13:09:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #personalization
13:09:23 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/05/17-personalization-irc
13:09:25 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
13:09:28 <trackbot> Meeting: Personalization Task Force Teleconference
13:09:28 <trackbot> Date: 17 May 2021
13:11:20 <Sharon> remove agendum 2
13:11:27 <Sharon> remove agendum 3
13:11:42 <Sharon> agenda?
13:11:51 <Sharon> chair: Sharon
13:12:40 <Sharon> agenda+ Review updates to the explainer - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/pull/181
13:12:49 <Sharon> agenda?
13:13:32 <Sharon> zakim, clear agenda
13:13:32 <Zakim> agenda cleared
13:13:54 <Sharon> agenda+ Review updates to the explainer - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/pull/181
13:14:09 <Sharon> agenda+  i18n issue #144 (waiting for a response back) - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/144
13:14:28 <Sharon> agenda+ Open Content module 1 issues https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%221%29+content+module%22
13:56:17 <janina> janina has joined #personalization
13:59:20 <Matthew_Atkinson> Matthew_Atkinson has joined #personalization
13:59:30 <Matthew_Atkinson> agenda?
13:59:36 <Matthew_Atkinson> present+
14:00:25 <janina> https://www.w3.org/wiki/Holidays
14:01:20 <CharlesL> CharlesL has joined #personalization
14:01:40 <becky> becky has joined #personalization
14:02:26 <JF> JF has joined #personalization
14:02:31 <JF> Present+
14:02:48 <janina> present+
14:02:48 <Sharon> scribe: janina
14:02:52 <janina> scribe: janina
14:03:11 <becky> present+
14:03:18 <janina> zakim, next item
14:03:18 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Review updates to the explainer - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/pull/181 -- taken up [from Sharon]
14:03:36 <janina> Sharon: Notes this is the PR ...
14:04:11 <janina> Sharon: Asks about the various expected edits, what remains?
14:04:39 <janina> JF: Believe only remaining is bold/italic vs strong/emphasis
14:05:28 <janina> http://www.w3.org/respec/
14:05:55 <janina> CharlesL: Notes preference in W3C for strong/emphasis
14:06:06 <janina> johnNotes CSS styling is still available
14:06:26 <janina> JF: The semantic includes visual, but can be styled
14:07:18 <janina> CharlesL: Notes screen reader settings used by some users
14:09:30 <janina> Sharon: Will look at PR for any gotchyas and approve or inform the list
14:09:51 <janina> JF: Notes also more recent updates? Are those included?
14:10:39 <janina> [discussion re whether the PR has the latest and greatest}
14:10:50 <janina> s/\}/]/
14:11:34 <Matthew_Atkinson> These are JF's latest changes https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/pull/181/files/876929e665c6042ecca329ae4033dac404abe11f..ee0e82229ad30642d512441c75ab6930acf8b08e
14:11:44 <JF> The latest is here: https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/pull/181/commits/ee0e82229ad30642d512441c75ab6930acf8b08e
14:12:13 <Matthew_Atkinson> For reference, the date was the 13th of this month.
14:12:16 <janina> zakim, next item
14:12:16 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, janina
14:12:21 <janina> q?
14:12:24 <janina> ack jf
14:12:25 <janina> q?
14:12:25 <JF> ack me
14:12:34 <janina> zakim, next item
14:12:34 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- i18n issue #144 (waiting for a response back) - https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues/144 -- taken up [from Sharon]
14:12:51 <janina> Sharon: Notes this is dangling for i18n
14:12:56 <janina> Sharon: No response?
14:13:11 <janina> becky: looks at history
14:14:56 <JF> Q+ to say we've waited lon genough
14:15:18 <Sharon> ack JF
14:15:18 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to say we've waited lon genough
14:15:39 <janina> janina: Suggests misunderstanding not cleared via github, we should ask for mtg as needed to clear
14:15:46 <janina> jf: Agrees we should move on
14:17:38 <janina> janina: Will ping addison
14:17:42 <janina> zakim, next item
14:17:42 <Zakim> agendum 3 -- Open Content module 1 issues https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%221%29+content+module%22 -- taken up [from Sharon]
14:18:20 <janina> Sharon: Seems destination/action/purpose -- are we good?
14:18:31 <janina> Sharon: Where to start?
14:18:39 <CharlesL> q+
14:18:55 <janina> Sharon: Are we still looking at possibly combining these?
