IRC log of wai-wcag on 2005-05-25
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 14:00:06 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:00:06 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc
- 14:00:27 [Michael]
- chair: Michael Cooper
- 14:01:02 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 14:01:03 [Michael]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0556.html
- 14:01:05 [Zakim]
- + +1.703.527.aaaa
- 14:01:14 [Becky_Gibson]
- Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:01:23 [Zakim]
- +Christophe_Strobbe
- 14:01:38 [mcmay]
- mcmay has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:01:49 [mcmay]
- zakim, what's the code?
- 14:01:52 [Zakim]
- +??P14
- 14:02:00 [Zakim]
- the conference code is 92248 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), mcmay
- 14:02:07 [ben]
- zakim, ??P14 is Ben
- 14:02:22 [Zakim]
- +Ben; got it
- 14:02:36 [Zakim]
- +Matt
- 14:03:01 [Michael]
- zakim, 1.703 is Tim_Boland
- 14:03:01 [Zakim]
- sorry, Michael, I do not recognize a party named '1.703'
- 14:03:07 [Michael]
- zakim, +1.703 is Tim_Boland
- 14:03:07 [Zakim]
- +Tim_Boland; got it
- 14:03:29 [Michael]
- zakim, ??P7 is Lisa_Seeman
- 14:03:29 [Zakim]
- +Lisa_Seeman; got it
- 14:04:06 [Michael]
- zakim, tu me gen!
- 14:04:06 [Zakim]
- I don't understand 'tu me gen!', Michael
- 14:04:29 [leasa]
- no wonder zakim does't like Canadians
- 14:05:14 [Michael]
- zakim, take up item 1
- 14:05:14 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Script techniques http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0249.html and baseline impact" taken up [from Michael]
- 14:06:08 [ben]
- Scribe: Ben
- 14:06:25 [ben]
- agenda?
- 14:06:33 [ben]
- zakim, take up agendum 1
- 14:06:50 [ben]
- bg: think we need to think about what we want to include in script techniques for next WD
- 14:06:53 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Script techniques http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0249.html and baseline impact" taken up [from Michael]
- 14:07:25 [ben]
- bg: propose we have 3 levels of scripting techniques 1) no scripting in baseline; 2) scripts that can enhance access; 3) accessible scripting
- 14:07:41 [leasa]
- this sounds good
- 14:07:53 [Michael]
- ack john
- 14:07:53 [ben]
- bg: difference between 2 and 3 are things that help accessibility vs. ways to write scripts acessibly
- 14:08:07 [ben]
- js: think that's 3 different approaches, but only 2 baselines
- 14:08:12 [leasa]
- we can add a cover note
- 14:08:24 [leasa]
- maybe that it is beeter not to have scripts in the baseline
- 14:08:30 [leasa]
- today
- 14:08:41 [ben]
- bg: agree, does seem like only 2 baselines
- 14:08:54 [ben]
- bg: leave accessible scripts out for the next WD?
- 14:09:15 [ben]
- js: leave placeholder and include some preliminary description of these techniques?
- 14:09:41 [ben]
- bg: do people agree we need all 3 categories?
- 14:10:12 [ben]
- ls: think it might make more sense to merge them - scripts that enhance accessibility should be part of both baselines
- 14:10:46 [Zakim]
- +Alex_Li
- 14:11:20 [ben]
- bg: so you're saying use scripts that enhance accessibility, but if they don't run, no harm is done
- 14:11:32 [ben]
- ls: yes, include them even if it's outside of baseline
- 14:11:36 [ben]
- q+
- 14:11:48 [Michael]
- ack john
- 14:11:52 [leasa]
- q+
- 14:12:09 [ben]
- js: in base baseline, where there is no support for client-side scripting, we might want to suggest use of server-side validation techniques
- 14:12:43 [Michael]
- ack ben
- 14:13:19 [ben]
- bc: javascript can be used even if not part of baseline (just not relied upon)
- 14:13:34 [Michael]
- ack leasa
- 14:13:37 [ben]
- bg: think what we're saying is that anywhere we can, we include advice about script that degrades gracefully
- 14:14:12 [Zakim]
- +Wendy
- 14:14:37 [wendy]
- wendy has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:14:40 [ben]
- ls: example of server-side validation as fallback - it's still good to also have client-side validation - don't want to reduce accessibility features just because a technology isn't in the baseline
- 14:15:03 [ben]
- mc: yes, these techniques would be optional in the base baseline
- 14:15:14 [ben]
- mc: do we feel pretty confident on the baseline?
