IRC log of text on 2011-04-25

Timestamps are in UTC.

15:27:54 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #text
15:27:54 [RRSAgent]
logging to
15:28:38 [Stevef]
Stevef has joined #text
15:29:40 [judy]
agenda reference
15:30:07 [judy]
15:30:10 [judy]
scribe: gregory_rosmaita
15:30:10 [judy]
agenda+ Action item review
15:30:10 [judy] ;
15:30:10 [judy]
(please associate new actions with "text" product in tracker
15:30:10 [judy] )
15:30:11 [judy]
agenda+ Additional accessibility feature decisions/rejections:
15:30:11 [LynnH]
LynnH has joined #text
15:30:14 [judy] ;
15:30:15 [judy] ;
15:30:18 [judy]
15:30:19 [judy]
agenda+ Updated discussion on edited requirements: questions,
15:30:22 [judy]
timeline to comment
15:30:23 [judy]
15:30:25 [judy]
agenda+ Draft clarification on title/alt (Rich/Judy drafting, will
15:30:27 [judy]
send); discussion of approach (outline; detail; request): questions,
15:30:30 [judy]
timeline to comment, support?
15:30:31 [judy]
agenda+ Update on formal objection on normative accessibility
15:30:33 [judy]
guidance on alt
15:30:35 [judy]
15:30:37 [judy]
; options, questions, timeline to comment, text sub-group?, next steps
15:30:39 [judy]
agenda+ Continue planning clarification mails on rejected
15:30:41 [judy]
accessibility features: outlining key response points; drafting
15:30:43 [judy]
details; who; when; escalation path
15:30:45 [judy]
agenda+ Other business? Additional thoughts on organizing our work?
15:30:47 [judy]
agenda+ Recap of action items and timelines
15:30:49 [judy]
agenda+ Confirm scribe for 29 April: Rich Schwerdtfeger?; identify
15:30:51 [judy]
scribe 2 weeks out; adjourn.
15:31:25 [judy]
zakim, code?
15:31:25 [Zakim]
sorry, judy, I don't know what conference this is
15:31:29 [gfreed]
gfreed has joined #text
15:31:36 [judy]
zakim, this is WAI_PFWG(text)
15:31:36 [Zakim]
sorry, judy, I do not see a conference named 'WAI_PFWG(text)' in progress or scheduled at this time
15:31:48 [oedipus]
regrets: laura_carlson
15:31:52 [oedipus]
scribe: gregory_rosmaita
15:31:55 [richardschwerdtfe]
richardschwerdtfe has joined #text
15:31:55 [oedipus]
scribenick: oedipus
15:32:11 [judy]
zakim, this is WAI_PF(Text)
15:32:11 [Zakim]
ok, judy; that matches WAI_PF(Text)11:30AM
15:32:16 [judy]
zakim, code?
