Re: Minutes: MathML intent meeting, 14 Jan, 2020

I left out the passcode for the recording. Here are the details:
Meeting Recording:
https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/gdxvJss6b72v_SppliShabMH11fGffNj_0i8A-nWJr1Nll_TfJm1VGxx1OSplBDb.proRY69qm5tzvi_m

Access Passcode: +0FFfu2%

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 7:44 PM Neil Soiffer <soiffer@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

>
> Attendees:
>
> Neil Soiffer
>
> Bruce Miller
>
> David Carlisle
>
> Deyan Ginev
>
> David Farmer
>
> Sam Dooley
>
> Murray Sargent
>
> Charles LaPierre
>
> The meeting was recorded:
> https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/share/tLcatjVCPn_HVROiYmD1RSENQteUOiFKcSVSgyKyiYx3xHVGUClG3c6wMAMgl2gp.tX0umhf8Pz7-01ne
>
>
>
> Agenda:
> 1. Announcements/updates
>
> MS:  I came up with a way to indicate the selection by adding some attrs.
> This can be sent to a braille display.
>
> NS: It could be fodder for the spec or for a note.
>
> NS: Need new zoom link.
>
> NS: EPUB WG wants to talk to us about concerns about the charter. Is
> tomorrow at 10 Eastern ok?
>
> <some yes>
>
> CP: I think they just want to make sure nothing breaks
>
> 2. Deyan's action item on schema.org
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fschema.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C2d212f0fbdd941d0cb8208d8b6bea0a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637460277147909164%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=FftoIbbWD188QKNtnuKzbpE1gfbl7sSKZ%2F4Zic67aM4%3D&reserved=0>
>
> DG: I tried RDFa and JSON-ld. I was disappointed with the experiment. You
> can request Google index pages. It takes less than a day to do that. See
> https://dginev.github.io/tiny-mathml-a11y-demo/ for an experiment.
>
> DG: If you do a site search, google finds the new pages.
>
> DG: Their report on rich text support says everything was good on the
> pages.
>
> DG: However, if you do a search for the metadata, google finds nothing. If
> you search for something for something visible like h-bar, google will find
> it.
>
> DG: So it seems like they extract the data but don’t use it as part of
> search.
>
> DG: FYI: difference between the pages -- I tried using MathML and not
> MathML.
>
> NS: Disappointing for search, but it does narrow down the options.
>
> 3. Review of what we've looked at/Plans for future
>
> NS: We went from mathrole to semantics to intent with a functional
> notation using different variants
>
> SD: As a summary. We had so many things for mathrole it would not make it
> as an option to add to aria’s roles. Also, the role didn’t provide enough
> info.
>
> SD: … considered whether markup goes on the operator or to the outermost
> level. [transpose example]
>
> SD  … at this point, we worried about “semantics” as being too loaded in
> meaning with everyone having their own thoughts about what it meant.
> Transitioned to “intent”
>
> SD … found places that just tagging the operators wasn’t enough. At this
> point we moved to the functional notation with several shorthands. That
> somewhat allowed minimal markup as with the earlier ideas of just marking
> up the outermost part of the semantics
>
> SD  … I think we got to the point where we can capture what we want to
> capture
>
> NS: DC had brought up using intent to deal with linebreaking and alignment
> done with tables.
>
> BM: The mystery to me is that we have RDFa-like semantics. We need
> structure for computation and maybe for speech. That remains unclear to me.
> The intent proposal is heavyweight, so it’s not clear that’s what you want?
> Why not just use content MathML if that’s what you need?
>
> DG: Two things I wanted to get clarity on. One is scope and the other is
> applications. I’m still a proponent on open-endedness. The split into level
> 1 and everything else where level 1 is common and known and let’s make sure
> that is designed/described so everyone is on the same page.
>
> DG: … I’ve been working on level 3 so people who want to deal with more
> advanced math or other topics.
>
> DG: … On the computation side, I wanted to get clarification and it is
> becoming clear. I’m certain that we now need to prioritize accessibility
> over computation. The intersection of search and computation and
> accessibility might be fragile.
>
> MS: I agree with the importance of accessibility
>
> NS: For accessibility, I don’t need all the structure but it doesn’t hurt.
>
> DF: Accessibility is why I’m involved. I understand computation is
> interesting but I’m not sure how that will work. My goal with PreTeXt is to
> make sure we don’t lose.
>
> BM: I have a tentative request. It would be informative to me to get a
> sense of what information is needed for accessibility. I don’t want to get
> bogged down into the details on how to do the markup, just a higher level
> need.
>
> NS: I’m happy to do that. What would you like to have annotated?
>
> SD: so what you’re looking for is what is the minimal info over
> presentation MathML that is needed for a11y?
>
> BM: Yes, I don’t think we need to reinvent content MathML. We are looking
> for something simpler, but what.
>
> DG: I like the discussion of what we need for speech.
>
>