- 14:15:38 [ben]
- js: are we agreed that we're dealing with 2 baselines and 2 tracks within them or is it back to three?
- 14:16:02 [ben]
- [group agrees - 2 baselines - 2 tracks]
- 14:16:04 [wendy]
- fyi: can use "resolution: ...." to capture resolutions in scribe.perl
- 14:16:33 [ben]
- resolution: assume 2 baselines and 2 tracks for script techniques
- 14:16:49 [ben]
- mc: matt and becky, what do we need to do to script techinques?
- 14:16:51 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 14:16:51 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-minutes.html wendy
- 14:17:10 [ben]
- mm: most of those things implicitly falls into one of those categories - not a bright line between the two in some cases
- 14:17:20 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, make log world
- 14:17:25 [ben]
- mm: still have a list of bugs and issues against current draft to work through
- 14:18:42 [ben]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 14:18:42 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see John_Slatin, Lisa_Seeman, Michael_Cooper, Becky_Gibson, Tim_Boland, Christophe_Strobbe, Ben, Matt, Alex_Li, Wendy
- 14:18:50 [ben]
- Present: John_Slatin, Lisa_Seeman, Michael_Cooper, Becky_Gibson, Tim_Boland, Christophe_Strobbe, Ben, Matt, Alex_Li, Wendy
- 14:19:27 [ben]
- mc: are there additional techniques to be proposed? want to have a good set of draft techniques for the face to face.
- 14:20:55 [ben]
- mc: what other general decisions do we need to make about script techs?
- 14:21:24 [ben]
- bg: one thing is if we allow scripts in a baseline, do we still need to say don't use javascript URIs in hrefs?
- 14:21:52 [ben]
- mc: optional in baseline that includes scripts, but can't do it in the base baseline
- 14:23:13 [ben]
- bg: in some applications, you can't degrade gracefully
- 14:24:42 [ben]
- mc: might be good excercise to take script techniques and sort them into the two baselines
- 14:26:08 [ben]
- bg: we do need to go through to make sure that now that script can be part of a baseline, guidelines cover all the issues around what people might do with script
- 14:26:41 [Michael]
- ack john
- 14:26:43 [ben]
- mm: suggest dividing on general techniques around scripting and "if javascript is required"
- 14:27:23 [ben]
- js: think we may have fundamenatally different assumptions about accessibility practice
- 14:28:29 [ben]
- js: may be a need to have a conversation about those two assumptions
- 14:29:59 [David]
- David has joined #wai-wcag
- 14:30:18 [Zakim]
- +Dave_MacDonald
- 14:30:27 [David]
- sorry I'm late, had to finish a job for a client
- 14:30:33 [ben]
- mm: may not be as different as you think - talking about "unobtrusive javascript" in some cases, then other approach is where javascript is the only way to achieve certain functionality
- 14:32:00 [Zakim]
- -Tim_Boland
- 14:32:10 [ben]
- bg: agree that it's important that we handle script techniques that way - here's how you use javascript and degrade gracefully - here's how you use it if you rely on javascript
- 14:32:48 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 14:33:11 [ben]
- action: becky and matt to review SC and identify script issues related to each baseline assumption
- 14:33:24 [ben]
- zakim, close this item
- 14:33:24 [Zakim]
- agendum 1 closed
- 14:33:25 [Zakim]
- I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 14:33:26 [Zakim]
- 2. Prioritise content for next round of techniques drafts [from Michael]
- 14:33:30 [ben]
- zakim, take up agendum 2
- 14:33:30 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "Prioritise content for next round of techniques drafts" taken up [from Michael]
- 14:33:58 [ben]
- js: what I had in mind was something like the discussion we just had for scripting techs, but for the techniques documents in general
- 14:34:31 [ben]
- js: near-term goal is new draft of techniques at end of June, question is what is most important to include in these new drafts
- 14:35:06 [ben]
- js: one goal is to come as close as we can to a last call draft - more specifically, we're aiming at giving web community a clear understadning about what it is we're actually planning to do
- 14:35:23 [ben]
- js: question is, what has to be in techniques documents to accomplish that?
