"branding" personalization work

[shawna-slh]

Summary: We want to come up with a title for this work that will be clear and will resonate. Think "ARIA".

Background on Personalization: Personalization Overview page, Personalization video (4 minutes), Personalization presentation (18 minutes) plus slides, Janina's Intro to EOWG 11 February

Collection of ideas: Personalization module renaming - summary from 24 January discussion

Discussions:

• Personalization TF 24 January
• Intro to EOWG and some brainstorms 11 February
• Personalization TF 14 February
• EOWG 18 February
• NEW: Personalization TF and EOWG 7 March
• NEW: EOWG 11 March 2020 Minutes

This issue gathers brainstorms and ideas. Please add your thoughts. Even ideas that won't work directly might help fuel other ideas...

[shawna-slh]

brainstorms from past meetings:

• Personalized Adaptation: Tools Module,
  Personalized Adaptation: Help and Support Module,
  Personalized Adaptation: Semantics Content Module
• "PAd" for "Personalized Adaptation"
• it's not "personalization" but "personalizable"
• PAL - Personalization Adaptation Language,
  "WebPal" if it needs to be webbie

[iadawn]

I am avoiding the acronym trap (mostly):

• Adaptable HTML Attributes
• Adaptable Interface Elements
• Versatile content attributes
• User customisable attributes
• User adaptable content attributes
• User adaptation attributes

We (@mpalmersg and I) did come up with:

• Adaptable Element Refactoring Options - but that was only so we could have AERO

[Sylduch-Conseil]

I like the idea of an acronym like ARIA, in particular, the idea of "PAd" for "Personalized Adaptation".

Other ideas:

• PASS: personalization and adaptation strategies (may be write a better acronym for pass);
• Shape: systems helping advanced personalization;
• PAT: personnalizable adaptation tools.

[SteveALee]

Riffing on content:

• alt content
• bundled content
• preferred content
• content options
• varied content provision
• content choice markup
• content variation
• choosable content
• accessible content choices
• content streams (though not really streams)
• variety content
• favourite content
• selectable content

[jade-mc]

Has the word 'optimize' come up yet? If you add 'Adaptable' in there as well, then we won't be far off Kevin and Mark's AERO, let's defo make that work.

Kicking some ideas round my head here: personal accessibility/adaptable optimizing/optimization.

PAO!

There are linguistic considerations with the acronym thing: either we use this chance to come up with an acronym which has real meaning, and this is an advantage. Otherwise whatever we come up with runs the risk of having an acronym forced on it, so people will just turn it into an acronym if it's a long phrase (and it might end up being a bad one!)
For reference: https://readabilityguidelines.co.uk/grammar-points/abbreviations-and-acronyms/ https://louisearonson.com/acronyms-3-simple-rules-for-making-them-meaningful/

[JenniferChadwick]

I prefer 'personalizable' to 'personalization' and agree with the distinction being important. Importance of the word "adaptable" to be kept in there.

Considering Steve's inclusion of the word "content" (what you're changing) and personalizable (what you're doing with the content).

PAL - Personalization Adaptation Language (similar to ARIA being a language / code as a way to personalize).

Personalizable Content Adaptation Language (P-CAL)

I like the word "optimize" but feel like personalizable should be included, not replaced by 'optimized'.

[hkramer]

Personalized Design - a play on "Responsive Design"

[kakinney]

Want to be sure we don't lose the user piece of this. That these adaptations are to support people, users of the site to make it more understandable to them in the way they need it. Its semantics so that a user agent can adapt content.

[shawna-slh]

From @matatk (e-mail)

• Most of what we're doing affects content, and that's really important—though as it's such a broad area, we may want to qualify exactly what we're doing with the content.
• Bringing it back to the user and their needs is paramount.
• An acknowledgement that ARIA is a great acronym because everyone knows about it, but perhaps not many people understand the implications of its expansion (hence it's over-used sometimes).
• A concise "phrase" (though just two words would be fine, if they fit) is possibly better than an acronym, though if that phrase happened to collapse to a convenient acronym, that could only help.
• ...but we may not even want to ACK that implied acronym in the name of the spec (i.e we'd just use the full, albeit concise, name). Our intent would be just to allow people to start naturally referring to the spec in the logical shorter way, which will happen naturally if it collapses well, and it avoids too many acronyms on our part.

It seems that something around "adaptation" was a strong focus, like content, and something to indicate that the adaptation would be for a particular user, such as "Personalizable" or similar would be required.