15:32:16 [Zakim]
the conference code is 2119 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 tel:+ tel:+44.203.318.0479), judy
15:32:21 [Zakim]
15:32:23 [oedipus]
chair: judy_brewer
15:32:27 [oedipus]
meeting: HTML-A11Y Text Alternatives Sub-Group Teleconference
15:32:33 [Zakim]
15:32:42 [oedipus]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:32:42 [Zakim]
On the phone I see John_Foliot, ??P3, ??P4, [IPcaller], +44.208.517.aaaa, WGBH?, Rich, Gregory_Rosmaita
15:32:52 [Lynn]
Lynn has joined #text
15:33:04 [Zakim]
15:33:09 [oedipus]
present+ Steve_Faulkner,John_Foliot
15:33:24 [oedipus]
zakim, WGBH? has Geoff_Freed
15:33:24 [Zakim]
+Geoff_Freed; got it
15:33:30 [oedipus]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:33:30 [Zakim]
On the phone I see John_Foliot, ??P3, ??P4, [IPcaller], +44.208.517.aaaa, WGBH?, Rich, Gregory_Rosmaita, Judy
15:33:33 [Zakim]
WGBH has Geoff_Freed
15:34:23 [oedipus]
present+ Lynn_Haldworth
15:34:31 [oedipus]
TOPIC: Action Item Review
15:34:38 [oedipus]
15:34:44 [oedipus]
15:34:53 [JF]
JF has joined #text
15:35:01 [janina]
zakim, ??P3 is janina
15:35:01 [Zakim]
+janina; got it
15:35:09 [oedipus]
JB: text product to associate action items to
15:35:22 [oedipus]
present+ Marco_Rannon
15:35:30 [oedipus]
present- Marco_Rannon
15:35:36 [oedipus]
present+ Marco_Ranon
15:36:02 [oedipus]
next agendum
15:36:09 [oedipus]
close agendum
15:36:12 [oedipus]
open agendum 2
15:36:20 [oedipus]
JB: 3 that fall into this category
15:36:50 [oedipus]
JB: reviewing in detail
15:36:55 [judy] ;
15:36:55 [judy] ;
15:36:55 [judy]
15:37:23 [oedipus]
JB: 3 new ones - at least 2 fall under this subgroup's purview; third might as well
15:37:31 [oedipus]
JB: one has to do with validation of @alt
15:37:37 [oedipus]
JB: another normative guidance for @alt
15:39:03 [oedipus]
JB: validation of @alt -- Rich and i began to mock-up a draft of something to review in response -- consult
15:39:06 [judy]
15:39:34 [oedipus]
JB: 6-part decision -- 6 sub-items on whether HTML5 validates with or without presence of @alt, @title, FIGCAPTION, etc.
15:40:09 [oedipus]
JB: response missing info on how @alt works as opposed to @title (@alt has default place in visual rendering; @title does not and is transitory
15:40:36 [oedipus]
JB: advice on Alt Text Techs -- WAI CG has interest in responding to this
15:40:48 [oedipus]
15:41:23 [oedipus]
ISSUE-31 / ISSUE-80 requirements survey:
15:41:41 [oedipus]
JB: what text to use for IMG element definition
15:41:47 [oedipus]
GJR: this is our 1 win
15:41:50 [oedipus]
15:42:56 [oedipus]
GJR: changed precisely in way submitted to HTML WG
15:42:59 [oedipus]
ack oe
15:43:06 [oedipus]
JB: further action needed?
15:43:10 [JF]
15:43:15 [janina]
15:43:17 [oedipus]
SF: nothing further
15:43:19 [oedipus]
plus 1
15:43:21 [MRanon]
15:43:36 [oedipus]
JB: other items fall in scope of this group?
15:43:38 [oedipus]
SF: yes
15:43:39 [oedipus]
GJR: yes
15:43:41 [oedipus]
JF: yes
15:43:45 [janina]
15:43:47 [oedipus]
JB: any objections?
15:43:49 [judy]
zakim, who's here?
15:43:49 [Zakim]
On the phone I see John_Foliot, janina, ??P4, [IPcaller], +44.208.517.aaaa, WGBH?, Rich, Gregory_Rosmaita, Judy
15:43:51 [Zakim]
WGBH has Geoff_Freed
15:43:52 [Zakim]
On IRC I see JF, Lynn, richardschwerdtfe, gfreed, Stevef, RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, MRanon, judy, oedipus
15:44:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
15:44:58 [oedipus]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:45:09 [Zakim]
15:45:28 [Zakim]
15:45:34 [oedipus]
zakim, ??P4 is Steve_Faulkner
15:45:34 [Zakim]
+Steve_Faulkner; got it
15:45:46 [MRanon]
zakim, ??P6 is me
15:45:46 [Zakim]
+MRanon; got it
15:45:58 [Stevef]
zakim, Steve_Faulkner is Stevef
15:45:58 [Zakim]
+Stevef; got it
15:46:06 [oedipus]
zakim, aaaa is Lynn_Holdsworth
15:46:06 [Zakim]
+Lynn_Holdsworth; got it
15:46:10 [oedipus]
agendum 3
15:46:15 [oedipus]
take up agendum 3
15:46:24 [oedipus]
JB: quick check for now
15:46:44 [judy]
15:46:47 [oedipus]
JB: discussed last week whether having agreed-upon set of reqs from us would be helpful
15:47:01 [oedipus]
JB: 9 items currently
15:47:11 [oedipus]
JB: Rich only person to provide comments since last week
15:47:36 [oedipus]
JB: anyone else have chance to review Verbose Desc Reqs this week and thoughts upon them?
