Re: Review needed for Personalization TF CFC: Latest updates to the Requirements document

Hi Sharon and all,

I have to give a -1 for the reasons I found below.  These need to be fixed first IMO.


Introduction

“Adding the semantics in these specifications must enable user agents to adapt the content for the individual needs of the user. “

“must enable” is not what we want to say here I believe.  I would think we should remove the word “must”.

“Adding the semantics in these specifications enables user agents to adapt the content for the individual needs of the user. “

——

“Keyboard short cuts that are familiar to the user"

"shortcuts" should be one word.


——

“Personalization enables the author the ability to keep their original design in tack,..."

in tack is misspelt it should be “intact” one word.

——


  *   Learning new designs, patterns and widgets can be confusing - we want to allow users use widgets they already know.

“Users use widgets” is awkward, I suggest


  *   Learning new designs, patterns and widgets can be confusing - we want to allow users to use widgets they already know.

——

Missing capitalization of “Alternatively"

 either for the individual or as a popular “skin”. alternatively, the web


————————————

Section 2 Personalization Features
<https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/requirements-punctuation-edits09-29/requirements/index.html#personalization-features>
Familiar Terms and Symbols
“Common concepts used in controls should be machine understandable so the user agent or script should understand the context of links, "

“should” I believe should be “could” or “can”

——

Step Indicator
"<https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/requirements-punctuation-edits09-29/requirements/index.html#personalization-features>

Support to users must be able to track completed tasks in order to identify their location in a process."

“Support to users must be able to track” is awkward I suggest:

“Support added to allow the ability to track complicated tasks in order to identify their location in a process."

——

Once these changes are adopted I support publishing this updated working draft.

Thanks
EOM
Charles LaPierre
Technical Lead, DIAGRAM and Born Accessible
Imageshare Product Manager
Twitter: @CLaPierreA11Y
Skype: charles_lapierre


On Sep 29, 2020, at 2:49 PM, Sharon D Snider <snidersd@us.ibm.com<mailto:snidersd@us.ibm.com>> wrote:

Hi all,

Please take a few moments to review the latest editorial updates to the Requirements document and respond to this email with your approval (+1) or disapproval (-1) by Friday 2 Oct 2020.
https://raw.githack.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/requirements-punctuation-edits09-29/requirements/index.html


The changes are as follows:

1. Introduction - corrected the spelling of personalization.
2. Enable Additional Help Information - corrected the spelling of unnecessary.
3. Bullets changed for consistency.
4. Replaced missing periods at the end of a few sentences.
5. For example: Revert - the first sentence had an extra “that”.
6. Made the statement: “Implemented in module …” text and links updated for consistency.


Regards,
Sharon Snider
IBM Cloud & Cognitive Software ► IBM Accessibility Leadership Team
(512)965-3957
www.ibm.com/able<https://www.ibm.com/able> and w3.ibm.com/able<https://w3.ibm.com/able>