12:01:59 RRSAgent has joined #eo 12:02:00 logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/09/19-eo-irc 12:02:17 Zakim has joined #eo 12:02:32 zakim, this will be eowg 12:02:32 ok, doylesaylor; I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM scheduled to start in 28 minutes 12:02:48 rrsagent, make logs public 12:03:04 Scribe: Doyle 12:03:19 ScribeNick: doylesaylor 12:03:33 Meeting: EOWG 12:03:58 Chair: Shawn Henry 12:07:35 Song has joined #eo 12:12:37 Song has left #eo 12:12:44 Song has joined #eo 12:19:51 Wayne has joined #eo 12:25:13 andrew has joined #eo 12:26:26 Sharron has joined #eo 12:27:05 zakim, who is here? 12:27:05 WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has not yet started, shawn-off 12:27:06 On IRC I see Sharron, andrew, Wayne, Song, Zakim, RRSAgent, doylesaylor, shawn-off 12:27:50 WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has now started 12:27:57 +doyle 12:28:04 + +1.512.305.aaaa 12:28:48 +Shawn 12:28:50 achuter has joined #eo 12:29:48 +??P3 12:30:09 +Loughborough 12:31:01 + +035850374aabb 12:31:06 +??P6 12:31:14 zakim, ??P6 is me 12:31:14 +achuter; got it 12:31:19 zakim, ??P3 is Song 12:31:19 +Song; got it 12:31:44 zakim, 1.512.302.aaaa is me 12:31:44 sorry, Sharron, I do not recognize a party named '1.512.302.aaaa' 12:31:55 zakim, who is on the phone? 12:31:55 On the phone I see doyle, +1.512.305.aaaa, Shawn, Song, Loughborough, +035850374aabb, achuter 12:32:30 zakim, aaaa is me 12:32:30 +Sharron; got it 12:32:34 + +0137383aacc 12:32:39 andrew has left #eo 12:33:09 zakim, who is here? 12:33:09 On the phone I see doyle, Sharron, Shawn, Song, Loughborough, +035850374aabb, achuter, +0137383aacc 12:33:12 On IRC I see achuter, Sharron, Wayne, Song, Zakim, RRSAgent, doylesaylor, shawn 12:33:13 +Wayne_Dick 12:33:51 zakim, aacc is Liam 12:33:51 +Liam; got it 12:33:59 zakim, aabb is Anna 12:33:59 +Anna; got it 12:35:33 zakim, who is here? 12:35:33 On the phone I see doyle, Sharron, Shawn, Song, Loughborough, Anna, achuter, Liam, Wayne_Dick 12:35:35 On IRC I see achuter, Sharron, Wayne, Song, Zakim, RRSAgent, doylesaylor, shawn 12:36:29 LiamMcGee has joined #eo 12:37:48 Topic: Relationship between Mobile Web Best Practices (MWBP) and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 12:38:17 +Sylvie_Duchateau 12:38:37 zakim, mute me 12:38:37 Shawn should now be muted 12:38:40 zakim, unmute me 12:38:40 Shawn should no longer be muted 12:38:40 zakim, who is making noise? 12:38:51 LiamMcGee, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: doyle (13%), Shawn (63%), Anna (3%), achuter (79%) 12:38:57 zakim, mute me 12:38:57 Song was already muted, Song 12:39:04 zakim, mute me 12:39:04 achuter should now be muted 12:39:48 hbj has joined #eo 12:41:06 sylvie has joined #eo 12:41:14 Shawn: Agenda - on the homepage. http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/#agenda 12:42:24 zakim, unmute me 12:42:24 achuter should no longer be muted 12:42:34 zakim, mute me 12:42:34 achuter should now be muted 12:43:20 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2008JulSep/att-0090/together_in_overview.html 12:43:25 Shawn: Pull down from email the document Alan just sent. If you prefer the agenda, now available. 12:43:59 Shawn: pull the new document from email now. Refresh the browser will show the link from Alan. 12:44:20 Shawn: Does anyone not have the new page from Alan. sent in email? 12:45:39 +Helle_Bjarno 12:46:06 zakim, unmute me 12:46:06 achuter should no longer be muted 12:46:12 Shawn: Thanks Alan for getting that for the discussion today. A reminder of where we are with this document. Alan has made some changes and some change from the Mobile Web Best Practices Group. Last time we looked at, WCAG2 and Mobile Web together, a couple of paragraphs and Alan has done to integrate. 12:46:39 zakim, helle_bjarno is hbj 12:46:39 +hbj; got it 12:46:40 Alan: I haven't changed the text. What we need to look at the right place in the page, further up. More explanation? 