14:02:29 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:02:35 <Michael> rrsagent, make logs world
14:03:02 <JimT> JimT has joined #wai-wcag
14:03:09 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
14:03:31 <Michael> zakim, [Microsoft] is temporarily Jenae_Andershonis
14:03:31 <Zakim> +Jenae_Andershonis; got it
14:03:37 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:03:56 <Michael> zakim, who's here
14:03:57 <Zakim> Michael, you need to end that query with '?'
14:04:00 <Michael> zakim, who's here?
14:04:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see Jim_Thatcher, ??P3, ??P4, Becky_Gibson, Sailesh_Panchang, Michael_Cooper, Ben, Don_Evans, Jenae_Andershonis
14:04:02 <Zakim> On IRC I see JimT, RRSAgent, bcaldwell, Becky, wendy, ChrisR, Zakim, Michael, sh1mmer
14:05:08 <Michael> zakim, ??P3 might be David_MacDonald
14:05:08 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P3 might be David_MacDonald', Michael
14:05:12 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:05:19 <Michael> zakim, ??P3 is David_MacDonald?
14:05:19 <Zakim> +David_MacDonald?; got it
14:06:39 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:06:42 <Michael> zakim, ??P4 is Chris_Ridpath?
14:06:42 <Zakim> +Chris_Ridpath?; got it
14:06:49 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:07:09 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:07:14 <David_MacDonald> David_MacDonald has joined #wai-wcag
14:07:30 <bcaldwell> scribe: Ben
14:07:59 <bcaldwell> sp - issues w/ guideline 2.4 - facilitate ability to orient and move w/ in content 
14:08:08 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:08:11 <bcaldwell> need to reorganize and distinguish between level 2 and 3
14:08:20 <Zakim> +??P14
14:08:25 <bcaldwell> titles for page and titles for frames need to be differentiated
14:08:37 <bcaldwell> title of other elements would remain level 3 items
14:08:53 <bcaldwell> also, no HTML techniques for many of the SC in 2.4
14:09:02 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:09:17 <bcaldwell> ex. table markup enables navigation w/in content
14:09:59 <bcaldwell> also, no technique related to structure: ex. identify what the structure should be for various components of the content 
14:10:22 <Michael> zakim, ??P14 is Lisa_Seeman
14:10:22 <Zakim> +Lisa_Seeman; got it
14:10:55 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:11:47 <bcaldwell> action: Sailesh to write up 2.4 issues and make proposals on list
14:12:18 <ChrisR> Proposed format for test case: http://tile-cridpath.atrc.utoronto.ca/acheck/servlet/ShowCheck?check=1&wcag=true
14:12:20 <bcaldwell> agenda - format of test cases
14:13:59 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:15:45 <Zakim> +Wendy
14:15:51 <bcaldwell> at this point, no common format for test suites 
14:15:57 <bcaldwell> there are over 50 in w3c
14:16:16 <bcaldwell> settled on this format becuse it seemed easy to understand, simple and straightforward for people to use
14:16:49 <bcaldwell> process needed for submitting tests and reviewing them
14:18:32 <Michael> q+ to ask tests tied to guideline instead of success criterion?
14:19:18 <bcaldwell> ? how detailed should this be?
14:19:37 <bcaldwell> target audience would be for the avg. person creating content
14:19:54 <bcaldwell> action: chris to work on examples with varying levels of detail
14:20:30 <Michael> ack lisa
14:20:51 <wendy> q+ to ask "i like that more detailed than uaag, but how coord w/uaag? not just a wcag test suite, should be a shared wai resource"
14:21:34 <bcaldwell> what happens when tests are not applicable?
14:22:39 <bcaldwell> how do we handle exceptions?
14:24:29 <bcaldwell> need to create layers of detail?
14:26:46 <bcaldwell> ja- this mockup focuses on what a test case might look like
14:27:28 <bcaldwell> to prevent cases where test cases are rarely applicable, we will need a process for determining that they are doing what they were intended to do
14:27:57 <bcaldwell> layers of information may be built into multiple tests 
14:28:32 <bcaldwell> so links to other tests and the way they flow allows users to move through the information and get additional detail
14:31:30 <bcaldwell> test files should make it clear whether it is a test for a technique or a test for a guideline/criterion 
14:31:40 <Michael> ack michael
14:31:40 <Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to ask tests tied to guideline instead of success criterion?
14:31:59 <bcaldwell> q+
14:32:04 <wendy> ack wendy
14:32:04 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to ask "i like that more detailed than uaag, but how coord w/uaag? not just a wcag test suite, should be a shared wai resource"
14:32:36 <bcaldwell> not just a WCAG test suite, but a WAI resource for testing 
14:33:03 <bcaldwell> have other WAI groups seen this yet?
14:33:14 <bcaldwell> not yet
14:33:35 <bcaldwell> next steps?
