RE: Can we have a straw poll - are we in the right direction - was RE: Moving personlization forward - wording suggestion

From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 6, 2017 2:13 PM

I think the decision tree is something like:
- are people comfortable with adding an SC for personalisation metadata?
[Jason] I'm very supportive of it, provided that the metadata requirements are precisely defined, broadly applicable to the Web at large, and that the associated assistive technologies are efficacious in solving real and important problems for users. It is doubtful that these conditions will be met in time for WCAG 2.1.

If yes, at what scope? Should the elements be:
- links only
- links and form controls
- links, form controls and sections of the page.
[Jason] I think this is a derivative issue which depends on what the metadata requirements are, and how the metadata can best be used to enhance accessibility. I'm not sure that role information (i.e., the type of element) is the right determinant of which elements should be associated with metadata, so it's too early to make this decision.

Then should the scope of metadata be:
- predetermined items only (like home links)
- predetermined items and open items (like the coga-context)
[Jason] I think the terms used in the metadata need to be precisely specified. Perhaps a vocabulary which is supported by AT and which meets certain additional criteria would be sufficient (this falls short of prescribing the use of a specific taxonomy), but it isn't obvious what the criteria should be.

If no (at whatever scope) then there is a lot more work to do on the SC than can happen by mid August because it isn't basing the details on coga-personalisation. (The question about what should take an icon etc)

If people are happy with a metadata one in principle then there is a lot of work to do on the spec, and showing that there is something to use it.
[Jason] I think there's a lot of work to do, that it's important work, and that, realistically, it won't happen quickly enough for a mid August deadline - or even for a WCAG 2.1 Recommendation deadline.


________________________________

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.


Thank you for your compliance.

________________________________