14:57:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
14:57:04 <RRSAgent> is logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc
14:57:07 <wendy> scribe: wendy
14:57:11 <wendy> chair: michael
14:57:34 <wendy> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0362.html
14:57:54 <wendy> agenda+ Finish review of alt text test files  http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/checkstatus.html#alttests
14:58:08 <wendy> agenda+ Review Fasttrack tests http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0341.html
14:58:24 <wendy> agenda+ Review proposal to close issues 734 and 739 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0357.html
14:58:38 <wendy> agenda+ Requirements for checklists & techniques http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-wcag2-tech-req-20050202.html
14:58:49 <wendy> agenda+ Action item reminder
14:59:02 <wendy> Date: 2 February 2005
14:59:08 <ChrisR> ChrisR has joined #wai-wcag
14:59:15 <wendy> Meeting: Techniques Task Force of the WCAG WG weekly telecon
14:59:52 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has now started
14:59:55 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:00:14 <Zakim> +??P19
15:00:15 <Zakim> -??P19
15:00:19 <Zakim> +??P19
15:01:27 <ChrisR> IPcaller should be Chris
15:01:42 <Zakim> +Wendy
15:01:53 <Zakim> +Alex_Li
15:02:04 <wendy> zakim, ??P19 is David
15:02:06 <Zakim> +David; got it
15:02:10 <wendy> zakim, who's on the phone?
15:02:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller], David, Wendy, Alex_Li
15:02:18 <wendy> zakim, IPcaller is Chris
15:02:18 <Zakim> +Chris; got it
15:03:44 <Zakim> +??P36
15:03:52 <ben> zakim, ??P36 is Ben
15:03:52 <Zakim> +Ben; got it
15:04:33 <Zakim> +Michael_Cooper
15:05:16 <Becky_Gibson> Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
15:05:31 <Becky_Gibson> be right there - finishing up another meeting
15:05:35 <Zakim> -Ben
15:05:43 <Michael> Michael has joined #wai-wcag
15:09:17 <Zakim> +Shadi
15:09:37 <shadi> shadi has joined #wai-wcag
15:11:53 <Zakim> +??P41
15:11:59 <ken> ken has joined #wai-wcag
15:12:00 <Zakim> +John_Slatin
15:12:04 <Michael> regrets: Alistair Garrison, Don Evans
15:13:49 <wendy> ack john
15:17:46 <ChrisR> test suite status showing Alt text tests: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/checkstatus.html
15:18:01 <wendy> [some discussion of the possible ways to group items in level 3 since there is concern about the inability to reach level 3 by following *all* SC in level 3]
15:18:08 <wendy> zakim, take up item 1
15:18:09 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Finish review of alt text test files  http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/checkstatus.html#alttests" taken up [from wendy]
15:18:14 <Zakim> +Becky_Gibson
15:19:28 <wendy> cr: perhaps leave the controversial tests alone for now. the others that seemed to have agreement, accept via straw poll.
15:21:37 <wendy> wac: had discussed a few, is the next step a proposal? or not enough info to make a proposal?
15:22:24 <wendy> action: cr will either propose changes for 195, 192, 60 or we'll discuss on list (or call)
15:24:15 <Zakim> +??P0
15:24:18 <ben> zakim, ??P0 is Ben
15:24:18 <Zakim> +Ben; got it
15:24:29 <wendy> cr: feel that we have decided about 12, 13, 132
15:25:22 <wendy> Test 12 - All IMG elements with an ISMAP attribute have a valid USEMAP attribute.
15:25:25 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test12.html
15:25:43 <wendy> js: doesn't make sense to have both a server-side and a client-side image map
15:25:56 <wendy> cr: the technique says to use client-side instead of server-side
15:26:04 <wendy> cr: therefore test 12 doesn't make sense.
15:26:25 <wendy> Test 13 - All links in all client side image-maps are duplicated within the document.
15:26:28 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test13.html
15:27:02 <wendy> js: dmd did some testing
15:27:08 <wendy> cr: 2 people said to kill, 2 said optional
15:27:20 <wendy> mc: part of the baseline assumption. therefore, mark as transitional.
15:27:57 <wendy> mc: it's a deprecated technique.
15:28:57 <wendy> cr: should we dump it?