12:46:45 zakim, mute me 12:46:45 achuter should now be muted 12:46:54 zakim, mute me 12:46:54 hbj should now be muted 12:47:57 zakim, unmute me 12:47:57 achuter should no longer be muted 12:48:03 Shawn: let's concentrate on two things first of all. Under the first H2 there is an abstract of the document...how to use this document. Go to the How to use this Document. The second paragraph has a review note, a bulleted list or table to understand? Two different ways to present this information. Alan do we pick which we go with, or do you prefer? 12:48:20 zakim, mute me 12:48:20 achuter should now be muted 12:48:25 Alan: I think we should make a final decision. Perhaps the table is easier to read. I don't care either way. 12:48:47 William: the problem discussed of the inadequacy of access. 12:50:04 Shawn: Let's make it accessible. Any compelling reason to use one or the other? Sylvie have you read this? Where it says in the second paragraph, right under a set of bullets, and after that a little table. Do you find either? The list or table easier or more difficult to use and understand? 12:50:13 Sylvie: I have to look at it. 12:50:55 Sharron: my preference is the bulleted list. The headings on the table are not necessary. The language sounds forced or awkward. The bulleted list is not confucing at all. 12:51:01 Shawn: others? 12:51:15 zakim, unmute me 12:51:15 achuter should no longer be muted 12:51:21 Wayne: after at what Sharron said, I prefer the bulleted list. Flows well. 12:51:33 Alan: I would be for the list as well. 12:51:36 zakim, mute me 12:51:36 achuter should now be muted 12:51:42 Shawn: any objections to remove the table? 12:51:44 no 12:51:54 Sylvie: I prefer the list. 12:51:56 PROPOSED RESOLUTION: Remove the table and keep the list 12:52:06 RESOLUTION: Remove the table and keep the list 12:52:50 ACTION on Alan, to remove the table (and review note) and keep list. 12:53:05 zakim, unmute me 12:53:05 achuter should no longer be muted 12:53:15 Shawn: any objections for removing the table? Alan you can record as an action or whatever works for you. Remember to remove your little review note. The document is the same as it was before, except Alan moved WCAG 2 and Mobile Web Best Practices to sections in the document. 12:53:41 Sharron: the second major bullet, ...re WCAG 2 a typo? 12:53:51 Alan: missing the last line of the table. 12:54:01 Shawn: we don't want to add that. 12:54:05 zakim, mute me 12:54:05 achuter should now be muted 12:54:11 Alan: shouldn't we have a pointer? 12:54:40 ACTION on Alan, correct "If you have done WCAG 1.0 and considering progressing to MWBP 1.0, then read WCAG 2.0 to MWBP" 12:54:59 Shawn: I have a question for you. Some questions for review. And a big question about how to integrate the sections on WCAG2 and MWBP? Do people have any content suggestions? 12:55:12 Wayne: a specific wording. 12:55:49 Shawn: anyone else with comments? I want to do everyone the chance to read the new page that Alan has sent. Let's talk overall about the sections stuck in here. 12:55:55 Wayne: what section? 12:56:16 Shawn: pay attention to WCAG2 and MWBP but read the whole thing. 12:56:43 zakim, unmute me 12:56:43 achuter should no longer be muted 12:56:52 Shawn: we are going to remove the table and use the list. And also the whole document, what to do the sections together. Alan? 12:57:42 Alan: the list at the beginning is two parts. The first bullet point is split into two sub points. The last two are more verbose and longer, what to do. The first one is made in to one item to two items. 12:57:53 zakim, mute me 12:57:53 achuter should now be muted 12:57:54 Shawn: you can't break up the second ones. 12:58:22 Shawn: break to read. Pay attention to WCAG2 and MWBP sections and how they work. 13:00:08 Regrets: Shadi, Andrew, Jack, Henny 13:00:55 regrets+ Lisa, Yeliz 13:01:35 Regrets+ Jack Welsh, Henny Swan, Lisa Pappas, Yeliz, Andrew 13:01:54 Present+ Song, Doyle, Shawn, Wayne, Sharron, William, Andrew, Alan, Liam, Anna, Helle, Sylvie, 13:03:34 zakim, unmute me 13:03:34 achuter should no longer be muted 13:04:01 Shawn: Alan? 13:04:17 Alan: I wrote what was in my mind 13:04:33 Alan: just an idea. 13:04:51 zakim, mute me 13:04:51 achuter should now be muted 13:04:53 Shawn: over all what do you think about this page. the flow the information, tone? 13:05:53 William: in the tone part, when WCAG2 becomes a recommendation. We should rewrite things so that don't treat WCAG1 as not a step child. WCAG2 is it. Everyone to use WCAG2 part of our mention. Every document should have that attitude. 