13:53:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #er
13:53:27 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/04/26-er-irc
13:53:31 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #er
13:53:38 <shadi> zakim, this will be ert
13:53:38 <Zakim> ok, shadi; I see WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 7 minutes
13:54:18 <shadi> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006Apr/0016.html
13:54:22 <shadi> chair: Shadi
13:54:28 <shadi> meeting: ERT WG
13:54:40 <shadi> agenda+ EARL pointers proposal by Jim
13:54:50 <shadi> agenda+ Explicit vs blanket assertions
13:55:01 <shadi> agenda+ URI-in-RDF vs single URI by CarlosV
13:55:10 <shadi> agenda+ WCAG 2.0 Last Call
13:57:09 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has now started
13:57:11 <Zakim> +Shadi
13:57:35 <ChrisR> ChrisR has joined #er
13:58:46 <CarlosI> CarlosI has joined #er
14:00:44 <niq> niq has joined #er
14:02:05 <Zakim> +CarlosI
14:02:30 <Zakim> +Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
14:02:46 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:02:53 <JohannesK> JohannesK has joined #er
14:03:09 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is Nick
14:03:10 <Zakim> +Nick; got it
14:04:49 <shadi> zakim, who is making noise?
14:05:00 <Zakim> shadi, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Klaus/Johannes/Thomas (14%), Nick (46%)
14:05:12 <niq> Zakim: who is here?
14:05:26 <niq> bah
14:05:58 <carlos> carlos has joined #er
14:07:39 <JibberJim> JibberJim has joined #er
14:08:19 <Zakim> -Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
14:09:02 <Zakim> +Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
14:10:14 <JohannesK> can you read me?
14:10:17 <JohannesK> :-)
14:10:22 <niq> hehehe
14:10:42 <shadi> jim, are you joining?
14:11:01 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:11:12 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is Chris
14:11:13 <Zakim> +Chris; got it
14:11:46 <Zakim> +Jim_Ley
14:12:15 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 1
14:12:15 <Zakim> agendum 1. "EARL pointers proposal by Jim" taken up [from shadi]
14:12:44 <JibberJim> sure
14:12:47 <drooks> drooks has joined #er
14:13:07 <shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006Mar/0003
14:13:18 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/2006/04/05-er-minutes#item02
14:13:28 <shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006Apr/0018.html
14:14:44 <ChrisR> SAZ: summary of issue - byte offset or char offset
14:15:06 <ChrisR> JK: has 2 issues...
14:15:26 <ChrisR> 1) byte offset
14:15:42 <Zakim> +??P14
14:16:11 <ChrisR> JK: 2) problem with unicode
14:16:44 <shadi> zakim, ??p14 is really David
14:16:44 <Zakim> +David; got it
14:16:56 <ChrisR> JL: agrees with JK, need both
14:16:58 <niq> char offsets fall down if there's an encoding error in a text source.  Need byte offsets to be allowed.
14:18:09 <ChrisR> NIQ: yep, need both types of offsets
14:19:45 <niq> text text [badbytes] more text *
14:20:03 <niq> the number of chars in [badbytes] is undefined.
14:20:17 <niq> so the char offset of * is not well-defined
14:20:29 <niq> but the byte offset of * works just fine
14:21:56 <JibberJim> I think Johannes could be able to do and proably should. but it doesn't hurt EARL Pointers to have both
14:22:14 <Zakim> -David
14:23:11 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:23:39 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is David
14:23:39 <Zakim> +David; got it
14:23:58 <ChrisR> NIQ: problem can occur with text encoding errors or if any bytes are unencoded, this is real world problem
14:25:18 <Zakim> -David
14:26:07 <ChrisR> SAZ: suggests that scheme could be developed for snippets or bytes/chars, example binary files such as images or audio files
14:26:08 <Zakim> -Nick
14:27:13 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:27:22 <ChrisR> JL: currently don't have anything to point to binary files, should be developed
14:27:50 <niq> niq has joined #er
14:28:01 <drooks> zakim, ipcaller is drooks
14:28:01 <Zakim> +drooks; got it
14:29:25 <ChrisR> (general agreement that both byte and char offset needed but more discussion needed)
14:29:41 <ChrisR> action: JL will review with feedback
14:29:49 <shadi> action: jim to refine current snippets proposal
14:29:53 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:30:02 <shadi> rrsagent, drop action 1
14:31:26 <shadi> zakim, close agendum 1
14:31:26 <Zakim> agendum 1, EARL pointers proposal by Jim, closed
14:31:27 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:31:28 <Zakim> 2. Explicit vs blanket assertions [from shadi]
14:31:36 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 2
14:31:36 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Explicit vs blanket assertions" taken up [from shadi]
14:31:59 <shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006Apr/0010
14:32:23 <JibberJim> SAZ: Last call, we had proposal from Carlos for groups of webcontent
14:32:34 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/2006/04/19-er-minutes#item02
14:33:00 <JibberJim> SAZ: Do we want blanket states by earl and use wildcards rather than specifying all 
14:33:28 <JibberJim> SAZ: Could be verbose if you list all, but it's very accurate
14:34:34 <JibberJim> SAZ: Alternatively it allows us to make general statements about entire sites, related to the Content Labelling Group
14:35:19 <Zakim> -drooks
14:35:28 <JibberJim> q+
14:35:38 <shadi> ack JibberJim
14:37:00 <Zakim> +??P2
14:38:35 <shadi> zakim, ??p2 is really David
14:38:35 <Zakim> +David; got it
14:39:38 <JibberJim> JL: Wildcards don't give us any more expressability, as we can extend EARL to have a new TestSUbject that covers are groups and can be expressed as we want.
