[Accessforall] Minutes of AccessForAll Meeting on 2012-01-31

Gottfried Zimmermann (List) zimmermann at accesstechnologiesgroup.com
Mon Feb 13 09:36:45 UTC 2012


Okay.  Good point.

So far we have focused on user preferences, and haven't really talked about
metadata on resources.  I see them as two different components, though
related.  

User preferences are stored in a user profile, and need to be translated
into application-specific UI settings.  Some applications only need these UI
settings, they don't need to find resources that match a user's profile.
For example, a Web browser would adjust its settings based on a user
profile, but otherwise use the digital resources (HTML, CSS) as specified
for the Web page.

I see the need for more discussion on this.  The line that I am drawing here
may not be as distinct as it appears on first sight.  And we might want to
use the same technologies for describing user preferences and digital
resources.  

Still open for good thoughts...

Thanks,
Gottfried

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: accessforall-bounces at fluidproject.org
[mailto:accessforall-bounces at fluidproject.org] Im Auftrag von Liddy Nevile
Gesendet: Montag, 13. Februar 2012 10:23
An: Accessforall at fluidproject. org
Betreff: Re: [Accessforall] Minutes of AccessForAll Meeting on 2012-01-31

Gottfried
can you explain why describing the needs and prefs is different from
describing the resources please....

Liddy

On 13/02/2012, at 6:16 PM, Gottfried Zimmermann (List) wrote:

> Agreed very much.
>
> Currently, what i see happening on schema.org is that semantic classes 
> and properties are defined for marking up Web content, in the manner 
> of the semantic Web.
>
> For us, this is to be considered when developing the techniques for 
> marking up resources.  However, our personal profile is not directly 
> affected by this, as I see.
>
> Thanks,
> Gottfried
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: accessforall-bounces at fluidproject.org
> [mailto:accessforall-bounces at fluidproject.org] Im Auftrag von Liddy 
> Nevile
> Gesendet: Freitag, 10. Februar 2012 22:59
> An: Accessforall at fluidproject. org
> Betreff: Re: [Accessforall] Minutes of AccessForAll Meeting on
> 2012-01-31
>
> oh, and the other thing I think is really important is that Google, 
> Microsoft etc are all getting together to build, use and share 
> metadata - hence the work of schema.org. This suggests very strongly 
> that we should be following their lead and doing our metadata the way 
> they are doing theirs, surely?
>
> Liddy
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accessforall mailing list
> Accessforall at fluidproject.org
> http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessforall
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accessforall mailing list
> Accessforall at fluidproject.org
> http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessforall

_______________________________________________
Accessforall mailing list
Accessforall at fluidproject.org
http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/accessforall



More information about the Accessforall mailing list