14:54:03 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #er
14:54:04 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/01/11-er-irc
14:54:11 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #er
14:54:18 <shadi> zakim, this will be ert
14:54:18 <Zakim> ok, shadi; I see WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes
14:54:28 <shadi> meeting: ERT WG
14:54:32 <shadi> chair: Shadi
14:54:53 <shadi> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006Jan/0014.html
14:55:06 <shadi> agenda+ Next Face-to-Face meeting
14:55:18 <shadi> agenda+ Updated EARL 1.0 Schema
14:55:38 <shadi> agenda+ Update from ET TF
14:58:18 <JibberJim> JibberJim has joined #er
14:58:49 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has now started
14:58:50 <Zakim> +Shadi
15:00:37 <shadi> regrets: CarlosV, Johannes
15:00:56 <Sandor> Sandor has joined #er
15:01:56 <JibberJim> if I can get on the call
15:02:22 <shadi> are you having trouble dialing in?
15:02:40 <Zakim> +Jim_Ley
15:03:06 <Zakim> +Sandor_Herramhof
15:03:27 <ChrisR> ChrisR has joined #er
15:03:50 <shadi> scribe: Jim
15:03:51 <CarlosI> CarlosI has joined #er
15:03:59 <shadi> scribenick: JibberJim
15:04:14 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:04:24 <chaals> chaals has joined #er
15:04:41 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is really Chris
15:04:47 <Zakim> +Chris; got it
15:05:18 <chaals> zakim, code?
15:05:21 <Zakim> the conference code is 3794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200), chaals
15:05:45 <shadi> agenda?
15:05:46 <Zakim> +??P22
15:05:58 <Zakim> +Jose_Manuel_Alonso/CarlosI
15:06:03 <chaals> zakim, ??P22 is really me
15:06:03 <Zakim> +chaals; got it
15:06:32 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum  1
15:06:32 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Next Face-to-Face meeting" taken up [from shadi]
15:06:44 <JibberJim> SAZ: Welcome to the call, and Happy New Year!
15:06:52 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/2005/12/allgroupoverview.html
15:07:17 <JibberJim> SAZ:Tentative meet at the Technical Plenary
15:07:29 <JibberJim> SAZ: Good for cross WG interactions.
15:07:57 <JibberJim> SAZ: Maybe meet with WCAG WG and QA-IG folk
15:08:24 <JibberJim> SAZ: 2 proposals, either in that week, or find another date/venue
15:08:59 <JibberJim> SAZ: Chaals you said Monday/Tuesday aren't any good for you?
15:09:15 <JibberJim> CMN: I'm booked up for the entire week...
15:09:43 <JibberJim> CarlosI: Probably Yes.
15:10:05 <JibberJim> ChrisR:I'd love to, but no budget.
15:10:46 <JibberJim> JL: No problem with any of the dates
15:10:55 <JibberJim> Sandor: 27/28 are okay with me
15:11:06 <chaals> [If any days are going to be possible for me they will be Monday/Tuesday]
15:11:35 <JibberJim> CMN: Monday and Tuesday are possible.
15:11:47 <JibberJim> SAZ: Are there any objections that we hold the meeting?
15:13:09 <JibberJim> CMN: I won't object, but it is a little annoying that it's planned so late
15:13:53 <JibberJim> SAZ: I'll check with Carlos and Johannes
15:14:59 <JibberJim> SAZ: okay it's a tentative yes
15:15:20 <shadi> zakim, close agendum 1
15:15:20 <Zakim> agendum 1, Next Face-to-Face meeting, closed
15:15:21 <Zakim> I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
15:15:22 <Zakim> 2. Updated EARL 1.0 Schema [from shadi]
15:15:25 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 2
15:15:25 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Updated EARL 1.0 Schema" taken up [from shadi]
15:15:41 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL10/WD-EARL10-Schema-20060101
15:15:56 <JibberJim> SAZ: Big thanks to Chaals!
15:16:04 <Zakim> + +44.783.371.aaaa
15:18:04 <JibberJim> David Rooks: I'm from Segala mtest, I'm based in London and we're looking at joining the ert group.