13:06:08 -hbj 13:06:13 Shawn: this one is not a purpose to promote that. But we should be promoting this from now on. 13:06:48 zakim, unmute me 13:06:48 achuter should no longer be muted 13:07:03 William: the one in question WCAG2 and together WCAG1 be more emphatic, we suggests for many projects to do both at the same time. At the beginning of the paragraph. 13:07:23 zakim, mute me 13:07:23 achuter should now be muted 13:07:29 Alan: we should explain what information is not present. People should do both. Mobile and WCAG together. 13:07:38 Wayne: WCAG 2 is easier to implement. 13:08:05 zakim, unmute me 13:08:05 achuter should no longer be muted 13:08:10 zakim, mute me 13:08:10 achuter should now be muted 13:08:14 William: the only reason to retain WCAG1 for legal and other reasons. 13:09:09 Shawn: what about overall point we want to say is do we want to say, for the proposed suggestion make it clear near the beginning we recommend using WCAG 2.0 but this has WCAG 1.0 information. 13:09:33 William: for historical reasons. Still in WCAG 1.0 is still in the literature is the grandfathering. 13:09:34 zakim, unmute me 13:09:34 achuter should no longer be muted 13:09:43 zakim, mute me 13:09:43 achuter should now be muted 13:10:43 Wayne: first off, ok as you have already implemented WCAG 1 at that point in that article, upgrading to meet mobile web best practices, also a good time to upgrade WCAG 2.0 If you are not ready then give that document. 13:11:08 Wayne: localized not necessaryly in one central document. Make WCAG 2 the first choice on everything. 13:11:32 ACTION: Shawn & Alan - look at how to put preference on WCAG 2.0 in both the overview and also in the subpages. 13:11:33 Shawn: I am writing an action item to put preference on WCAG 2.0 in both the overview and in sub pages. 13:12:02 zakim, unmute me 13:12:02 achuter should no longer be muted 13:12:02 Shawn: What next over view on high level on this document. 13:12:37 Alan: where it says the success criteria is assinged levels. Link to the section above. Perhaps at the end of the section put a mention of the subpages so that people don't get confused. 13:13:01 William: obsolute, I don't see the terms in this document. 13:13:20 action: Alan change to something like "Some common words are used in THE OTHER PAGES OF this document with specific meanings" 13:13:34 zakim, mute me 13:13:34 achuter should now be muted 13:13:46 Shawn: other things over all? 13:14:48 zakim, unmute me 13:14:48 achuter should no longer be muted 13:14:51 Shawn: This section WCAG 2.0 and MWBP has a fair amount of benefits. And also in the managing overlapping requriements there are benefits. Have in this page rather than the over view page? 13:14:58 Alan: I don't we discussed that. 13:15:19 zakim, mute me 13:15:19 achuter should now be muted 13:16:15 Shawn: to remind people go under the table of contents is how to use this document. the first one is WCAG and MWBP and pretty brief now. Alan has some good information about the benefits doing both versus moving the to WAI overview page. 13:16:23 13:16:32 Wayne: we leave it, even technical readers need motivation. 13:16:44 Shawn: they should read related documents? 13:16:47 zakim, unmute me 13:16:47 achuter should no longer be muted 13:16:52 Wayne: do together you better. 13:17:13 zakim, mute me 13:17:13 achuter should now be muted 13:17:56 Shawn: the technical document is a note, complex to change. A WAI is much more easy to change. The technical focus on what won't change. Business case more likely to change. 