[lwolberg]

Great brainstorming here. We reviewed it yesterday, and while we agree that an acronym should not be the deciding factor, we can't help thinking of acronyms as well.

In this round, we found "semantics" is the most exciting aspect of this spec, so we played with that word quite a bit.

Personalizable semantic accessibility: PSA Personalizable accessible semantic attribute: PASA Semantic Accessible Personalization Interface: SAPI

[matatk]

This thread is great, as have been our discussions with EO. I was just chatting with @mbeganyi about how we might decide which is a particularly good name, and wondered if it would help for us to be thinking about who might be the primary audience for the spec itself...

• Users: probably not, though clearly we're doing this to help people access and create content.
• Content authors: possibly; whilst I feel we should ensure everything could be created by hand, I think the expectation is that most authors will be using authoring tools.
• Browser vendors: hopefully—we aspire to have the markup being proposed somehow recognised as being part of valid HTML, perhaps via a prefix (perhaps we should keep that in mind, too).
• Browser extension/Assistive technology/Adaptation developers: Yes.

There is also the philosophical question about the perspective from which we should be naming the specs. Should we call it by...

• What it does, i.e. the goal for the user? To me, personally, this makes a lot of sense, and it frees us from implementation detail, though it may seem ambiguous to some readers.
• How it does it, i.e. the mechanism(s) by which it works? This may be of more interest to the intended audiences, but runs the risk of restricting the techniques or approaches we can use in future. We expect this to be a long-running project, with many 'modules', only some of which we've named (with varying degrees of confidence).

I think any reader of the spec is likely to at least read the title and abstract, and maybe the start of the Explainer too. That means we don't have to rely on the title to impart everything, though it still needs to be good at imparting whatever we decide is important to impart.

[bakkenb]

Just another thought on an acronym that is pronounceable...

UPAC - User Preferred Adaptable Content UPAC - User Personalizable & Adaptable Content

[shawna-slh]

I added link to minutes from 7 March to the first comment in this issue.

[lwolberg]

The keywords we played with, in no particular order

• Personalization / Personalizable
• Enabling
• Semantic
• Adaptable / Adaptation
• Context
• Inclusive
• Intent
• Customization
• Tailor
• User
• Agent

And these were mentioned along with many others

• Personalized Adaptation
• Adaptable Personalization
• Personalizable Adaptations
• Inclusive Personalizable Adaptations
• from user perspective:
  • Personalization Enabled / Personalize Now
  • Digital Personalization Assistant , Content My Way
• Personalizable Content: XYZ Module
• Enabling Personalization: XYZ Module

[shawna-slh]

About Acronyms: If it is 1 word or 2 not-too-hard-to-say words, then people probably won't use an acronym. If three or more words, then acronym is likely to happen whether we want it or not.

[bakkenb]

About Acronyms: If it is 1 word or 2 not-too-hard-to-say words, then people probably won't use an acronym. If three or more words, then acronym is likely to happen whether we want it or not.

Agreed. I don't have research that backs this, but my personal experience shows it to be fairly typical.

And if there is no easy to say acronym, then people will just use initials to refer to it. Examples:

• Acronyms: NASA or NATO
• Initials: FBI or ISS
• Ones that are both (people sound it out or use the initials): ISO, WHO

People will automatically start to do this just to be quicker with the name and not say the three or more words.

[jade-mc]

Hmmm, slightly disagree here, people are lazy and will shorten everything, even if the words aren't particularly lengthy or complex.
Maybe not one letter, but 2 letter acronyms/initialisms are everywhere: All of the American states The UN The FA CD AA e.g. EO!

[mbeganyi]

I've found myself leaning more towards "Personalized Adaptations" over anything else, and have an acronym suggestion.

The reason I like "personalized" over "personalizable" is because the former indicates a stronger state of the content: the content is personalized, whereas the latter implies that it can be personalized. I think the former is more affirmative and it's a shorter word. Both words function identically except for the can be versus is aspect, in my opinion.

I propose the acronym SONATA, borrowing from the "s-o-n" of "Personalized" and the "a-t-a" of "Adaptations". I think this provides a nice correlation, given that ARIA has musical connotations as well. Beyond that, music is the universal language, as they say, and since we're trying to provide a meaningful ontology for all users, I find it particularly fitting. It's also easy to type and could function semantically as a prefix like "aria" does.

I do acknowledge that it's a bit unusual to borrow letters from within the word, but I very much like the musical aspect to it (musician's bias, perhaps).

