See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: Dave
<scribe> scribenick: dsr
Jaroslav: yes, I will now be able to come
Fabio: anyone else (other than already on the page)
See Paolo's email http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mbui/2013Jun/0021.html
This covers proposed modifications for device, platform and
peripheral.
Paolo: the notion of platform covers quite a wide spectrum.
<UCL> UCL is coming. Sorry for the delay.
Jaroslav: do we agree that a screen is a peripheral rather than a device?
Paolo: yes. A device could be a tablet, where the use thinks he is interacting with a screen, but is really interacting with a computational system.
Jaroslav is concerned with wording about individual units for "device".
Paolo: perhaps functional unit would be clearer.
Jaroslav talks about the relationship between device and system.
Paolo: it is a question of whether to be more or less specific.
Jaroslav: functional unit sounds good.
Paolo asks Fabio what he thinks.
Fabio: do we need the last part of the platform definition?
Perhaps we should add some examples for platform?
Paolo: okay
Fabio: e.g. smart phone, tablet for platform, and iPhone and Samsung Galaxy III for devices.
<UCL> It should be interesting to provide a new column with example instead to be inside de definition?
Paolo: I would suggest removing elementary platform etc.
<UCL> Yes, the contrast is very difficult to read, :-)
We update the glossary entries live ...
Fabio: should we now remove the old definition? (for platform)
Paolo: yes, I would remove it
Jaroslav: my suggestion would be to put the new definition into a new row.
Fabio: this would make the document hard to manage
Jean: you can have different kinds of platforms, e.g. software platforms or hardware platform
Jaroslav: a smart phone is combination of both
<UCL> platform = shortcut for computing platform?
<UCL> ok with def
Jaroslav: it is quite common to talk about platform independence in terms of interaction modes, which is related to the type of peripheral, which seems to be missing here.
Jean asks whether we should adopt the terminology from OMG?
Fabio: we just had a small earthquake! We left the building, but have just returned.
Paolo: I've changed interaction modality, and we could relate this to interaction modality.
Jaroslav: I will think on this and provide a proposal for next week
A small remark should we explain the term "effector" here.
Effector is less commonly used than actuator.
Fabio: vibrating the phone is an example of an embedded effector
Paolo: effectors are part of the
interaction process.
... I would prefer to use "effector" to "actuator" to avoid the
robotics domain
However wikipedia notes that the two terms have essentially the same meaning.
Jaroslav: I agree with that.
Fabio: we should try to remove entries that we no longer feel are significant
Paolo: we need to aim for consistency across entries.
Jaroslav: should the glossary be ready for final review at the Munich F2F?
Fabio: yes and we plan to publish it very soon after that meeting.
For the next call, we need to check for consistency and for which entries we could remove
Jaroslav: please don't drop entries immediately, rather mark them as obsolete.
Fabio: do we have time to discuss this now?
Paolo: we could perhaps review the email thread on the AUI
Fabio: let's cover that next week
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138 of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/tha/that/ Found Scribe: Dave Found ScribeNick: dsr Present: Dave Jaroslav Paolo Cristina Fabio Nick_Kaklanis Jean Regrets: Joelle Gerrit Got date from IRC log name: 21 Jun 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/06/21-mbui-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]