RE: personalistion for the gap annalisis

Hi JohnSteve and me did a first review of them, hence wrote something up and it was sent to the list (I believe). They are different aspects of the same issue, and splitting them up does not work when identifying gaps, it needs to be viewed together.  

All the best

Lisa Seeman

Athena ICT Accessibility Projects 
LinkedIn, Twitter





---- On Sun, 28 Jun 2015 19:07:26 +0300  Rochford<john.rochford@umassmed.edu> wrote ---- 

  Hi Lisa,
  
 What is the significant advantage to merging those three papers? I ask especially because I’m always thinking of cost/benefit. Why would the work needed to merge the three papers be worth the effort compared to leaving them separate?
  
 John
  
 John Rochford
 UMass Medical School/E.K. Shriver Center
 Director, INDEX Program
 Instructor, Family Medicine & Community Health
 www.DisabilityInfo.org
 Twitter: @ClearHelper
  
  
   From: lisa.seeman [mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com] 
 Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 9:03 AM
 To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf
 Subject: personalistion for the gap annalisis
 
 
  
    
 
  short review of :
 
  ·  adapting content for coga personalization ,Gathering User Preferences, Syntax for adaptable links and buttons and portable preference
 
   
 
  Firstly we would like to merge these papers.
 
   
 
  conclusions
 
  GPII - cog a is potentially support but not yet,as
 
  a, it is not yet  well supported and implemented 
 
  b, tools are on sensory accessibility and not coga.
 
  Similar conclusion for  ISO/IEC 24751, (Individualized adaptability and accessibility in e-learning, education and training.  Part 1: Framework. Part 2: Need and Preference Terms Registration.  Part 3: Core Application Profile.
 
   
 
  However we feel GPII will incorporate what we do when we do it
 
   
 
  The plan is that the JSon and scripts in  "easy personalistion" can address most of what is described in adapting content for coga personalization and then we can relie on GPII to address portable preferences in the future.
 
   
 
  Missing from our roadmap and techniques - enabling the  use  to replace  widgets/ components like video player, whilst keeping the content the same. This will enable a player to be  loaded that the user understands how to work. idealy this should work with 
 
  mavis or Brian (new projects https://github.com/OpenDirective/brian)within our Json notation. This needs to enclude player settings such as diffrent levels of complexity.
 
  We also need to address graded help for json
 
   
 
  
  All the bestLisa Seeman
 
  Athena ICT Accessibility ProjectsLinkedIn, Twitter