See also: IRC log
<Christophe> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/Overview
CS: Shadi updated the mockups
... the search page
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/tests/simple
SAZ: may need additional tweaks based on
experience from using the search functions
... may also use some wording and presentation tweaks, maybe EOWG can help
... for now, is this the functionality that we want?
... we had talked about categorizing Techniques or Test Samples into
"automatable" or not
... is this a priority to consider now?
CS: we used to have this information in the BenToWeb metadata
<Christophe> Automatable or not: see testMode element in TCDL: http://www.bentoweb.org/refs/TCDL2.0.html#edef-testmode
TB: we have information on the Technology, may also help selecting tests
SAZ: what kind of information is key for tool developers?
MC: all information, with the metadata, and let me deal with it myself
CV: agree with michael
CS: all tests regardless if automatable or not?
CV: yes. want information about automatable or not but want everything
MC: might have my own definition of what's automatable or not
TB: agree
SAZ: there is the "view format" feature
... seems that this may be most useful
... may need to better highlight it or explain it
CS: techniques and technology features will be
pretty long
... might be a problem to select
SAZ: ideally scripting could help pre-select
these based on other criteria
... anyone has ideas for addressing this?
RESOLUTION: mockups accepted, SAZ to start implementing functionality
<scribe> ACTION: Shadi to add issue on AJAX scripting on the search interface into tracker [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/27-tsdtf-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-25 - Add issue on AJAX scripting on the search interface into tracker [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2009-02-03].
<scribe> ACTION: shadi to ask shawn if we can bring these mockups into EOWG for additional feedback (from an educational perspective) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/27-tsdtf-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-26 - Ask shawn if we can bring these mockups into EOWG for additional feedback (from an educational perspective) [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2009-02-03].
<Christophe> CarlosI's review: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2009Jan/0009.html
CS: want to review that status of where we
are
... CarlosI researched and summarized the situation
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert-tsdtf/2009Jan/0011.html
SAZ: seems that #26 is out of synch, what are you proposing to change?
CS: expand the table to make summary attribute more useful
SAZ: so change the sample file to align it with the purpose/description?
CS: yes
<scribe> ACTION: christophe to update the sample files for test #26 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/27-tsdtf-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-27 - Update the sample files for test #26 [on Christophe Strobbe - due 2009-02-03].
CS: #36 and #41 have same issue, we have dummy page to avod 404 that is outside the naming convention
CI: two option, using a single dummy file or use one per test case
CS: have a duplicate for each test anyway, just doesn't follow the naming convention
SAZ: see no reason why
<scribe> ACTION: christophe to change names of the dummy pages for #36 and #41, to follow the naming convention [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/27-tsdtf-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-28 - Change names of the dummy pages for #36 and #41, to follow the naming convention [on Christophe Strobbe - due 2009-02-03].
<Christophe> status list: http://www.w3.org/2006/tsdtf/TestSampleStatusList
CS: test samples need review
... should we start reviewing or should we wait for the automation?
SAZ: will take some time until the WG tool is
ready
... may be better to do some manual reviewing
CS: even if people did 10 reviews per week it would still take until March 2010 to finish all the tests currently in the repository
SAZ: primarily Michael, CarlosI, and Tim for
now
... available to do reviews?
MC: overhead so difficult that it takes too
much time
... have trouble getting my head around the actual reviews
SAZ: concludes that the WG tool has much higher priority now
CS: maybe more than the public web interface
SAZ: think that at least the draft mockups are
important to show our work and potentially recruit participation
... but now need to put more focus on the WG tool
CS: maybe a new time might make it more easy for folks in north america to attend
MC: is there a request?
SAZ: any known conflicts?
... let's defer until have a real need
Next meeting: 10 February 2009