IRC log of eo on 2007-06-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

12:37:06 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #eo
12:37:06 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc
12:37:11 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #eo
12:37:18 [shadi]
zakim, this will be eo
12:37:18 [Zakim]
ok, shadi, I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM already started
12:37:31 [Alan]
scribe Alan
12:37:35 [Alan]
scribe: Alan
12:38:27 [shadi]
zakim, code?
12:38:27 [Zakim]
the conference code is 3694 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+33.4.89.06.34.99 tel:+44.117.370.6152), shadi
12:39:19 [Zakim]
+Shadi
12:39:37 [Alan]
topic: Continuing EOWG review of WCAG 2.0 Working Draft from 17 May 2007
12:40:08 [Alan]
AC: Surprised by description of assistive technology as user agent.
12:40:11 [Zakim]
+ +39.813.aabb
12:40:22 [Alan]
WD: Based on what is in the WCAG draft.
12:41:12 [Alan]
JB: Is generally accepted definition in WCAG.
12:41:34 [judy]
judy has joined #eo
12:41:36 [Andrew]
zakim, +39.813.aabb is Andrew
12:41:36 [Zakim]
+Andrew; got it
12:41:37 [Zakim]
+[LC]
12:42:44 [judy]
zakim, LC is Justin
12:42:44 [Zakim]
+Justin; got it
12:43:49 [judy]
zakim, P4 is William
12:43:49 [Zakim]
sorry, judy, I do not recognize a party named 'P4'
12:43:55 [judy]
zakim, ??P4 is William
12:43:55 [Zakim]
+William; got it
12:44:24 [judy]
zakim, 0207391aaaa is Henny
12:44:24 [Zakim]
sorry, judy, I do not recognize a party named '0207391aaaa'
12:44:29 [Zakim]
+ +1.512.305.aacc
12:44:54 [Andrew]
zakim, +1.512.305.aacc is Sharon
12:44:54 [Zakim]
+Sharon; got it
12:45:05 [judy]
zakim, +1.512.305.aacc is Sharron
12:45:05 [Zakim]
sorry, judy, I do not recognize a party named '+1.512.305.aacc'
12:45:24 [judy]
zakim, who is here?
12:45:24 [Zakim]
On the phone I see doyle, William, +0207391aaaa, Jack, Judy, ??P8, Wayne_Dick, [IPcaller], Shadi (muted), Andrew, Justin, Sharon
12:45:26 [Zakim]
On IRC I see judy, Zakim, RRSAgent, shadi, Jack, Sylvie, Alan, Wayne, Henny, Andrew
12:45:28 [Andrew]
zakim, Sharon is Sharron
12:45:28 [Zakim]
+Sharron; got it
12:45:53 [Andrew]
zakim, +0207391aaaa is Henny
12:45:53 [Zakim]
+Henny; got it
12:47:10 [shadi]
zakim, ipcaller is really Alan
12:47:10 [Zakim]
+Alan; got it
12:47:19 [shadi]
zakim, ??p8 is really Sylvie
12:47:19 [Zakim]
+Sylvie; got it
12:47:32 [Sylvie]
maybe I am P8, I could notsee my name on the list
12:47:52 [Alan]
DS: Unfamiliar with term API, and teh phrase about robustness of an API.
12:48:16 [Alan]
JB: SD sent comments saying that Note 1 was very technical and difficult to understand.
12:48:28 [Alan]
WL: First sentence hard to understand.
12:50:05 [Alan]
WD: Could drop the last sentence of first paragraph.
12:50:29 [judy]
action: wayne's redef: drop last sentence of first paragraph
12:52:37 [Alan]
WL: Confusion because User Agent is usually used to mean browser. "user agents denote user agents in the familiar sense of the term"
12:54:06 [Alan]
WL: Might be better to just say "browser"
12:59:00 [Alan]
SD: Mostly had problems with first part.
12:59:42 [Alan]
WL: Have compared with previous definition. Has removed phrase about disabilities that go beyond mainstream user agents.
13:00:01 [judy]
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#assistivetechnologydef
13:00:48 [Alan]
JB: Maybe go back to last week's version.
13:01:01 [Alan]
JB: Update it.
13:01:50 [judy]
action: wayne's redef: still need to revise "In this definition, mainstream user agents denote user agents in the familiar sense of the term" -- does not work.
13:04:00 [Alan]
WD: In main part of definition. New sentence "Assistive technologies for Web content can also stand alone and interact directly with operating system services."
13:04:52 [Alan]
JB: What does standalone mean?
13:05:05 [Alan]
WD: Like a voice browser.
13:05:48 [Alan]
JB: Meaning too wide
13:06:12 [judy]
action: wayne's redef: remove "stand alone and"
13:07:33 [judy]
action: wayne's redef: remove the entire sentence starting with "In either case,..."
13:08:03 [Alan]
JB: Several people have problems with the notes.
13:08:40 [Alan]
JB: Recommend dropping Note 1?
