Re: Cfc: Call for Consensus on our Specification Name

My vote is for (A) WAI-ADAPT --
I could live with WAI-APT.

(Case not important to me -- I am also happy with JF's WAI-Adapt, and glad
to have JF's comments)




Lionel Wolberger
COO, UserWay Inc.
lionel@userway.org
UserWay.org <http://userway.org/>
<https://t.sidekickopen90.com/s3t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7kF8cFFTBW4T_qld2zGCwVN8Jbw_8QsRtKVn1vXj1p1kknW16gGBN41Jd6G101?te=W3R5hFj4cm2zwW4hLZp04myBBCf43Wg2w04&si=8000000004174048&pi=70a699d0-92fb-4e68-d7e3-f7c2dcfea661>[image:
text]


On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:39 PM John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:

> [pokes his head above the sand]
>
> Hi All,
>
> FWIW, I can live with WAI-ADAPT, could live better with WAI-Adapt (case
> sensitivity), and strongly oppose WAI-APT (what's a WAI Apartment
> <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apt#:~:text=an%20apt%20pupil-,apt,2%20aptitude>
> ?)
>
> (I recognize I've been MIA for a number of weeks now dealing with some
> personal issues, and was not part of the larger discussion here, but
> overall I remain fundamentally disappointed with Adapt as a new identifier.
> I would have preferred something that alluded closer to individual or
> personal customization, rather than adaptability, but... that's just me. At
> the end of the day, we are customizing
> <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/customize> the UI/UX, but not
> really impacting the way users can or will interact with it, which to my
> mind is what adapt suggests - i.e. our work mostly falls under the WCAG
> Principle of "Perception" and not "Usable". For example, our attribute "
> destination
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/personalization-semantics-content-1.0/#destination-explanation>",
> when used, makes it easier to comprehend or perceive where or what the
> destination is, but we aren't 'adapting' to that destination, nor are we
> modifying the destination or even for that matter the UI - it *might*
> change the UI, or instead the attribute and value may only be processed by
> AT.)
>
> JF
>
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 10:56 AM Lionel Wolberger <lionel@userway.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Public Personalization Task Force member,
>>
>> This is a Call for Consensus regarding our Task Force's determination of
>> the specification's name. Two names have made it to this final decision.
>> Please find below each name, and how it will read as a prefix:module.
>>
>> Choice (A): WAI-ADAPT.
>> Spelled out:
>> WAI-ADAPT: Content Module, WAI-ADAPT: Help Module, WAI-ADAPT Tools Module
>>
>> Choice (B): WAI-APT.
>> Spelled out:
>> WAI-APT: Content Module, WAI-APT: Help Module, WAI-APT Tools Module
>>
>> Please note: (A) and (B) are not both abbreviations that need to be
>> expanded. No expansion is necessary for ADAPT -- it is just "ADAPT".
>>
>> We propose a potential possible expansion for either of the above:
>> "Adaptable Personalizeable Technologies". This expansion can be applied to
>> "APT" or "ADAPT".
>>
>> Please reply to these two questions:
>> 1. Which is your choice for the name of the standard, (A) WAI-ADAPT, (B)
>> WAI-APT.
>> 2. If your preference is not selected as the majority decision, can you
>> live with the other option? Yes/No.  If you answer "No" please explain.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> - Lionel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Lionel Wolberger
>> COO, UserWay Inc.
>> lionel@userway.org
>> UserWay.org <http://userway.org/>
>> <https://userway.org>[image: text]
>>
>
>
> --
> *John Foliot* |
> Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility |
> W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor |
>
> "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
> Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"
>