, etc

matatk: And, we need to agree on project management

matatk: Vocabulary should be taken up early, need to coord with COGA and phps RQTF to make sure we're using a necessary and sufficient set of terms for destinations

matatk: Inconsistencies need resolution as pointed out by Abhinav

Lionel_Wolberger: Requests links for discussion threads?

<matatk> Discussion threads on technical matters relating to the explainers: https://github.com/w3c/adapt/discussions

Lionel_Wolberger: recollects 3 new explainer drafts from Matt

matatk: yes

matatk: Still working on how all the pieces fit together

matatk: WKU designed to send to a page, not some subsection of a page

matatk: The subsection may involve phps landmarks

Abhinav: Need to consider sequence; site-map inadequate, etc

Lionel_Wolberger: asks Abhinav for top issues

janina: Beginning the discussion of vocabulary
… let's start with the term "well known URI" itself
… since this is a well defined term, we likely need our own label for the spec we are considering
… I propose destination

matatk: +1 to destination

Lionel_Wolberger: Is destination the same as what we have been calling wku?

<Abhinav> We can take in following order:

<Abhinav> https://github.com/w3c/adapt/discussions/253

<Abhinav> https://github.com/w3c/adapt/discussions/254

<Abhinav> https://github.com/w3c/adapt/discussions/252

Lionel_Wolberger: Here is a deprecated link to 'destination' https://www.w3.org/TR/2022/WD-adapt-content-20220609/#destination-explanation

matatk: Yes, still good

Lionel_Wolberger: Similar to av

janina: or TOC

Lionel_Wolberger: I am concerned that Adapt 'Destination' and our intention with WKU are not identical

matatk: Notes destination names the object the link will bring up

Lionel_Wolberger: adapt 'destination' is an attribute that informs the end-user of what is to be expected at the href or URL hyperlinked in a given anchor
… WKU is a naming convention that is to be used if and only if the page found at that URL is a destination expected by that URI naming pattern (probably stipulated using the IANA well known URL standard)

matatk: Agree that one is an attribute that you put on a link

matatk: Notes we would provide a mechanism that brings up objects regardless of page navigation; ask for it via the mechanism from the user agent without finding in page links
… and another is a URL that would be implemented on a given website

janina: Whether or not a website has implemented these well known 'destinations' would be an indicator of the site's attention to accessibility
… it's a way of getting companies to compete on getting really good at accessibility
… it is a form of complexity management, welcome in today's complex world

matatk: I suggest we call the text of the URL, 'token'.

matatk: Also note, adapt 'destination' supports parts of a page as well as entire pages
… the well known URL spec is only for an entire page

Issue 240 sub-group

matatk: much progress made; might be approaching amicable solution

matatk: assuming we agree to use unicode, need examples of how to author content

matatk: It would justify the registry -- regardless of whether registry provides unicode or BCI values

matatk: also need to link to authoring tool

matatk: Offers to draft this

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 221 (Fri Jul 21 14:01:30 2023 UTC).

Diagnostics

No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: janina

Maybe present: janina

All speakers: Abhinav, janina, Lionel_Wolberger, matatk

Active on IRC: Abhinav, janina, Lionel_Wolberger, matatk