13:08:51 [Alan]
[No disagreement]
13:10:40 [judy]
action: gloss-assistivetech: drop note 1
13:10:55 [Alan]
WD: Parsing theory not necessary.
13:11:11 [Alan]
JW: Agree to drop it.
13:11:39 [Alan]
AA: If drop Note 1, can also drop Note 2, as it is addition to former.
13:13:30 [Alan]
AA: How about putting it after examples, relating it to them.
13:14:03 [Alan]
JB: It's like saying that there are features that are separated from mainstream user agent and called AT.
13:15:09 [Alan]
SR: These functions can also be performed by maintstream user agents, but are provided separately in AT.
13:16:15 [judy]
something like "note that these same supportive functions can also be provided by the mainstream user agent, but when they are performed by a separate tool, we call them assistive technologies"
13:16:56 [judy]
"some of them are provided..."
13:17:52 [judy]
action: wayne's redef: remove note 3
13:19:40 [Alan]
JB: Comments from Justin
13:20:50 [Alan]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007AprJun/0067.html
13:24:32 [shadi]
yes
13:24:34 [judy]
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#contents
13:24:54 [shadi]
ok
13:25:48 [Alan]
JT: There's no meaningful difference between the two, blinking and flashing.
13:30:11 [judy]
draft action: the difference between 2.2.2 (blinking) and 2.3.1 (flashing) are not clear even with the links to definitions, as the definitions are mutually referencing and seem just like different degrees of the same thing. either differentiate more in the SC themselves, or combine them.
13:31:02 [judy]
s/mutually referencing/mutually self-referencing
13:31:31 [Zakim]
-Shadi
13:31:33 [Zakim]
-Alan
13:31:35 [Wayne]
zakim, scribenick wayne
13:31:35 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'scribenick wayne', Wayne
13:31:54 [Wayne]
zakim, scribenick: wayne
13:31:54 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'scribenick: wayne', Wayne
13:32:01 [Wayne]
scribenick: wayne
13:32:41 [Wayne]
Group: Accepts Judy's clarification as an action.
13:33:00 [judy]
action: [guideline 2] the difference between 2.2.2 (blinking) and 2.3.1 (flashing) is not clear even with the links to definitions, as the definitions are mutually self-referencing and seem just like different degrees of the same thing. either differentiate more in the SC themselves, or combine them.
13:34:52 [judy]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007AprJun/0081.html
13:37:08 [Wayne]
Justin: We only talked about the changes to 1.3, but did not get to the 1.2
13:38:01 [judy]
http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/Overview.html#media-equiv-captions
13:38:54 [Wayne]
Judy: Change "multi-media alternative to text" to "visual or audio" equivalent to text.
13:39:22 [judy]
draft action: [SC 1.2.1] Replace "multimedia alternative to text" with "audio or video alternative to text"
13:42:46 [judy]
action: [SC 1.2.1] Replace "multimedia alternative to text" with "audio and/or video alternative to text" since it is possible to gloss text w/ audio only, or w/ silent video only (for instance, sign language) or w/ audio & video together (e.g. video of talking head).
13:43:31 [Wayne]
Group: Agrees
13:45:33 [Andrew]
what about 'second life'?
13:52:30 [Wayne]
Judy: We need to focus on clarity rather than content, this concern should be passed directly to WCAGWG directly.
13:54:52 [judy]
draft action: [SC 1.3.1] What does this mean? We have no idea, nor do the linked definitions help.
13:58:41 [judy]
draft action: [SC 1.3.1] What does this mean? Most of us had no idea, and the few who did had difficulty explaining what the practical implications of this would be for content development.
13:59:49 [judy]
draft action: [SC 1.3.1] What does this mean? Most of us had no idea, and the few who did had difficulty explaining what the practical implications of this would be for content development. Do you mean "semantics conveyed through presentation?" If so, that would be more understandable.
14:02:53 [judy]
draft action: [SC 1.3.1] What does this mean? Most of us had no idea, and the few who did had difficulty explaining what the practical implications of this would be for content development. Do you mean "semantics conveyed through presentation?" Or is it the semantics about the relation between objects? If so, that would be more understandable.
14:03:29 [judy]
draft action: [SC 1.3.1] What does this mean? Most of us had no idea, and the few who did had difficulty explaining what the practical implications of this would be for content development. Do you mean "semantics conveyed through presentation?" Or is it the semantics about the relation between objects? Either one of these, or both, would be more understandable.
14:03:42 [judy]
action: [SC 1.3.1] What does this mean? Most of us had no idea, and the few who did had difficulty explaining what the practical implications of this would be for content development. Do you mean "semantics conveyed through presentation?" Or is it the semantics about the relation between objects? Either one of these, or both, would be more understandable.
14:03:51 [Wayne]
Group: Agrees
14:05:11 [judy]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007AprJun/0085.html
14:07:34 [judy]
draft action: [SC 2.4.2] Do you mean the title tag or the title that goes in the H1? Please clarify (even if in some non-HTML specific way).