15:29:17 <wendy> mc: don't have to dump it, unless dump the technique as well. but we've got a technique for a WCAG 1.0 checkpoint saying, "don't need to do this anymore"
15:29:23 <wendy> js: helps people transition (from 1.0 to 2.0)
15:29:29 <wendy> mc: needs to be clear it is deprecated
15:30:47 <wendy> cr: so 13 stays in for now, but is deprecated.
15:31:02 <wendy> wac: later discussion today's agenda to discuss what to do with deprecated techniques/tests
15:31:26 <wendy> Test 132 - All active areas in all server-side image maps have duplicate text links in the document.
15:31:29 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test132.html
15:31:53 <wendy> js: "available geometric shape" was probably before "poly" added to spec
15:32:08 <wendy> cr: may need 1,000 text links for a server-side img map
15:33:01 <wendy> bc: if can't make a client-side map (because too complex), then probaby need an alternative means that text-links may not provide the functionality.
15:33:05 <wendy> js, dmd, mc agree
15:33:44 <wendy> js: if we're thinking it's still possible that someone will need to use a server-side map and that an alternative navigation mechanism is required, need to have something in 2.4?
15:35:07 <wendy> mc: map sites are using server-side image map
15:35:44 <wendy> js: svg technique
15:35:53 <wendy> bc: for 132 - don't want to require text links
15:36:01 <wendy> mc: need to mark the technique as deprecated
15:36:14 <wendy> mc: 132 is the same status as 13
15:38:33 <wendy> action: mc mark technique ssim_textlinks as deprecated and add technique for alt. nav mech for serverr-side img maps (ala map sites)
15:38:48 <wendy> kk: if we keep 132, the example is invalid.
15:39:15 <wendy> action: cr change the examples in 132
15:39:33 <wendy> cr: renaming incidental?
15:39:52 <wendy> js: it was "not relevant" - haven't made a formal proposal
15:40:08 <wendy> cr: some of the alt-text tests require "decorative"
15:40:23 <wendy> cr: can we assume that "decorative" be changed to "not relevant" in teh straw poll
15:44:06 <wendy> concern that "not relevant" might not sit well with designers who feel that decorations are relevant to the content.  perhaps use "decorative" but provide examples to explain what we mean.
15:44:42 <wendy> js: context may matter
15:45:01 <wendy> bc: just about any photo will have text in it (e.g., street sign, t-shirt, etc.)
15:45:34 <wendy> resolved: moving forward w/using "decorative" for now
15:45:47 <wendy> zakim, close this item
15:45:47 <Zakim> agendum 1 closed
15:45:48 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:45:50 <Zakim> 2. Review Fasttrack tests http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0341.html [from wendy]
15:45:54 <wendy> zakim, take up item 2
15:45:54 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Review Fasttrack tests http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0341.html" taken up [from wendy]
15:46:11 <wendy> 29 - HTML document has a valid doctype declaration
15:46:13 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test29.html
15:46:33 <wendy> mc: syntactically correct, or a preferred doctype
15:46:39 <wendy> bc: someone raised an issue
15:47:47 <ben> http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=775
15:49:05 <wendy> mc: do any asst. tech use doctype?
15:49:13 <wendy> js: would it be an issue in the way xforms are handled?
15:49:28 <wendy> mc: likely using namespaces
15:49:57 <wendy> cr: suggesting that we dump it?
15:50:01 <wendy> mc: just asking questions
15:50:18 <wendy> js: these are html tests, html requires a doctype
15:50:31 <wendy> bc: then we have to test for everything that the validator tests for?
15:51:12 <wendy> cr: the benefits are iffy?
15:51:17 <wendy> cr: let the valiator catch it?
15:52:20 <wendy> mc: there is a wcag 1.0 checkpoint.  if deprecate, would be saying "not important" but we still think doctype is necessary but it's require dby the spec so we don't have to require it.
15:53:15 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#idx-document_type_declaration-3
15:53:52 <wendy> cr: this is a level 1 requirement
15:53:57 <wendy> mc: valid code is level 1
15:57:54 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#strict
15:58:55 <wendy> wac: xhtml 1 requires both xmlns and doctype 
15:59:09 <wendy> bc: need to be specific in the test/technique which version of html using?
15:59:20 <wendy> js: html 3.2 require doctype?
15:59:34 <wendy> mc: do we say don't use anything previous to HTML 4.01
16:00:56 <wendy> bg: concern about legacy applications
16:01:06 <wendy> mc: could validate 3.2 against 4.01 
16:01:16 <ben> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html32
16:01:36 <wendy> bc: 3.2 also requires doctype
16:02:11 <wendy> dmd: january 1997 for 3.2
16:02:35 <wendy> mc: don't have to worry about. if using 3.2 is before accessibility guidelines, therefore likely to update for accessibility anyway.
