IRC log of tsdtf on 2006-09-05

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:05:33 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #tsdtf
12:05:33 [RRSAgent]
logging to
12:05:38 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #tsdtf
12:05:48 [shadi]
zakim, this will be TSD TF
12:05:48 [Zakim]
I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled near this time, shadi
12:05:53 [shadi]
zakim, this will be TSD
12:05:53 [Zakim]
ok, shadi; I see WAI_TSDTF()8:30AM scheduled to start in 25 minutes
12:06:02 [shadi]
meeting: TSD TF
12:06:31 [shadi]
12:06:46 [shadi]
agenda+ Follow-up review of integration tools and CVS
12:06:55 [shadi]
agenda+ Follow-up review of TCDL
12:07:05 [shadi]
agenda+ Start of test production phase
12:07:23 [shadi]
chair: CarlosV, Christophe
12:21:26 [Vangelis]
Vangelis has joined #tsdtf
12:24:40 [Christophe]
Christophe has joined #tsdtf
12:27:07 [CarlosI]
CarlosI has joined #tsdtf
12:29:31 [Sandor]
Sandor has joined #tsdtf
12:29:43 [Zakim]
WAI_TSDTF()8:30AM has now started
12:29:44 [Zakim]
12:30:52 [ChrisR]
ChrisR has joined #tsdtf
12:31:07 [Zakim]
12:31:08 [Zakim]
12:31:09 [Zakim]
12:31:35 [shadi]
zakim, ? is really CarlosI
12:31:35 [Zakim]
+CarlosI; got it
12:31:39 [Zakim]
12:32:17 [Zakim]
12:32:48 [Zakim]
12:33:11 [shadi]
zakim, ipcaller is really Chris
12:33:11 [Zakim]
+Chris; got it
12:34:45 [carlos]
carlos has joined #tsdtf
12:35:42 [Zakim]
12:36:40 [carlos]
Zakim, Johannes is really CarlosV
12:36:40 [Zakim]
+CarlosV; got it
12:37:08 [Tim]
Tim has joined #tsdtf
12:37:22 [Zakim]
12:38:47 [shadi]
regrets: Shane
12:39:02 [shadi]
scribe: Tim
12:39:06 [shadi]
scribenick: Tim
12:40:13 [Zakim]
12:40:31 [shadi]
zakim, take up agendum 1
12:40:31 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Follow-up review of integration tools and CVS" taken up [from shadi]
12:41:43 [Tim]
CV: replicate structure from BentoWeb or not?
12:42:04 [Michael]
Michael has joined #tsdtf
12:42:14 [Tim]
CV: name of technology missing from top-level structure?
12:42:14 [Zakim]
12:43:03 [shadi]
12:43:09 [Tim]
CV: we have XHTML currently, but what about other technologies?
12:43:59 [Tim]
CS: what is argument for organizing by SCs?
12:44:27 [Tim]
SAZ: Understanding WCAG2.0 document structured by SC..
12:45:15 [Tim]
..two ways of grouping (1) by technologies, or (2) by SC
12:45:59 [Tim]
CV: can filter anyway by metadata
12:46:33 [Tim]
SAZ: doesn't feel strongly one way or another, but OK if currently structured by technology
12:47:26 [Tim]
MC: no strong feelings, just so long as metadata contains relevant information, basic organization doesn't matter..
12:48:30 [Tim]
CS: in BentoWeb, metadata not big XML file, but file for each test case
12:48:58 [Tim]
CV: could metadata file have different name from test file?
12:49:20 [Tim]
SAZ: What about file extensions?
12:49:35 [Tim]
CV: depend on technology..
12:50:15 [Tim]
SAZ: What about granularity (spread out resources)?
12:50:38 [Tim]
CV: has to do with server issues
12:51:35 [Tim]
SAZ: now explained that tests grouped by technologies, so there isn't a large
12:51:48 [Tim]
group of them, makes sense..
12:52:33 [Tim]
CV: test files can be reused for different SCs/techniques, so need to enforce naming conventions
12:53:11 [Tim]
CV: agree on structure for now.. close topic?
12:53:44 [Tim]
Resolution: agree to accept naming convention and directory structure from BentoWeb
12:54:59 [Tim]
CV: clarification to group tests by main technology..
12:56:15 [Tim]
CS: also we will use newer version of naming convention
12:57:14 [shadi]
zakim, close agendum 1
12:57:14 [Zakim]
agendum 1, Follow-up review of integration tools and CVS, closed
12:57:15 [Zakim]
I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
12:57:17 [Zakim]
2. Follow-up review of TCDL [from shadi]
12:57:18 [shadi]
zakim, take up agendum 2
12:57:18 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Follow-up review of TCDL" taken up [from shadi]
12:58:04 [Tim]
CV: new draft of TCDL with example sent, so far no comments
12:58:57 [Tim]
CS: ruleset description not included, also want to add description of language called RuleSetXML
13:00:28 [shadi]
13:00:30 [Tim]
CS: current format too verbose or descriptive, that's why example added to use only required attributes and elements
13:01:23 [Tim]
CV: what do others (besides BenToWeb) think of document?
13:01:41 [Tim]
CR: looks good to me (haven't gone over it in detail)
13:02:12 [Tim]
SAZ: discussion on mailing list re: disabilities section - any follow-up?
13:02:26 [Tim]
CS: requires a lot of changes
13:03:24 [Tim]
CV: issue is how to define disability types, not feasible to incorporate right now
13:04:27 [Tim]
CV: do we accept current version of TCDL as current description?
