14:44:03 RRSAgent has joined #eo 14:44:12 zakim, this will be eowg 14:44:12 ok, shawn; I see WAI_EOWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes 14:44:23 rrsagent, make logs world 14:56:57 WAI_EOWG()10:00AM has now started 14:57:04 +Bingham 14:57:17 +Libby 14:58:15 beach7 has joined #eo 14:59:19 Helle has joined #eo 14:59:33 shawn has changed the topic to: NOTE: IRC log will be public viewable 14:59:52 +Shawn 15:01:44 Harvey has joined #eo 15:01:50 hi harvey 15:02:05 welcome to IRC ! ! ! 15:02:10 +Henk 15:02:16 zakim, who is here? 15:02:22 On the phone I see Bingham, Libby, Shawn, Henk 15:02:36 On IRC I see Harvey, Helle, beach7, RRSAgent, Zakim, shawn 15:02:39 A first -- onto IRC 15:03:23 +Helle_Bjarno 15:07:38 -HS: I didn't receive any complaints about a task force structure. I understood from Shawn that it's better to work as a task force since a lot of the work is done outside the EOWG. We have our own mailing list and this makes it easy to communicate. I sent the work statement. 15:07:55 HS: Sylvie will be joining as soon as possible. 15:09:10 HS:We will review the statements and how our ideas will fit in. The objectives are from the requirement document. Does anyone wish to say anything about objectives? work statement? 15:10:33 HS: Communication. There are 3 points: mailing list, bi-weekly telephone conference, monthly work in EOWG. I actually do not know that we need to have a teleconference every two weeks or the monthly work in EOWG. 15:11:21 +Sylvie 15:11:26 SLH: We should be able to fit into the EO agenda. We may need to push it off for a week. But, it shouldn't be a problem. How will the group process the work and how often would it be effective to EO. 15:11:35 HS: We should do it every month. 15:13:08 HS: Can each person manage the bi-weekly telephone conference? 15:13:17 Harvey ok 15:13:46 SD: I prefer something more flexible. If there's nothing urgent, perhaps we could put it off. 15:14:39 HS: Will we have a fixed time? Selecting the date for the next teleconference could be difficult. Perhaps it would be good to have a fixed time. We could also skip. For me, Monday afternoon is ok. 15:14:50 HBj: It's difficult for Andrew. 15:15:32 HS: This is difficult. There is not an available hour that everyone has working time. Having Andrew in the call, means that he will call in the middle of the night. Or, we could have meetings in our evening time. 15:15:51 HBj: When we had the Wednesday meetings in the EO group, was that very late? 15:16:07 SLH: 3:30 eastern, 9:30 for Europe. 15:16:27 HBj: Or, the people on the west coast would have to meet at 5 or 6. 15:16:41 HS: I can call from my home in the evening. 15:16:48 HBj: I can call from my home. 15:17:05 SD: It's difficult for me. If we don't do it for every call. 15:17:16 HS: Do you think that you will call from your home? 15:17:23 SD: I will call from your home. 15:18:04 HBj: Could we use the mailing to decide an appropriate time for Andrew? 15:18:35 HS: Also, depending on our strategy, perhaps it's not necessary to talk every 2 weeks. We could work more by mailing list; more by telephone. 15:19:07 Re: archives -- I have accumulated 30 emails on the Lexicon -- not in archive 15:19:12 SLH: Unless, it can be easier to discuss things by phone. Decisions are easier by phone. Means a commitment to respond by mailing list. 15:19:59 HBj: We need a combination of mailing list and teleconferences. When we are close to a deadline to make final decisions. We could do this by phone. Terminology on the mailing list. 15:21:23 HS: Participation. A minimum of 2 hours a week for task force work. To read mail that comes to list. Participation in teleconferences. Preparation of deliverables for discussion. Any comments on these suggestions? 15:21:33 No comments 15:22:06 HS: Anyone want to withdraw? 15:22:32 SLH: I am the team contact and you are the facilitator. You are the equivalent of the chair. 15:22:54 HS: Any remarks about work statement? 15:23:10 HBj: If we take away the monthly, say just "as appropriate," 15:23:24 HS, SLH: when needed 15:23:41 HS: Rather than biweekly, we could say every 2 or 3 weeks. Is there a better way? 15:24:10 SLH: It would be good to discuss how we go about things and then come back to how often have a teleconference. 15:24:26 HB: Are we on some mailing list that we know the name of? 15:24:47 HS: Yes. I hope that everyone receives the details. Knows how to get there and submit mails. 15:24:59 HB: I've got 20 or so e-mails. 15:25:47 LC: Does everyone get attachments? 15:25:58 HS: The mailing list should get everything? 15:26:13 SLH: The mailing list was set up last week. It was set up last week. 15:26:22 HB: Send to mailing list name. 15:26:29 HS: Do you have the details,Harvey? 