- 14:36:32 [ben]
- mc: this is in terms of content and not structure, right?
- 14:36:39 [ben]
- js: yes, primarily content
- 14:37:03 [ben]
- mc: example might be to include the techniques proposed as a result of the issue summaries
- 14:37:20 [ben]
- mc: another one is let's really feel good about script techniques
- 14:38:07 [ben]
- dm: focus is on General, HTML, CSS and Script?
- 14:38:31 [ben]
- js: I have a question about general, but certainly the other 3 (we haven't resolved relationship between general and the guide)
- 14:39:43 [ben]
- js: at f2f, one possibility was that the guide doc would replace general techniques, another was that general does live as a separate document on par with HTML and CSS. We've not had a real discussion on that and I think it makes a difference about how we go about doing the work
- 14:39:57 [wendy]
- q+
- 14:40:32 [Michael]
- ack wendy
- 14:40:54 [ben]
- action: john and david to make recommendation about how guide doc and general techniques relate
- 14:41:38 [ben]
- wc: we talked about format of guide doc as an agenda item for the face to face - wondering if we should wait until F2F?
- 14:42:43 [ben]
- js: propose that we're in agreement about HTML, CSS and Scripting techniques and that the general techniques and guide doc need to be further addressed at the F2F
- 14:44:49 [ben]
- action: john to initiate additional work from subgroup on format of guide docs
- 14:46:08 [wendy]
- q+
- 14:46:16 [Michael]
- ack wendy
- 14:46:17 [ben]
- mc: there have been techniques issue reviews for guidelines which have resulted in various reccomendations, should we include them?
- 14:46:46 [ben]
- wc: think as much cleanup as we can do, the better - a lot of the reviews have been moving toward that
- 14:46:55 [Michael]
- resolution: Focus on HTML, CSS, Script techniques for next round of drafts
- 14:47:33 [Michael]
- resolution: Have at least placeholders for the techniques proposals arising out of guideline reviews
- 14:53:16 [ben]
- action: wendy look into time to create questionnaires
- 14:54:04 [ben]
- dm: any resolution about how much baseline information is included yet?
- 14:54:48 [ben]
- mc: have been operating under the 3 baselines assumption for some time now
- 14:55:08 [ben]
- dm: does there need to be a recommendation on format?
- 14:55:15 [wendy]
- q+
- 14:55:20 [jslatin]
- [music]Don't stop thinking about to-MOR-row...
