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

Re: Personalization Task Force meeting minutes

From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 11:44:00 -0500
To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
Cc: Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org>, public-personalization-tf <public-personalization-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20200205164400.GW2274@rednote.net>
We hear you, John. I suspect not all of us agree with you, but we
certainly hear you.

BTW: Who suggested NOT keeping our friends in the loop? I believe the
suggestion was to ask them to provide the permanent prefix.

John Foliot writes:
> Given we're barely at FPWD, and with 2 more  modules that are even less
> mature, I'm not that concerned. With enough implementation evidence, we may
> get to final CR with **no prefix at all**, at least for some of our
> proposed attributes.
> 
> This is a well-worn path at the W3C already - we need to only look at how
> CSS advanced features: they used 'browser-flags' as shown in this code
> sample:
> 
> -webkit-transition: -webkit-transform .3s ease-in-out;
>    -moz-transition:    -moz-transform .3s ease-in-out;
>     -ms-transition:     -ms-transform .3s ease-in-out;
>      -o-transition:      -o-transform .3s ease-in-out;
>         transition:         transform .3s ease-in-out;
> 
> (And, I keep coming back to the fact that TAG also recommended using data-*
> after our presentation at TPAC 2018, and at some point we need to keep our
> friends on board as well)
> 
>  So, respectfully, I don't think this is a huge concern at this time. Let's
> get what we have out now, get it socialized and get some implementation
> examples and experience, and go from there.
> 
> I understand the sense of urgency from the COGA WG perspective, but as my
> grandmother used to say, "less haste, more speed". I'll further suggest
> revisiting "prefixes" at this time is a distraction - we went there, and
> decided on data-* during those deliberations. Let's move forward and not
> revisit old discussions.
> 
> JF
> 
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 6:32 AM Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
> 
> > OK, quick response ...
> >
> > Without a replacement for data- this spec can go no further than CR.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Janina
> >
> > Steve Lee writes:
> > > On 03/02/2020 18:27, John Foliot wrote:
> > > > I am unconvinced that deciding on a prefix at this time is that
> > critical.
> > >
> > > That is my opinion too.
> > >
> > > It feels like an implementation detail level distraction.
> > >
> > > There way be other aspects I'm missing but if we are concerned about the
> > > impact on community users at this early stage I think anyone trying out
> > an
> > > implementation or trial will be aware it is experimental and so likely to
> > > change. We can always be sure to give clear messaging
> > >
> > > Steve
> >
> > --
> >
> > Janina Sajka
> >
> > Linux Foundation Fellow
> > Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:       http://a11y.org
> >
> > The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> > Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures        http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
> >
> >
> >
> 
> -- 
> *​John Foliot* | Principal Accessibility Strategist | W3C AC Representative
> Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good
> deque.com

-- 

Janina Sajka

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

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2020 16:44:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 5 February 2020 16:44:09 UTC