15:47:56 [oedipus]
JB: thanks to RichS for comments -- GJR integrated some and documented others
15:48:12 [oedipus]
15:48:35 [oedipus]
JF: will look at it today
15:48:53 [oedipus]
s/today/this week/
15:49:02 [oedipus]
JB: any comments?
15:49:16 [oedipus]
JF: clarification -- further feedback, straight up review -- specific deliverable?
15:49:59 [oedipus]
JB: specific requirements may help form consensus on this TF for clarification -- haven't walked through too many clarifications as consensus activity, some of these may map against arguements/lack-of-agreement
15:50:30 [oedipus]
JB: hoping to come up with good consensus capture of overall principles and figure out points-of-discussoin -- like to address this week on list and next week at call
15:50:48 [oedipus]
JB: like to spend more time talking about clarification emails today
15:51:02 [oedipus]
JB: will review requirements
15:51:05 [oedipus]
JS: will review
15:51:23 [oedipus]
reviewers: JF, JS, JB (already reviewed RS, GJR)
15:51:39 [oedipus]
JF: request if comment use the [text] subject line tag
15:51:48 [oedipus]
GF: will review, too
15:52:03 [oedipus]
zakim, open agendum 4
15:52:03 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Draft clarification on title/alt (Rich/Judy drafting, will" taken up [from judy]
15:52:37 [oedipus]
JB: @alt validation -- sent email to RS this morning -- can you clean-up and bounce-to-list?
15:52:43 [oedipus]
RS: send note to list?
15:53:10 [oedipus]
JB: suggested that add edits i made, strip out what indicated, and post to list -- can do myself
15:53:13 [oedipus]
RS: please do JB
15:53:30 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
15:54:38 [oedipus]
s/@alt validation/@alt and @title validation/
15:55:16 [oedipus]
JB: posting now
15:55:39 [oedipus]
JB: Rich and i looked at the chairs' decision on validation of @alt which has 6-sub-positions in it
15:56:44 [oedipus]
JB: noted that there appear to be some things that chairs' didn't understand as reflected in decision; collection of decisions of considerable concern; took premise that while a FO may need to be forwarded, wanted to reply to decision specifically
15:57:12 [oedipus]
JB: 1 approach: respond to everything incorrect in decision, or highlight most important mistakes/errors
15:57:32 [oedipus]
JB: RS found that 4 of 6 sub-decisions problematic
15:57:55 [oedipus]
JB: would like to know if attendees agree with conclusion, and that this email captures subgroup's understanding
15:58:51 [oedipus]
JB: 4 items: 1) aria-labelledby does not make @alt conforming; 2) role="presentation" does not make missing @alt conforming; 3) missing @title ok if no @alt; 4) FIGCAPTION
15:58:53 [JF]
15:59:11 [oedipus]
JF: skipped over meta name="generator"
15:59:37 [oedipus]
JF: if put meta name="generator" in HEAD would allow author to not add any @alt AND validate
16:00:02 [oedipus]
JF: personal email exception -- i shape my email in accordance with the person to whom i am sending the emessage
16:00:52 [oedipus]
JB: any disagreement that need consensus clarification on 1) aria-labelledby does not make @alt conforming; 2) role="presentation" does not make missing @alt conforming; 3) missing @title ok if no @alt; 4) FIGCAPTION, 5) meta name="generator"
16:00:58 [oedipus]
SF: figcaption issue?
