RE: User Intentions Explainer (was: List of Intentions)

+1



* katie *
 
Katie Haritos-Shea 
Senior Accessibility SME (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)
 
Cell: 703-371-5545 | ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA | LinkedIn Profile |
Office: 703-371-5545

-----Original Message-----
From: Janina Sajka [mailto:janina@rednote.net] 
Sent: Saturday, August 9, 2014 1:23 PM
To: Jason White
Cc: public-indie-ui@w3.org
Subject: Re: User Intentions Explainer (was: List of Intentions)

Jason:

I want to encourage you to repost this message with cross posting at least
to public-editing-tf@w3.org, if not also to public-webapps@w3.org other
list, at least 

You make some excellent points, particularly on the need to agree on a
vocabulary, and this is the right time to hold this discussion in the wider
W3 context.

Yes, cross posting is awkward, but we're in a transition phase here that I'm
convinced will be resolved before too much more time passes.

Janina

Jason White writes:
> Responding only to Indie-UI in order to inform our discussion with Web 
> Apps and possibly others.
> 
> I concur with Janina's insightful remark today that the "explainer" 
> could evolve into a (potentially cross-group) requirements document. 
> This raises several issues.
> 
> 1. Harmonization of terminology. We're already seeing differences 
> between the terminology used by WEb Apps in connection with editing 
> and our own terms for similar concepts, e.g., "abstract events" and 
> "intentions". Naming conventions for events aren't harmonized either.
> 
> 2. Whether there should ultimately be one spec or several, and where 
> the division should lie, is obviously up for discussion. Given the 
> progress we've made to date, it makes good sense that support for 
> interactive editing could reside in its own spec, with its own 
> development schedule. this, after all, is work that we anticipated in
IndieUI but postponed.
> 
> 3. If there are two or more specs to be produced in this area, we 
> should provide appropriate cross-references (perhaps a non-normative 
> reference in each spec to the requirements would be sufficient), so 
> that user agent and Web application implementors alike can readily 
> appreciate the relationships between the technologies described in the
respective documents.
> 
> My main concern at this point is that the designs be consistent and 
> that terminology be unified wherever possible.

-- 

Janina Sajka,	Phone:	+1.443.300.2200
			sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
		Email:	janina@rednote.net

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair,	Protocols & Formats	http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
	Indie UI			http://www.w3.org/WAI/IndieUI/

Received on Saturday, 9 August 2014 18:53:15 UTC