14:19:06 <janina> janina: My recollection is we didn't actually decide
14:19:14 <JF> Q+ to propose a path forward
14:19:23 <Sharon> ack CharlesL
14:19:26 <janina> CharlesL: Have update on issue 128
14:19:34 <janina> CharlesL: Tried to reach out, but email bounced
14:19:44 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:19:53 <janina> Sharon: Close?
14:20:12 <janina> CharlesL: Yes, but will add comment. Perhaps the github handle may get action?
14:20:43 <Sharon> ack JF
14:20:43 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to propose a path forward
14:21:08 <janina> jf: Believe right question posed. We need to make decision on the 3 attributes vs one
14:21:49 <janina> Sharon: OK, Charles will ping via github and close
14:22:03 <Sharon> q?
14:22:07 <janina> jf: Notes 3 attribs proposed for some time; combining coming awfuly late
14:22:31 <janina> jf: Concerned with the rewrite job
14:22:37 <Sharon> ack Matthew_Atkinson
14:22:51 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Suggest we might want to look at some other items and delay this one ...
14:23:03 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Not adverse to delaying this one while we mull it
14:23:19 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: We do have other discrete items, and we've made progress on some
14:23:36 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: We're not quite done with conflict resolution
14:23:50 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Some of these others may be easier to resolve
14:23:55 <janina> Sharon: Link?
14:24:29 <Matthew_Atkinson> Latest question on-list: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-personalization-tf/2021May/0009.html
14:25:09 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Suggests various distinctions ...
14:25:19 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: expectation of link vs button, etc
14:26:14 <JF> Q+
14:26:32 <Sharon> q?
14:26:42 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Believe it's simpler to allow help to be either link or button
14:27:05 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: some destinations might be actions
14:27:06 <becky> q+
14:27:55 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: the notion "opens inpage dialog" seems reasonable, but could be more than, might be several
14:27:58 <janina> q+
14:28:17 <Sharon> q?
14:28:22 <Sharon> ack JF
14:28:40 <janina> jf: Agree we could shorten ....
14:29:12 <janina> jf: point is what serves target audience best?
14:29:29 <janina> jf: believe we need to define both
14:29:37 <Sharon> q?
14:29:46 <janina> ack jf
14:30:02 <Sharon> ack becky
14:30:27 <janina> becky: Concerned developers were confused having same name in two places. Is that better documentation?
14:31:03 <Sharon> ack janina
14:31:37 <JF> Q+
14:31:49 <JF>  to also talk about augmenting with icons
14:31:59 <JF> Q+
14:32:01 <becky> q?
14:32:26 <Sharon> ack JF
14:32:33 <becky> q+
14:32:38 <janina> janina: Concerned we may be over thinking mechanism vs what user needs
14:32:51 <janina> jf: we had concerned an onscreen icon
14:33:22 <janina> jf: but we may have multiple help icons -- different terms for each is cleanest
14:33:28 <Sharon> q?
14:33:31 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:33:48 <Sharon> ack becky
14:34:02 <janina> becky: Believe Janina provided justification for just using purpose
14:34:23 <JF> Q+ to also speak to 'teaching' AI
14:34:24 <janina> becky: Developer will understand user's need
14:34:31 <Sharon> q?
14:34:48 <Sharon> ack Matthew_Atkinson
14:34:56 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: interesting discussion ...
14:35:17 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Believe adding icon may be indeed simplest; but maybe we only need one
14:36:14 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: if we had a way of working out distination vs action ...
14:36:18 <Sharon> q?
14:36:28 <Sharon> ack JF
14:36:28 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to also speak to 'teaching' AI
14:36:42 <janina> jf: believe goal is also teachin AI systems
14:36:53 <janina> jf: so specificity wins out
14:37:35 <janina> jf: Not overly concerned if same icon is used for either
14:37:40 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:37:41 <Sharon> q?
14:37:51 <Sharon> ack Matthew_Atkinson
14:38:02 <CharlesL> q+
14:38:13 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Generally agree with explicit is better than implicit ....
14:38:37 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: should we consider the rules we give to a validator?
14:38:59 <Sharon> q?
14:39:00 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Sometimes both would be valid; but other times not. How do we guide?
14:39:55 <janina> jf: Perhaps an Ed Note asking responses during CR
14:40:19 <janina> jf: Concerned we may already have devs working from the draft
14:40:44 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Ask one detail ...
14:41:19 <janina> Matthew_Atkinson: Is the example currently legit? Where both can be used?
14:41:37 <Sharon> q?
