12:29:57 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #er
12:29:57 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/04/09-er-irc
12:30:04 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #er
12:30:11 <shadi> zakim, this will be ert
12:30:11 <Zakim> ok, shadi; I see WAI_ERTWG()8:30AM scheduled to start now
12:30:18 <shadi> meeting: ERT WG
12:30:27 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()8:30AM has now started
12:30:28 <Zakim> +Shadi
12:30:48 <shadi> chair: Shadi
12:31:11 <shadi> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2008Apr/0003.html
12:31:24 <shadi> agenda+ HTTP Vocabulary in RDF Editor's Draft
12:31:32 <shadi> agenda+ Updated draft ERT WG Charter
12:31:43 <shadi> agenda+ Upcoming meetings and schedule
12:32:40 <Zakim> +[IBM]
12:33:31 <shadi> zakim, ibm is really Michael
12:33:31 <Zakim> +Michael; got it
12:34:11 <carlosI> carlosI has joined #er
12:34:51 <shadi> zakim, mute me
12:34:51 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
12:35:22 <JohannesK> JohannesK has joined #er
12:35:31 <MikeS> MikeS has joined #er
12:36:05 <Zakim> +Carlos_Iglesias
12:36:05 <Zakim> -Carlos_Iglesias
12:36:05 <Zakim> +Carlos_Iglesias
12:37:36 <shadi> zakim, unmute me
12:37:36 <Zakim> Shadi should no longer be muted
12:39:38 <shadi> scribe: MikeS
12:39:43 <MikeS> scribe: MikeS
12:39:54 <Zakim> +Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
12:39:54 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 2
12:39:54 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Updated draft ERT WG Charter" taken up [from shadi]
12:40:15 <JohannesK> Zakim, klaus is really Johannes
12:40:15 <Zakim> +Johannes; got it
12:41:30 <MikeS> CI: CV is out traveling
12:41:30 <shadi> regrtes: CarlosV
12:41:48 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/charter3
12:42:20 <MikeS> SAZ: current charter is scope of work for working group
12:42:26 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/charter4
12:42:26 <MikeS> expires end  of Apr 2008
12:42:30 <MikeS> zakim, mute me
12:42:30 <Zakim> sorry, MikeS, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
12:42:49 <MikeS> zakim, IBM is MikeS
12:42:49 <Zakim> sorry, MikeS, I do not recognize a party named 'IBM'
12:43:12 <MikeS> zakim, mute michael
12:43:12 <Zakim> Michael should now be muted
12:43:55 <MikeS> SAZ: updated charter tempalte and more scrutiny of charters
12:44:39 <MikeS> introduction - overall mission of group
12:46:02 <MikeS> ER is working much more closely with UAAG, ATAG, WCAG
12:46:48 <MikeS> charter runs until Mar 2010
12:47:24 <MikeS> Secope - main scope of work
12:49:39 <MikeS> supporting docs include the guide, HTTP in RDF, pointers, and other auxilary documents
12:49:55 <MikeS> EARL Schema is only rec-track document
12:50:37 <MikeS> JK: auxilary documents are already listed in section 2; can we reference?
12:50:48 <shadi> action: clarify "supporting documents" in point 1 of the scope
12:52:45 <MikeS> CI: confusion around point about metadata and "input"
12:53:04 <MikeS> SAZ: provide some sort of guidance for development of tools that may be RDF-agnostic
12:53:06 <MikeS> ok
12:53:32 <shadi> action: consider "providing guidance on the development of tools that..." in point 3 of the scope
12:55:03 <MikeS> SAZ: Success criterion section has no content currently
12:55:39 <MikeS> request for assistance on stating criteria of emasurement of success
12:56:42 <MikeS> what are the expectations of ourselves and what should they be from others?
12:56:58 <MikeS> usually met with implementations of specifications (i.e. EARL Schema)
12:57:27 <MikeS> EARL is unique - tools can output EARL and tools can process EARL
12:57:58 <MikeS> JK: criteria targeted at specifications (deliverables) or for the group?
12:58:19 <MikeS> SAZ: for the group but based on success of rec-track docs
12:59:21 <MikeS> need not focus on rec-track docs only but these will be most scrutinized
13:00:27 <MikeS> JK: if funding were provided, test suite for WCAG2 might be one criterion
13:00:44 <MikeS> CI: don't see relation between funding and mission of working group
13:02:33 <MikeS> SAZ: agree with CI - funding is distinct from mission of group
13:02:49 <MikeS> part of core work is definitely development of test suites
13:03:31 <MikeS> should be a success criteria to develope such suites but make it clear that we're not alone
13:04:20 <MikeS> possible statement of success criterion: contribute to the development of test suites among WCAG, UAAG, and ATAG (and possibly PF)
13:04:47 <MikeS> KJ: +1 for contribute; responsibility is not ours alone
13:04:51 <MikeS> CI: +1
13:04:56 <MikeS> MS: +1
13:05:26 <MikeS> MS: lots of test suties around ARIA already so not sure how much work is there
13:06:25 <MikeS> SAZ: some discussion about evaluation technology and methodology and ER would certainly be involved if that work got off the ground
13:07:35 <shadi> cotntribute to the development of an updated WAI EValuation Resource Suite
13:09:24 <MikeS> SAZ: includes evaluation tools, conformance, evaluation in specific contexts
13:09:39 <MikeS> CI: sounds more like work around supporting documents
13:10:35 <shadi> cotntribute to the development of an updated WAI EValuation Resource Suite, especially to the development of an evaluation methodology around WCAG 2.0
13:11:02 <shadi> **potential development
13:11:44 <shadi> **consider WAI evaluation methodology
13:11:50 <MikeS> MS: I think "evaluation methodology" will need lots of clarification
13:13:33 <MikeS> SAZ: while we're not actively supporting WCAG1.0, whatever is supported around WCAG2.0 evaluation methodology
13:14:15 <MikeS> ok
13:15:06 <MikeS> JK: Can we expand methodologies to toher technologies (eg mobile)
13:15:15 <MikeS> SAZ: yes, but probably out of our scope
13:15:49 <MikeS> MS: why wouldn't be an accessibility evaluation methodology in the context of mobile?
