13:58:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #er
13:58:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/05/03-er-irc
13:58:29 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #er
13:58:37 <shadi> zakim, this will be ERT WG
13:58:37 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled near this time, shadi
13:58:41 <shadi> zakim, this will be ERT
13:58:41 <Zakim> ok, shadi; I see WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 2 minutes
13:58:43 <ChrisR> ChrisR has joined #er
13:58:46 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has now started
13:58:50 <shadi> meeting: ERT WG
13:58:51 <Zakim> +??P25
13:59:23 <shadi> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006May/0002.html
13:59:27 <shadi> chair: Shadi
13:59:34 <shadi> scribe: Nick
14:00:00 <Zakim> -??P25
14:00:01 <Zakim> +??P25
14:00:03 <Zakim> +Shadi
14:00:40 <shadi> zakim, p25 is really David
14:00:40 <Zakim> sorry, shadi, I do not recognize a party named 'p25'
14:00:44 <shadi> zakim, ? is really David
14:00:44 <Zakim> +David; got it
14:02:00 <Zakim> +Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
14:02:07 <CarlosI> CarlosI has joined #er
14:02:12 <Zakim> +??P13
14:02:17 <carlos> carlos has joined #er
14:02:40 <shadi> zakim, ? is really Chris
14:02:40 <Zakim> +Chris; got it
14:04:19 <niq> niq has joined #er
14:06:07 <Zakim> + +34.98.439.aaaa
14:06:22 <JibberJim> shadi, did you not see my regrets?
14:06:37 <JibberJim> I'm stuck in holland with no network and in another meeting.
14:06:37 <shadi> zakim, aaaa is really CarlosI
14:06:37 <Zakim> +CarlosI; got it
14:06:49 <shadi> oh jim, sorry, missed that
14:06:52 <niq> Zakim won't talk to me
14:07:05 <shadi> regrets: Jim
14:07:40 <niq> Zakim won't talk to me *2
14:07:47 <shadi> :(
14:08:06 <shadi> scribe: Johannes
14:08:16 <shadi> scribenick: JohannesK
14:08:27 <JohannesK> agenda+ EARL snippets proposal
14:08:31 <niq> I can hear him, but he ignores my conference code, and he also ignores my "star zero for w3c admin assistence"
14:08:43 <JohannesK> agenda+ Explicit vs blanket assertions
14:08:53 <JohannesK> agenda+ URI-in-RDF vs single URI
14:08:58 <shadi> nick, stay on the line...
14:09:04 <JohannesK> agenda+ WCAG 2.0 Last Call
14:09:17 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:09:24 <niq> aha, made it
14:09:49 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is really Nick
14:09:49 <Zakim> +Nick; got it
14:10:21 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 1
14:10:21 <Zakim> agendum 1. "EARL snippets proposal" taken up [from JohannesK]
14:14:09 <niq> saz: encoding (raw or base64) as separate elements, or properties of a content element
14:14:41 <niq> niq: like the flexibility of the RFC822 approach
14:15:53 <niq> niq: MIME is tried-and-tested
14:18:12 <JohannesK> JK: what we need is a transformation method to transform the bytes we got over the network into characters; and I think base64 is enogh for this task
14:18:32 <JohannesK> s/enogh/enough
14:20:28 <niq> q+
14:20:47 <JohannesK> JK: I would like to use this approach in HTTP-in-RDF as well
14:21:36 <JohannesK> JK: if EARL writing tool can use whatever transformation method it likes, EARL reading tool will have to implement several as well
14:22:16 <JohannesK> SAZ: generic approach is more flexible and future-proof
14:22:36 <shadi> ack niq
14:22:52 <JohannesK> NK: ACK to SAZ
14:25:06 <JibberJim> generic approach is unneccesarilly solving problems we don't really need
14:25:14 <niq> You say "text" vs "base64".  But "text" isn't really well-specified, at least outside of plain ascii
14:25:54 <niq> I'm OK with non-generic approach (though prefer generic) provided it's well-specified
14:26:19 <Zakim> -CarlosI
14:27:19 <JohannesK> SAZ: others?