16:01:09 [oedipus]
JB: 1st reaction, caption can't stand in for @alt
16:02:05 [oedipus]
JB: looked at material on-line -- FIGCAPTION in publishing has specific purpose with nothing to do with @alt -- haven't had chance to check against HTML5 draft; mis-match of purpose in my opinion
16:02:08 [oedipus]
16:02:11 [oedipus]
ack JF
16:02:40 [oedipus]
JB: sceintific publication, have terse caption that encapsulates image context, but not sufficient as @alt
16:02:44 [Stevef]
16:02:44 [richardschwerdtfe]
16:02:57 [JF]
16:03:30 [oedipus]
GF: agree with JB -- FIGCAPTION used for totally diff purpose than @alt -- not sure if strictly used as visible label, but conflating the 2 is a HUGE mistake
16:03:33 [oedipus]
ack stev
16:04:11 [oedipus]
SF: allowing use of FIGCAPTION not to replace @alt --
16:04:46 [oedipus]
SF: @title becomes caption below image -- if person can't provide @alt, if do provide CAPTION for it, will be conforming, but not neccessarily accessible
16:04:50 [judy]
16:04:55 [oedipus]
SF: cases where users can't or will not provide @alt
16:04:58 [oedipus]
ack JF
16:05:22 [richardschwerdtfe]
16:05:24 [oedipus]
JF: this is a problem, but this is the least of the issues facing us
16:05:28 [richardschwerdtfe]
16:05:49 [oedipus]
JF: if i post pic of cat on flickr and use caption "the neighborhood cat" --- need to investigate positive implications
16:06:01 [Stevef]
16:06:05 [oedipus]
JF: is caption appropriate @alt text? better than 73525.jpg
16:06:14 [oedipus]
ack judy
16:06:47 [oedipus]
JB: like to review with Geoff -- FIGCAPTION use generally and specifically -- may be substantially different
16:06:57 [oedipus]
JB: like some examples
16:07:37 [richardschwerdtfe]
16:07:39 [oedipus]
JB: goal of what is conforming is something that is accessible -- whatever we agree to in TF, has to be something specific
16:07:48 [oedipus]
GF: will work with Judy on this
16:07:58 [judy]
action: judy , geoff to look into figcaption & alt decision
16:08:14 [janina]
q+ to say Flicker's inadequate ml shouldn't define good enough alt
16:08:18 [oedipus]
JB: anyone have questions about other items RS and i identified?
16:08:42 [oedipus]
JS: a bit confused -- don't want to set policy on bad UI design (flickr case)
16:08:50 [oedipus]
JS: concern about conflating caption and @alt
16:09:17 [oedipus]
JS: caption like a comment on IMG; @alt is description of IMG
16:09:19 [oedipus]
16:09:22 [judy]
16:09:25 [oedipus]
ack rich
16:09:57 [oedipus]
RS: aria-labelledby conforming -- rationale -- if author uses aria-labelledby to point to visual image, when turn image off, will have label present with image, so operates same as @alt
16:10:30 [oedipus]
RS: use @alt or @aria-labelleby -- with labelledby saying this belongs to this particular image -- label probably centered in area reserved for image
16:10:37 [oedipus]
RS: similar to figcaption
16:10:46 [oedipus]
RS: showing label associated with image
16:11:27 [oedipus]
SF: issues with labelledby is there is no need for text to be physically associated with image -- can be anywhere on page -- when image disappears, could be problematic -- FIGCAPTION has to be inside figure next to image
16:11:28 [JF]
+1 to Stevef
16:12:15 [oedipus]
SF: with labelledby need text alternative, can't be caption because of way mapped in a11y APIs -- no way to say this is not a text equivalent but a caption -- FIGCAPTION has semantic meaning; can't mistake caption for @alt