15:26:46 HB: What about old archive stuff? Should we keep it all? 15:27:15 HS: It's not necessary to keep everything. 15:27:24 HB: All we need is the going forward part. 15:27:44 HS: Descriptions, etc. Not all communications. Everything falls into automatic archiving. 15:29:00 LC: You and I did have an e-mail exchange about whether you received my descriptions. 15:29:05 zakim, mute helle 15:29:05 Helle_Bjarno should now be muted 15:29:06 I will send them again. 15:31:08 HS: What have we done until now? I asked everyone to pick 10 words starting with A from the list. I got 6 or 7 lists of words. I took out the ones that we chosen most and presented the top 10. After that, I asked everyone to get the descriptions. I got some descriptions. Is this a good way of working? We will ask everybody to look for words, not letter for letter. Ask everyone to select words and analyze choices and make a list. 15:31:44 HB: I observe that we have multiple definitions. If we like a particular definition we should identify the source. 15:32:20 LC: Do we look at A through Z? 15:32:28 HS: No, it's too much. 15:32:47 SLH: For A, you chose 10. How many will be in the glossary? 15:34:00 HS: 30 or 40. If we have 10 from each letter, there will be too much. We need these 10, at least. Letter A is an exception. For the next letters, not take 10. We don't have to look for 10 words of every letter. 15:34:20 HS: I hope that we won't end up with hundreds of words. 15:34:36 Zakim, please umute me 15:34:36 I don't understand 'please umute me', Helle 15:34:38 SLH: We need to take back to EO, if different from initial discussions. 15:35:06 SLH: Once you have a list that the task force is considering, then can say how many and why over the original estimate. 15:35:19 HB: Choose words that are appropriate and confusing. 15:35:22 SLH: scope 15:35:38 HB: We don't duplicate the WAI glossary. 15:36:13 HS: We don't have to be that strict for each letter. In the end we will see if we have too many words or not. 15:37:00 HBj: Has anyone have an idea for average of each letter in the WAI glossary. There are probably not the same number for each letter. 15:37:11 HS: I will do this for next time. 15:37:52 HBj: I think that there were quite a few words starting with A. Could we look at BCD. Suggest a number of words but no more than 7 or 10 for each. 15:38:48 HS: For next time, let's select the next 5 letters. BCDEF, for the next time. Just look at words and whether they should be in Lexicon. Not fix to a certain number. 15:39:20 SLH: Is this the most efficient to do small groups, or larger, or half, 5, 13, versus 25. 15:39:39 HBj: I prefer few letters. 15:40:05 HB: handful of letters. Up through E. 15:41:35 HS: Need to consider from what documents the words come from. The documents will be translated. The words primarily come from these documents. They have a high priority for being translated. I will analyze everyone's choices and report back. Then, make the descriptions. But, we will do this later. 15:42:12 SLH: It would be helpful to have a schedule. This will help people plan to do their work and have an idea of the overall project. 15:42:36 action: henk, prepare a schedule 15:42:52 HS: That is a good suggestion. I will set up a schedule for the coming weeks. Have a handful of letters. 15:43:22 HB: Do we want to have extractions from the glossary? 15:44:09 HS: First, just do terms and the source. I will report back. Then, we will look for the descriptions. First, just the words and the documents where they come from. 15:44:39 HS: I don't hear any disagreements. Is this correct? 15:45:11 HBj: Should we collect all words before starting the discussion? Or, are we taking them part by part? 15:46:08 HS: Good if we work with a handful of words. As soon as we agree on the words, then start with the description. I want to discuss whether we have to make brand new descriptions. Or, we will only do this if the description is not simple and clear. 15:46:51 HBj: Any following the mailing list? They are discussing the glossary. The glossary is part of the normative documents. 15:47:42 HS: I saw that ??? sent a message about the glossary. I looked up in their glossary and there are only 50 words, in total. I saw perhaps one or two words that we are discussing. There are not many words that we will take from them. 15:48:00 HBj: I will send mail from Tim Borland (?). 15:49:22 draft work statement online at: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2004/lexicon.html 15:49:39 HS: Now, we come to the descriptions. All descriptions should be in clear language. We have to read existing descriptions and consider whether they are clear and plain. I am not aiming to make new descriptions of all words, but we have to read the descriptions and consider whether they are plain and correct. 