See also: IRC log
<scribe> Scribe: Jan
JA: Has been talking to someone else about joining as an Invited Expert
JB: Met some people at CSUN
... Checking UA site...
... Jim, please send me email at end of meeting.
... ANother person...
... At discussion of media and captions...
... Person is an accessibility consultant
... Will send him mail to follow up
JA: I have some other cards as well
JB: We do need to be careful that
when people step into meetings they sign the patent
policy
... OK so it looks like we could be adding several new
people
JB: Technically the draft is out
as a dreft of a document on Note track
... Because our charter doesn't currently allow a new Rec track
doc.
... JB: Wasn't caught as early as it could have been
<AllanJ> http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2007/draft_uawg_charter_21feb07.html
Existing charter: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/charter-20041107.html
Draft NEW charter: http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/2007/draft_uawg_charter_21feb07.html
JA: Milestones need to be changed
but aren't too far off
... Based on CG call should we put formal dependencies on
Compound Docs and WebAPI
JB: "Formal Dependency"
means...
... Usually between PF and other W3 groups...
... What's needed here is that UA group will be reviewing what
those other groups are doing
... Think charter generator has different wording
... Under this call most relationships would be through PF, and
actually would want more direct ability to go directly to other
W3 groups
... Former chair was frustrated by that
... Think its a good way to get progress in general on user
agent accessibility support across WAI
KF: Agree that it's better if UAWG can contribute out rather than waiting for things to come in.
JA: Maybe just say "The UAWG may also interact with the following non-WAI W3C Working Groups."
JB: Maybe still makes sense to
channel some stuff through PF
... So if promoting a particular strategy that should go
through PF
... So maybe "except where we're coordinating on compound docs,
Web APIs, or user agent support"
JA: "user agent support" too broad?
JB: I mean like guidance...SVG spec...so SVG players...so UAWG would help with developer guidance on player features
JR: Sounds ok, but no hard division possible
<scribe> ACTION: JR to Try out charter generator with wording to cover UAWG communication with other format groups [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-ua-minutes.html#action01]
JB: All charters will get cross-reviewed in CG
KF: Other things that need to be changed are all the timelines
JB: Should be chartered through
Rec and then follow on work....test suites etc.
... May make sense to charter for 2 or 3 year period
... Also under deliverables, specify v2.0
<scribe> ACTION: JR to In new charter clarify v2.0 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-ua-minutes.html#action02]
JB: Charter should start July 1?
JA: Shouldn't charter pre-date draft?
JB: Can't predate what happened
last week.
... But maybe we could say April 1
... Not just "Publish", "Publish Recommendation"
... "Develop test suites for user agents that render HTML and
CSS. " seems too narrow
JA: What to add?
KF: Would we do the test
suites?
... Shouldn't CSS suite go to CSS group?
... We should advise and contribute as appropriate
JB: Catch under W3C
Process....Last Call...then CR...then final Rec
... Under CR need several interoperable implementations...test
suites help prove this.
... So we need to do test suites
... It's another reason we need more people on the group
JA: So what happens if we;re doing HTML4 and then HTML5 comes out
<AllanJ> JR: UA level of abstraction is higher
<AllanJ> ... test cases are difficult
JB: In WAI we customize
... Requirements document could also be an exit criteria
<AllanJ> JR: AU and UA have even larger problem
JB: Doesn't work that way in WAI
JA: John S. and I discussing this
several years ago...
... WCAG tells them what to do...but needed to bring it into a
user agent to do the test
JB: Sounds good
JA: Yeah but we didn't do it
JB: So maybe this is enough on
the charter today
... Under "Scope" "Increase membership" should not be in
there...should be in Participation
<scribe> ACTION: JR to Under "Scope" "Increase membership" should not be in there...should be in Participation e.g. 10 active members [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-ua-minutes.html#action03]
JA: Some discussion of whether
UAAG wiki could be used....prob not
... But we should review it
... It's a huge document
http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/ARIA_UA_Best_Practices
KF: And more coming
JA: I heard that Safari is starting to incorporate HTML5 tags
JB: Really?
JA: Nothing prevents them
Maybe here: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/ARIA_UA_Best_Practices
Sorry: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206904535
JA: Based on conversation with AG, the browser group will go off and talk about it.
JB: ANd if they want to come back
to UAWG space should we welcome them?
... Yes
JA: Yes
KF: Yes
JA: Would they all have to sign up?
JB: Yes
JA: If we start doing this more with Pierre and Geoff is there a quick process page for this?
JB: Most on participation page already
JR: Phillipe
JB: So keyboard Agneda item to next week
JA: Anything on TEITAC wiki that we should point to?
JB: Yes and more coming - I'll send it along
JA: Can't make it on April 3rd
JB: Can't make it on April
17,24
... I'll be co-chairing the UAWG for a few months
JA: Certainly helpful
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: Jan Inferring ScribeNick: Jan Default Present: Jan, KFord, Judy, Jim Present: Jan KFord Judy Jim Regrets: Gregory Rosmaita Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2008JanMar/0065.html Got date from IRC log name: 20 Mar 2008 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2008/03/20-ua-minutes.html People with action items: jr WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]