16:12:19 [MRanon]
16:12:23 [oedipus]
RS: view CAPTION as label
16:12:28 [oedipus]
JF: more direct association
16:12:51 [judy]
ack S
16:13:07 [oedipus]
JF: looking at web page with list of speakers at conference -- have phone numbers -- if images turned off, have big blank square and loss of binding
16:13:10 [judy]
ack J
16:13:10 [Zakim]
janina, you wanted to say Flicker's inadequate ml shouldn't define good enough alt
16:14:29 [oedipus]
MR: people use text with images using HTML4 -- use text as label for image, but not programmtically associated -- with HTML5 using CAPTION can be programmatically associated, but htere are cases where caption provides more info than contained in image
16:15:07 [oedipus]
MR: authors can use labels in diff ways -- should provide authoring advice for labelledby and FIGCAPTION
16:15:16 [oedipus]
MR: as we did for @alt
16:15:22 [oedipus]
ack MR
16:15:31 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
16:15:39 [oedipus]
JB: appreciate discussion --
16:16:22 [oedipus]
JB: wonder if people could take on individual sections to refine and post to list in next few days so can file comprehensive clarification email request by friday so can look at it at next monday's meeting and vote on consensu
16:16:56 [JF]
16:17:03 [oedipus]
JB: level of detail -- would like to explore specific coordinated comprehensive clarification on each item and then sending them to HTML WG chairs with some urgency
16:17:37 [oedipus]
JF: concerned about meta name="generator" -- currently discussion on list
16:18:05 [oedipus]
JF: Leif raised some really good points and done very good research about auto-generated meta strings
16:18:52 [oedipus]
JB: would like to proceed as quickly as possible -- terse response useful, may want to hold 1 or more aside to get full consensus -- idally would be good to pass along whole package at once
16:19:30 [oedipus]
starter draft response (JB and RS)
16:19:49 [oedipus]
JB: would generator change to decision or clarification presented
16:20:30 [oedipus]
JF: if start multiple attacks on individual issues, may be subject to divide and conquer counter-strategy
16:20:45 [oedipus]
JF: will chairs accept sub-decision comments individually?
16:21:20 [oedipus]
JB: invite discussion --- suggest that we do as much work as possible, so reply to as much as can now, perhaps add comments later
16:21:36 [oedipus]
JB: with meta name="generator" sounds like JF willing to help with drafting?
16:21:38 [oedipus]
JF: yes
16:22:04 [oedipus]
JB: Rich do you want to clarify the aria-labelledby sub-decision
16:22:29 [oedipus]
RS: don't need to argue with decision -- don't care if made argument or not -- using aria-labelledby is not overwritten by @alt
16:22:36 [oedipus]
JB: drop aria-labelledby?
16:22:41 [oedipus]
[no objections]
16:22:49 [oedipus]
RS: can still use, NOT a replacement for @alt
16:23:00 [oedipus]
JB: support clarification as written?
16:23:47 [oedipus]
JF: preence of role="presentation" should not make @alt non-conforming
16:23:58 [oedipus]
RS: failure condition if have @alt and role="presentation"
16:24:09 [oedipus]
JS: think they want alt="" for presentational images
16:24:12 [oedipus]
RS: redundant
16:24:14 [oedipus]
JS: agree
16:25:04 [oedipus]
JF: authoring tools will always insert alt="something" -- if don't put in value, most will put in alt="" -- presentation role is additional info -- whay if add one remove other?
