W3C

ERT WG

26 Mar 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
CarlosI, Johannes, Shadi, Michael
Regrets
CarlosV
Chair
Shadi
Scribe
CarlosI

Contents


Introducing Michael Squillace

SAZ: Michael's experience on tools will be useful for the group

presentation round

<shadi> http://www.eclipse.org/actf/

SAZ: have several tool producers at the group
... interesting for the group objective

Comments on WCAG 2.0 - testing for 80 characters

SAZ: just one agenda item, lots of pending action items

<JohannesK> 1.4.8 Visual Presentation

<JohannesK> For the visual presentation of blocks of text, a mechanism is available to achieve the following:

<JohannesK> width is no more than 80 characters or glyphs (40 if CJK)

SAZ: requirement of 80 characters width at WCAG2 1.4.8
... try to avoid a minimun width of the block of text in a way that the text will not reflow

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/20071211/Overview.php#qr-visual-audio-contrast-visual-presentation

JK: CI questioned on his mail if ems is a proper measurement fot line-width

SAZ: C20 technique is what we are talking about

CI: nothing has changed in the technique since my last response
... you can't use ems as a line-length measure
... ems refeer to character height not width

SAZ: the question is if we think it is impossible to test this provision
... it is focused on too long lines
... what's the problem with this?

JK: not problem from the testing perspective
... resize window and count characters

MS: it is manually testable as JK said

SAZ: proposal: send WCAG back the idea we don't have any problem with the SC itself
... follow-up the Technique issue

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/2005/Demo/after/index

SAZ: our comment back could be we don't have any problem with the SC itself but the associated technique need clarification and we may have further comments on it

<scribe> ACTION: CI to draft response and send it to the list for further discussion by tomorrow midday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-er-minutes.html#action01]

SAZ: some pending action items
... SAZ to finish schema
... JK and CV update Content in RDF
... new HTTP in RDF to review
... CI to finish Pointers draft

MS: timeline for Last Call?

SAZ: we reached LC time ago
... hard to say right now

JK: EARL is the only in the REC process

SAZ: maybe publish for the 14th of April
... then need decission by the 9th
... on the 2nd April (next meeting) we should have Content in RDF and HTTP in RDF on the Agenda

JK: maybe not possible for CV and me
... probably regrets for the next week

SAZ: then next meeting is tentative depending on agenda and people availibility

<scribe> ACTION: SAZ try to get a new publication plan [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-er-minutes.html#action02]

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: CI to draft response and send it to the list for further discussion by tomorrow midday [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-er-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: SAZ try to get a new publication plan [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/03/26-er-minutes.html#action02]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2008/03/26 17:47:23 $