See also: IRC log
<DanC> yes, oedipus , I read that message. as I say, it's all procedural
<DanC> it's a nice supplement to last week's minutes, but what I'd like is participation in the relevant threads.
<oedipus> the sticky wicket is this part: "PF WG already made an official announcement on this issue and requested the attribute be re-instated, consult:
<oedipus> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Aug/0213.html
<oedipus> "
<pimpbot> Title: Re: Request for PFWG WAI review of summary for tabular data from Al Gilman on 2008-08-06 (public-html@w3.org from August 2008) (at lists.w3.org)
<oedipus> "PF WG's position from the outset has been that there is a need to restore @summary for TABLE in the draft specification BEFORE the next public working draft is issued -- janina sajka, chair of PFWG will probably say so formally in the near future in a post to public-html"
<oedipus> that last seems pretty specific
<DanC> yes, Al G's msg of 6 Aug was noted in the telconference; what we noted is: it doesn't include an argument to justify the conclusion "@summary should stay"
<DanC> yes, the last is specific, but it's procedural, not a technical argument
<oedipus> what is the counter argument? where is the evidence of abuse? why are people afraid of content that assists a certain user group to have the same understanding of a table that a sighted person has by looking at it?
<oedipus> what is the hold up? why haven't we moved forward on this -- why was our request to restore summary NOT heeded before the next PWD was pushed?
<oedipus> those are the questions that need to be answered
<DanC> I can look up the counter-argument; I'm pretty sure it's cited in the tracker
<DanC> the request wasn't heeded because it wasn't persuasive
<oedipus> the only thing i've heard is vague generalities
<rubys> don't worry too much about PWD, beyond the fact that the issue wasn't noted accurately in the draft.
<oedipus> well, since the PWD is a yard-stick by which our progress is measured, the lack of summary is EXTREMELY disappointing
<rubys> the issue needs to be closed by last call
<rubys> there are a lot of issues which aren't making progress
<oedipus> yes, but there are people within and without the HTML WG who are working hard and dilligently -- we aren't just sniping from the sidelines -- our hands are as dirty as anyone else's
<DanC> editor's position is given in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2008Dec/0175.html , from ian@hixie.ch on 2008-12-20. I don't agree with it, but I don't think Al's msg of 6 Aug helps much.
<pimpbot> Title: Table feedback from Ian Hickson on 2008-12-20 (public-html@w3.org from December 2008) (at lists.w3.org)
<rubys> I'm not suggesting that anybody is merely sniping from the sidelines. The issue is far from closed.
<oedipus> bottom line: PFWG wants @summary
<DanC> yes, and I want a porche for christmas.
<DanC> stating what you want isn't enough to get it.
<oedipus> we have shown the need for it, we have shown use cases, we have gathered data, and no one who was blind in 1999 is any less blind 10 years later, so why was @summary removedd -- that is the question -- we cannot prove a negative as you would have us
<oedipus> do'\
<rubys> actually, my father in law was legally blind in 1999, but no longer is
<oedipus> steve faulkner's collection
<jgraham> oedipus: pointer?
<DanC> Al's msg doesn't show the need for it. I think perhaps other messages have, would you like to help collect them, oedipus ?
<oedipus> well, i admire and congratulate your dad, but i'm not any less blind than i was when i was on the HC review team that worked on HTML4x and CSS2 with the respective working groups
<rubys> you may very well have provided enough justification, and this working group hasn't quite caught up
<DanC> hang on... can we stick with "we have shown use cases, we have gathered data" and get that in the tracker?
<oedipus> just read any of steve faulkner's recent posts
<oedipus> hold on, i'll get a pointer
<oedipus> http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/misc/summary.html
<pimpbot> Title: summary attribute usage data (at www.paciellogroup.com)
<rubys> time to invite Zakim?