14:41:48 <janina> jf: Believe not explicitly forbidden; multiple attribs not forbidden
14:42:21 <janina> jf: Notes authors might do that and we're just trying to augment authoring
14:42:31 <Sharon> ack CharlesL
14:42:36 <janina> CharlesL: +1 to Ed Note
14:43:13 <janina> CharlesL: My only concern with 3 is that we have to ask for 3 from WHAT
14:43:16 <janina> q+
14:43:30 <JF> Q+ to suggest that Matthew and I pull together a 'whitepaper' with the outstanding questions and possible ways forward, and reference that in the Ed. Note
14:43:55 <Sharon> ack janina
14:44:47 <Sharon> q?
14:45:18 <Sharon> ack JF
14:45:18 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to suggest that Matthew and I pull together a 'whitepaper' with the outstanding questions and possible ways forward, and reference that in the Ed. Note
14:45:31 <janina> janina: Notes we're replacing data- specifically, with a reserved prefix
14:45:42 <janina> jf: Prefers to ask for the attribs without the prefix first
14:46:08 <janina> janina: That's another conversation and one that's strategic -- possibly above the TF pay grade
14:46:18 <Sharon> q?
14:47:07 <JF> draft proposal: a) add Ed. Note to 1st module, b) Matthew and JF pull together a whitepaper that outlines the issues and possible ways forward
14:47:12 <Matthew_Atkinson> +1 to working with JF on white paper to support Editor's Note about possible ways forward wrt attributes.
14:47:14 <becky> q+ to ask about resolving the name of the action help value
14:48:01 <Matthew_Atkinson> +1 to it being a wiki page (thanks Janina)
14:48:14 <becky> +1
14:48:35 <janina> jf: Clarifies that we need a destination for our Ed Note to point for all the pros and cons
14:48:37 <Sharon> +1
14:48:39 <janina> jf: Could be a wiki
14:48:42 <Sharon> q?
14:48:43 <Roy> +1
14:49:12 <Sharon> q?
14:49:51 <janina> becky: Are we agreed on this one?
14:49:52 <janina> +1
14:49:56 <JF> +1
14:50:04 <Sharon> +1
14:50:05 <janina> Sharon: Appears so, and where it lives to be decided
14:50:16 <janina> jf: Will get it started
14:51:04 <Sharon> ack becky
14:51:04 <Zakim> becky, you wanted to ask about resolving the name of the action help value
14:51:20 <JF> ACTION: JF to start the process of working with Matthew to collect pros and cons, and possible places to host that 'discussion'
14:51:22 <trackbot> Created ACTION-84 - Start the process of working with matthew to collect pros and cons, and possible places to host that 'discussion' [on John Foliot - due 2021-05-24].
14:51:39 <janina> becky: Want to get back to original q? action-help -- are we OK with same name for different values
14:52:08 <JF> action="opens_dialog" sort of maps to "hasPopup"
14:52:38 <janina> becky: Appears opening in page dialog is too specific -- as we currently have it
14:52:55 <janina> becky: Do we need more generic? Or allow two values
14:53:08 <janina> becky: There was confusion when they were the same, so we broke them out
14:53:19 <JF> Q+
14:53:38 <Sharon> ack JF
14:53:42 <janina> jf: Values?
14:53:45 <janina> Becky: yes
14:55:03 <janina> [discussion on what we actually mean ...]
14:55:22 <Sharon> q?
14:55:50 <janina> jf: On screen text may say "help," but tech may be different
14:56:05 <janina> becky: should look at the others where there may be overlap
14:56:14 <janina> jf: I propose Matthew and I will consider that ...
14:57:17 <Sharon> q?
14:58:35 <Matthew_Atkinson> q+
14:58:55 <Sharon> ack Matthew_Atkinson
14:59:19 <CharlesL> CharlesL has joined #personalization
14:59:42 <janina> matthew: Noting I agree with what's being said, thinking distinction may be helpful to some users; but we also want to encourage creative competition among implementing user agents
15:00:06 <janina> Sharon: So we have a plan ...
15:00:12 <janina> Sharon: Anything else?
15:01:54 <janina> zakim, bye
15:01:54 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been JF, CharlesL, Lionel_Wolberger, janina, LisaSeemanKest, sharon, Roy, Matthew_Atkinson, becky
15:01:54 <Zakim> Zakim has left #personalization
15:01:59 <janina> rrsagent, make minutes
15:01:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/05/17-personalization-minutes.html janina
15:03:38 <janina> rrsagent, bye
15:03:38 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in https://www.w3.org/2021/05/17-personalization-actions.rdf :
15:03:38 <RRSAgent> ACTION: JF to start the process of working with Matthew to collect pros and cons, and possible places to host that 'discussion' [1]
15:03:38 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/05/17-personalization-irc#T14-51-20