[Accessforall] Minutes of our 2012-07-31 Meeting

Gottfried Zimmermann (List) zimmermann at accesstechnologiesgroup.com
Tue Jul 31 15:04:09 UTC 2012

Dear Preferences & Needs working group, and other Cloud4All partners,

the minutes of our meeting today are posted at
http://wiki.fluidproject.org/display/ISO24751/2012-07-31+Meeting, and below
my signature.

Our next calls are scheduled as follows:

*	Tue Aug. 14, 12:00 UTC = 2pm CET (Gregg chair)
*	Tue Sep. 4, 12:00 UTC = 2pm CET

Thanks for your participation,





 Gottfried Zimmermann

 Prof. Mobile User Interaction

Hochschule der Medien, Stuttgart, Germany

Phone: +49 711 8923-2751

 Email:  <mailto:gzimmermann at hdm-stuttgart.de> gzimmermann at hdm-stuttgart.de

Web:  <http://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/home/gzimmermann>



2012-07-31 Meeting 

Tue July 31, 12:00-14:00 UTC

12&hour=12&min=00&sec=0&p1=0> Translate to my time zone


This meeting is being held as part of the Raising the Floor Consortium. The
Raising the Floor membership agreement, in particular its IPR policy,
applies to the contents of the meeting.


*	Gottfried, Christophe, Andreas (HdM)
*	Andres (TECH)
*	Andy (Axelrod)
*	Claudia, Gerhard (TUD)
*	Colin (IDRC)
*	Jim (Inclusive Tech.)
*	Liddy (Sunrise)
*	Vassilis (CERTH)
*	Ignacio
*	Xavier

Securing our discussions and decisions

Summary of results:

*	Glossary:  <http://wiki.gpii.net/index.php/Glossary>

Pages of past discussions:

*	Overall Structure:
*	Context properties:
*	Device properties:  <http://wiki.gpii.net/index.php/Device_Profile>
*	JSON format and coding alternatives:


*	Format of condition? 

*	Proposal too preliminary?  Derive a new proposal based on new user
research?  Involve user interaction team of IDRC?
*	"Semantic presentation" - User should be able to edit conditions.
*	But: Should we constrain the condition language just for the
authoring tool?  But there may be other tools and automatic generation of
conditions that don't have these constraints.
*	Need to register terms that are meaningful to the user for
describing context and context items.
*	Do we need all these operators?
*	Most users will not edit their preference sets, they will just
adjust their settings in different contexts.
*	Do we need labelled sets of conditions? - Extension of current
*	If adaptations are dependent on conditions, how are users going to
correct them? - User feedback loop. Hard to do with current syntax.
*	Preference values can depend on other pref. values. Also depend on
context item values. Implement something now and then validate this.
*	We need decisions to migrate preferences from one platform to the
other, and from one application to another.
*	Decision: Let's not term the current proposal as "final", but as
"first proposal". Let implementors use this first proposal if they want to -
baring the risk of having to change it later. Try to keep it as simple as

*	Canonical form of a preference set? 

*	Architecture board agreed on using JSON as standard representation.
Preference server will be able to deliver preference sets in the standard
format, though other formats may be delivered as well.
*	We should say that the preference server will have supported formats
to serve information. "Default presentation"?
*	Terms can be releated through an external registry.  Or they can be
related via conditions.

Digital Resource Description

Issues from last meeting:

*	Do we need a vocabulary for resource description?
*	If yes, do we want to reuse ISO/IEC 24751-3 (which used a simple
1:1-relationship approach)?
*	Can we build matchmakers that can deal with resources without
artifical resource descriptions?
*	Can we use schema.org, attributes, and HTML markup to automatically
derive metadata on resources? - Currently being explored by IDRC, Andy and

We should make metadata as simple and directly attached to resources as

(This item was not discussed due to time constraints.)

Action Items

*	Look at existing ISO standards that use a registry approach. (See
topic 43.)
*	Formulate proposals for dealing with conditions (see
topic 34).
*	Jutta: share a preliminary list of needs & preferences for literacy

Future Meetings

*	Tue Aug. 14, 12:00 UTC = 2pm CET (Gregg chair)
*	Tue Sep. 4, 12:00 UTC = 2pm CET

Future Agenda Items

*	Presentation on user ontology
*	User research with user interaction teams.


Appendix A: Metadata Resources

*	Email message by Andy on 2012-02-07.
*	Schema.org: http://schema.org/
*	NSDL Paradata standard:
*	Link to Paradata learning registry:
<http://www.learningregistry.org/> http://www.learningregistry.org/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/pipermail/accessforall/attachments/20120731/56f35a95/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Accessforall mailing list