14:41:04 RRSAgent has joined #personalization 14:41:04 logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/10/16-personalization-irc 14:41:11 rrsagent, make logs public 16:33:39 agenda: this 16:33:40 agenda+ updates: TPAC, 16:33:42 agenda+ what to downgrade in the speck (survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/101569/2017-10-12_priorities/results) 16:33:43 agenda+ Specification as a vocablory - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2017Oct/ 16:51:42 Roy has joined #personalization 16:59:12 present+ 17:00:27 janina has joined #personalization 17:00:41 zakim, who's here? 17:00:41 Present: lisa 17:00:42 On IRC I see janina, Roy, RRSAgent, Zakim, lisa, MichaelC, jasonjgw 17:00:46 clapierre has joined #personalization 17:00:54 present+ 17:01:00 present+ 17:01:07 present+ 17:01:22 present+ 17:01:49 AndyHeath has joined #personalization 17:01:54 Thaddeus has joined #Personalization 17:02:29 + present thaddeus 17:04:50 scribe: janina 17:04:51 scribe: janina 17:05:07 present+ 17:05:26 zakim, next item 17:05:26 agendum 1. "updates: TPAC," taken up [from lisa] 17:05:33 present_ 17:05:40 present+ 17:06:34 chair: clapierre 17:08:53 Tuesday 11-noon (css) 17:08:53 web platform 2-3 editing 17:09:28 cl: Asking informal Wednesday after hours mtg? 17:09:35 ls: As available 17:09:58 cl: Benetech expecting to host an event 17:10:11 cl: Probably Thursday evening 17:12:39 js: Noting the wcag excursion to meet with Bay Area Accessibility 17:12:51 cl: May need a different evening, then! 17:13:20 cl: Also need to coordinate with Joanie for ARIA joint mtg time 17:14:06 thaddeus has joined #personalization 17:14:37 Thaddeus intro ... 17:14:52 zakim, agenda? 17:14:52 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda: 17:14:53 1. updates: TPAC, [from lisa] 17:14:53 2. what to downgrade in the speck (survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/101569/2017-10-12_priorities/results) [from lisa] 17:14:53 3. Specification as a vocablory - https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2017Oct/ [from lisa] 17:14:59 +present 17:15:12 q? 17:16:31 zakim, next item 17:16:31 agendum 2. "what to downgrade in the speck (survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/101569/2017-10-12_priorities/results)" taken up [from lisa] 17:16:59 q+ 17:17:48 cl: Notes first time I created a wbs -- have 30 questions ... 17:18:19 q+ 17:19:00 [discussion about extending the survey] 17:19:53 ls: We agreed on basic "low priority" language last week 17:20:06 ls: Q on what that might apply to 17:20:19 ls: Also looking for info on implementations 17:21:06 ls: Important would mean that we would push for implementations 17:21:40 ls: Asking the call whether anyone is confused? 17:21:41 ack l 17:22:00 ah: Was daunted by the size 17:22:28 ah: Do these map to WCAG SC eventually? 17:22:52 ah: e.g. simplification 17:23:15 q+ 17:23:22 ah: Recalling my experience with Drupal trying to establish this 17:23:41 ls: That's an important question we need to clarify 17:23:49 ack Andy 17:23:54 ls: I won't say it doesn't matter, but it is independent of this spec 17:24:35 ls: Most does map, imo 17:24:38 q+ 17:25:28 ls: How they map is an AGWG issue 17:25:48 s/issue/concern/ 17:27:23 ah: Believe there's lots for WCAG 17:27:35 ah: multiple implementation scenarios in multiple techs 17:28:19 ls: But we don't need to concern with that here, in this group 17:28:22 ack l 17:28:23 ack 17:28:38 q- 17:29:22 cl: Are you thinking it would all go AAA in WCAG? 17:29:26 ls: NO. Some AA 17:29:58 q+ 17:30:03 ls: Common controls might be AA 17:30:24 cl: Is this stated in the doc? 17:30:32 ls: In the wiki, but doesn't belong in the spec 17:30:36 q? 17:31:04 ack jas 17:31:32 jw: Whatever we take to TR needs to be carefully and well defined 17:31:54 jw: e.g. misusing metadata can be harmful 17:32:59 jw: Believe there's considerable opportunity here for misuse 17:34:01 jw: In favor of rigorously chosen small set of implementable metadata properties 17:34:02 q+ 17:34:21 cl: Note we have 15 proposed items 17:34:36 cl: Believe we need examples of how this looks in the real world 17:34:56 cl: Concerned that we're taking on too much 17:35:10 cl: Saying yes to everything means we won't get it done 17:35:31 cl: We need to choose what will get done. Remainder can come in later rev 17:36:10 q+ 17:36:24 ls: We're not at the stage where we need to toss something that's not clear. That can come later. 17:37:19 ack lisa 17:37:29 ls: Prefer to see what people will implement first 17:37:43 q+ to say need to set and keep to a timeline and useful spec - make decisions that support that 17:37:53 q- 17:38:07 ack MichaelC 17:38:07 MichaelC, you wanted to say need to set and keep to a timeline and useful spec - make decisions that support that 17:38:20 mc: I'm OK with keeping things for now, but we also need to set and meet a timeline 17:38:45 mc: Simple and useful would be an important goal 17:40:02 https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Task-list-for-semantics 17:40:29 ls: Reason I want to maintain a table on wiki is for the reason that we could more readily update 17:40:39 +1 for the table idea 17:41:47 cl: Believe lists are easier for most 17:41:54 js: List easier for mwa 17:42:32 +1 for list 17:42:50 anything that is actionable and updateable 17:42:58 +1 list is fine 17:43:32 cl: Meanwhile, we still have the survey ... 17:44:21 cl: Myself, I deprioritized logs only, because of the taxonomic complexity 17:44:42 ls: Well, I drafted, so it's there because i thought it was important 17:44:49 q+ To ask Lisa about logs 17:45:27 ls: Anyone can answer the WBS? 17:45:33 cl: No, internal only 17:45:50 ls: In favor of open 17:46:12 ls: To get implementers to +1 17:47:30 mc: If we have reason to make a public survey, OK, but not as a general rule 17:49:35 ls: It's about gathering information 17:49:57 q? 17:50:15 ack janina 17:50:15 janina, you wanted to ask Lisa about logs 17:53:18 js: Asks about logs 17:53:27 ls: Bread crumbs, different representations 17:56:17 q+ 17:56:51 ls: Have it only if you want it 17:57:38 ack ja 17:58:09 cl: Maybe "logs" not the best handle 17:58:17 ack andy 17:58:26 ah: Bread crumbs is an implementation technique 17:58:49 ah: We're missing a user model of needs 17:58:56 q+ 17:59:30 https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/table.html 18:01:31 i need a concret example of what is missing andy so I know what you think is missing 18:01:53 ls: Need concrete example of what's missing 18:02:00 ah; There's lots. Will do off line 18:02:08 cl: next call, next Monday! 18:02:17 cl: Please respond on survey 18:02:49 zakim, bye 18:02:49 leaving. As of this point the attendees have been lisa, janina, clapierre, jasonjgw, Roy, AndyHeath, present 18:02:49 Zakim has left #personalization 18:02:58 rrsagent, make minutes 18:02:58 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/10/16-personalization-minutes.html janina 18:03:08 rrsagent, bye 18:03:08 I see no action items