15:50:32 SLH: It's going to be tough balance. There is some advantage to having same definitions throughout the document. Need consistency throughout documents. 15:50:40 +Carol 15:51:08 HBj: I have concerns from terms that have normative status. 15:51:22 HS: Whether our Lexicon will be a normative document? 15:52:06 HBj: Can we change the definition if term comes from normative document? We have different normative glossaries with different definitions of the same word. 15:52:31 SLH: Could we look at each of them. I don't think that all were normative. 15:53:04 HBj: Somebody at WAI should talk to Wendy Chisholm. The authoring tools has a normative glossary. 15:53:19 ATAG 2.0 will be normative? 15:53:38 HBj: I will send an e-mail to the list. 15:53:51 WCAG 2.0 glossary is normative 15:54:06 HS: We have to deal with several normative documents. 15:54:39 SLH: ATAG and WCAG 2.0, there is an opportunity to work with these groups. 15:54:52 HB: We can concurrence that we haven't change their intended use of the word. 15:55:15 SLH: We should use it as they use it. We have one 2.0 version of a word. That include ATAG 2.0, WCAG 2.0. 15:55:27 HB: Don't retrofit to UAG. 15:55:30 UAAG is normative as well: http://www.w3.org/TR/UAAG/glossary.html#terms 15:55:36 SLH: That is normative. 15:56:20 HBj: Could we have an explanation and we know about this and we have chosen one definition. We show you the ones we prefer. Put in note explaining in plain English what they mean. 15:56:42 HS: We said that if definition is not a closed document, we could discuss with the group. 15:56:53 HBj: But documents have a normative status. 15:57:43 SLH: We should be forward thinking. We have an opportunity to coordinate with ATAG and WCAG. Not worry about UAG and WCAG 1.0. They are open documents. We can help work on definitions. 15:58:56 HS: The normative documents. Perhaps we can add to our stuff when we come up with words. We also find out whether the documents are normative. 15:59:12 SLH: We have a timing issue. I think that ATAG is going to last call this year. 15:59:21 HBj: They are working hard on closing. 15:59:30 SLH: We may have to do an adjustment. 15:59:38 HB: We look at their whole glossary. 15:59:51 http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG20/#definitions 16:00:04 LC: Do they have a group working on the glossary? 16:00:15 SLH: It's just their group. 16:00:54 SLH: They have about 40 words. They are specific to ATAG. They may not be in a beginner's lexicon. 16:01:27 HB: Authoring tool is in 4 subsections, a whole page. 16:01:40 HBj: Six different words starting with accessibility. 16:02:08 -Carol 16:03:58 HS: We have to take this into consideration. I do not hear that many people that say we can't deal with the description at all. The balance may not be easy. If everyone is ok, I want to go to the descriptions. Do we talk about big changes or using plain and simple language. See the last list that I sent out this morning. 16:04:40 HS: The last document has contributions from Carol, me, WAI, mixed description from several glossaries. 16:04:47 HB: Where is the WAI definition? 16:04:58 HS: It's from the WAI glossary. 16:05:10 SLH: WAI printable glossary. 16:05:47 SLH: The WAI printable glossary is definitions from other documents. 16:06:00 HS: But there are some more descriptions. 16:06:32 http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/Glossary/printable.html 16:07:03 SLH: For example, in the assistive technology, where did the definition come from? I'm looking at the WAI printable glossary, I don't see that there is a separate definition for assistive technology. The only definition is from UAG. 16:08:21 HB: There is one from Access Board. 16:08:57 SLH: Most of this document was collecting definitions from different places, and not selecting a specific definition. 16:09:10 HS: Need to put Access Board here. 16:10:03 SLH: The middle column should be different. Also, the first column, what went into the choices? 16:10:34 HS: That was from WCAG. There should also be this description. Is is WCAG 1.0 or 2.0. 16:10:58 SLH: I'm not understanding where definitions came from and why there are those definitions and not others. 16:11:50 HS: I tried to collect what I found. I took the ones that I thought were close to the ones we want to have. We don't want to have lengthy descriptions. I made the choice to not take UAG and take Access Board instead. Is this reasonable? 16:12:17 HBj: The one from the Access Board, I sent that to you as a suggestion. None of the person sent the definition from UAG as a suggestion. 16:12:22 HS: That is possible. 16:12:32 HB: It is about half a page. 16:12:36 q+ to suggest linking to the WAI printable glossary in this table (so can see collection of other definitions) 16:13:03 HS: We are looking for beginner's lexicon. It is a very specific, technical description. 