See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 28 January 2010
<janina> Meeting: HTML-A11Y telecon
<janina> agenda: this
<MichaelC> scribe: Marco_Ranon
action 2 left open
<trackbot> Sorry, couldn't find user - 2
<oedipus> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/track/actions/16 on Jon G
JS: no sub teams report today
<kliehm> Re: ACTION-16 Please check out http://www.wait-till-i.com/2008/01/08/generating-charts-from-accessible-data-tables-using-the-google-charts-api/
JS: next item, working on proposed consensus document
JS: Consensus needs to be more than 50 percent plus 1. need to find the sufficient percentage
<gfreed> 617-300 is wgbh.
JS: we want to stop discussing the same issues indefinitely but allow for constructive discussion
JS: any feedback on this document?
Jon: how do we know when we are
ready to submit a decision to WG?
... there should should be also counter proposals
MichaelC: counter proposals should go in an appendix
Cynthia_Shelly: ideally the cycle should take a month weeks
MichaelC: two weeks for TF discussion
JS: we need to produce change
request in the TF before we we are ready to submit to WG
... email discussion is important as well as teleconfs
<Joshue> thats fine
<gfreed> sounds fine.
JS: do we think we should run web survey ion consensus?
Cynthia_Shelly: it was useful in WCAG, as deadline and single reference for discussion
JS: can be used to manage the TF
... we would be able to approve a proposal or provide comments with a survey
Cynthia_Shelly: survey before the teleconf so people not into the call can still provide feedback
MichaelC: call for objections
... call for consensus or for objection?
JS: should be call for consensus
Cynthia_Shelly: results of the survey ccould be passed on to the WG to show discussion behind a proposal
<kliehm> I'm OK with it.
JS: should we vote on this today? any objections?
<AllanJ> no objection
<Joshue> Its fine
RESOLUTION: the draft consensus procedures document was approved as amended
JS: next topic, Bugs Review; Grouping; Timelines
<Laura> Bugs Proposed to be Accepted
<Laura> Bugs Proposed to be Rejected
MichaelC: better to tackle the
bugs by group
... there are 10 categories
JS: questions about the grouping?
<MikeSmith> amen to what Gregory just said
Jon: suggesting to group by accessibility API mapping
JS: Jon, do you want to lead on this project?
Cynthia_Shelly: Cynthia_Shelly and SteveF already working on something like this
JS: if we change group are we still sending a summary change proposal?
Cynthia_Shelly: we should due to the importance of summary
<Laura> Accessibility Change Proposal Status: http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/HTML/wiki/Accessibility_Change_Proposal_Status
<Laura> If a change proposal is not completed by the deadline, the issue will be closed without prejudice & deferred to the next version of HTML.
JS: need to forward decisions to
the WG fairly quickly. Using the proposed groups ould help to
focus on the single items
... can we do that still considering accessibility API?
<Joshue> Joshue, to say that I agree with setting the rules for the cascade etc. @summary should be in the spec but we are aware of its limitations as a semantically rich long descriptor
JS: should we add cascading to the ten topics to be considered after the other groups?
Jon: cascade will help provide arguments for the importance of things like summary but also to explain how things should work re accessibility API
JS: we can add cascade to the
other ten groups
... proposing call for consensus on summarynext conf call
MikeSmith: will chair next week
<Joshue> bye y'all
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135 of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Succeeded: s/no sub teams/JS: no sub teams/ Found Scribe: Marco_Ranon Inferring ScribeNick: Marco_Ranon WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found. WARNING: No "Present: ... " found! Possibly Present: AllanJ Ben Ben_Caldwell Cooper Cynthia_Shelly Gregory_Rosmaita JS Jon Jon_Gunderson Joshue Laura Marco_Ranon Matt MichaelC Mike MikeSmith P1 P16 P22 P8 WGBH aabb aacc gfreed is janina jongunderson kliehm oedipus perhaps trackbot You can indicate people for the Present list like this: <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary <dbooth> Present+ amy WARNING: Replacing previous Regrets list. (Old list: Denis_Boudreau, Chaals, Eric_Carlson, Laura_Carlson, Steven_Faulkner, Kelly_Ford, Markku_Hakkinen, Bruce_Lawson, Aurélien_Levy, Sylvia_Pfieffer, David_Singer, Maciej_Stachowiak) Use 'Regrets+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list, such as: <dbooth> Regrets+ Denis_Boudreau, Maciej_Stachowiak, David_Singer, Bruce_Lawson, Markku_Hakkinen, Eric_Carlson, Kelly_Ford, aur�en_levy, steven_faulkner Regrets: Denis_Boudreau Maciej_Stachowiak David_Singer Bruce_Lawson Markku_Hakkinen Eric_Carlson Kelly_Ford aur�en_levy steven_faulkner Found Date: 28 Jan 2010 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/01/28-html-a11y-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option. WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found! Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>. Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of new discussion topics or agenda items, such as: <dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]