16:02:59 <Zakim> -Alex_Li
16:03:16 <Zakim> -John_Slatin
16:03:18 <Zakim> -David
16:10:11 <Zakim> +??P16
16:10:59 <Zakim> +John_Slatin
16:11:13 <wendy> 49 - HTML document has a valid language code
16:11:15 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test49.html
16:11:48 <wendy> bc: reads level 1 requirement from 3.1 does not require author to provide lang attribute
16:12:07 <wendy> js: my intent (of proposing tha twording) was that author would provide something that automated tools could use.
16:12:57 <wendy> wac: why would we have a level 1 requirement that doesn't require the author to do anything?
16:13:28 <wendy> cr: not a big deal to require the lang attribute
16:13:33 <wendy> js: i18n group thinks it is essential
16:14:22 <wendy> mc: encoded in utf-8 and use the chinese characters it could be a japanese document. therefore, need lang attribute.
16:14:49 <wendy> js: glyphs are different even if the charset is the same. therefore, use the lang attribute for subtle differences in rendering.
16:15:26 <wendy> dmd: an accessibility issue?
16:15:54 <wendy> js: if a japanese reader with a learning disability is seeing chars that are rendered slightly differently than what struggled to learn, increase reading difficulty (even more) for them.
16:16:15 <wendy> mc: content lang header is equally valid, html spec requires lang
16:16:23 <wendy> js: i18n says difficulties with the header
16:17:28 <wendy> action: bc, gv, js talk about GL 3.1 L1 #1
16:18:10 <wendy> mc: a valid lang code needs to be valid value
16:18:36 <wendy> mc: determining a valid value is difficult b/c the lang codes keep changing
16:18:40 <wendy> bc: i18n is clear
16:18:53 <wendy> mc: however that list provides for both 2 and 3 chars, other variants
16:18:57 <wendy> bc: ever remove anything?
16:18:59 <wendy> mc: no
16:19:12 <wendy> bc: as long as don't remove, then won't become invalid if you were valid
16:19:33 <wendy> mc: could be valid but not pass the validator (if list hasn't been updated)
16:20:26 <wendy> discussion about where the list is, how much it costs, how often it is updated, how it is updated
16:22:42 <wendy> bc: ref i18n for which lang codes to use
16:23:54 <ben> tutorial: http://w3c.org/International/tutorials/tutorial-lang/
16:24:43 <ben> http://www.w3.org/TR/i18n-html-tech-lang/
16:26:15 <wendy> js: gen techs links to 
16:26:38 <wendy> action: michael add links to i18n info from html techs from specifying lang
16:26:59 <wendy> cr: test 48 is the presence test and then the code must be ok.
16:27:35 <wendy> 57 - INPUT, type of "text", has an explicit label
16:27:37 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test57.html
16:27:38 <wendy> 118 - INPUT, type of "password", has an explicit label
16:27:40 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test118.html
16:27:41 <wendy> 119 - INPUT, type of "checkbox", has an explicit label
16:27:43 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test119.html
16:27:44 <wendy> 120 - INPUT, type of "file", has an explicit label
16:27:46 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test120.html
16:27:47 <wendy> 121 - INPUT, type of "radio", has an explicit label
16:27:49 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test121.html
16:27:50 <wendy> bg: concern about using explicit when spec says can use implicit.
16:28:05 <wendy> js: if there is a label wrapped around, that is explicit.
16:28:15 <wendy> mc: but the spec calls that explicit
16:28:28 <wendy> bg: however, test requires label/for
16:29:18 <wendy> js: note the user agent issue...
16:29:41 <wendy> mc: explicit or implicit or title
16:29:58 <wendy> bg: should be to spec
16:30:00 <wendy> js: agree
16:30:14 <wendy> cr: another test that discourages
16:30:19 <wendy> bc: that's a repair technique
16:30:28 <wendy> cr: allowing all 3 methods?
