ERT WG Teleconference

15 Feb 2005



Shadi, Carlos Iglesias, Andrew Kirkpatrick, Wendy, Steve F, chrisoula, Chris Ridpath, Sailesh Panchang, Jim Ley, Charles McCathieNevile, Karl Dubost




<shadi> Scribe: Wendy Chisholm

<shadi> ScribeNick: wendy

<ericP> wow, er activity

<shadi> hey eric

<shadi> 1st meeting under the new charter...

<ericP> yo y'all, i'm mucking with annotea. i just wrapped bookmark queries into it and coudl do stuff for earl at the same time.

<ericP> let me know what you need

<scribe> Scribe: wendy

<scribe> Chair: Shadi

so i see

topic, date, etc, too?

<shadi> yup

4 am! ouch!

Presentation Round

awk: WGBH/NCAM, working on STEP - looks at results from various tools and prioritizes

ci: former staff of W3C Spanish Office. Now work with tech center (host of spanish office). work on accessibility. have tau (or taw?)

<shadi> TAW

ci: working on new version of TAW that works with EARL

cmn: SIDAR, couple versions of tool, generates earl. guides user through manual evaluation process. have worked on a variety of tools that incorporated earl.
... have worked w/euroaccessibility who had been testing eval tools and comparing results.
... to help determine if tools were reliable for a set of tests. work currently on hold.

cr: ATRC at university of toronto. work on a-prompt. have online checker checks for wcag 2.0. working on wcag 2.0 test suite.

ca: from [research center in greece - didn't get full name] research on HCI
... accessibility and personalization of web-based tools.
... automatic transforms of web sites. latest version is customizable.

jl: indie developer. lots of work on earl in previous wg.
... primarily ineterested in making svg and javascript accessible.

sp: deque. we have a couple tools: ramp (web access. eval tool), ramp [other edition] only does eval, ramp ascend does eval and repair.
... soon launching server version
... i oversee accessibility practices. do testing. help make sure java app is accessible.

sf: NILS in australia. web accessibility consultant. have developed variety of tools. one is a tool bar for IE.
... working w/group of folks on firefox version.
... working w/folks from bartimeus for custmoized version.
... recently released color contrast analyzer
... an update of chris ridpath's tool from earlier.

kd: w3c, qa team. conformance manager of w3c.
... interested to participate b/c in qa need these tools.
... specifically, earl to make reports and results of test suites.
... have issues w/how language currently designed.
... could help include quality of spec itself.

<chaals> kd == Karl Dubost

<shadi> wac: co-team contact, was previously chair of ERT WG

<shadi> wac: team contact for WCAG

<shadi> wac: ERT WG will help crucial work

<chaals> wac == Wendy Chisholm

saz: happy that group is starting again. have received a good response. have about 13 people registered for the group.
... we all probably have diff views on earl and what tools should do. hope we can work together to finish earl and bring new quality to evaluating web accessibility.

W3C Process in Brief

saz: any questions about sign up process or work of the group?
... point out the w3c process document


saz: it includes duties, responsibilities of participating in a W3C WG.
... our primary form of communication is the weekly teleconference and mailing list.
... we have a variety of participants spread around the world. we will be operating in english, but that is not many people's primary language.
... please speakly slowly and clearly.
... scribing - we have 2 irc bots. type minutes in irc. RRSAgent will make an html page of the log.
... we will have a scribe list. each participant will be on the list.
... we will rotate through the list.
... if you are unable to scribe for any reason, let shadi know and he will remove you from the list.
... or, if temporarily unable to scribe, you may pass and scribe the following week.

ERT WG Deliverables

saz: these are the items we are chartered to do


section 4: deliverables - http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/charter3#deliverables

saz: there are 8 deliverables

1. Issues lists for all deliverables under development

saz: we need to track issues/bugs of EARL as well as other work.
... in wcag wg using bugzilla. other w3c wgs use other tools.

2. Requirements for Evaluation and Report Language (EARL), to be published as a W3C Working Group Note

saz: currently the earl spec has scenarios to help introduce earl, but it places some requirements for what earl should address.
... we should reexamine and expand on. ensure all requirements in there.

3. EARL 1.0 Working Drafts, and W3C Working Group Note or W3C Recommendation

saz: this is our primary deliverable
... diff between Note and Rec is the maturity of the doc. will decide/discuss as we set the requirements for earl.
... describes basic differences between note and rec.

4. Input into Evaluation Resource Suite

saz: everyone should become aquainted with the Evaluation Resource Suite - maintained by EOWG


saz: EOWG is revising. we will provide technical input.