13:18:05 Alan: any errors in it, much less critical. 13:18:13 ACTION: Alan, consider putting the documents after "Before continuing with this document, please read the introductory documents:" in bullet list so they stand out 13:19:17 Wayne: the introductory paragraph is very good. Go do to the list the little algorthm the paragraph just before that could do. Start there. This document looks at waqys some of the mwbp and criteria 13:19:26 Alan: in the together section, not the list. 13:20:13 Wayne: change the word document to section. If someone is skimming through that is all you need. If you want to point them to shared experiences you put that at the bottom of the list. bEfore appendix A references. 13:20:30 Wayne: then you could move the social motivation back to the over view documents. 13:20:43 William: I thouhgt this was the over view document. 13:21:15 Shawn: I shouldn't use over view, I meant the introductory page versus this which is the over view page for the technical document. 13:21:23 Wayne: this says how to do it. 13:21:41 William: no mapping table is too much for the presentation. For the editor. 13:21:54 Wayne: I thought it was very useful. 13:22:04 William: they don't map. Not useful. 13:22:49 Shawn: that is part of the reason why there is no WCAG 2 and 1 together. Just a back ground note? Or good to tell people that? So they would know why they provided. 13:23:06 Wayne: yes why not provide table. for technical guidance. 13:23:14 William: you would have the answer. 13:23:38 Wayne: you come into a topic and don't know the subtleties and want a table. 13:24:29 Sharron: you just said Shawn, no WCAG 1 and mobile web together. Maybe a paragraph what you won't find. Put the mapping table...I agree with William you wouldn't think of. 13:25:43 Shawn: I was technical writer for awhile, my editor hat and I have re-organized the document I have some suggestions for Alan to consider. We should say, we want integrate a little differently without a heading why no mapping table. Fine to talk about now, but I could take an action item, and send to Alan for what he thinks about. 13:25:49 Sharron: sounds good. 13:25:53 Alan: good 13:26:13 Wayne: because the mapping is not simple. Made for different user requirements. 13:26:32 action: Shawn propose moving some of the info from the technical overview page to the WAI intro page. and look at edits based on points from EOWG discussion... 13:27:06 Shawn: I am taking an action item. see EO discussion. Let's see what other comments you have? Anything else to work on in the next draft? 13:27:24 Shawn: Alan has much changed in the sub pages? 13:28:26 -Anna 13:29:03 Alan: I don't think so. I changed I took out the original using the success criteria the thing you have to do everything. I check the list to make sure it was complete. In WCAG 1 in the detail sections I made them shorter, the useful information is still there. There are some where Yeliz, put each one the techniques at the beginning and the techniques and provide examples about the redundancy. 13:29:27 Shawn: if you are looking at the over view page. Might want to go back to... 13:29:34 Alan: latest version use that. 13:30:57 Shawn: looking at the email version. The first page something that says this version and the latest version. Goes to the latest version also linked from the EO agenda. Any comments on the sub pages. It looks like in the document where you have nothing and something you say what those mean. I wonder if in the over view page. the appendix terms not be used at all. Used in the sub document. 13:31:13 Sharron has joined #eo 13:31:15 Alan: yes redundant each time. Much easier to read. 13:31:40 Shawn: So smoothly in the sub document take appendix b in the over view document. 13:32:52 Shawn: William we are looking at the over view page, is the appendix B still relevant. Alan has smoothly integrated into the sub pages. No longer needed. The links at the top that go to the sub pages of this document. 