csun draft
Topics Independent Living
Keywords Cognitive, Augmentative and Alternative Communications (AAC) , Emerging Assistive Technologies
Submission Title: Personalization that overcome cognative barrias
Presenters Lisa Seeman, Ruoxi(Roy) Ran
Contact Presenter Lisa Seeman: Lisa.seeman@zoho.com
Summary (25 words) Can personalization allow the same content to be adapted to users with very different cognitive needs and learning styles? Includes: Draft standard and working prototype!
Extended Summary
People have very different needs. Some people can not do numeric information, but others prefer numbers to words, some people with severe language disabilities use of symbols to represent words. One of the main challenges is transforming content for these different needs. We are working on an extreme personalization standard that let people with cognitive and learning disabilities join the online community and share information and communicate across groups. It lets the same content be presented in very different ways depending on the users' preference. Testing is currently being done via the EasyReading project.
Hi Lisa, I noticed we need at less 500 words for extended summary, I added personalization task force current work information in this part, feel free to edit/remove/integrate this part:
- Current work in personalization task force
** Vocabulary: Personalization Semantics introduces standard semantics to enable user-driven personalization, such as the association of a user-preferred symbols to elements having those semantics. The Personalization Task Force divided all vocabularies into there categories, they are content, help and support, tools. Content includes action, destination, field, simplification, distraction and symbol. Help and support includes literal, numberfree, easylang, alternative, explain, feedback, moreinfo,extrahelp, helptype. Tools includes stepindicator and message properties. We also divides the categories of vocabularies into three categories, they are Tokens, URI's and Text.
** Modules: Personalization Semantics consists of three modules. They are Content, Help and support, Tools. There are also a Explainer document to define features for specific categories of personalization. The Content module provides a vocabulary of terms that can be used to enhance web content with information about controls, symbols, and user interface elements, The Help and Support module addresses adding information about the content to enable help scaffolding and additional support for different user scenarios and the Tools module addresses adding information about the content to enable user agents and new extensions that support the user such as adaptable breadcrumbs. Explainer and 3 modules have already been published.
** Use in metadata languages, and issues: It was our initial idea that metadata languages can use the prefix and identification URI to distinguish the personalization semantics vocabularies. The Personalization Task Force proposed the prefix ("aui") and the identification URI ("https://www.w3.org/ns/aui/") as identifications mechanisms, which may be used separately or together according to the needs of the metadata language(BTW, we don't currently have a suggested way to use in content that uses the prefix and URI, but may come back to that), and we have considered a number of different approaches all with varying pros and cons with either excess burden on host languages or on authoring, including RDFa, HTML Microdata, ARIA, and potentially others, we spent a lot of time discussing the implementation, see our Pros/Cons discussion [https://github.com/w3c/personalization-semantics/wiki/Comparison-of-ways-to-use-vocabulary-in-content Comparison of ways to use vocabulary in content]. During discussion, we found RDFa would not be a useful metadata language for most of the use cases we have for personalization semantics and the HTML Microdata would not be a good choice for now, also we found the aui- have been used by others, etc. After a long discussion, we have a result for that issue which is how HTML 5 supports experimental features that are accepted by the validator, we decided to use data- as the implementation mechanism one month ago. At present, there are three vocabularies have been determined, namely data-action, data-purpose and data-destination. The Personalization Task Force will continue to use data- to explore the implementation of each vocabulary. We hope eventually to migrate from data- to another more native approach once the technology becomes established, but recognize there could be concerns about that path and would like input on it.
** How we expect these semantics to used by user agents: In Content, Help and support, Tools modules, they address adding information about the content to enable user agents and additional support for different demands. For each vocabulary, The module gives its characteristics and values for user agents to use those vocabulary to get personalization purpose, also there are example and use case for reference. If a user agent or script knows the context of links, buttons, and other page elements then symbols and text used can be ones that the user understands. This can include: Symbols and graphics that they are familiar with, Tooltips, Language the use can understand, Keyboard short cuts and so on. For that we need to standardize supportive syntax and terms that can be linked to associated symbols, terms, translations, explanations and so on, for the individual, via an attribute. For example, If an author gives to a button a role "send" then, without any work by the author, the button could be automatically rendered with a symbol, term, and/or tooltips that is understandable by a particular user. It could automatically imply F1 help that explains the send function in simple terms. It could be identified with a keyboard short cut that will always be used for send. In addition it could be identified as important and always rendered, or rendered as a large button. This would enable a consistent UI experience across applications and websites. We expect initial implementations will be browser extensions. We hope some of them will be so useful they become standard browser features later. Some users may use specialized or highly customized user agents, and personalization is intended to support those also. Here are some examples to show what is Personalization, this example is a proof of concept and is not coded the way we expect personalization implementations to be - the personalization semantics will make this much easier for authors.