ERT WG

Resuming ERT WG document development

saz: we have to get back to work after some weeks without regular meetings
... process document requires us to record any reaction on issues/comments

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/EARL10/issues

ACTION saz to update issues list for EARL 10 schema document

<scribe> ACTION: saz to update issues list for EARL 10 schema document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-er-minutes.html#action01]

<scribe> ACTION: jk to update issues list for HTTP-in-RDF document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-er-minutes.html#action02]

saz: pointer document
... no reaction by jim about our comments to the initial document from Gijon F2F
... CarlosI, would you take over the editing of the pointers document?

ci: yep

<scribe> ACTION: ci to create a plan (summary) for a first public draft for the pointers document [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-er-minutes.html#action03]

saz: including estimation about timeline
... EARL guide ...
... we need a first public draft at least when pushing EARL schema to CR

Criteria for listing contributors

saz: active WG member are usually listed as contributors
... but in current schema doc there are quite a lot of people that have not been involved in the editing of the current document

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=32094

saz: propose to list only current active members (in good standing)
... new members are added to the list

ci: what about lazy members initially listed as good standing?

saz: we need to synchronize good/bad standing status before we publish documents

ci: what about contributions/significant comments by people outside this group?

saz: significance has to be defined

jk: there were some significant changes after recieiving comments, we should mention these people

ci: have two separate lists: group members, external contributors

saz: could be difficult to explain why one contribution was more meaningful than the other

<CarlosI> [http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-mobileOK-basic10-tests-20061219/]

RESOLUTION: synchronize good/bad standing status before publication of documents
... list all participants in good standing as contributors for a publication
... lead editors of documents to track external contributions
... WG decision is needed for listing external contributors in specific documents

ERT WG comments on ATAG 2.0 WD

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Apr/0006

saz: no comments or objections to this list?

<scribe> ACTION: saz to send these comments to ATAG WG [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-er-minutes.html#action04]

ci: we had a comment about our definition of test modes is not very clear

saz: I reword comment #3

<scribe> ACTION: saz to reword comment #3 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/04/18-er-minutes.html#action05]

Schema-based checking of Web applications

saz: info by PF WG about ARIA for testing web applications
... growing importance of testing (dynamic) DOM structure instead of static source code

ci: Shadi, can you keep us up to date about this?

saz: yep
... we may want to think about recording the DOM structure

Outlook on some of the review comments

saz: <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2007Mar/0108>
... we currently use OWL as a constraint language which seems to be not optimal
... no meeting next week, but on May 2nd
... so have discussions on the mailing list