16:25:21 [judy]
16:25:22 [oedipus]
RS: if marked role="presentation" no reason to add alt="" -- author designated as presentational
16:25:27 [JF]
ack jf
16:25:57 [oedipus]
JS: problem other way around -- encourage use of role="presentation" less ambiguous than alt=""
16:26:26 [JF]
not a hill I'm willing to die on
16:26:29 [Stevef]
16:26:39 [oedipus]
RS: @alt with role="presenetation" eliminates need for alt="" and includes it in A11y API level -- want to keep presentation from a11y APIs -- stuck with @alt
16:26:44 [oedipus]
ack stv
16:26:47 [oedipus]
ack st
16:27:49 [oedipus]
SF: agree with RS, but in HMTL5 says @alt="" is same as role="presentation" which means that any img with alt="" is equivalent to role="presentation"
16:27:54 [oedipus]
RS: either or correct?
16:28:34 [oedipus]
SF: prefer to use role="presentaion" because is clearer semantically -- counsel use both or one (role="presentation")
16:28:45 [oedipus]
RS: role="presentation" does what we need
16:29:27 [oedipus]
SF: role="presentation" is in a11y layer; alt="" will be represented differently in view where images disabled -- if role="presentation" won't treat same way -- need to treat null alt as role="presentation"
16:30:01 [oedipus]
JB: could RS and SF take this discussion to email and report back to the group?
16:30:03 [oedipus]
SF: yes
16:30:26 [oedipus]
RS: will do my best
16:30:46 [oedipus]
JB: rescanning 6 issues: aria-labelleby decision ok?
16:30:56 [oedipus]
JB: role="presentation" needs more info from RS and SF
16:31:52 [oedipus]
action: Rich and Steve to draft reply to role="presentation" sub-decision for discussion at next week's meeting
16:32:26 [Stevef]
16:32:59 [oedipus]
JB: please review contents of and let us know if section beginning "title"...
16:33:15 [oedipus]
"Unlike alt="", role="presentation" has the added value of removing the image from the accessibility API object tree, effectively filtering out the image and improving assistive technology performance. Furthermore, a role of resentation is to state the intent of the author in a declarative fashion. For these reasons, role="presentation" should be considered a suitable alternative to...
16:33:17 [oedipus]
...requiring alt when it adds no meaningful information to an AT."
16:33:31 [oedipus]
SF: agree with what is in email, have further comments and ideas
16:33:50 [oedipus]
SF: will list what i perceive as problems, add to RS and JB's prose and repost to list
16:34:11 [oedipus]
JB: propose your terse addition? link to more detailed explanations fine
16:34:21 [oedipus]
SF: just add terse recommendation with links as needed
16:34:45 [Zakim]
16:35:05 [oedipus]
action: Steve - add terse statement about role="presentation" to RS and JB's prose and repost to list
16:35:44 [oedipus]
JB: Geoff -- please respond to SteveF's posts from the past several days
16:35:47 [oedipus]
GF: will do
16:36:04 [oedipus]
JB: FIGCAPTION needs more investigation and a report back to group
16:36:05 [JF]
16:36:09 [oedipus]
ack st
16:36:21 [gfreed]
16:36:40 [oedipus]
JB: for FIGCAPTION, would like for us to consense a comprehensive reply to this by next monday's meeting or VERY early in week
16:37:33 [oedipus]
JF: when look at 6, 2 critical ones are meta name="geneartor" and @title as replacement for @alt
16:37:47 [oedipus]
JF: FIGCAPTION and labelledby worth looking at but not "dying" for
16:37:56 [oedipus]
ack JF
16:38:10 [oedipus]
JF: severity: @tltle and generator most severe
16:38:26 [oedipus]
JB: looking at comprehensive clarification on what we do not agree with in decsions
16:39:06 [oedipus]
JF: getting clarification back may be useful
16:39:25 [oedipus]
JB: want to get comprehensive clarification request out as soon as possible
16:39:46 [oedipus]
JF: suggesting that as move forward, some things more critical to others
16:40:14 [oedipus]
GF: agree with JF -- @title in place of @alt is a SERIOUS problem
16:40:32 [JF]
+1 t Geoff
16:40:46 [judy]
s/early in the week/early in the week, and send these as clarification to the chairs; then see if reclarification is needed; and proceed with formal objections with expedited appeal as needed
16:40:51 [oedipus]
GF: don't want to break implementations -- drove home to everyone to use @alt -- changing that to say @title is ok is going to mess up a lot of work already done-- not a good idea period
16:41:26 [oedipus]
JB: draft email has very terse clarifications -- appears to me there are multiple misunderstandings in charis' decision
16:41:38 [oedipus]
JB: may be important from POV of priciples
16:41:59 [oedipus]
16:42:11 [gfreed]
16:42:54 [oedipus]
GF: if not mistaken, most SRs come with there presets defaulting to @alt not @title
16:43:05 [oedipus]
GF: SR users often don't personalize settings
16:43:11 [oedipus]
JB: add as comment to section?