- 14:55:31 [ben]
- q+
- 14:55:38 [Michael]
- ack wendy
- 14:56:19 [ben]
- wc: important to have a mock-up by the f2f - for guideline 1.1 work, I've been rewriting some techniques to include baseline info - would be helpful to have some mockups to discuss at f2f
- 14:57:01 [ben]
- dm: might want to do mockups while we do issue reviews
- 14:57:07 [Michael]
- ack ben
- 14:58:17 [ben]
- resolution: next techniques drafts will include baseline information
- 14:58:36 [ben]
- mc: need action items for people to create mockups
- 14:59:03 [ben]
- wc: part of what I was doing was looking at initial information that MC, BG and BC generated
- 15:00:14 [ben]
- wc: part of what needs to happen in reviews is to look at that info and addresss issues, suggest ways to address places where things don't match up
- 15:01:18 [David]
- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0010.html
- 15:01:48 [David]
- i can
- 15:02:20 [Michael]
- action: ben create mockup of baseline in techniques
- 15:02:48 [ben]
- action: matt propose how to include baseline in scripting techniques
- 15:03:21 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 15:03:21 [Michael]
- zakim, ping in 5 minutes
- 15:03:22 [Zakim]
- ok, Michael
- 15:03:23 [Zakim]
- -Dave_MacDonald
- 15:03:25 [Zakim]
- -Christophe_Strobbe
- 15:03:32 [Zakim]
- -Lisa_Seeman
- 15:07:18 [Zakim]
- +Dave_MacDonald
- 15:08:22 [Zakim]
- Michael, you asked to be pinged at this time
- 15:08:35 [Zakim]
- +John_Slatin
- 15:08:53 [David]
- scibe: david
- 15:08:59 [Zakim]
- +Christophe_Strobbe
- 15:09:00 [Michael]
- scribe: David
- 15:09:00 [ben]
- agenda?
- 15:09:06 [ben]
- zakim, close this item
- 15:09:07 [David]
- scribe: David_macDOnald
- 15:09:14 [Michael]
- scribe: David
- 15:09:20 [ben]
- zakim, take up agendum 3
- 15:09:23 [Zakim]
- agendum 2 closed
- 15:09:24 [Zakim]
- I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 15:09:26 [Zakim]
- 3. Continue review of 2.4 [from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/att-0344/2005-05-02_issuesummary_techniques_2_4.html via Michael]
- 15:09:29 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "Continue review of 2.4" taken up [from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/att-0344/2005-05-02_issuesummary_techniques_2_4.html via Michael]
- 15:10:01 [David]
- mc: john yvette and I worked on 2.4
- 15:10:56 [David]
- major thing is clarify dif betwn 1.4 & 2.3 because they both had structure techniques, 1.4 is structure for its own sake 2.4 is mostly navigation
- 15:11:18 [David]
- mc: went over sc regarding that
- 15:11:46 [David]
- mc: that delt with most techniques issues,
- 15:14:03 [wendy]
- Linear reading order of tables
- 15:15:34 [David]
- js: resolution is that proposal to move this technique with the sc on reading order
- 15:16:15 [wendy]
- reading order SC may move from 2.4 to 1.3. this technique should move with that SC. there are issues. hold off discussion until know where it goes.
- 15:17:05 [Michael]
- #layouttables_linearize
- 15:17:13 [wendy]
- agenda+ 655
- 15:17:20 [wendy]
- agenda+ #layouttables_linearize
- 15:17:35 [wendy]
- Link groups
- 15:18:54 [Michael]
- #linkgroups
- 15:19:03 [wendy]
- agenda+ #linkgroups
- 15:19:06 [David]
- js: we also refined sc on this
- 15:20:01 [Michael]
- #linkgroups_tabindex
- 15:20:03 [wendy]
- resolution: drop technique "tabindex to skip link groups (future)"
- 15:20:47 [David]
- technique to skip groups needs work
- 15:20:49 [wendy]
- q+
- 15:20:56 [Michael]
- #linkgroups_skip
- 15:21:05 [Michael]
- ack wendy
- 15:22:17 [David]
- mc: keepers are skipping links and identiying link groups
- 15:22:31 [David]
- bc: hide link groups makes no sense
- 15:23:17 [David]
- wc: we are not making skip links visible
- 15:23:33 [David]
- wc: on wai
- 15:23:50 [Michael]
- #linkgroups_hide
- 15:23:57 [David]