14:33:52 <bcaldwell> cr - would like to go public soon to get more feedback
14:35:20 <Michael> action: Wendy, Chris deal with format of test cases re W3C process
14:35:31 <wendy> action 3= wendy and chris talk about process (either move this document to w3c space or remove w3c logo and copyright since not on w3c site)
14:35:37 <bcaldwell> priority of level 1? what does that mean?
14:36:29 <wendy> bc tests for criteria or techniques? haven't decided which techniques were sufficient. is there a different scale here? 1-to-1 relationship to criteria?
14:36:33 <Michael> action: Chris, Jenae take test suite proposal (modified from today's discussion) out to other people in WAI working on test suites
14:36:55 <Michael> ack ben
14:37:00 <Michael> ack bcaldwell
14:37:10 <wendy> cr if checking level 1 conformance, could ignore level 2 and 3
14:37:30 <wendy> cr are you saying we should take out the level thing?
14:37:45 <wendy> bc there may be 2 scales. if the tests are specificly about techniques, may be cases where there is not level.
14:37:52 <wendy> bc it might be an optional technique.
14:38:29 <wendy> cr every test will need a level.
14:39:24 <wendy> bc say we have a technique for accesskey. it gets associated with guideline 2.4
14:39:34 <wendy> bc with the user agent issues, we are not requiring that people implement that technique.
14:39:59 <wendy> bc you could have a test case to determine that accesskey has been used, but how do you assign it a priority or level if it getting implemented doesn't effect conformance.
14:40:12 <wendy> cr the test suite is designed for people who want to check conformance to the guideliens.
14:40:24 <wendy> cr if something is an optional techqniue, there will not be a test case for it.
14:40:50 <wendy> ja test cases for conformance should be our first priority. 
14:40:52 <wendy> cr there is enough work to do just with doing those that are required.
14:41:05 <wendy> ja we could use status for that. status could be "optional"
14:41:16 <wendy> q?
14:41:30 <wendy> ack jenae
14:41:51 <wendy> ja re: a WAI test suite, the UA group don't review all of their test cases.
14:41:58 <wendy> ja we shouldn't let that slow us down.
14:42:06 <wendy> ja they don't have a process for approving them.
14:42:52 <Michael> q+ to say part of the coordination w/ other groups should be to develop an approval process
14:42:57 <Michael> ack sailesh
14:43:13 <wendy> sp there might be more than one success criteria that relates to a technique.
14:43:31 <wendy> sp cr said "w/every test case need a level associated withit" not sure i agree.
14:43:50 <wendy> sp if i'm going to conform to level AA, then I need to look at those checks for level 1 and 2.
14:44:10 <wendy> sp levels should be associated with success criteria
14:44:31 <donaldfevans> donaldfevans has joined #wai-wcag
14:45:16 <wendy> cr the test suite is designed to check conformance to the guidelines. the techniques are for people who are writing their content and want to make it accessible.
14:45:26 <wendy> cr if you follow the techniques, you should pass the test suite.
14:46:02 <wendy> ack Lisa
14:46:16 <bcaldwell> zakim, Chris_Ridpath is David_MacD
14:46:16 <Zakim> +David_MacD; got it
14:46:25 <wendy> ls i am concerned about how the test suite will be used.
14:46:37 <bcaldwell> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:46:37 <Zakim> On the phone I see Jim_Thatcher, David_MacDonald?, David_MacD, Becky_Gibson, Sailesh_Panchang, Michael_Cooper, Ben, Don_Evans, Jenae_Andershonis, Lisa_Seeman, Wendy
14:46:39 <wendy> ls it is important to understand why you are doing what you are doing.
14:46:52 <bcaldwell> zakim, David_MacDonald is Chris_Ridpath
14:46:52 <Zakim> +Chris_Ridpath; got it
14:47:17 <wendy> ls don't want to limit creativity of people who want to go the extra mile to make something accessible.
14:47:22 <bcaldwell> q+
14:47:44 <wendy> ls thus, i suggested having a ranking/percentage of how many people agree with a technique.
14:48:26 <wendy> ls how do we maintain the creativity of the author to promote accessibility?  how promote real testing with assistive technologies?
14:48:42 <wendy> ack Chris
14:49:25 <wendy> dmd relation between test suite/guideline: (i think gv's perspective is that) the test suite relates to the guidelines, although this is an html-specific test.
14:49:38 <wendy> dmd how can we have a test relate to a guideline when guidelines are tech-indie
14:49:45 <wendy> dmd go back to the group?
14:50:21 <wendy> dmd can we really do test suites for non-tech-specific requirements?
14:50:26 <wendy> ack bcaldwell
14:50:46 <wendy> bc don't see how a test suite can directly test the guidelines. don't think that is gv's perspective.
