15:00:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #adapt
15:00:29 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/02/13-adapt-irc
15:00:30 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
15:00:31 <Zakim> please title this meeting ("meeting: ..."), janina
15:00:35 <janina> agenda?
15:00:40 <janina> agenda+ Introduction, Any Updates?
15:00:40 <janina> agenda+ Virtual TPAC submission
15:00:40 <janina> agenda+ Github actions and PRs
15:00:40 <janina> agenda+ Symbols: Issue 240 Way Forward
15:00:40 <janina> agenda+ Symbols: vocabulary
15:00:42 <janina> agenda+ Issues raised in the Well Known Destination/URL Git
15:00:46 <janina> agenda+ Recruiting
15:00:53 <janina>  Meeting WAI-
15:01:10 <janina> Meeting: WAI-Adapt Teleconference
15:01:17 <janina> Chair Lionel_Wolberger
15:01:23 <janina> Date: 13 Feb 2024
15:01:29 <janina> zakim, who's here?
15:01:31 <Zakim> Present: (no one)
15:01:31 <Zakim> On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, roy__, gb, imlostlmao, AnthonySpencer, justinestrada, sdd, Github, Mike5Matrix, gonzu_15
15:01:42 <janina> present+
15:02:16 <Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel_Wolberger has joined #adapt
15:02:25 <Lionel_Wolberger> present+
15:02:29 <janina> scribe+
15:02:30 <Abhinav> Abhinav has joined #adapt
15:02:33 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda?
15:02:38 <Abhinav> present+
15:02:40 <Vikas> Vikas has joined #adapt
15:02:48 <Vikas> present+
15:04:04 <Russell> Russell has joined #adapt
15:04:08 <Lionel_Wolberger> scribe+
15:04:13 <Russell> present+
15:04:20 <Lionel_Wolberger> zakim, next item
15:04:20 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Introduction, Any Updates? -- taken up [from janina]
15:04:33 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Any updates?
15:04:49 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Notes his participation at Zero Project in Vienna next week
15:05:19 <janina> janina: Are we meeting?
15:05:23 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Yes.
15:05:34 <Lionel_Wolberger> zakim, next item
15:05:34 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Virtual TPAC submission -- taken up [from janina]
15:07:40 <Lionel_Wolberger> janina: We have some time, and should propose a session
15:07:50 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... these virtual sessions are something relatively new to W3C
15:08:49 <janina> https://github.com/w3c/breakouts-day-2024/issues
15:08:51 <Lionel_Wolberger> https://www.w3.org/events/happenings/2024/call-for-w3c-breakouts-day-2024-session-1/
15:09:01 <Lionel_Wolberger> https://www.w3.org/events/happenings/2024/w3c-breakouts-day-2024-session-2/
15:09:24 <janina> Event is 12 March; Proposals due 29 February
15:09:41 <janina> janina: Notes Matthew and I believe we should do session on WKD
15:09:58 <Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel_Wolberger: I propose a "strawman" session, "Well Known Destination Development using Well Known URLs for Accessibility"
15:10:24 <Lionel_Wolberger> Abhinav: Vikas and I would be interested in contributing.
15:10:39 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... and you mentioned September?
15:11:03 <Lionel_Wolberger> janina: You are talking about TPAC. Last year was Seville, Spain. In 2024 it will be in Anaheim California
15:11:21 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... APA generally has many meetings, and we can address Well Known Destination
15:11:43 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... the main goal is joint meetings with other groups, where we have things to iron out or work jointly
15:12:37 <Lionel_Wolberger> Abhinav: More details about March please, vs September
15:14:51 <Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel_Wolberger: Any other proposal? Perhaps symbols?
15:14:54 <janina> For reference, our TPAC schedule from 2023 is here:
15:14:56 <janina> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2023
15:15:00 <Lionel_Wolberger> janina: Symbols has been done.
15:15:14 <matatk> matatk has joined #adapt
15:15:21 <Lionel_Wolberger> zakim, next item
15:15:21 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Github actions and PRs -- taken up [from janina]
15:15:28 <matatk> present+
15:15:58 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Checks github for new issues or PRs
15:16:11 <matatk> https://github.com/w3c/adapt/issues
15:18:17 <janina> zakim, next item
15:18:17 <Zakim> agendum 4 -- Symbols: Issue 240 Way Forward -- taken up [from janina]
15:18:54 <janina> matatk:
15:19:05 <janina>  We're coming around to accepting use of Unicode
15:19:17 <Lionel_Wolberger> matatk: Adapt has come to accept this idea of using Unicode as a keying mechanism
15:19:21 <janina> matatk: We want to file a comment to that effect but also note author considerations
15:19:25 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... this raises questions around authoring
15:19:36 <matatk> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-adapt/2024Feb/0001.html
15:19:46 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... we want to surface those authoring considerations back to the people (and Unicode people) who raised the issue
15:19:58 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... the gist is, affirmative: Yes we can use this method
15:20:07 <janina> matatk: Msg has been in draft and edited for clear communication
15:20:12 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... Russel has been fine-tuning the methodology
15:20:14 <janina> matatk: Reviews current msg draft
15:20:25 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... we have crafted a proposed response draft
15:20:38 <janina> matatk: If our response is accepted, we return to WHAT for our attribute
15:21:02 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
15:21:37 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Do we still expect a W3C registry based on BCI IDs?
15:22:47 <janina> Russell: Believe conversation was what IDs to use in the registry
15:23:17 <janina> matatk: From authoring perspective, purpose of registry is a dictionary to find the concept identifier
15:23:31 <janina> matatk: So yes to a registry, but phps using unicode
15:24:02 <janina> matatk: We want to avoid people thinking they can only use single symbols
15:24:27 <janina> rrsagent, make minutes
15:24:28 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/13-adapt-minutes.html janina
15:25:26 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: So the registry will provide key values code points for concepts to be used in web content?
