W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-personalization-tf@w3.org > August 2020

Re: Update: joint meeting with CSSWG

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 09:21:06 -0400
To: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>
Cc: James Craig <jcraig@apple.com>, Rossen Atanassov <Rossen.Atanassov@microsoft.com>, Alan Stearns <stearns@adobe.com>, APA Chairs <group-apa-chairs@w3.org>, Joanmarie Diggs <jdiggs@igalia.com>, "Gottfried Zimmermann (Lists)" <zimmermann@accesstechnologiesgroup.com>, James Nurthen <nurthen@adobe.com>, Personalization tf <public-personalization-tf@w3.org>, Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>, "Tess O'Connor" <eoconnor@apple.com>, Alice Boxhall <aboxhall@google.com>
Message-ID: <20200825132106.GA2187@rednote.net>

RE Media Queries 5 and Privacy ...

Perhaps we need to spend a little time laying out the concerns we have
before trying to articulate solutions? Perhaps we might take this up
specifically when we look at MQ5 and a11y?

Please note that Gottfried Zimmerman has the horizontal review action
from APA for MQ5. I can ask him to consider privacy as he looks at the

PS: The current deliverables of our Personalization Task Force are orthagonal to
the features of MQ5. Somehow, over the years the work of this TF has
become quite narrowly scoped (mainly to COGA concerns), even though it
bears such a broadly applicable name.

FYI: The Personalization Explainer is here:


PPS: APA intends to create a short video demonstration for TPAC. Perhaps
one illustrating MQ5 might be useful as well? Do we have any
implementations yet that could showcase MQ5?



Florian Rivoal writes:
> > On Aug 25, 2020, at 11:29, James Craig <jcraig@apple.com> wrote:
> > 
> >  I haven’t seen evidence to suggest that adding privacy restrictions on Media Features is a priority for the CSS MQ editors. (Rossen, Alan, and Florian may disagree.)
> I agree that privacy is a weak spot of media queries. As you said, media features that can be useful to everybody have been specified, while we've been more reluctant to add those that relate exclusively to disabilities.
> Even for those we have, the privacy aspect is still somewhat concerning.
> Personally, I would welcome doing something to minimize the privacy impact, and if that could be used to open the path to even more sensitive queries, that would be great, but I must admit I don't quite know what the solution would be. But if the Working Group did have an idea on how to make progress, I'd be very supportive. Maybe the notion of privacy budget is applicable here? I must admit I don't fully understand how that works and what the status of this approach is though.
> —Florian


Janina Sajka

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

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Co-Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
Received on Tuesday, 25 August 2020 13:22:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 25 August 2020 13:22:06 UTC