I am not sure what people are thinking but here is a start from me (Liddy).
I have been wondering what the role of context is. We had a lot of difficulties fitting it into our original AccessForAll work with ISO despite many discussions. My problem was finding how to fit it into an RDF model. I was simultaneously concerned that the attributes we want should not be seen as attributes of a person, yet, they did have to share a common domain.
I am thinking now that if what we are describing is a context, given its particularities, we can solve these problems. That is, if the 'domain' of our needs and preferences is a 'context', we can describe the accessibility attributes of that context, and say nothing about the many other attributes it might have - especially what gives cause to it.
Here is a starting image that helps me think about this - the attribute headings are just illustrative, of course, but I am wondering if people are thinking of working by type of need in this way, or in some other way? Here is my pic. Where I have 'context', I am assuming that a person may have a number of different contexts. Any single person can add info to their context such as a name of it, and it could have location details, times, etc. .
I think in some other cases, people will think about other attributes of context such as the features of the device being used (esp technical attributes), the location of the device (for location specific resources), etc. Some of these things may turn out to be relevant to this work too. The abilities of devices, for example, should be relevant. Similarly, when 24752 is being worked on, the device being spoken to by the user may need to be considered - not sure but what about the maximum temperature at which a hot tap should deliver water?...