5. Input into tools for aggregating accessibility metadata among multiple sources

saz: refers to the exchange of metadata between tools and sources (eval tools and auth tools or eval tools and browsers or amongst eval tools)
... so that human reviewers input data and could be aggregated into authoring tool
... could speak of syndication (different consumers)

6. Input into development of test files and test suites for WCAG 2.0, UAAG 2.0, and ATAG 2.0

saz: currently, primarily wcag . there is a techniques task force which is working on developing test suites for wcag 2.0. we should keep an eye on it.
... we could help wcag a lot (primarily working on html). have techniques for scripting and css.
... we could start development of other test suites (svg or smil). will see how we will coordinate with wcag and others on development of test suites.

7. Meeting minutes

8. If EARL 1.0 enters the W3C Recommendation track, documentation of open issues, resolutions, responses to comments, and implementation reports and other artifacts of the W3C Process as described in section 7.2 General Requirements for Advancement of the W3C Process document.

<Zakim> karl, you wanted to say that Rec is better for Implementation fostering

kd: Rec v. Note - even if harder to get to Rec, a benefit is better quality checking.
... incentive to get implementations and in the end is beneficial. pushes development of tools.

saz: in irc you can type "q+" and zakim will add you to the speaker queue. or on the phone type 41#

sp: is it important for us to have accessibilty eval and repair techniques? there is a document for WCAG 1.0. Should we build for WCAG 2.0? should that be on our list of deliverables.

saz: partially, some of that work is going into WCAG 2.0 Techniques some went to ATAG Techniques.
... WCAG 2.0 is taking a different approach. Each Success Criteria needs to be testable.
... the testing is more of a black box. if described well enough, then if the tool can execute...some tests will only be executable by humans.
... rather than develop an additional document, which would repeat much of the wcag 2.0 test suite work, we need to work with the wcag wg on test suite development.

<shadi> wac: WCAG 2.0 is taking a different approach than WCAG 1.0

<shadi> wac: feedback from WCAG 1.0 shows that Criteria need to be testable statements

<shadi> wac: non-technology specific and technology specific techniques

<shadi> wac: test suites partly reflect AERT work

<shadi> wac: so far we primarily worked on HTML

<shadi> wac: we understand that the main focus of ERT is to get EARL ut

<shadi> wac: but we hope ERT WG can help with test suites

WCAG 2.0 tests: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/

HTML Techniques for WCAG 2.0: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-HTML-TECHS/

Introduction to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Working Draft Documents: http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag20

saz: one requirement in the charter is to give input to the transition support materials from WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0.

Initial Discussion on EARL

saz: everyone should be acquainted w/the current EARL spec. if not, please do so soon.
... would like to first look at scenarios that are at the beginning of the current doc.


saz: user scenarios will help ppl understand what they can use earl for.
... will help us gather the requirements of earl.
... help us determine the target audience of the earl spec and how to reach them.
... in current spec, discussion of current roles.
... are there more audiences that could benefit? an end user browsing the web.

<chaals> [Yep, seems like a reasonable thing to do]

kd: good idea to discuss on mailn glist.

<scribe> ACTION: everyone read scenarios and send comments to the mailing list.

F2F at the W3C Technical Plenary

saz: mtg was scheduled/announced on short notice. it would be a shame to miss this opportunity to meet at the TP. many w3c groups will be meeting there. good exchange of ideas.
... good opportunity to check base with other groups. especially since we are just starting would be good to contact other groups - let them know we exist and what we are working on.
... e.g., eo wg, qa wg, wcag wg techniques task force.
... since we have a low registration propose that those who will attend we will not make any decisions during f2f since won't have quorum.
... we will try to scout and gather information about requirements for earl.
... will also work on requirements document - seems to be a good setting. not a requirement to particpate at the f2f.
... any questions?

cmn: if you can't make a telecon and a decision is to be made, how can you be heard?
... what is the process to comment on a decision? if i'm not at a mtg, is there a way to say, "can we revisit that decision?"

saz: in general, don't expect decisions to be surprises. expect there will be sufficient notification. let's look at on a case-by-case basis.
... should be sufficient notice on agenda/mailing list if decision to be made.
... want to check w/everyone who will be at TP

yes: ak, cmn, steve, wac, saz

not likely: ci, sp (by phone?)

no: cr (phone in?), chrisoula (could by phone), jl, kd (happy by phone)

saz: registration deadline is this friday
... try to organize teleconference bridge
... try for morning time mtg time so that convenient for europe
... probably meet with eowg on thurs afternoon and qa on friday afternoon
... agenda should be posted in next couple of days

<Zakim> karl, you wanted to say something about decision process

kd will post to mailing list

saz: please complete the questionnaire about meeting time

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/32094/ERT_TeleconMeetingTime/

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/02/15-er-minutes wendy

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: everyone read scenarios and send comments to the mailing list.
Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.111 (CVS log)
$Date: 2005/02/15 22:54:44 $