15:18:41 <shadi> zakim, aaaa is really David
15:18:41 <Zakim> +David; got it
15:18:54 <JibberJim> CarlosR: Hi, I'm Carlos
15:19:01 <JibberJim> CMN: Hi, I'm Chaals
15:19:31 <JibberJim> ChrisR: Hi, I'm Chris
15:20:03 <JibberJim> JL, Hi, I'm Jim
15:20:11 <JibberJim> Sandor: Hi, I'm Sandor
15:21:28 <JibberJim> SAZ: There are editors questions in the WD, but the spec is mature, should we wait for the Earl Guide.
15:21:51 <JibberJim> SAZ: First proposal is we just remove example 9
15:22:32 <JibberJim> CMN: The example is invalid, and doesn't really seem to make sense.
15:22:49 <JibberJim> CMN: The use case is covered in example 3 I believe
15:24:05 <JibberJim> SAZ: The idea was to be able to link to a requirement online without having to specify it all, and it's already an RDF feature and is not needed in the spec
15:24:38 <JibberJim> SAZ: Remove example 9, all fine?
15:24:51 <JibberJim> SAZ: okay, let's remove it!
15:24:56 <chaals> RESOLUTION: remove example 9
15:25:37 <JibberJim> SAZ: in test mode, we added earl:mixed
15:26:32 <JibberJim> SAZ: a manual was a human who said it was a pass/fail, automatic is where the computer decides if it's a pass/fail with no human assistance
15:27:04 <JibberJim> SAZ: earl:mixed is useful for compound assertors using multiple results to get a result.
15:27:24 <JibberJim> SAZ: We need specific definitions here
15:27:29 <chaals> ack me
15:27:29 <Zakim> chaals, you wanted to propose....
15:28:32 <JibberJim> CMN: My recollection was that the use case for earl:mixed is where some org. has tested some pages, and some was by machine some by human and don't want to specifically export the test details so want to say a mix of techniques were using.
15:29:51 <JibberJim> CMN: The agreement as I recall was to support this use case to enable responsibility tracking so a manual test which implies a higher standard of correctness
15:30:25 <JibberJim> SAZ: We should discourage earl:mixed for more granular situations, so just for compound assertions
15:30:41 <JibberJim> SAZ: earl:manual - is the definition clear
15:31:01 <JibberJim> All:agree
15:31:53 <JibberJim> SAZ: earl:automatic - no human assistance.   What about a use case where a human answers specific questions that aren't directly related to the decision, the judgement more comes from the tool.
15:32:07 <JibberJim> CMN: I believe that's a manual test.
15:32:34 <JibberJim> Carlos: I also beleive it's a manual as we agreed.
15:32:36 <JibberJim> q+
15:33:54 <JibberJim> JL: I can see there are some not very manual computer assisted tests so there is a range, but it would be better for a strict seperation,.
15:33:59 <JibberJim> SAZ: I agree
15:34:25 <JibberJim> SAZ: maybe insert fully to make it clear in earl:automatic
15:34:56 <JibberJim> SAZ: earl:mixed is clearly only really applicaple for compound results, so should we SHOULD things be included.
15:35:22 <JibberJim> CMN: I see mixed for low quality results, so it's likely people not adding more evidence
15:36:17 <JibberJim> CMN: we did a load of tests and concluded that your site sucks - that uses mixed, only in more detailed results we'd give more detail
15:37:13 <JibberJim> SAZ: What is my test mode if we've got a load of tests we point to and then give a result for them, what's the test mode?
15:37:20 <JibberJim> CMN: earl:Heuristic
15:37:29 <JibberJim> SAZ: so mixed is for crude blanket statements
15:37:50 <JibberJim> SAZ: any disagreement/questions?
15:38:43 <JibberJim> Carlos: I'm concerned about a lack of a use case of the earl:mixed - but I can live with it.
15:39:13 <chaals> proposal: Mixed - used for statements which do not provide further information about how the test was done - typically a summary statement which is not pointing to the basis for the claim.
15:39:17 <JibberJim> SAZ: We can add we want feedback, this isn't carved in stone.
15:40:47 <JibberJim> CMN: I can see a use case, there's some general statements that we want to say, but don't want to expose the processes
15:41:15 <JibberJim> Carlos: This seems to be more like an UNKNOWN use case, which we don't need as we can turn it off.