13:16:30 <MikeS> CI: main use case is accessibility but try to stay as generic as possible with regard to evaluation methodology or technology
13:17:49 <MikeS> SAZ: EARL implementations must be part of criteria
13:18:13 <MikeS> who can we count on for these implementations?
13:18:24 <MikeS> CI: hope to implement but depends on time line and resources
13:18:58 <MikeS> and, of course, what constitutes an implementation?
13:19:08 <MikeS> SAZ: focus on output EARL rather than tools that process EARL
13:20:23 <MikeS> SAZ: Dan C from HTML5 has been doing scripting based on EARL for testing; might want to follow-up with him and build upon his work for implementation of process EARL
13:20:30 <MikeS> yet, focus should be on output EARL for now
13:20:50 <MikeS> zakim, unmute michael
13:20:50 <Zakim> Michael should no longer be muted
13:22:30 <MikeS> MS: will follow-up with management here at IBM for candidates for implementations; possibly validation engine in ACTF
13:22:36 <MikeS> http://www.eclipse.org/actf
13:23:02 <MikeS> MS: follow-up with Paciello Group on evaluation toolbar
13:23:11 <MikeS> zakim, mute michael
13:23:11 <Zakim> Michael should now be muted
13:23:47 <MikeS> SAZ: list of deliverables
13:26:51 <MikeS> SAZ: LC should happen prior to large summer break in Europe in Aug
13:27:25 <MikeS> dropping from LC to WD in May with EARL 1.0 schema
13:27:54 <MikeS> publish EARL 1.0 schema as LC and most related notes in June
13:28:11 <MikeS> first working group note for Pointers
13:29:01 <MikeS> CI: can meet deadline for publication of poitners in RDF
13:29:39 <MikeS> SAZ: ideal publication of CR for EARL Schema 1.0 at end of July or very early August
13:29:58 <MikeS> updated notes (e.g. pointers, http)
13:30:20 <MikeS> four months for implementation: Aug thru Oct
13:30:29 <MikeS> correction: Aug thru November
13:31:16 <MikeS> enter PR mode in mid-November and final rec published in December 2008
13:31:22 <MikeS> along with updates to notes
13:32:01 <MikeS> MS: So proposed charter ends Dec 2008?
13:32:21 <MikeS> JK: discussion of moving HTTP, content in RDF to rec-track
13:32:40 <MikeS> when to do this - before or after final publication in Dec 2008?
13:33:01 <MikeS> MS: What are the advantages to recommendation v. note?
13:33:18 <MikeS> SAZ: more visibility as rec
13:34:15 <MikeS> MS: what's ITF/IETF?
13:35:37 <MikeS> IETF = Internet Engineering Task Force; describe common internet protocols
13:36:15 <MikeS> SAZ: might consider HTTP in RDF a rec-track in charter
13:36:49 <MikeS> "would be published as working group note *or* CR"
13:37:35 <MikeS> CI: rec, as seen from outside, is more authoritative
13:37:48 <MikeS> zakim, unmute michael
13:37:48 <Zakim> Michael should no longer be muted
13:38:16 <MikeS> SAZ: 04/16 not available and traveling week of 04/23
13:38:26 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 3
13:38:26 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Upcoming meetings and schedule" taken up [from shadi]
13:39:56 <MikeS> SAZ: 05/07 may also be problematic for many
13:40:09 <MikeS> no conf on 04/16
13:40:15 <MikeS> tentative on 04/23
13:40:25 <MikeS> confirmed for 04/30
13:40:34 <MikeS> tentative on 05/07
13:41:20 <MikeS> JK to check in with CV
13:41:38 <Zakim> -Johannes
13:41:39 <Zakim> -Michael
13:41:46 <Zakim> -Shadi
13:41:57 <Zakim> -Carlos_Iglesias
13:41:58 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()8:30AM has ended
13:41:59 <Zakim> Attendees were Shadi, Michael, Carlos_Iglesias, Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, Johannes
13:45:20 <shadi> zakim, bye
13:45:20 <Zakim> Zakim has left #er
13:45:29 <shadi> rrsgent, make logs world
13:45:42 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
13:45:47 <shadi> rrsagent, make minutes
13:45:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/04/09-er-minutes.html shadi
13:45:51 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
13:45:55 <shadi> rrsagent, bye
13:45:55 <RRSAgent> I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/09-er-actions.rdf :
13:45:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: clarify "supporting documents" in point 1 of the scope [1]
13:45:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/09-er-irc#T12-50-48
13:45:55 <RRSAgent> ACTION: consider "providing guidance on the development of tools that..." in point 3 of the scope [2]
13:45:55 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/04/09-er-irc#T12-53-32