16:30:37 <wendy> agreement: allow all three
16:30:58 <wendy> action: michael modify techniques to allow implicit, explicit, or title
16:31:07 <wendy> action: cr: modify tests to allow implicit, explicit, or title
16:31:30 <wendy> 116 - B (bold) element is not used
16:31:32 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test116.html
16:31:33 <wendy> 117 - I (italic) element is not used
16:31:35 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test117.html
16:32:24 <wendy> bg: they are both in the spec. in techs - have use strong and i. have css techs that say, use css for b and i
16:34:01 <wendy> http://www.bestkungfu.com/archive/date/2004/05/strongly-emphasizing-semantics/
16:34:47 <wendy> js: theoretically could modify sound scheme to do something diff for b and strong, however, typically don't hear a difference.
16:39:14 <wendy> dmd: does XHTML still use b and i?
16:40:54 <wendy> b and i are not in the latest WD of XHTMl 2.0
16:41:01 <wendy> dmd: is it an accessibility issue?
16:41:08 <wendy> dmd: or is it compliance?
16:41:20 <wendy> mc: think we thought it was going to be a few years ago.
16:41:53 <wendy> dmd: it seems a little dogmatic, if it's not an accessibilty issue.
16:42:40 <wendy> bc: if informative, say good advice? at future point, require it?
16:42:45 <wendy> cr: currently level 1
16:43:00 <wendy> mc: level 1 to require valid markup
16:43:18 <wendy> mc: a technique that matters about version of html
16:43:32 <wendy> bc: checklist will have to depend on html version?
16:44:00 <wendy> mc: if xhtml, don't say anything about (validator will pick up)
16:45:18 <wendy> where is it WCAG 1.0? currently in defn of http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#style-sheet
16:45:33 <wendy> will need to list removed techniques
16:46:02 <wendy> action: michael revmoe b/i technique from html techs
16:46:08 <wendy> action: chris remove b/i tests
16:46:28 <wendy> action: michael look at html techs issues to see if this closes any
16:46:45 <wendy> action 10 = ben look at html techs issues to see if this closes any
16:47:43 <wendy> action: john check that b/i not used in gen techs for 1.3
16:47:47 <wendy> no change to css techs
16:48:51 <wendy> agenda?
16:49:20 <wendy> 174 - Source anchor contains text.
16:49:22 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test174.html
16:49:31 <wendy> js: source anchor = ??
16:50:31 <wendy> mc: expand procedure to check for text - currently only checks for img/alt
16:50:56 <wendy> wac: isn't there another test about this? combine them?
16:51:20 <wendy> js: this is related, but different
16:51:49 <wendy> mc: think this is link-text issue, img in an anchoor could be dropped.
16:51:55 <wendy> mc: don't remembre outcome of that discussion.
16:52:05 <wendy> bc: can you have an object in an a?
16:52:08 <wendy> mc: in theory, yes
16:52:18 <wendy> bc: should be talking about text equivs in generic sense instead of alt
16:53:39 <wendy> mc: need for both - tool will look at anchor or an img, wanted test for each
16:53:55 <wendy> cr: do have another test for text (imgs must hav alt text)
16:55:04 <wendy> other tests:
16:55:06 <wendy>     *   Alt text for all IMG elements used as source anchors identifies the destination of the link. (test 15)
16:55:07 <wendy>     * Alt text for all IMG elements used as source anchors is not empty when there is no other text in the anchor. (test 7)
16:55:09 <wendy>     * Alt text for all IMG elements used as source anchors is different from the link text. (test 175)
16:55:10 <wendy>     * Alt text for all IMG elements used as source anchors does not begin with "link to" or "go to" (English). (test 195)
16:55:12 <wendy> mc: propose dropping 1st 2
16:55:44 <wendy> Test 174 - Each source anchor contains text.
16:57:08 <wendy> 174 says that text for anchor can come from alt-text of img or from text in anchor.
16:58:28 <wendy> 7 and 15 - not necessary b/c of 174 and 197
16:58:32 <wendy> Test 197 - Each source anchor contains text that describes the link destination.
16:59:35 <wendy> 195 - "the link text"
16:59:45 <wendy> instead of restricting to alt-text
16:59:49 <wendy> 195 - level 2
17:00:20 <wendy> mc: currently maps to a level 3
17:01:44 <Zakim> -Becky_Gibson
17:01:49 <wendy> action: someone record issue for mapping the text link tests to success criteria
17:03:23 <wendy> resolved: keep tests 174,175, 195 (w/modification), 197. drop 15 and 7
17:03:29 <wendy> zakim, close this item
17:03:29 <Zakim> agendum 2 closed
17:03:32 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:03:35 <Zakim> 3. Review proposal to close issues 734 and 739 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0357.html [from wendy]
17:03:41 <wendy> zakim, take up item 3
17:03:41 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Review proposal to close issues 734 and 739 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005JanMar/0357.html" taken up [from wendy]
17:03:52 <wendy> mc: summarizes becky's message
17:08:37 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-CSS-TECHS/#number-not-name
17:08:55 <wendy> wac: is it an accessibility issue? similar to b and i discussion earlier, you can get the info, but how often do you need it or want it?
