- From: Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 20:57:04 +0530
- To: "Leonard Rosenthol" <lrosenth@adobe.com>, "Laurent Le Meur" <laurent.lemeur@edrlab.org>
- Cc: "Teixeira, Mateus" <mteixeira@wwnorton.com>, <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <92BD448F818246158DA4D8F7076B00EF@AvneeshHP840>
A web browser can also remember the selections made on a website. So,why we want to put remembering personalization in out of scope?
Definitely reading systems can do it in much better way, but we should try to achieve what ever is possible with web browsers.
With regards
Avneesh
From: Leonard Rosenthol
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 20:00
To: Avneesh Singh ; Laurent Le Meur
Cc: Teixeira, Mateus ; public-publ-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [personalization] Task Force - first call minutes
> Another aspect is remembering the personalization choices.
>
While I understand that position – especially from an accessibility perspective – I would consider it “out of scope” for WP, as it’s tied to the UA and (I believe strongly) that we can’t dictate features of a UA (as this would be).
Also, there is a lot of interesting work around per-document vs. per-application personalizations. And I wouldn’t want to get in the way of that debate.
Leonard
From: Avneesh Singh <avneesh.sg@gmail.com>
Date: Friday, July 28, 2017 at 8:29 AM
To: Laurent Le Meur <laurent.lemeur@edrlab.org>, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com>
Cc: "Teixeira, Mateus" <mteixeira@wwnorton.com>, "public-publ-wg@w3.org" <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [personalization] Task Force - first call minutes
Another aspect is remembering the personalization choices.
If a person with cognitive disability selects a specific font, specific gaps between characters, specific high contrast mode and more, the UA should be able to remember the preferences.
So, UA comes into play one way or other.
I acknowledge the statement in minutes that there is a good overlap in personalization and accessibility. If both the task force need to work on some issues collectively, we are glad to do it.
Personalization for cognitive disabilities is being done by task force under WCAG and APA. Their documents may be helpful in PWG also.
https://w3c.github.io/coga/gap-analysis/
With regards
Avneesh
From: Laurent Le Meur
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 17:23
To: Leonard Rosenthol
Cc: Teixeira, Mateus ; public-publ-wg@w3.org
Subject: Re: [personalization] Task Force - first call minutes
Hi Leonard,
It would be useful to specify common vocabulary to be sure we understand each other. I can make a try, but I'm not a native english speaker so ...
- presentation: the appearance of the content
- personalization: results of actions a user can apply to the presentation of the content
An author must have control on the default presentation, I guess there is a strong consensus there.
A question is: should the *actions* (buttons and selections) offered to the user for personalization be provided as part of the content?
IMO the answer is no: such actions must be at the UA level, and resulting CSS modifications must be "injected inside the content" by the UA.
Do you agree with that?
laurent
Le 28 juil. 2017 à 13:10, Leonard Rosenthol <lrosenth@adobe.com> a écrit :
Sorry I missed the call – great stuff and thanks for the minutes. I am really glad to see us moving towards heavy semantics for content from which presentation can be derived!
I do want to comment on one item in there:
> some people in the working group think that reading systems should not exist and that everything should be included inside the publication.
>
I am one of “those people”.
I believe that an author should be able to have control over the *default* presentation of their content. Meaning that the way that the user should initially presented with the content is one that behaves accordingly to the author’s wishes. *BUT* if that isn’t a presentation that works (eg. accessibility or device-size considerations), then a user should then be able to apply their own personalizations/choices as needed.
I also believe that some aspects of the content *must* always be preserved by personalization – for example, relative font “categories” and sizes. For example, if the author picked a sans-serif font for a particular piece of text, then while a user may prefer a different sans-serif font, they can’t replace it with a serif font. And if headings are 1.5% of body text, that relationship must remain even if the actual sizes increase/decrease.
Leonard
From: "Teixeira, Mateus" <mteixeira@wwnorton.com>
Date: Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 10:47 AM
To: "public-publ-wg@w3.org" <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
Subject: [personalization] Task Force - first call minutes
Resent-From: <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Thursday, July 27, 2017 at 10:46 AM
Thanks, all, for joining our first conversation about the personalization of web publications. Minutes are here: https://www.w3.org/2017/07/27-pwg-ptf-minutes.html
It sounds like we have a rather clear direction on how to approach this issue. As I said in the call, I will go through our discussion and pull out threads we can delve into more deeply in GitHub. As we discuss, I will formulate a skeleton draft that we can collaborate on.
Best,
Mateus
---
Mateus Manço Teixeira
Co-Director, The Norton Lab
Manager, Ebook Production
W. W. Norton & Company
Independent Publishers Since 1923
500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10110
wwnorton.com
From: mteixeira@wwnorton.com
When: 10:00 AM - 11:00 AM July 27, 2017
Subject: W3C PWG Personalization TF
Location: WebEx - See info in invitation body.
Hi all,
Tomorrow is the inaugural call of the Personalization Task Force. Our role is to define personalization in a Web Publication context, and to identify restrictions, use cases, and overlaps between our work and other parts of the specification (and between our work and existing standards). Especially as a newbie, I am looking forward to working with you and gathering your feedback and guidance.
Agenda
1.. What do we mean by "personalization" and what use cases do we need to consider? [1]
1.. User's customization of the user agent and publication
2.. Author/publisher's customization of the publication and prescriptions to the user agent
3.. (Other avenues for personalization?)
4.. Restrictions to personalization
2.. Difference between content authoring and user choices
3.. Where does our work overlap with other WP task forces?
4.. Where do we intersect with other W3C work?
1.. Assign/forcefully-but-nicely volunteer people for scouting and outreach.
Logistics
IRC: #pwg (barring any objections)
WebEx: W3C PWG Personalization TF
Thursday, July 27, 2017
10:00 am | Eastern Daylight Time (New York, GMT-04:00) | 1 hr
Meeting number (access code): 634 347 893
Meeting password: NxVpjSx6
When it's time, join the meeting.
Join by phone
1-650-429-3300 Call-in toll number (US/Canada)
1-866-469-3239 Call-in toll-free number (US/Canada)
Global call-in numbers | Toll-free calling restrictions
[1] Laurent shared the following existing views on personalization as it is defined in most reading systems today:
- currently, personalization generally includes
* display variants for collections of books (list/mosaic, sort order)
* night mode
* theme
* font size, font, spacing, margin size, text justification,
* appearance of page numbers (or other way of locating the user in the book)
* background and text color
* page animation (turn ...)
* management of bookmarks and annotations
- we will study in the future additional a11y features like
* activation of specific key controls on a desktop app
* activation of vocal controls on a desktop app
* activation of specific displays for cognitive impaired people (incl. dyslexic people), using enriched content
Note that Jiminy Panoz is currently working for EDRLab on a Readium CSS project, which tackles the difficult subject of the differentiation between what the author's CSS will propose and what the user choices will impose, taking into account what the reading app CSS will require (mostly pagination). More on https://github.com/readium/readium-css/issues.
Received on Friday, 28 July 2017 15:27:34 UTC