16:13:12 ack shawn 16:13:12 shawn, you wanted to suggest linking to the WAI printable glossary in this table (so can see collection of other definitions) 16:13:47 SLH: That makes sense. What about including link to printable glossary. So we can see what other people have done. In the table, provide a link to the printable glossary. Just link to the first one. 16:13:54 HS: Just for our description? 16:14:01 SLH: Right. 16:14:15 HS:I hope that it is in alphabetical order. 16:14:21 SLH: Yes. 16:14:54 HS: There's a third one on the ???? Why is assistive technology devices there? 16:17:16 HS: When we see some of the attempts to make the description easier, is this the way we should go? Carol uses words in slightly different order. Going through descriptions, finding one that reads easy and understandable. It's a good exercise to see the first words in our list. We can put in link so that can go back to original place. What do we think about the descriptions? Let's start with assistive technology. 16:17:22 HB: Take access board. 16:17:33 LC: I agree. 16:18:15 SLH: We don't have same reason to take Access Board as another word in our documents. We don't have same level of motivation to take Access Board definition. 16:18:59 HS: When there is a description that is correct, easy to understand, we don't change a word. 16:19:13 HB: There's nothing in our current glossary to suggest that we have a simple one. 16:19:20 HS: Then, we put this one in. 16:19:34 HB: I didn't add Access Board definition. 16:20:09 HBj: Isn't it more like a description, wheelchairs and things like that. I think that they have done a bad job in other groups about the glossaries. 16:20:39 SLH: What about take shortened version of WCAG 1.0 definition. It just tries to describe what is assistive technology. 16:20:44 HB: I like that definition. 16:21:19 HS: Do we want to make the word understandble or do we want to give information about different types of assistive technology. 16:21:43 SLH: In the beginning, should say that the words are defined as in the WAI document. 16:22:01 HS: Keep as short as possible, without being incomplete. 16:22:59 HS: I use assistive technology,screen reading program, etc. it makes it easier to understand. Don't have to be complete about all assistive technologies. 16:23:42 HS: I need feedback on what I am doing. 16:24:39 SLH: I think that we should change it as little as possible. Unless there is a compelling reason, should stay with the original. 16:25:09 HS: The reason I did that is because in our country we are talking about hardward and software, and in this specific order. 16:27:58 HS: I need more people who will look at descriptions and give feedback. We discussed not to change description when it is not necessary. Make short descriptions without being complete about assistive technologies. More people to go through descriptions and give comments. I will make a schedule for the coming weeks. I will analyze how many entries for each letter of the alphabet. Normative documents. Shawn, will you talk with Wendy? 16:28:13 SLH: I'm not sure when I'll talk with Wendy. We need to talk with Jan. 16:28:25 HBj: Talk with Jutta. 16:28:32 SLH: I will try. 16:28:48 HBj: I will talk with Danish girl and ask about schedule. 16:29:21 -Shawn 16:31:44 HS: Make the next call that includes Andrew. Sylvie, can we do this one time? At the end of November 29 in the evening. 9 o'clock for the Europeans. That means 6 hours earlier in Boston. In Boston, it's 3. Harvey & Libby? 16:31:52 Ok for Harvey and Libby 16:32:22 It's 6 in the morning for Andrew. 16:32:51 HS: What about half an hour later? 16:33:10 HS: Try to keep meeting for one hour. 16:33:33 HS: 9:30 to 10:30 in Europe. 16:33:52 HBj: Natasha? 16:34:03 LC: It would be 12 noon on west coast. 16:34:19 HS: I will confirm agenda. 16:34:33 HB: You've good work, Henk. 16:34:52 HBj: Do we want age-related conditions, or should we discuss this? 16:35:31 HS: I came to this word because quite a few people proposed it.We can always talk about the words. Do you have suggestions? 16:35:44 HBj: It's more in general. 16:35:53 HB: Not perjorative. 16:36:18 HS: In the next call, we will go through choices for the next letters. 16:36:29 HBj: Should we look at definitions in the list. 16:37:03 -Bingham 16:37:04 HS: Comment and then we can tell if we are using the same definitions. Every comment is welcome. 16:37:05 -Sylvie 16:37:08 -Helle_Bjarno 16:37:09 -Libby 16:37:10 -Henk 16:37:11 WAI_EOWG()10:00AM has ended 16:37:12 Attendees were Bingham, Libby, Shawn, Henk, Helle_Bjarno, Sylvie, Carol 16:37:24 Harvey has left #eo 16:37:26 beach7 has left #eo 16:38:38 shawn has left #eo 18:35:56 Zakim has left #eo