- bc: should retitle task , hiding the spip link
- 15:24:12 [David]
- wc: all of these should be the same technique
- 15:24:44 [David]
- wc: propose merging 3 techniques into one
- 15:25:05 [David]
- bc: but hiding skip link is optional and skip link necessary to meet sc
- 15:25:57 [David]
- wc: ask is what maps to sc
- 15:26:07 [David]
- s/ ask/task
- 15:27:35 [David]
- js: let's put on agenda next week, is it promising enough to put into the f2f
- 15:28:22 [Michael]
- #link_structure
- 15:28:30 [David]
- mc: zap that above
- 15:29:18 [David]
- mc: hiding ASCII mapped repeating
- 15:30:11 [Michael]
- #asciiart
- 15:30:23 [David]
- mc: need to do something with sc, put in 1.1 not 2.4, it's wendy's problem
- 15:31:19 [Michael]
- #frame-title
- 15:31:41 [David]
- mc:issue 1117,i don't think the comment is confusing,
- 15:32:33 [David]
- mc: test cases have to be worked on as well
- 15:33:02 [David]
- mc: the problem is title attribute has different reasons for use
- 15:33:18 [wendy]
- q+
- 15:34:05 [David]
- mc: at best optional
- 15:35:01 [David]
- wc: I have question relating to 1.1, comment is some titles needed my concern, when we use an image in a link, is that 1.1
- 15:35:17 [David]
- js: I don't think of frames as non text content
- 15:35:36 [Zakim]
- -Alex_Li
- 15:35:36 [David]
- bc: its a box around text
- 15:36:32 [David]
- 2c: i'm confused because I run into stuf that is in 1.3, 2.4 etc....made me question other things in 1.1
- 15:36:46 [David]
- s/2w/wc
- 15:36:54 [David]
- s/2c/wc
- 15:37:16 [David]
- js: do we need this techniques
- 15:37:41 [David]
- mc: it's in 1.0 and useful to have it there to know that we dropped it
- 15:37:46 [Michael]
- #frame-longdesc
- 15:37:57 [David]
- wc: do we need a separate appendix, of has been techniques
- 15:38:44 [Becky_Gibson]
- Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:39:06 [David]
- js: propose that we not recommend this tachnique and propose an appendix of ead techniques
- 15:39:14 [David]
- s/ead/dead
- 15:39:51 [David]
- bc: what about reapair techniuqes many reasons to deprecate things
- 15:40:24 [wendy]
- two appendicies: 1. fallback/repair - still using although not happy about 2. deprecated - don't need to do anymore/don't recommend
- 15:40:34 [rscano]
- rscano has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:40:39 [David]
- js: distinction between reapair and fully dead techniques
- 15:40:42 [rscano]
- rscano has left #wai-wcag
- 15:40:49 [rscano]
- rscano has joined #wai-wcag
- 15:41:04 [wendy]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20050211/#fallback-techniques
- 15:42:12 [David]
- mc: tab order in forms
- 15:42:17 [David]
- js: still need it
- 15:42:23 [David]
- mc: need to remap
- 15:42:27 [wendy]
- action: michael create 2nd appendix for deprecated techniques and move deprecated techs there.
- 15:42:42 [David]
- mc: access key
- 15:42:46 [wendy]
- action: someone write rationale for each deprecated technique to explain why deprecating.
- 15:42:59 [David]
- mc: tab spaces,
- 15:43:27 [David]
- mc: don't think you can do that. just one tab space
- 15:43:46 [David]
- bc: if in forms, links mode virtual tab space
- 15:44:22 [Zakim]
- +Becky_Gibson
- 15:44:29 [leasa]
- leasa has left #wai-wcag
- 15:45:11 [David]
- mc: quick decision not possible
- 15:45:20 [Michael]
- #form_tabindex
- 15:45:58 [David]
- wc: tab order important but don't use tabindex
- 15:46:30 [David]
- mc: if technique is kept it needs work
- 15:46:54 [David]
- links sparation, character between links
- 15:49:34 [David]
- bc: now we';ve go authors looking in various places for similar information
- 15:52:24 [Michael]
- #separate-links
- 15:52:34 [David]
- mc: flag it
- 15:53:20 [David]
- flag it applies to separation between links
- 15:54:50 [David]
- wc: links to gl 1.3
- 15:55:07 [ben]
- agenda?