<oedipus> also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0503.html
<pimpbot> Title: Re: Use and abuse of summary from Leif Halvard Silli on 2009-02-19 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
<oedipus> and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0512.html
<MikeSmith> trackbot, start meeting
<pimpbot> Title: Re: Use and abuse of summary from Steven Faulkner on 2009-02-19 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
<trackbot> Date: 19 February 2009
<DanC> ACTION-98: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0420.html Re: Use and abuse of summary ; also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0503.html
<trackbot> ACTION-98 Discuss missing-alt with the WAI CG and report back notes added
<pimpbot> Title: Use and abuse of summary from Steven Faulkner on 2009-02-18 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
<DanC> action-98: and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0512.html
<trackbot> ACTION-98 Discuss missing-alt with the WAI CG and report back notes added
<pimpbot> Title: Re: Use and abuse of summary from Steven Faulkner on 2009-02-19 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
<DanC> thanks, gregory; those do seem to have technical content; I'll try to read them more closely
<oedipus> no problem
<jgraham> Interestingly none of stevef's examples follow wcag
<oedipus> jgraham are you referring to WCAG2 H7?
scrobe: Julian
<MikeSmith> action-93?
<trackbot> ACTION-93 -- Larry Masinter to make a proposal on doctypes and versioning -- due 2009-02-16 -- PENDINGREVIEW
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/93
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-93 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<oedipus> scribe: Julian
<oedipus> ScribeNick: Julian
Masinter: preference for
versionig mech. in the language
... no specific technical proposal yet
<jgraham> oedipus: WCAG H73
Masinter: not happy with lack of versioning
<DanC> good point... "Should the new HTML language bear a version mechanism?" is probably worth chaning
DanC: change title of issue (not to be specific to DOCTYPE)
<DanC> but hmm... maybe that _is_ the issue.
<dsinger> it does seem as if the chairs/team-leads of HTML and XHTML could usefully chat about the use of namespaces (that a new specification can extend a namespace but not incompatibly redefine it)?
<DanC> (no, in point of fact, the TAG doesn't have a finding on versioning.)
(talk about related TAG finding)
Masinter: update TAG finding and
see how it then applies to HTML
... due during TAG F2F meeting in march
<DanC> TAG ftf is 3-5 Mar http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/#mtg
<pimpbot> Title: W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG) (at www.w3.org)
DanC: no agreed upon TAG finding
Masinter: ...draft finding...
DanC: advocate version attribute?
<jgraham> HTML design principles seem more relevant than the TAG finding if the TAG is working from different principles...
<DanC> ACTION: Larry ask the TAG to consider HTML in particular in its work on versioning [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-108 - Ask the TAG to consider HTML in particular in its work on versioning [on Larry Masinter - due 2009-02-26].
<DanC> close action-93
<trackbot> ACTION-93 Make a proposal on doctypes and versioning closed
<DanC> action-108 due 15 Mar
<trackbot> ACTION-108 Ask the TAG to consider HTML in particular in its work on versioning due date now 15 Mar
<DanC> action-108 due 30 Mar
<trackbot> ACTION-108 Ask the TAG to consider HTML in particular in its work on versioning due date now 30 Mar
<DanC> (let's use names along with numbers...)
Sam: interest in HTML WG to join task force?
<DanC> (anne declined. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0225.html )
<pimpbot> Title: Re: Joint task force on ARIA user agent implementation from Anne van Kesteren on 2009-02-11 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
Cynthia: keep TF under 20 people
<DanC> hsivonen?
DanC: not heard from Henri S.
<DanC> ACTION-107 due next week
<DanC> ACTION-107 due next week
<trackbot> ACTION-107 recruit ARIA joint-TF members due date now next week
MikeSmith: need people committed
to reviewing the draft
... ..and contributing
... ...adding examples
<DanC> (I'm working on contributing... learned the editing mechanics and made a small edit yesterday)
MikeSmith: ask people on the call
Cynthia: timeline?
MikeSmith: 1..2 months?
Cynthia: interested in reviewing
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to say he'd like to get 2 drafts out by June
DanC: recreated build process and did first commit
Masinter: add note about normative overlap issue
<DanC> action-100?
