See also: IRC log
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
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
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]