Meeting minutes
Date 03 Jun 2025
WKD
matatk: Notes we've been symbols focussed and not keeping up with WKD
matatk: Have more time now because have staff. Will be updating Explainer
matatk: There are also related developments from GAD, other W3C ...
matatk: Good use case for symbols will be WKD!
matatk: We can make the browser extension support symbols in WKD
matatk: We've also been thinking what web sites
matatk: Start would be WAI
janina: I think that's done!
matatk: No deliverables to show today, but WKD not forgotten; and updates coming soon
Abhinav: Notes two parts ...
Abhinav: Server side is clear; how do we do the user side?
matatk: I see two answers
matatk: Ultimately we expect browsers to support; though presentation may not be suitable for everyone
matatk: I expect some users will need extensions for their particular presentational needs
matatk: We'll demonstrate with an extension; but our goal is direct browser support
Abhinav: How do we get our initial users for totyping and feedback?
matatk: We actually have access to a fairly good userbase, e.g. WAI-IG, COGA, APA, AGWG, ...
matatk: Perhaps we could link to a embedded html form for feedback
Abhinav: Should we take up some topics today? Or take the open items for off line on list?
AAC
matatk: No work for Russell just now, I will be updating Explainer
WKD Comments
<matatk> w3c/
<gb> Pull Request 279 Update well-known destinations explainer in accordance with TPAC 2024 (by matatk)
matatk: Notes 288 (rhel)
matatk: and 289 -- Criteria for adding new values
matatk: Looking at comments to ensure we have an issue for all that need one!
matatk: Notes 296 for localization
matatk: matatk: Looking at comment/question on what links are WKD; janina: Key use case from COGA is distraction support
matatk: styling
janina: Somewhat like W3C's new minutes page without navbar -- much like an html 2.0 page
Abhinav: points to
<matatk> https://
matatk: Bit concerned about performance -- but will be more efficient if browser-based
matatk: Worth exploring; may be we separate into two parts
janina: Notes no issue?
matatk: Correct
matatk: Notes and share efficiency concern when in an extension;
<matatk> Re distractions - https://
<gb> Pull Request 279 Update well-known destinations explainer in accordance with TPAC 2024 (by matatk)
issue 290
matatk: We need to explain why not using linksets
<matatk> https://
matatk: in alternatives considered section; mayh come back!
<matatk> Re definitions for things like sub-sites and sub-domains: https://
Abhinav: Explain why not using IETF wku
Abhinav: needs to be better documented
matatk: Notes one alternative previously considred
matatk: But documentation not caught up
matatk: just rhel on any link -- have arg against vecause relies on content being in every page
<matatk> ^ re https://
<matatk> Re review comment (overall) from Abhinav: https://
<gb> Pull Request 279 Update well-known destinations explainer in accordance with TPAC 2024 (by matatk)
matatk: Also considered WKU+rhel; implementers said no
matatk: If everyone coded their sites correctly, then it would work but that doesn't happen
Abhinav: Some global WKU we can take
matatk: agree they will apply to top as well as subdomain -- but can get confusing from author
matatk: for us to suggest multiple approaches would be confusing
matatk: browser devs pointed us to existing html markup we could use that's not currently used
matatk: advantage is works for user and author as well
matatk: if concern on resources, browser devs were not concerned
matatk: Linksets can solve the repetition problem; and we may get there in a future rev
matatk: Notes no compatability problem should we eventually go to linksets
matatk: I can go ahead and edit now based on the comments