13:33:32 William: now includes the fifth one doesn't have a navigation at the top. Four sub documents, what happened to the fifth one. Couldn't have a navigation? 13:33:51 Shawn: William could you clarify? 13:34:22 William: four navigation buttons at the top of the page, put a fifth one there, if you have the together there, links to this document. 13:34:30 Shawn: that page won't exist anymore. 13:34:45 Alan: should be there for people expectations. 13:35:07 Shawn: Navigations links to separate with detailed comments. 13:35:12 action: alan - remove Appendix B from the overview page 13:35:19 William: not logical precluded. 13:35:33 Alan: would people expect to see it there. Probably would 13:36:02 William: I think it is fine not separate document but still get to it from naviation bar rather than table of contents. 13:36:25 Shawn: would be five things, four to web pages and one to an inside page location. Five page table. 13:36:45 Shawn: if you did that if you were on another page go to the middle. 13:36:53 William: no no? 13:37:14 Shawn: yes, a no no where group does one things, with one that doesn't. 13:37:27 William: most people would be looking for. 13:38:11 Doyle: I think is a problem to land on the middle of a page. 13:38:19 Shawn: ok other? 13:38:33 Liam: I am not sure it is in a technical document. 13:39:13 shawn: look at the technical document at the top where the WCAG 2 and MWBP leave the link there so that would go the middle of over view page. 13:39:42 Liam: I am not keen on that because you are ascribing different functions to navigation objects. 13:40:28 Liam: where we have the table of contents, break into short labels and put main map at the top. Better for normal web navigation. The only problem can you cut down to one or two word labels. 13:40:48 Shawn: we could look at that. William are you happy with an action for consideration? 13:41:09 William: sure, I am not sure why it would put off by landing in the middle of a document? 13:41:36 action: Alan/Shawn consider subnav on Overview page 13:41:38 Shawn: when you have a group of links do one thing, except one. You expect groups of things to have the same action. 13:41:50 William: I don't but that is cool. 13:41:56 Shawn: any other comments? 13:42:13 Wayne: we are going to have the normal jump to the contents? 13:42:25 Shawn: we could but not with the sub nav 13:42:40 Wayne: I would like to be able to jump to the content. Table of contents. 13:42:48 Shawn: any objections to that? 13:42:56 Shawn: Liam? 13:42:57 action: Alan consider add link to the contents (like on other pages...) 13:43:18 Liam: no objection. do you want me to style up a sub pattern? 13:43:29 s/pattern/nav 13:44:46 Shawn: maybe maybe not. Let's see what we do with the re-write. Probably yes please we would love it. Thank you very much. I will ping Andrew to join on the last point. Go back to the EO home page to the agenda, and refresh, Item number 13:44:52 Topic: WCAG 2.0 at a Glance - edit suggestion 13:45:26 andrew has joined #eo 13:45:51 Shawn: From the email, sent an email an edit suggestion of WCAG 2 at a glance, or go to the EO agenda available now as Item number two. 13:45:52 +Andrew 13:46:06 Present+ Andrew 13:46:22 13:47:48 Shawn: go look at the page itself, from the email the first link goes to the link above. Couple of word suggestions. Go ahead William the second bullet under perceivable. 13:48:07 William: change the word multipedia, to video and audio. 13:48:49 Shawn: change the second bullet provide captions and altenatives for multimedia, to audio and video. A little more context for this just a minute. 13:49:04 s/multipedia,/multimedia,/ 13:49:05 Sharron: so not confused with flash? Wouldnt' we want to include flash? 13:50:21 Shawn: some people feel that the term multimedia has become synonmous with flash. In flash they used syncrhonized media, lets use a more common term, multimedia but some people are still uncomfortable with that, the ...for synchronized multimedia. 13:50:36 Maybe correct the date in "This page will be provided in a print version ... in August 2008" 13:50:43 Alan: combined use of more than one medium. A bit better and more obvious. 