Re: [w3ctag/design-reviews] Personalization Semantics Explainer and  Module 1 (#476)

Our apologies for taking so long to look at this, again.

@atanassov and I just looked at this at our virtual face to face. Here are our thoughts:

- The research here is very thorough, and there are very real user needs addressed.
- It would be good to see some examples of how the proposed vocabulary would be consumed, particularly for some of the less obvious values.
   - Specifically, what types of tools would consume these values, and how? Extensions? AAC tools? Specialised user agents?
- It seems like this proposal is aimed at overlapping but distinct sets of users - it might be helpful to separate these out a bit, and explain how each set of users would be served by what subset of these vocabularies, and where the intersections are. It might make sense to have a few different technologies instead of one single standard.
- We wonder if you've researched [microformats](microformats.org) as a potential avenue for providing the hints described in the vocabulary of the content module. That seems to be a potentially good fit for the types of annotations we're seeing here, and would avoid needing to reserve an attribute prefix in HTML.
- We note that `purpose` seems to have a near 100% overlap with the [`autocomplete` attribute](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Attributes/autocomplete) - could whatever is intended to consume `purpose` use `autocomplete` instead?
- `distraction` unfortunately seems largely geared at allowing users to remove content which is intended to generate revenue for the site - why would a site voluntarily make it easy for users to hide that content?
    - `distraction=sensory` is a slight exception to this, but has strong overlap with the [`prefers-reduced-motion` media query](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@media/prefers-reduced-motion) - could its intended uses be covered by that existing technology?
 

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/476#issuecomment-698641238