14:07:48 [Wayne]
Justin: What does page title mean? title-element, page-element
14:07:57 [Wayne]
Group: yes
14:08:00 [judy]
action: [SC 2.4.2] Do you mean the title tag or the title that goes in the H1? Please clarify (even if in some non-HTML specific way).
14:13:06 [judy]
draft action: [SC 3.1.4] We debated this but could not agree on a common interpretation. What do you mean?
14:14:13 [judy]
action: [SC 3.1.4] We debated this but could not agree on a common interpretation. What do you mean?
14:15:09 [judy]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007AprJun/0073.html
14:16:48 [judy]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007AprJun/0070.html
14:17:58 [Wayne]
Shadi: (through email) "The phrasing of success criterion 1.1.1 is very dense and may have a lot of implicit assumptions.."
14:18:35 [judy]
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#intro
14:18:38 [Wayne]
Judy: Intorduction
14:19:32 [judy]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2007AprJun/0081.html
14:20:38 [Wayne]
Justin: Email on June 6 (0081) on Introduction
14:22:09 [Wayne]
Justin: What are we (WAI) doing in this area of research?
14:25:00 [Wayne]
Judy: There were complaints that WCAG claimed a more comprehensive coverage of disabilities that they actually did.
14:26:16 [Wayne]
Judy: There was a meeting that revealed the need for research, but the means was not identified.
14:26:45 [Wayne]
Jack: What does the need for research mean for these Guidelines.
14:26:47 [judy]
s/There was a meeting/There was a series of meetings
14:29:16 [judy]
draft action: [introduction, last paragraph] The last sentence on "R&D is needed" leaves the reader hanging -- can anything more specific be said?
14:31:16 [judy]
draft action: [introduction, last paragraph] The last sentence on "R&D is needed" leaves the reader hanging -- can anything more specific be said, or would it be helpful to the reader to re-explain the testability tie-in here?
14:33:44 [Zakim]
-William
14:33:45 [Zakim]
-Sylvie
14:33:46 [Zakim]
-Jack
14:33:47 [Zakim]
-Justin
14:33:49 [Zakim]
-doyle
14:33:50 [Zakim]
-Sharron
14:33:52 [Zakim]
-Henny
14:33:53 [Zakim]
-Judy
14:33:55 [Zakim]
-Wayne_Dick
14:36:16 [Zakim]
-Andrew
14:36:17 [Zakim]
WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has ended
14:36:18 [Zakim]
Attendees were doyle, Jack, Judy, Wayne_Dick, Shadi, Andrew, Justin, William, Sharron, Henny, Alan, Sylvie
14:37:12 [Andrew]
Apologies: Liam, Helle, Shawn, ???
14:38:24 [Andrew]
Present: Doyle, Jack, Judy, Wayne, Shadi, Andrew, Justin, William, Sharron, Henny, Alan, Sylvie
14:38:33 [Andrew]
rrsagent, draft minutes
14:38:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-minutes.html Andrew
15:39:50 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #eo
16:18:55 [shawn]
shawn has joined #eo
18:08:16 [shawn]
shawn has joined #eo
18:31:10 [judy]
judy has joined #eo
20:29:48 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
20:29:52 [shadi]
rrsagent, make minutes
20:29:52 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-minutes.html shadi
20:29:54 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
20:29:58 [shadi]
rrsagent, bye
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
I see 11 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-actions.rdf :
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wayne's redef: drop last sentence of first paragraph [1]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T12-50-29
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wayne's redef: still need to revise "In this definition, mainstream user agents denote user agents in the familiar sense of the term" -- does not work. [2]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T13-01-50
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wayne's redef: remove "stand alone and" [3]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T13-06-12
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wayne's redef: remove the entire sentence starting with "In either case,..." [4]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T13-07-33
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: gloss-assistivetech: drop note 1 [5]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T13-10-40
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: wayne's redef: remove note 3 [6]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T13-17-52
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: [guideline 2] the difference between 2.2.2 (blinking) and 2.3.1 (flashing) is not clear even with the links to definitions, as the definitions are mutually self-referencing and seem just like different degrees of the same thing. either differentiate more in the SC themselves, or combine them. [7]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T13-33-00
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: [SC 1.2.1] Replace "multimedia alternative to text" with "audio and/or video alternative to text" since it is possible to gloss text w/ audio only, or w/ silent video only (for instance, sign language) or w/ audio & video together (e.g. video of talking head). [8]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T13-42-46
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: [SC 1.3.1] What does this mean? Most of us had no idea, and the few who did had difficulty explaining what the practical implications of this would be for content development. Do you mean "semantics conveyed through presentation?" Or is it the semantics about the relation between objects? Either one of these, or both, would be more understandable. [9]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T14-03-42
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: [SC 2.4.2] Do you mean the title tag or the title that goes in the H1? Please clarify (even if in some non-HTML specific way). [10]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T14-08-00
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: [SC 3.1.4] We debated this but could not agree on a common interpretation. What do you mean? [11]
20:29:58 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/22-eo-irc#T14-14-13