15:42:41 <JibberJim> JL: I like the idea of having something if it is a popular use case so we can distinguish between genuinely unknown and just no RDF info on it.
15:42:48 <JibberJim> CMN: I'm happy to drop it
15:43:07 <JibberJim> SAZ: I think we need to withdraw it without everyone being present.
15:43:16 <JibberJim> SAZ: I'd rather have it as an open issue item
15:43:46 <JibberJim> CMN: I'd like to have a note saying "this property is likely to be removed type note"
15:43:59 <JibberJim> SAZ: lets add this as an editors note then.
15:44:17 <chaals> RESOLUTION: The value is under threat of removaL..
15:45:48 <JibberJim> SAZ: Seperate this WD and previous WD contributors?
15:46:03 <chaals> CMN: Don't think that is a good idea.
15:46:18 <JibberJim> CMN: I've only ever seen a long list, or people in the WD, and that makes little sense, especially here
15:46:22 <JibberJim> SAZ: so let's publish?
15:46:43 <JibberJim> RESOLUTION: Publish it.
15:47:00 <JibberJim> SAZ: next one we want to sync. with earl guide.
15:47:14 <shadi> zakim, close agendum 2
15:47:14 <Zakim> agendum 2, Updated EARL 1.0 Schema, closed
15:47:15 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:47:16 <Zakim> 3. Update from ET TF [from shadi]
15:47:19 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 3
15:47:19 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Update from ET TF" taken up [from shadi]
15:47:37 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/tools/
15:48:38 <JibberJim> SAZ: The EO WG is developing the user interface for this, and the ET task force is migrating the existing HTML tools list into RDF
15:49:15 <JibberJim> SAZ: We have a lot more tools than we used to have
15:49:51 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2005/tools
15:50:29 <JibberJim> SAZ: The tools where we've contacted from tools people are being tracked here
15:51:01 <JibberJim> SAZ: Some are on hold as they're not really evaluation tools list, they're more authoring tools.
15:51:18 <JibberJim> SAZ: Some have been dropped for various reasons
15:51:46 <shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006Jan/0018.html
15:52:23 <JibberJim> SAZ: Carlos has some suggestions for more criteria
15:53:03 <JibberJim> SAZ: What to do with the tools on hold?  We could suggest to the ATAG folk that they take should take ownership 
15:53:28 <JibberJim> SAZ: or we could just chuck them in anyway, as they can be used in ER way although they aren't primarily
15:54:35 <JibberJim> SAZ: If there's no opinions, let's send it to the EO people to sort it ou
15:55:17 <JibberJim> SAZ: Carlos's proposals, adding API integration would be good
15:55:19 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/eval/tools/advanced
15:56:13 <JibberJim> Carlos: I'm not so sure the "API integration" is the right approach, the more platform approach names is a better idea
15:57:04 <JibberJim> SAZ: yep so proposal to change API integration to platform
15:58:02 <Zakim> -Chris
15:58:30 <JibberJim> SAZ: there are other proposals, there's a classifications section proposals
15:58:47 <JibberJim> SAZ: classifications were tough, more searchable criteria were better.
15:59:21 <JibberJim> SAZ: I'll take it back to the tools folk!
15:59:58 <JibberJim> Carlos: I'd like to add another proposal...
16:00:21 <JibberJim> SAZ: Our next meeting is next wednesday 18th.
16:00:25 <Zakim> -Sandor_Herramhof
16:00:26 <Zakim> -Jim_Ley
16:00:41 <Zakim> -Jose_Manuel_Alonso/CarlosI
16:00:42 <Zakim> -chaals
16:16:42 <Zakim> -David
16:16:44 <Zakim> -Shadi
16:16:46 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has ended
16:16:47 <Zakim> Attendees were Shadi, Jim_Ley, Sandor_Herramhof, Chris, Jose_Manuel_Alonso/CarlosI, chaals, +44.783.371.aaaa, David
16:17:01 <shadi> zakim, bye
16:17:01 <Zakim> Zakim has left #er
16:17:08 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
16:17:15 <shadi> rrsagent, make minutes
16:17:15 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/01/11-er-minutes.html shadi
16:17:19 <shadi> rrsagent, bye
16:17:19 <RRSAgent> I see no action items