personalization as a technique - was Re: New Wiki page with SC text proposals to combine issues 79, 78, and 74

Hi Alistair and Low Vision task force

We are working on a full personalization architecture and will have a free browser extension
 
We will have a specification for both the semantics and the personalization settings https://w3c.github.io/personalization-semantics/ it is under the aria working group.
A first open implementation is at https://github.com/ayelet-seeman/coga.personalisation and there is a demo at http://rawgit.com/ayelet-seeman/coga.personalisation/demo/conactUs.html
IBM and Pearson are saying they intend also to implement it (although clearly I can not commit for either of them by CR it should have at least 2 implementations )

Should someone from the low vision task force coordinate with me to ensure LV personalization settings are fully addressed?

Also than you can add personalization as a technique. This makes it much easier to make it widely applicable. 

We are addressing the testing burden by having a maximum of 5 recommended settings per user setting. So developers can test all recomended settings by testing against 5 templates.

All the best

Lisa Seeman

LinkedIn, Twitter





---- On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 01:16:54 +0200 Alastair Campbell<acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote ---- 

Hi everyone, 
 
Thinking about the(se) adaptation Success Criteria, I really think the process is more important than the SC text at this stage. 
 
As I outlined before: 
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017JanMar/0418.html 
 
I think we need an *open* process to test the limits of what a user-side script or extension can do, to find out what authors can reasonably do. 
 
These things are not new, the Opera browser used to have user-stylesheets that adjusted colours, layouts etc. There are extensions now that pull out content and re-format it. But there is no standard, no one has tried to define it in an open way. 
 
We need to have a preliminary requirement (SC text), then test, write and test again. 
 
If we don’t have an initial stake in the ground (of the SC text) then there is no point putting the effort into testing and writing techniques, but if we do, we have a plan and the SC text can be modified later based on the results. 
 
Cheers, 
 
-Alastair