13:05:03 [Tim]
CI:plans to incorporate whole TCDL language or subset of it?
13:05:40 [Tim]
CS: TCDL has many optional sections, so use all of it is quite a lot of work, so don't
13:05:52 [Tim]
need to subset it if don't use options
13:06:33 [Tim]
CI: If we want to use it for WCAG, need to subset it..
13:07:08 [Tim]
CS: questions are validation process used in test suite itself..
13:07:37 [Tim]
CI: haven't discussed problems separating accessibility and other issues,
13:08:03 [Tim]
not in scope of this task force.. will WCAG WG work on this issue?
13:08:33 [Tim]
CV: related to how we validate it, since we need user feedback
13:09:01 [Tim]
CI: are we going to define WCAG questions?
13:09:32 [Tim]
CV: we're just talking about test cases - different issue
13:10:15 [Tim]
we decide we need feedback from users
13:11:01 [Tim]
CI: we're going to confuse people asking for schema related to WCAG2?..
13:11:30 [Tim]
need to just cover use cases - just use subset?
13:12:07 [Tim]
CI: example, "test case mode" define "one expert" - what kind of expert - needs to go
13:12:18 [Tim]
through WCAG WG?
13:12:39 [Tim]
CS: it's how we in task force review test cases
13:13:29 [Tim]
SAZ: how is test case evaluated, or how test case is developed?
13:14:00 [Tim]
SAZ: Only take vocabulary we need, don't take BenToWeb specific info..
13:14:14 [shadi]
13:14:24 [Tim]
we may need to look at other elements to consider adoption?
13:14:58 [Tim]
SAZ: may look at CS's minimal example, and then start looking to add to that to match our needs
13:15:34 [Tim]
SAZ: description and purpose should come from WCAG in this example - maybe need smaller language?
13:16:17 [Tim]
CS: description - description of test materials and purpose - purpose of test itself
13:16:59 [Tim]
CV: per test case, for every technique there would be many test cases
13:17:12 [Tim]
SAZ: where is mapping to WCAG SC?
13:17:20 [Tim]
CS: In rule section
13:18:26 [Tim]
SAZ: start by minimal example, and then add to it (taking from TCDL) - another approach?
13:19:07 [Tim]
SAZ: goal is minimal set of vocabulary that can describe our tests, we're opening up too many questions?
13:19:28 [Tim]
.. opening up scope of task force?
13:20:17 [Tim]
CV: we should be careful in reviewing/disregarding elements, "test mode" is relevant element
13:20:55 [Tim]
SAZ: BenToWeb person to send examples of metadata?
13:21:05 [Tim]
CV: Sure, they're on line..
13:21:13 [Tim]
SAZ: maybe some smaller examples?
13:21:45 [Tim]
CS: the example provided is from scratch, and could be real
13:22:51 [Tim]
CV: ask eveyone to review in detail, and comment on mailing list, to streamline TCDL,
13:22:58 [Tim]
by next week
13:23:41 [Tim]
SAZ: Can people spend more time reviewing this in detail this week? - answer is yes
13:25:00 [Tim]
Action: non-BenToWeb people to review current draft
13:25:31 [Tim]
Action: CS to complete current draft with missing sections
13:26:11 [shadi]
zakim, close agendum 2
13:26:11 [Zakim]
agendum 2, Follow-up review of TCDL, closed
13:26:12 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
13:26:13 [Zakim]
3. Start of test production phase [from shadi]
13:26:27 [shadi]
zakim, take up agendum 3
13:26:27 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Start of test production phase" taken up [from shadi]
13:26:44 [Tim]
CV: wait for next week for producing minor examples
13:27:12 [Tim]
CV: 1-2 weeks finish up new version of test cases - maybe task force can
13:27:17 [Tim]
review them?
13:28:18 [Tim]
CV: maybe can review what is public from BenToWeb? - starting point
13:29:02 [Tim]
SAZ: makes sense - close several test samples this way, and test our structure and metadata, and process within task force
13:29:40 [Tim]
CV: in two weeks can have some examples ready
13:29:49 [Tim]
SAZ: next week finalize TDCL
13:30:05 [Zakim]
13:30:07 [Zakim]
13:30:10 [Zakim]
13:30:12 [Zakim]
13:30:13 [Zakim]
13:30:13 [Zakim]
13:30:17 [Zakim]
13:30:19 [Zakim]
13:30:43 [Vangelis]
Vangelis has left #tsdtf
13:30:46 [Sandor]
Sandor has left #tsdtf
13:34:54 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
13:34:54 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Vangelis
13:35:06 [shadi]
zakim, drop vangelis
13:35:06 [Zakim]
Vangelis is being disconnected
13:35:07 [Zakim]
WAI_TSDTF()8:30AM has ended
13:35:08 [Zakim]
Attendees were Shadi, CarlosI, Sandor_Herramhof, Vangelis, Chris, CarlosV, Tim_Boland, Christophe, Cooper
13:35:11 [shadi]
zakim, bye
13:35:12 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #tsdtf
13:35:20 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
13:35:24 [shadi]
rrsagent, make minutes
13:35:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate shadi
13:35:25 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
13:35:30 [shadi]
rrsagent, bye
13:35:30 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in :
13:35:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: non-BenToWeb people to review current draft [1]
13:35:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
13:35:30 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: CS to complete current draft with missing sections [2]
13:35:30 [RRSAgent]
recorded in