14:40:12 <JibberJim> JL: Wildcards are more complicated and make things harder for people
14:40:13 <drooks> sorry but my skype is really playing up. will have to continue via irc
14:40:28 <Zakim> -David
14:40:39 <niq> skype--
14:41:02 <JibberJim> SAZ: Would you say that EARL is a general reporting language for making statements exactly what is tested, rather than for making blanket statements?
14:41:14 <JibberJim> JL: Yes.
14:41:33 <JibberJim> SAZ: Nick we can't hear you!
14:42:36 <JibberJim> JK: I like the idea of having specifically for reporting results of tests and what I tested is the resource, and some more resources etc. saying exactly what I tested
14:43:09 <JibberJim> SAZ: Is Verbosity a problem for your tools?
14:43:12 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
14:43:47 <JibberJim> JK: Not everything is necessary to be recorded every time, only if necessary, so a report doesn't need to be huge
14:44:16 <JibberJim> CR: I don't think we should allow blanket statements without refering back to something
14:45:06 <JibberJim> SAZ: Are we saying the blanket statement is not a role for EARL?
14:45:33 <niq> niq has joined #er
14:45:59 <JibberJim> CR: blanket statements could still be made, but you need to refer back to something
14:46:40 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:46:51 <JibberJim> CR: You could say "this site passes" in EARL
14:47:05 <JibberJim> SAZ: But you need to extend EARL currently to make statements about entire sites
14:48:12 <JibberJim> JK: If you make a statement about a list of pages, then you've not made a statement about the whole site
14:48:35 <JibberJim> CR: Could you not say that "these are all the pages that make up the site"
14:48:42 <JibberJim> JK: Not with the EARL Vocabulary
14:48:59 <JibberJim> JK: There is hasPart etc.
14:49:40 <niq> we already have multi-level testsubject
14:50:02 <niq> e.g page/snippet
14:50:14 <niq> whole site is just another level
14:50:24 <CarlosI> agrees
14:51:23 <JibberJim> CI: We all have different ideas of what a report is and different use cases
14:52:04 <JibberJim> CI: lots of users just care about different groups, e.g. site, rather than individual pages
14:52:16 <JibberJim> CI: So if we want a complete report language, we need to cover that
14:53:17 <JibberJim> SAZ: Do we need to be able to say site X is valid and points to an EARL report, does EARL have to be able to fulfil both
14:53:34 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
14:53:51 <JibberJim> CI: We should give our requirements to the Content Labelling group if we don't do it
14:54:02 <Zakim> -Jim_Ley
14:54:20 <JibberJim> grr!
14:55:11 <ChrisR> SAZ: proposal: Seperate conformance claim from groups of pages.
14:55:39 <ChrisR> SAZ: can be done in RDF but may not be easy to parse
14:56:13 <ChrisR> SAZ: need to describe groups of pages (regular expressions for domain names) sort of thing
14:58:19 <ChrisR> SAZ: using EARL for blanket statements does not seem to have much support in group
15:03:16 <Zakim> -Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
15:03:18 <Zakim> -Shadi
15:03:19 <Zakim> -Chris
15:03:19 <ChrisR> ChrisR has left #er
15:03:27 <Zakim> -CarlosI
15:03:29 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has ended
15:03:30 <Zakim> Attendees were Shadi, CarlosI, Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, Nick, Chris, Jim_Ley, David, drooks, [IPcaller]
15:03:41 <shadi> zakim, bye
15:03:41 <Zakim> Zakim has left #er
15:03:50 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
15:03:51 <drooks> drooks has left #er
15:03:59 <shadi> rrsagent, make minutes
15:03:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/04/26-er-minutes.html shadi
15:04:09 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
15:04:18 <shadi> rrsagent, bye
15:04:18 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/26-er-actions.rdf :
15:04:18 <RRSAgent> ACTION: jim to refine current snippets proposal [2]
15:04:18 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/04/26-er-irc#T14-29-49