<trackbot> ACTION-100 -- Michael(tm) Smith to add a note about issue-67 to the Status section of "HTML 5: The Markup Language" -- due 2009-02-19 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/100
<rubys> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/100
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-100 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-100 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<DanC> (what's the overlap, technically? help? I'm missing a detail)
<DanC> (oh... overlap with /TR/html5/ ?)
Masinter: need a statement about what's missing
<Zakim> Julian, you wanted to volunteer for review
SamR: got sufficient interest
<DanC> ACTION: Sam pursue publication of HTML 5: The Markup Language... poll or whatever [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-109 - Pursue publication of HTML 5: The Markup Language... poll or whatever [on Sam Ruby - due 2009-02-26].
<MikeSmith> ACTION: Michael(tm) to add note to H:TML draft about what's currently missing and planned to be added [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-110 - Add note to H:TML draft about what's currently missing and planned to be added [on Michael(tm) Smith - due 2009-02-26].
<DanC> close action-77
<trackbot> ACTION-77 Lead HTML WG to response to TAG discussion and report back to TAG closed
<oedipus> ISSUE-31 (missing-alt) http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/31 - What to do when a reasonable text equivalent is unknown/unavailable?
<oedipus> Action 98 (http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/98 - Discuss missing-alt with the WAI CG and report back - due 2009-02-25 - open
<oedipus> we are working assiduously on it -- most of the WAI WG chairs are involved with a core of PF participants -- we had hoped to provide something for today, but are exercising caution and due dilligence before we submit our final findings and recommendations to the HTML WG -- our HTML5 Issues Caucus tomorrow (20 February 2009) is dedicated solely to wrapping up on @alt
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 98
<pimpbot> Title: ISSUE-31 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-98 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
ISSUE: ISSUE-31 (missing-alt)
<trackbot> Created ISSUE-69 - ISSUE-31 (missing-alt) ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/69/edit .
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0429.html
<pimpbot> Title: Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" from Dan Connolly on 2009-02-18 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
<oedipus> PF and the WAI CG are working assiduously on it -- most of the WAI WG chairs are involved with a core of PF participants -- we had hoped to provide something for today, but are exercising caution and due dilligence before we submit our final findings and recommendations to the HTML WG -- our HTML5 Issues Caucus tomorrow (20 February 2009) is dedicated solely to wrapping up on @alt
<DanC> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Feb/0246.html
<pimpbot> Title: Re: Need differentiator between "no alt text provided" and "no alt text necessary" from Dan Connolly on 2009-02-11 (public-html@w3.org from February 2009) (at lists.w3.org)
DanC: tried to confirm that james craig was speaking on behalf of PF WG
Matt: TF still working toward
it
... will take longer
<DanC> ACTION-98 due 15 March 2009
<trackbot> ACTION-98 Discuss missing-alt with the WAI CG and report back due date now 15 March 2009
Gregory: trying to come up with comprehensive and complete answer
DanC: propose to close
issue
... no movement
... new tests by James graham
... leave it as low prio
<jgraham> Would like someone to take over writing tests
Gregory, can you repeat that in IRC?
<DanC> action-72?
<trackbot> ACTION-72 -- Dan Connolly to monitor progress of testing re 20 Dec HTML 5 spec draft and test materials from WCAG 2 -- due 2009-02-26 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/72
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-72 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<DanC> DanC: I proposed to close a while ago, but the proposal didn't carry because Chaals and James want more study
<oedipus> GJR: table headers and summary are still on our front-burner, but we are concentrating on the alt issue right now because of availability of WAI chairs to work intensely on a complete and comprehensive solution
<jgraham> really
Sam: can't close this week
Chris: need to figute how to make decision
s/sfigure/figure/
DanC: thinks PF WG is done with this
Matt_May: still consensus that summary should be in the spec
<DanC> (I think Matt said that... yeah)
<oedipus> but i concur with matt
<DanC> (TODO: take some pointers that i mistakenly put on action-98 and move them to the summary issue)
Gregory: PF chair is changing, ARIA going to LC
<rubys> ACTION: sam to work on process issues re: summary due late march [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/02/19-html-wg-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-111 - Work on process issues re: summary due late march [on Sam Ruby - due 2009-02-26].