14:51:08 <wendy> ack michael
14:51:08 <Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say part of the coordination w/ other groups should be to develop an approval process
14:51:37 <wendy> cr it can be specific to the guidelines, doesn't have to be derived from anything.
14:51:45 <wendy> cr you are writing a web page, want to conform, what do you do?
14:51:55 <wendy> cr if you don't have the test suite, how can you tell if you conform or not?
14:52:03 <wendy> bc that's what the checklists are for?
14:52:09 <wendy> cr isn't this the same as the checklists?
14:52:13 <wendy> ls don't think so
14:52:48 <Zakim> -Lisa_Seeman
14:52:54 <wendy> sp for wcag 1.0, have aert. ithas tests. 
14:52:59 <wendy> sp for every checkpoint there are test files
14:53:27 <wendy> q+ wendy to talk about evolution of aert (if chris doesn't)
14:53:39 <wendy> cr this is an elaboration of aert. it is more detailed, more specific, more clear.
14:53:46 <bcaldwell> q+ to say, "what are advantages and disadvantages about formatlity of this. UAAG suites seem very informal - is that a more realistic direction to go given resources?"
14:53:54 <wendy> cr to address creativity, the creative part is still there but we need to agree on the specifics.
14:54:20 <wendy> cr 25 words vs 150 characters. have heard 60 characters. what the test files will do is help people agree on what is too long.
14:54:32 <wendy> ack jenae
14:54:57 <wendy> ja do we have an example of a checklist?  i don't think checklist and test case do the same thing, but can't tell until i look at one.
14:55:29 <wendy> ack wendy
14:55:29 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to talk about evolution of aert (if chris doesn't)
14:59:19 <wendy> seems that sp liked aert because it gives an overview of what is needed.
14:59:26 <wendy> wac thinks that is the role of the checklist
14:59:40 <wendy> bc role of test suite resource to determine if the techniques you are trying to apply have been applied correctly.
14:59:55 <wendy> bc separating what has to be done vs what doesn't would be in checklist. how to do correctly, in test suite.
15:00:16 <wendy> cr in the test process (this document) at the pass instructions, it lists other tests that are related.
15:00:51 <wendy> cr re: test suite being derived from techniques?
15:01:01 <wendy> bc yes, can't imagine tests that test the guidelines.
15:01:08 <wendy> bc guidelines are too abstract.
15:01:25 <wendy> bc checklists can define a way to conform to the guidelines.
15:01:32 <wendy> bc "these techs are required for a given success criteria"
15:01:41 <wendy> bc that brings you to the technology level
15:01:54 <wendy> bc part of providing text equiv is to provide alt on img
15:02:03 <wendy> bc checklist can say that. the test suite support the need to do that.
15:02:16 <wendy> ack bcaldwell
15:02:16 <Zakim> bcaldwell, you wanted to say, "what are advantages and disadvantages about formatlity of this. UAAG suites seem very informal - is that a more realistic direction to go given
15:02:19 <Zakim> ... resources?"
15:02:21 <David_MacDonald> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004AprJun/0272.html
15:02:33 <wendy> bc what are advantages and disadvantages about formatlity of this. UAAG suites seem very informal - is that a more realistic direction to go given resources?
15:03:24 <wendy> q+ to ask, "what does qa recommend about formality?"
15:03:54 <wendy> cr thought uaag was prescriptive
15:03:55 <wendy> ack david
15:04:18 <wendy> dmd found mail in archives, it was checklists that come off of guideliens not test suite.
15:04:27 <wendy> dmd that draws distintion between checklist and test suite
15:04:42 <wendy> dmd feel we should draw test suites from techniques documents
15:04:49 <wendy> cr link to old checklist?
15:04:51 <wendy> ack wendy
15:04:51 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to ask, "what does qa recommend about formality?"
15:05:30 <wendy> what does qa recommend about formality?
15:06:36 <bcaldwell> (really) old checklist drafts: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2004/05/checklists/
15:10:10 <Michael> ack jenae
15:10:30 <wendy> ja if test cases are not reviewed, will be useless
15:11:04 <wendy> bc want to separate the two
15:11:09 <wendy> wac please explain
15:13:16 <wendy> bc can the test suite be a tool to determine conformance?
15:13:47 <wendy> bc conformance is achieve through implementing techniques. the test suite information seems to exist to say "how do you do that? did you do that?"
15:14:04 <wendy> bc if it should also include a flow...a process...think there will be too many dependencies.
15:14:14 <wendy> bc may be tests that will apply in some cases, not in others.
15:14:20 <wendy> bc perhaps biting off more than we can chew
15:14:28 <wendy> bc if determining conformance is a part of it.
15:15:04 <wendy> cr test suite should include all that we know about making things accessible. those will be tested for.
15:15:11 <wendy> cr if there are other things, they won't be in here.
15:15:23 <wendy> bc does that mean that a lot of info will be lost?