14:27:25 <JohannesK> CR: still thinking
14:27:33 <Zakim> +CarlosI
14:27:41 <JohannesK> CV: + for text/base64
14:29:02 <JohannesK> CI: + text/base64
14:31:19 <JohannesK> Resolution: two content properties, one for text, one for binary
14:31:52 <JohannesK> Resolution: binary content is base64-encoded
14:34:05 <niq> q+ to say Johannes is right, but that's not the whole story
14:34:15 <shadi> ack niq
14:34:15 <Zakim> niq, you wanted to say Johannes is right, but that's not the whole story
14:34:32 <JohannesK> JK: we don't need to report a specific character encoding for textContent
14:36:57 <niq> Snippets included from a document must be converted from the character encoding of a document snippeted to the charset of the EARL report.  Tools traditionally get that wrong (c.f. mail-over-the-web systems)
14:40:09 <Zakim> -Nick
14:40:20 <niq> grrr
14:42:33 <JohannesK> JK: some dikussion about characters, bytes, character encodings ...
14:43:20 <JohannesK> s/dikussion/discussion
14:44:19 <shadi> saz: 2 possibilities: 1. use the encoding of the original EARL report which is the simplest and easiest approach
14:45:13 <shadi> saz: 2. use the encoding of the remote Web resource, in which case we would need to record this encoding as well (and thus add complexity to processors and parsers)
14:46:16 <niq> 2. only works if all snippets are CDATA
14:47:40 <JibberJim> JibberJim has joined #er
14:49:35 <JohannesK> JK: the only connection between character encoding used for the EARL report and the character encoding used to create the character from the resource byte stream is that there must be a mapping for the characters to be put into the snipping
14:49:42 <JohannesK> s/snipping/snippet
14:51:18 <JohannesK> CV: #2 doesn't make sense
14:54:48 <JohannesK> Resolution: people agree with JohannesK that there is no problem with characters in text snippets
14:55:03 <shadi> zakim, close agendum 1
14:55:03 <Zakim> agendum 1, EARL snippets proposal, closed
14:55:04 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:55:05 <Zakim> 2. Explicit vs blanket assertions [from JohannesK]
14:55:13 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 4
14:55:13 <Zakim> agendum 4. "WCAG 2.0 Last Call" taken up [from JohannesK]
14:56:03 <JohannesK> SAZ: any objections that ERT WG should not review WCAG 2.0?
14:56:20 <JohannesK> CV: have problem with deadline
14:57:05 <JohannesK> SAZ: everyone is welcome to comment
14:57:42 <JohannesK> SAZ: we need to review from test tool implementor's POV
14:58:23 <JohannesK> SAZ: we should focus on the "Understanding" doc
14:58:56 <Zakim> -Chris
14:59:30 <JohannesK> SAZ: expect comments on ERT mailing list
15:01:14 <JohannesK> SAZ: I want a group's position
15:03:52 <JohannesK> ACTION: everyone to read the "Understanding WCAG 2.0" document until next week's meeting
15:04:13 <JohannesK> SAZ: send comments to ERT list
15:04:25 <Zakim> -David
15:04:26 <Zakim> -Shadi
15:04:27 <Zakim> -Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
15:05:37 <Zakim> -CarlosI
15:05:39 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has ended
15:05:41 <Zakim> Attendees were Shadi, David, Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, Chris, +34.98.439.aaaa, CarlosI, Nick
15:06:03 <shadi> zakim, bye
15:06:03 <Zakim> Zakim has left #er
15:06:11 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
15:06:31 <shadi> rrsagent, make minutes
15:06:31 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/05/03-er-minutes.html shadi
15:07:21 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
15:07:39 <shadi> rrsagent, by
15:07:39 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'by', shadi.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
15:07:40 <shadi> rrsagent, bye
15:07:40 <RRSAgent> I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/03-er-actions.rdf :
15:07:40 <RRSAgent> ACTION: everyone to read the "Understanding WCAG 2.0" document until next week's meeting [1]
15:07:40 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/05/03-er-irc#T15-03-52