13:51:06 William: video doesn't include video only. 13:51:18 Shawn: lot of support any objections. 13:51:37 Shawn: for audio video content? 13:51:51 Andrew: allows flash people would realize that is applies to themselves. 13:52:02 Alan: appropriate jargon is appropriate. 13:52:22 Shawn: we do have content in this document elsewhere. 13:52:33 Wayne: audio and video media? 13:52:39 Doyle: no 13:52:50 s/have content in this/have "content" in this 13:52:54 Provide captions and alternatives for audio and video content. 13:52:54 Make information adaptable and available to assistive technologies. 13:53:59 Andrew: Alan or anybody else, change to audio video make easier? 13:54:11 Alan: easier, derived words makes easier. 13:54:23 s/video make easier?/video make translation easier?/ 13:54:36 Shawn: any objections? 13:54:53 Alan: seizures understood by people? 13:55:11 Doyle: yes 13:55:30 William: very widely publicized effect. If you have a grandma. 13:55:40 Alan: occurs to me as unusual word. 13:56:04 Shawn: not another easy way to say in three words or less, but most people understand, and used in the technical documents. 13:56:22 Shawn: any other points about updates on outreach. 13:56:46 Wayne: does not cause seizures is not enough. 13:57:14 Shawn: lets talk about. Do not use content known to cause seizures. Let us talk about. 13:57:29 Alan: I think the current form because the other is a bit too cryptic. 13:57:52 Shawn: I can't remember Judy's discussions. If Wayne to bring up again. 13:58:17 Wayne: take the bold off so that seizures is standing out. Happy with that compromise. That is the handle. 13:58:24 Shawn: let's look at that. 13:58:58 Shawn: 'what about do not use content that cause seizures'? 13:59:04 Andrew: that is more direct 13:59:16 Wayne: I think we should know that. 13:59:27 Liam: even if you don't know go find out. 13:59:28 Do not use content known to cause seizures. 13:59:37 Do not use content that causes seizures. 14:00:00 Do not use content that can causes seizures. 14:00:10 William: any content might cause ...no no 14:00:23 Wayne: not use content that causes seizures is good. 14:00:35 Liam: leaves room for understanding. yes. 14:00:59 Wayne: here is one, guideline 3 is about seizures to bring people into the document. 14:01:23 Liam: make grammatical sense. All the others are noun phrases, but not to cause seizures is not. 14:01:31 Shawn: refresh. 14:01:47 Liam: yeah. I like that. Second bullet is understandable. 14:02:09 Liam: understandable the second bullet. predicatble ways is better? 14:02:16 Sharron: i agree. 14:02:25 Andrew: just predictable in that case. 14:02:29 Shawn: yes 14:02:45 Shawn: refresh 14:03:22 William: is the first bullet still covered in WCAG 2 as understandable? 14:03:33 Liam: as defined as understandable yes. 14:03:40 Shawn: anything else? 14:03:56 Liam: third bullet perceivable, what is the most important? 14:04:01 Shawn: adaptable. 14:04:12 Liam: do we need to make information about it. 14:04:29 Liam: the less we bold the more bold stands out. 14:04:52 Liam: currently information and adaptable is bolded and take information and leave adaptable. 14:05:17 Alan: in the last bullet where content is bolded, maybe take that out. 14:05:49 Shawn: so you are saying, next point? 14:06:01 william: unbolded comment in operable. 14:06:15 Shawn: bold phrase would be navigate? 14:06:31 Wayne: that is what I am thinking. I think that is a concept. 14:06:40 Liam: navigate and find. 14:06:49 Wayne: both verbs and both refer to content. 14:06:57 Shawn: navigage and find is bold. 14:07:02 general ye 14:07:06 general yes. 14:07:38 Shawn: refresh 14:07:57 William: space between make and information. 14:08:19 Sharron: lost your edit on perceivable. 14:09:11 Shawn: refresh 14:09:28 William: everything caught up except seizures. 14:09:55 Shawn: do not use content that causes, I'll fix the bolding later on. Bold only seizures, next one? 14:10:11 Wayne: very last on the very last one unbold mistakes. 