17:09:06 <wendy> js: must be enough people doing proofreading who get the info.
17:09:31 <wendy> mc: user agent issue w/the 3 digit hex value
17:09:46 <wendy> bc: it's an optional technique, it's good advice
17:09:58 <wendy> mc: close the 2 bugs by making optional technique
17:14:25 <wendy> action: wendy close bugs 734, 739, remove editorial note from number-not-name, change id of number-not-name, add more info about benefits/flesh out description of technique (e.g., get info from john about proofreading), delete rbg example
17:14:33 <wendy> zakim, close this item
17:14:33 <Zakim> agendum 3 closed
17:14:34 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
17:14:36 <Zakim> 4. Requirements for checklists & techniques http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-wcag2-tech-req-20050202.html [from wendy]
17:14:41 <wendy> zakim, close item 4
17:14:41 <Zakim> agendum 4 closed
17:14:42 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
17:14:43 <Zakim> 5. Action item reminder [from wendy]
17:14:48 <wendy> zakim, take up item 5
17:14:48 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Action item reminder" taken up [from wendy]
17:14:51 <Michael> action items list: http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/condensedreports/actionitems.php
17:15:31 <wendy> action: michael add actions from today to bugzilla
17:15:44 <wendy> action: everyone - please check action item list for those assigned to you
17:16:07 <wendy> !action: don't add last 2 action items to bugzilla
17:16:33 <Zakim> -Shadi
17:16:34 <Zakim> -Chris
17:16:36 <Zakim> -Michael_Cooper
17:16:38 <ChrisR> ChrisR has left #wai-wcag
17:16:38 <Zakim> -Wendy
17:16:40 <Zakim> -John_Slatin
17:16:42 <shadi> shadi has left #wai-wcag
17:16:43 <Zakim> -??P41
17:16:45 <Zakim> -Ben
17:16:48 <wendy> next week: requirements, more tests, checklists
17:16:48 <Zakim> -David_MacDonald
17:16:52 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
17:16:57 <Zakim> Attendees were [IPcaller], Wendy, Alex_Li, David, Chris, Ben, Michael_Cooper, Shadi, John_Slatin, Becky_Gibson, David_MacDonald
17:17:20 <wendy> Present: Wendy, Alex_Li, Chris, Ben, Michael_Cooper, Shadi, John_Slatin, Becky_Gibson, David_MacDonald
17:17:26 <wendy> RRSAgent, generate minutes
17:17:32 <wendy> RRSAGent, make log world
17:17:34 <wendy> zakim, bye
17:17:35 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wai-wcag
17:58:18 <wendy> RRSAgent, bye
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> I see 15 open action items:
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: cr will either propose changes for 195, 192, 60 or we'll discuss on list (or call) [1]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T15-22-24
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: mc mark technique ssim_textlinks as deprecated and add technique for alt. nav mech for serverr-side img maps (ala map sites) [2]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T15-38-33
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: cr change the examples in 132 [3]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T15-39-15
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: bc, gv, js talk about GL 3.1 L1 #1 [4]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-17-28
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: michael add links to i18n info from html techs from specifying lang [5]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-26-38
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: michael modify techniques to allow implicit, explicit, or title [6]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-30-58
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: cr: modify tests to allow implicit, explicit, or title [7]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-31-07
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: michael revmoe b/i technique from html techs [8]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-46-02
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: chris remove b/i tests [9]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-46-08
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: ben look at html techs issues to see if this closes any [10]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-46-28
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: john check that b/i not used in gen techs for 1.3 [11]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T16-47-43
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: someone record issue for mapping the text link tests to success criteria [12]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T17-01-49
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: wendy close bugs 734, 739, remove editorial note from number-not-name, change id of number-not-name, add more info about benefits/flesh out description of technique (e.g., get info from john about proofreading), delete rbg example [13]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T17-14-25
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: michael add actions from today to bugzilla [14]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T17-15-31
17:58:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: everyone - please check action item list for those assigned to you [15]
17:58:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/02/02-wai-wcag-irc#T17-15-44