See also: IRC log
cs: checking in on status from last meeting
... have there been diffs from last WCAG draft to current one?
mc: haven't done anything, waiting to offer assistance
cs: decision about updating test cases was dependent on that
mc: can work with someone
... straightforward diff off XML might not give you just what you need
... should do a "strategic" diff
saz: suggest action remain with BenToWeb person as they'll know what's needed
mc: will send source files to Carlos
cs: need to know which SC have changed substantively, and then need to estimate how much time needed to update test samples
saz: estimate how much needs to change, and understand which requirements seem to be stable (focus on them first)
cs: Tim's review of test samples http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2008Jan/0009.html
... further discussion in previous calls and on list
saz: naming and ID for next agendum
cs: question about versioning
mc: is an issue, though perhaps now not so much since significant changes not expected unless WCAG bounces back to WD again
saz: ID does indirectly indicate the version
cs: techniques also have dated references
saz: does date appear in HTML view generated from metadata of tests?
cs: yes for Bentoweb tests, but not sure for TCDL
saz: implementing that would help in the future
<Christophe> http://canada.esat.kuleuven.be/bentoweb/tsdtf/xhtml/index.html
<shadi> http://canada.esat.kuleuven.be/bentoweb/tsdtf/xhtml/metadata/sc1.1.1_l1_002.html
saz: looking at examples above, finding
references to dated versions
... maybe we need date to be visible, however
mc: if we have test samples against several dated versions would be important, otherwise not
saz: if WCAG opens techniques documents, could cause date versions to become relevant
mc: both latest version and dated version will
be available, we can use which we want
... suggest we use dated version
... and WCAG process for updating techniques would need to include a trigger
to review test case(s)
<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/usingTCDL#structure
saz: this case might affect our directory structure and naming conventions
<shadi> tests/xhtml/metadata
<shadi> tests/20070102/xhtml/metadata
saz: suggest adding datespace to the repository structure, as shown above
cs: is it necessary? hard to separate
versions
... wonder about extracting SC titles from an external doc
mc: suggest using WCAG source itself
cs: need to use back-dated versions sometimes
mc: can pull them out of CVS and run locally
... it's possible to get a URL to a particular CVS version as well, though
that might be Team only feature
... Michael can provide dated version on demand
tb: next issue - information about user environment needed to execute test
mc: prefer just to identify the technology
used, and you assume you have software that supports it
... could be chicken-and-egg with respect to "accessibility supported"
tb: satisfied as long as user has information needed to construct the test environment
mc: it should be case that users can find
accessibility support information if needed
... would only need to check if there was a problem executing test in a given
UA
cs: we assume user has environment needed to execute tests, is that ok?
tb: just want user to be able to find what they need
mc: a MIME type should be sufficient, and people able to run tests should know info needed
<Christophe> http://canada.esat.kuleuven.be/bentoweb/tsdtf/xhtml/metadata/sc1.2.1_l1_001.html
cs: do see in above example, video relied on
but video format not listed in metadata
... should add that info
saz: we're focusing on developing test samples
based on test procedures for techniques
... some issues might be relevant, e.g., <embed>, but that info should
be in test procedure
... we should be careful not to interpret in a way that adds restrictions
mc: suggest adding MIME type(s) to test case metadata should be sufficient
<agreement>
saz: updated TCDL document http://www.w3.org/mid/47DEA604.70100@w3.org, please let me know if comments