15:15:41 <wendy> bc do not think we can come to consensus on character lenght for alt-text.
15:15:58 <wendy> bc it could help people raise flags, but it will not be a definitive test for accessibility.
15:16:18 <wendy> cr think we can reach consensus on those.
15:18:38 <wendy> wac difference between how to use elements/attributes together (how to follow a spec) vs what is the value of an element or attribute.
15:19:07 <wendy> cr if 150 chars is ok, then ok.
15:19:13 <wendy> mc how would that be in the test case?
15:19:20 <wendy> mc action on failure needs to say...
15:19:26 <wendy> cr you've looked at the alt-text and it is ok for the image
15:19:39 <wendy> q?
15:19:41 <wendy> ack david
15:19:52 <wendy> dmd looking at the checklist and test suite proposal.
15:19:56 <wendy> dmd i see a lot of overlap
15:20:09 <wendy> dmd the checklist has guideline, success criteria, techniques and then we're into techniques
15:20:37 <wendy> dmd there is redundancy. if we write one, will it write the other?
15:20:40 <Michael> brb
15:20:59 <wendy> dmd seems to me that the checks are tech-specific. assume a checklist for each technology.
15:21:12 <wendy> dmd the only diff is a checkbox that says true whereas in test suite there are instructions.
15:21:46 <wendy> cr see the checklist being the same as the test suite.
15:21:53 <wendy> cr different views of the same content.
15:22:02 <wendy> ja checklists don't tell you how
15:22:13 <wendy> dmd isn't that techniques?
15:23:24 <Michael> back
15:24:23 <wendy> wac checklist is overview/memory jogger, test suite describes how to test, techniques describe what to do
15:24:36 <wendy> cr is the checklist the same as the procedure in the test suite?
15:24:50 <wendy> e.g., "check for presence of alt attribute on img element"
15:25:33 <wendy> mc or expected result?
15:29:27 <Zakim> -Jim_Thatcher
15:29:44 <wendy> discussion about relationship between checklists, test suites, and techniques.
15:33:02 <wendy> action: ben and chris work on mock-up of checklist
15:36:32 <wendy> wac go to uaag first, b/c if can go to larger group and say "here's what uaag and we agree to use" a better sell and hopefully prevents fragmentation.
15:36:56 <wendy> mc pick up discussion on test files and checklists
15:38:37 <wendy> checklists either this week or next (more likely week of 30th b/c ben going on vaction). also have gateway to discuss next week.
15:39:12 <wendy> sp confidence and links to other tests. perhaps a grouping mechanism?
15:39:15 <wendy> cr that might be role of checklist
15:41:19 <wendy> next week: gateway, report from uaag discussion, more test files.
15:41:30 <wendy> week of 30th: checklist, more test files, more gateway, html and css?
15:41:42 <Zakim> -Sailesh_Panchang
15:41:45 <wendy> try to get test files/test suite on thurdsayds' 26 august
15:52:30 <wendy> Topic: bugzilla tutorial
16:16:10 <Zakim> -Jenae_Andershonis
16:16:11 <Zakim> -Wendy
16:16:12 <Zakim> -Don_Evans
16:16:12 <Zakim> -Becky_Gibson
16:16:13 <Zakim> -Ben
16:16:14 <Zakim> -Chris_Ridpath
16:16:15 <Zakim> -David_MacD
16:16:16 <Zakim> -Michael_Cooper
16:16:17 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
16:16:19 <Zakim> Attendees were Jim_Thatcher, Becky_Gibson, +1.703.391.aaaa, Michael_Cooper, Sailesh_Panchang, Ben, Don_Evans, Jenae_Andershonis, David_MacDonald?, Chris_Ridpath?, Lisa_Seeman,
16:16:22 <Zakim> ... Wendy, David_MacD, Chris_Ridpath
16:31:25 <wendy> zakim, bye
16:31:25 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wai-wcag
16:31:31 <wendy> RRSAgent, bye
16:31:31 <RRSAgent> I see 5 open action items:
16:31:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Sailesh to write up 2.4 issues and make proposals on list [1]
16:31:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/08/18-wai-wcag-irc#T14-11-47
16:31:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: chris to work on examples with varying levels of detail [2]
16:31:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/08/18-wai-wcag-irc#T14-19-54
16:31:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: wendy and chris talk about process (either move this document to w3c space or remove w3c logo and copyright since not on w3c site) [3]
16:31:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/08/18-wai-wcag-irc#T14-35-20
16:31:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Chris, Jenae take test suite proposal (modified from today's discussion) out to other people in WAI working on test suites [4]
16:31:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/08/18-wai-wcag-irc#T14-36-33
16:31:31 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ben and chris work on mock-up of checklist [5]
16:31:31 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/08/18-wai-wcag-irc#T15-33-02