15:25:34 <janina> matatk: We need to add code points
15:26:47 <janina> Russell: Yes, we need registry to translate to other symbol sets
15:27:39 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: So if I want to mark my content, I can find a concept that most closely matches and get an ID to put in my content?
15:27:42 <janina> Russell: Yes
15:29:32 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Asks procfess in ml, will turn to the registry to find the concept I'm mapping which will point me to an ID to put in my content
15:29:54 <janina> matatk: Yes, though this could be built into tooling which would still use the registry as a backend
15:30:25 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: And if I fail to find a close enough entry, can i construct my own by using unicode concatination?
15:30:58 <janina> matatk: We need to make sure we have an identified process and document
15:31:03 <janina> Russell: Yes
15:32:32 <janina> Russell: What someone might come up with as their concatination may be unique and may not match what would be commonly used for that concept
15:32:59 <janina> Russell: There would also be a difference for other symbol sets
15:33:44 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: So, if I understand 240, the question was why built on BCI rather than unicode?
15:34:26 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Our considered answer is that unicode is close enough? Correct?
15:34:40 <janina> Russell: We need to clearify terminology
15:35:19 <janina> Russell: It's not "Bliss" but the Bliss IDs
15:36:35 <janina> q+ to ask what the trade-off is
15:38:01 <janina> Russell: proposal was that unicode could be relied on in perpetuity
15:38:51 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: When unicode will finalize?
15:39:41 <janina> Russell: A few small nits to iron out; e.g. BCI has equivalents to EN for alpha numerics, and Unicode doesn't care for that kind of duplication
15:40:00 <janina> Russell: Personally, I agree with Unicode; why not use them?
15:40:15 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: So we have a race condition
15:40:47 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: proposing we register both id values
15:40:50 <janina> Russell: Agree
15:40:55 <matatk> q+
15:40:57 <janina> Russell: we're doing that anyway
15:41:30 <janina> Russell: Will talk with Michael about this; this is publically available now
15:41:43 <janina> Russell: Believe it's now OK to use
15:42:18 <Lionel_Wolberger> janina: Want to check on the trade-off moving to Unicode as a keying ID
15:42:45 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... Unicode will never have the latest Bliss symbols, as Bliss is developing new symbols
15:43:09 <Lionel_Wolberger> Russell: When (and if) new Bliss symbols will arise, they will be constructed by aggregating existing glyphs
15:43:10 <matatk> ack me
15:43:14 <matatk> ack janina
15:43:14 <Zakim> janina, you wanted to ask what the trade-off is
15:43:33 <Lionel_Wolberger> ... so having Unicode represented might actually make that process easier
15:43:34 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
15:44:52 <Lionel_Wolberger> Lionel_Wolberger: I see this next action pending, add a column to the Registry that allows adding the Unicode equivilant
15:45:17 <Lionel_Wolberger> matatk: Russell and I will post a proposed reply to Issue#240 on the email
15:45:21 <gb> Issue 240 not found
15:45:49 <Lionel_Wolberger> janina: We are currently in CR, so we will likely need to rev the document
15:45:58 <Lionel_Wolberger> agenda?
15:46:10 <Lionel_Wolberger> zakim, take up issue 6
15:46:10 <Zakim> I don't understand 'take up issue 6', Lionel_Wolberger
15:46:18 <Lionel_Wolberger> zakim, take up item 6
15:46:18 <Zakim> agendum 6 -- Issues raised in the Well Known Destination/URL Git -- taken up [from janina]
15:46:49 <matatk> https://github.com/w3c/adapt/discussions
15:48:01 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Asks next steps?
15:48:13 <janina> matatk: There are questions we need to address in the Explainer
15:48:15 <Lionel_Wolberger> matatk: Abhinav raised some issues that should be covered in the explainer
15:48:27 <janina> matatk: I'll have a first go at a spec draft in parallel with Explainer
15:48:50 <janina> matatk: Will do so in standard W3C doc format on github
15:48:59 <Lionel_Wolberger> q?
15:49:34 <janina> Abhinav: So we could suggest pr against your draft?
15:49:38 <janina> matatk: Absolutely
15:50:03 <janina> matatk: For start we're just going for WKU -- the main one to begin
15:50:32 <janina> Abhinav: asks what's included
15:50:59 <janina> matatk: We're working out what belongs in what Explainer/spec; let me start and you can suggest pr
15:51:18 <janina> matatk: Where things fit in w3c is one reason for the iterated approach
15:51:41 <janina> Abhinav: Don't fully understand reporting, for example
15:52:00 <janina> matatk: We welcome contributions
15:52:49 <janina> rrsagent, make minutes
15:52:50 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/13-adapt-minutes.html janina
15:53:22 <janina> matatk: Reiterates that spec and explainers are spearate docs in W3C
15:53:36 <janina> matatk: Will create these in form suitable for W3C process on github
15:56:52 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Asks how to tie wkd proposals to our work from recent years; how to ground?
15:57:00 <janina> Lionel_Wolberger: Offer to write reqs
15:57:16 <janina> matatk: Note that Explainer has a template and includes use cases
15:58:11 <janina> zakim, bye
15:58:11 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been janina, Lionel_Wolberger, Abhinav, Vikas, Russell, matatk
15:58:11 <Zakim> Zakim has left #adapt
15:58:14 <Lionel_Wolberger> rrsagent, make minutes
15:58:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/02/13-adapt-minutes.html Lionel_Wolberger
16:00:24 <janina> rrsagent, bye
16:00:24 <RRSAgent> I see no action items