14:10:28 Liam: makes a slightly different quality. 14:10:38 Wayne: just like the content above. 14:11:04 Shawn: content is neutral 14:11:35 William: put causes not know to cause. 14:11:40 Shawn: yes 14:11:54 William: just reads the bolded things are they of a kind? 14:12:08 Sharron: pretty much so. 14:12:15 Shawn: anything else? 14:12:37 William: warn everyone sufficient contrast almost the paramount factor in the use of the web. 14:13:32 Shawn: William you sent some comments awhile ago. The answer to all of them if looking in isolation, but we are trying to match to WCAG2 probably not change them. Sent a long time ago. 14:13:45 Shawn: can we consider these taken of? 14:13:49 William: yes 14:14:09 Wayne: not on the card but on the page, make those bolded elements links to the guidelines. 14:14:14 William: over kill 14:14:25 Liam: not supposed to be print format? 14:14:50 Shawn: will be both, but have this page. You do that online version of the quick tips. 14:15:10 William: leave to the editors discretion. 14:15:38 Wayne: when I teach this, this gives them a friendly introduction. I might causes seizures it tells you how to do it. 14:15:43 action: Shawn consider adding links from the /glance/ to the How to Meet/Quick Ref 14:16:11 Shawn: refresh 14:16:22 Shawn: see if I have all the changes? 14:16:33 Liam: looks good to me. 14:16:37 Sharron: yep 14:16:49 Andrew: it certainly helps the scanning. 14:17:12 Liam: yes, WCAG a meta glance is like reading ... 14:17:36 Shawn: like a party game, bolded text and then say the guideline word for word. 14:17:52 s/WCAG a meta glance is like reading .../WCAG at a meta-glance is like reading the bold only/ 14:17:55 Wayne: when I use for teaching to link to the guidelines, have them read, then jump to how to meet. 14:19:21 Shawn: anything else on this? Anything else on the last ten minutes. Status of the public update, we are trying to get a really good fix on it. Finding things like in the evaluations one or two things that don't meet the guidelines, go back to and fix, the status is changing, and we did the re-evaluation, changing day by day. 14:19:30 Wayne: what about criteria we are risk. 14:19:52 Shawn: some still questionable. I don't know the status of every single one. 14:19:56 Wayne: that was all. 14:20:12 Shawn: Hoping, trying to get done in 2008 14:20:24 Shawn: any other questions or comments? 14:20:54 q+ to ask about Spain 14:21:22 Wayne: accessible announcement, accessibility curb cut, prepare a document using accessible format, especially scholarly, because it is semantically organized write off the various documents, like Modern Languaes and etc. 14:21:33 William: web best practices and other? 14:21:52 Wayne: if you want to sell where different formats is useful. 14:22:04 William: writing papers is a big deal for a lot of people. 14:22:45 Liam: this week I have mostly been doing text mining. Presenting is useful format. for search engines. The search would increase. 14:23:16 Shawn: ok reminder to update your availability Liam, Wayne and Henny, that would be good. 14:25:05 Shawn: under announcements the link for availability for upcoming conferences. List for the face to face for tele conference. Here is another question for you. I was surprised at how few are coming. Alan had offered to host a face to fact in Spain in April, in connection to the dub dub dub conference. So we can plan ahead, that say if we were to have a meeting in Spain in April who could attend? 14:25:09 ack me 14:25:09 shawn, you wanted to ask about Spain 14:25:22 William: Yeliz do what she did at Madrid? 14:26:01 Shawn: yes, Yeliz and Simon organizing a two day accessiblity conference for the last two years and I assume would do again. 14:26:17 http://www.w4a.info/2009/ 14:26:24 William: W 4 A was the best part of the conference in Beijing. 14:26:45 zakim, who is here? 14:26:45 On the phone I see doyle, Sharron, Shawn, Song (muted), Loughborough, achuter, Liam, Wayne_Dick, Sylvie_Duchateau (muted), Andrew 14:26:47