[bakkenb]

Interesting concept @mbeganyi.

Might I take this one step further. To be completely metaphorical about the name and staying in the same musical theme of ARIA...

I propose simply "Segue"
Let me explain...

It is not an acronym, and contains no words like personalization, adaptable, content, inclusion, etc. Instead, just uses the meaning of the word itself to describe what "Pesonalization" is/does. It is a catchy word that should be known throughout the world. It is catchy enough to where people will remember it, recall it, use it in conversation, and it could also be used as a prefix.

To me the definition is perfect...

se·gue

• /ˈseˌɡwā,ˈsāˌɡwā/

verb (in music and film) move without interruption from one piece of music or scene to another. "allow one song to segue into the next" noun an uninterrupted transition from one piece of music or film scene to another.

This "personalization" spec can provide an uninterrupted transition from one representation of content to another representation of the same content.

People will first hear it, "Segue, what is that?" Once it is explained to them or they read about it, they will not forget the name and what it is.

[shawna-slh]

beautiful brainstorming leading from one idea to another!

[RealJoshue108]

I'd pick SONA - Semantic, something, something, Accessibility. My 2 cents

[shawna-slh]

A reminder that we are leaning towards a prefix for a series of modules, e.g.,:

• Prefix: Semantics Content Module
• Prefix: Help and Support Module
• Prefix: Tools Module

[shawna-slh]

I appreciate @matatk and @mbeganyi thoughts about the primary audience for the spec itself. And I think we still probably want to use words that describe the purpose of the spec/modules.

"Personalizable" is hard to say and gets flagged as a spelling error in many dictionaries.

While I love the brainstorms and was pushing for a nice acronym... I'm now leaning towards two clear words and not a fancy acronym, largely given Janina's comments about people not knowing what this is.

More brainstorms:

• Personal Adaptation
• Enabling Content Adaptation
• Enabling Customized Content
• Enabling User Adaptation
• Individual-Adaptable Content
• Specs for Enabling User Adaptation

[iadawn]

Agree on your points @shawna-slh. I like:

• Enabling User Adaptation

Mostly because that does more to explain what it is.

[lwolberg]

User-centered design (UCD) is an iterative design process in which designers focus on the users and their needs in each phase of the design process.

Hence:

User-centered Adaptable Content

[mpalmersg]

Customisable User Semantic Personalisation - CUSP

[lwolberg]

I propose simply "Segue" Let me explain... ... People will first hear it, "Segue, what is that?" Once it is explained to them or they read about it, they will not forget the name and what it is.

@bakkenb -- This is a bold move, and is worth exploring.

[lwolberg]

A reminder that we are leaning towards a prefix for a series of modules, e.g.,:

• Prefix: Semantics Content Module
• Prefix: Help and Support Module
• Prefix: Tools Module

Super important! The "prefix" name must ring true with all of these. So let's try it on, with my last brainstorm:

• User-centered Adaptation Specification: Semantics Content Module
• User-centered Adaptation Specification: Help and Support Module
• User-centered Adaptation Specification: Tools Module

[lakeen]

Enabling Personalized Content Personalization Enabled

[daniel-montalvo]

ADAPT: Accessible Definition of Adaptable and Personalized Technology

[iadawn]

What about just Adapt. When talking about them I would just say 'you can use adapt attributes to do that'. Then the the modules would be:

• Adapt: Semantics Content Module
• Adapt: Help and Support Module
• Adapt: Tools Module

?

[SteveALee]

Riffing off the musical reference of ARIA how about PAEAN - Personalisable Agent Evaluated Accessibility Notation?

[shawna-slh]

I'm really liking

"Adapt specifications":

• Adapt: Semantics Content Module
• Adapt: Help and Support Module
• Adapt: Tools Module

I'm looking at revising the Personalization Overview -- e.g. "The Adapt specifications enable tailoring the [content and] user experience to meet the needs and preferences of individual users."

[shawna-slh]

I added EOWG 11 March 2020 Minutes to the first comment in this issue.

[shawna-slh]

A rough example of how "Adapt" could be used is in this draft preview: Adapt Overview

[shawna-slh]

Creating new issue on specific suggestion: Personalization -> Adapt specifications ? #9

[becka11y]

I realize this is closed and I have also put the following comment in #9.
Some members of personalization had concerns with Adapt. Another suggestion has been put forward, APT – Adaptable Personalisation Techniques. Is this something that can be considered?