- 15:55:09 [wendy]
- #css-fallback - maps to baseline and/or 1.3
- 15:55:11 [ben]
- zakim, close this item
- 15:55:17 [ben]
- zakim, take up agendum 4
- 15:55:24 [David]
- mc: defn of technology and technique
- 15:55:28 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 8
- 15:55:29 [Zakim]
- agendum 3 closed
- 15:55:30 [Zakim]
- I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 15:55:31 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 9
- 15:55:32 [Zakim]
- 4. Definition of technology and technique [from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0503.html via Michael]
- 15:55:33 [wendy]
- zakim, close item 10
- 15:55:36 [Zakim]
- agendum 4. "Definition of technology and technique" taken up [from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0503.html via Michael]
- 15:55:40 [Zakim]
- agendum 8 closed
- 15:55:41 [Zakim]
- I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 15:55:43 [Zakim]
- 4. Definition of technology and technique [from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0503.html via Michael]
- 15:55:46 [Zakim]
- agendum 9 closed
- 15:55:47 [Zakim]
- I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 15:55:49 [Zakim]
- 4. Definition of technology and technique [from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0503.html via Michael]
- 15:55:53 [Zakim]
- agendum 10 closed
- 15:55:54 [Zakim]
- I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
- 15:55:55 [Zakim]
- 4. Definition of technology and technique [from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005AprJun/0503.html via Michael]
- 15:56:42 [ben]
- q+
- 15:56:43 [David]
- js:recommend we adopt same defn of tehnology ---consistent defn across wcag socs
- 15:56:51 [wendy]
- q-
- 15:57:16 [David]
- s/socs/docs
- 15:58:15 [David]
- bc: we don't have a defn appendix, do we link to gl or make our own
- 15:58:23 [David]
- js: let's ling to theirs
- 15:58:35 [David]
- s/ling/link
- 15:59:36 [David]
- bc: we may need to define words later as tech docs evolve
- 16:00:04 [David]
- bc: could write xslt that pulls from GL
- 16:00:16 [David]
- js: can we add to that?
- 16:00:46 [David]
- wc: in 1.0 if term used in technique doc we compied it
- 16:00:51 [David]
- js: makes sense
- 16:01:33 [Zakim]
- -Matt
- 16:02:30 [wendy]
- resolution: if a term that is defined in wcag 2.0 is used in a techniques document, that definition is copied into the techniques glossary. definitions that are unique to techs docs are defined in techs docs.
- 16:02:52 [wendy]
- action: ben generate glossaries in techs documents
- 16:02:57 [wendy]
- ben? do you accept that action item?
- 16:03:09 [ben]
- sure
- 16:03:28 [wendy]
- thx. right now, i think all it includes is technique and technology. ;)
- 16:04:30 [ben]
- resolved: define "technique" as "a method or body of methods that may be used to satisfy the success criteria defined in WCAG 2.0"
- 16:05:36 [Zakim]
- -Michael_Cooper
- 16:05:38 [Zakim]
- -Becky_Gibson
- 16:05:39 [Zakim]
- -John_Slatin
- 16:05:39 [Zakim]
- -Dave_MacDonald
- 16:05:40 [Zakim]
- -Christophe_Strobbe
- 16:05:41 [Zakim]
- -Ben
- 16:05:49 [Zakim]
- -Wendy
- 16:05:51 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG(techniques)10:00AM has ended
- 16:05:51 [wendy]
- resolution: define "technique" as "a method or body of methods that may be used to satisfy the success criteria defined in WCAG 2.0"
- 16:05:52 [Zakim]
- Attendees were John_Slatin, Michael_Cooper, Becky_Gibson, +1.703.527.aaaa, Christophe_Strobbe, Ben, Matt, Tim_Boland, Lisa_Seeman, Alex_Li, Wendy, Dave_MacDonald
- 16:06:00 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 16:06:00 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-minutes.html wendy
- 16:07:44 [Christophe]
- Christophe has left #wai-wcag
- 16:08:55 [wendy]
- hmm. "resolution:" doesn't actually have an effect, although it is defined in the user's guide. must be a different template that picks that up.
