W3C

– DRAFT –
(MEETING TITLE)

05 November 2024

Attendees

Present
Abhinav, janina, Lionel_Wolberger, Roy_Ruoxi, Russel
Regrets
Matthew
Chair
-
Scribe
Lionel_Wolberger, janina

Meeting minutes

Title: Adapt Weekly Teleconference 5 November

Introductions. Updates.

Symbols

Russell: Update on the font conversion work

Russell: Continue to work on fot port issues ...

Lionel_Wolberger: Can you share screen with how you're approaching? Want to understand

Russell: Not an overly heavy time commitment.

Russell: Have imported SVG graphs;

Russell: Traditionally one creates an outline font; a default way of working

Russell: That's now how we'd be using SVG

Russell: Probably my lack of experience using the tool

Russell: Not yet much to see

Russell: not planning to purchase commercial tools but use open source, though people I'd speak with in industry would be using commercial

Russell: Most now are SVG

Russell: Symbols vendors tend not to think open source; they're mostly closed systems with dedicated hardware and other closed approaches

Russell: They need to be robust for users who are not destrous

Russell: They sell these for $8-$10K USD

Russell: Provide full solution and even help users obtain hardware through public support sources

Russell: An available font freely available for them could be problematic for that model

janina: Do these vendors even support web browsing?

Russell: No

Russell: Recall a system that provided access to MS Windows that was bought and shutdown

janina: proposing, we should focus on those symbols that could be shared widely, and are useable in a browser
… symbol sets that are not available can be seen as out of our scope

Russell: I should have something to send over the public list this week.

Russell: No longer believe detail of symbols will be an issue given SVG

Well Known Destinations

Abhinav: I see two types of well known destinations
… one is more fixed in nature, like a home page, accessibility statement, global help page
… there are other kinds of more optional destinations, like a page for security, contacting board members, restaurant reservations
… Security is already a well known destination in the .wellknown specification

janina: and it is documented somewhere

Abhinav: That is a page that is constant across the entire site
… booking a hotel room is more website-specific, or booking an appointment, these kinds of pages are not as good candidates for well known URL

Lionel_Wolberger: Clarifying what Abhinav is saying
… There is a global taxonomy of web pages, that identifies some as well known, such as home page
… this global taxaonomy is already addressed, implicitly, by the IETF wellknown implementation
… on the other hand, there are local taxonomies defined implicitly by websites
… a restaurant may have ordering pages, a website for a ecommerce site may have a shipping page and so on
… That is the two types of well known destinations
… and is Abhinav is saying that each type of taxonomy may have a different implementation under our specification/best practices guide
… e.g., linksets may be ideal for the local taxonomy

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 238 (Fri Oct 18 20:51:13 2024 UTC).

Diagnostics

Maybe present: Russell, Title

All speakers: Abhinav, janina, Lionel_Wolberger, Russell, Title

Active on IRC: Abhinav, janina, Lionel_Wolberger, Roy_Ruoxi, Russell