<DanC> action-111 due 30 March
<trackbot> ACTION-111 Work on process issues re: summary due late march due date now 30 March
<DanC> Lachy, no news on about: URI scheme, is there?
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to request an agendum re IETF in March
<Lachy> DanC, no news about that yet
<Lachy> DanC, whens the due date on the about: URI thing?
<masinter> ((was away))
<DanC> ACTION-103?
<trackbot> ACTION-103 -- Lachlan Hunt to track registration of about: URI scheme -- due 2009-03-05 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/103
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-103 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<DanC> action-100?
<trackbot> ACTION-100 -- Michael(tm) Smith to add a note about issue-67 to the Status section of "HTML 5: The Markup Language" -- due 2009-02-19 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/100
<pimpbot> Title: ACTION-100 - HTML Weekly Tracker (at www.w3.org)
<DanC> " 74th IETF - San Francisco, CA, USA
<DanC> (March 22-27, 2009)"
<dsinger> overlapping the AC rep meeting
<dsinger> curses
<DanC> -- http://www.ietf.org/
Sam: IETF meeting late March SF
<pimpbot> Title: IETF Home Page (at www.ietf.org)
<dsinger> can we do it a day later?
<Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ... umm... apologize or something about the W3C AC/IETF conflict
DanC: couldn't avoid the conflict
Sam: ApacheCon conflicts as
well
... cont. discussion on mailing list
DanC: agenda: URI overlap, web
sockets,
... HTTP, mime types
Masinter: talk about IETF process
issues
... identify actual issues first
Sam: IETF side to coord agenda
<DanC> rather:
<DanC> Sam: from the W3C side, I'll coordinate agenda; I'm not sure who from the IETF side
Masinter: Mark Nottingham essential because of HTTPbis
Sam: will follow up on mailing list
<masinter> Lisa has broader charter as app area director in HTTP
<oedipus> second move to adjourn
<DanC> +1 adjourn
<dsinger> ok
<DanC> say... that felt pretty crisp and fairly productive... mostly checking status of email discussions, but that's good.
<DanC> oh... right... julian...
That's behind an ACL.
Oh, not anymore, OK.
Now, sanity checks and fixes?
<DanC> Julian, the essential thing is to mail whatever you can to the WG. oedipus is experienced at helping the bots prepare the "whatever you can"
<pimpbot> Title: HTML Weekly Teleconference -- 19 Feb 2009 (at www.w3.org)
<DanC> or:
<DanC> phpht.
<DanC> hmm... glitch somewhere. Zakim seems to have a few screws lose.
the agenda still says: Chair SV_MEETING_CHAIR
<pimpbot> Title: HTML Weekly Teleconference -- 19 Feb 2009 (at www.w3.org)
yes
<pimpbot> Title: HTML Weekly Teleconference -- 19 Feb 2009 (at www.w3.org)
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/Cynthia/Sam/ Succeeded: s/ned/need/ Succeeded: s/SamC/SamR/ Succeeded: s/SamC/Sam/ FAILED: s/sfigute/figure/ Succeeded: s/Gregory: still PF/Matt_May: still/ Succeeded: s/figute/figure/ Succeeded: s/MNot/Mark Nottingham/ Succeeded: s/what else?/HTTP, mime types/ Found Scribe: Julian Inferring ScribeNick: Julian Found ScribeNick: Julian Default Present: Julian, Sam, Masinter, Mike, ChrisWilson, DanC, Matt_May, Gregory_Rosmaita, dsinger, Cynthia_Shelly Present: Julian Sam Masinter Mike ChrisWilson DanC Matt_May Gregory_Rosmaita dsinger Cynthia_Shelly WARNING: No meeting chair found! You should specify the meeting chair like this: <dbooth> Chair: dbooth Found Date: 19 Feb 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/02/19-html-wg-minutes.html People with action items: larry michael sam tm WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]