- 16:09:06 [wendy]
- i'm hoping to write a template for our minutes that puts actions and resoultions at the top.
- 16:12:45 [ben]
- does "resolved:" have an effect?
- 16:13:06 [wendy]
- no.
- 16:13:19 [wendy]
- http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/scribedoc.htm
- 16:13:27 [wendy]
- says to use "resolution"
- 16:13:43 [wendy]
- also says can use a variety of templates. therefore, assuming it is imlemented in one of the other tempaltes...or hadn't been yet.
- 16:15:09 [wendy]
- could either modifly scribe.perl to create or create a template and use -template templateFile.html
- 16:15:10 [wendy]
- Use templateFile.html as the template for generating the minutes.
- 16:15:19 [wendy]
- s/modifly/modify heh
- 16:16:36 [wendy]
- will definitely need to modify scribe.perl to create the list of resolutions.
- 16:16:43 [wendy]
- here's part of a template:
- 16:17:25 [wendy]
- <h2>Contents</h2>
- 16:17:26 [wendy]
- <ul>
- 16:17:28 [wendy]
- <li><a href="#agenda">Topics</a>
- 16:17:29 [wendy]
- <ol>
- 16:17:31 [wendy]
- SV_MEETING_AGENDA
- 16:17:32 [wendy]
- </ol>
- 16:17:34 [wendy]
- </li>
- 16:17:35 [wendy]
- <li><a href="#ActionSummary">Summary of Action Items</a></li>
- 16:17:37 [wendy]
- </ul>
- 16:17:39 [wendy]
- <hr>
- 16:17:40 [wendy]
- <div class="meeting">
- 16:17:42 [wendy]
- SV_AGENDA_BODIES
- 16:17:43 [wendy]
- </div>
- 16:17:45 [wendy]
- <h2><a name="ActionSummary">Summary of Action Items</a></h2>
- 16:17:46 [wendy]
- <!-- Action Items -->
- 16:17:48 [wendy]
- SV_ACTION_ITEMS
- 16:17:50 [wendy]
- therefore need to create "SV_RESOLUTIONS" in scribe.perl so that we can use in the template.
- 16:18:55 [wendy]
- hm. already handled in a checked in version: http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/%7Echeckout%7E/2002/scribe/scribe.perl
- 16:19:01 [wendy]
- wonder why rrs agent doesn't do it.
- 16:23:59 [wendy]
- RESOLUTION: this sucks and should work
- 16:24:08 [wendy]
- RRSAgent, draft minutes
- 16:24:08 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-minutes.html wendy
- 16:24:47 [wendy]
- nope. doesn't work yet.
- 16:25:06 [wendy]
- will require futzing. i'm off to finish surveys.
- 16:25:09 [wendy]
- zakim, bye
- 16:25:09 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #wai-wcag
- 16:25:13 [wendy]
- RRSAGent, bye
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- I see 9 open action items:
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: becky and matt to review SC and identify script issues related to each baseline assumption [1]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T14-33-11
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: john and david to make recommendation about how guide doc and general techniques relate [2]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T14-40-54
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: john to initiate additional work from subgroup on format of guide docs [3]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T14-44-49
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: wendy look into time to create questionnaires [4]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T14-53-16
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: ben create mockup of baseline in techniques [5]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T15-02-20
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: matt propose how to include baseline in scripting techniques [6]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T15-02-48
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: michael create 2nd appendix for deprecated techniques and move deprecated techs there. [7]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T15-42-27
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: someone write rationale for each deprecated technique to explain why deprecating. [8]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T15-42-46
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: ben generate glossaries in techs documents [9]
- 16:25:13 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in http://www.w3.org/2005/05/25-wai-wcag-irc#T16-02-52