16:43:14 [oedipus]
GF: ok
16:43:22 [oedipus]
ack gf
16:43:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
16:44:14 [oedipus]
JB: want to make 3 comments on other decisions -- location of @alt techniques (WAI CG responding to that -- may be able to review in detail next monday
16:44:25 [oedipus]
zakim, take up agendum 5
16:44:25 [Zakim]
agendum 5. "Update on formal objection on normative accessibility" taken up [from judy]
16:44:43 [oedipus]
JB: any objections to waiting for WAI CG report/draft
16:44:53 [oedipus]
JB: already a formal objection from SF on this
16:45:35 [oedipus]
JB: clarification that may set basis for formal objection
16:45:51 [oedipus]
zakim, take up agendum 6
16:45:51 [Zakim]
agendum 6. "Continue planning clarification mails on rejected" taken up [from judy]
16:46:19 [oedipus]
JB: scope includes rejections on @longdesc, @summary for TABLE, and @poster
16:47:01 [oedipus]
JB: email discussion on each of these -- some very lengthy -- can we prepare parrallell clarification emails
16:47:32 [oedipus]
JB: for @longdesc there is enough material to fill a book -- posibliity of starting more formal dialouge based on terse extraction from @longdesc materails
16:48:05 [oedipus]
JB: poster issue may be easiest to tackle -- JF work with someone to turn into parrallell comment / basis for future formal objection
16:48:38 [oedipus]
JF: filed FO on alt poster -- said technical stuff inconsistent, even though requested assistance on technical stuff
16:49:28 [oedipus]
JB: would you work with someone (probably JB) to draft next-round clarification and re-draft reply with JB to prepare something for the group to review next monday
16:49:43 [oedipus]
JF: sean hayes of MS has offered to help me with technical portion of FO
16:49:45 [judy]
zakim, who's here?
16:49:45 [Zakim]
On the phone I see John_Foliot, janina, Lynn_Holdsworth, WGBH?, Rich, Gregory_Rosmaita, Judy, MRanon
16:49:48 [Zakim]
WGBH has Geoff_Freed
16:49:49 [Zakim]
On IRC I see JF, Lynn, richardschwerdtfe, gfreed, RRSAgent, Zakim, janina, MRanon, judy, oedipus
16:50:05 [gfreed]
geoff has to run.
16:50:11 [oedipus]
JB: anyone who wants to write a sentence or 2 on alt poster?
16:50:15 [Zakim]
16:50:33 [oedipus]
JB: can we have draft clarification email for monday for voting on monday by group
16:50:59 [oedipus]
JB: assume that people have read pertinent emails
16:51:26 [judy]
action: JohnF, judy, sean work on reclarification email on poster-alt (alt-poster)
16:51:38 [oedipus]
JB: techincally "poster alt" but should be "alt poster"
16:51:50 [oedipus]
JB: table sujmmary -- draft of clarification email?
16:51:56 [oedipus]
GJR: have a CP for summary as element
16:52:27 [oedipus]
JB: GJR can you draft email in format of email RS and JB circulated
16:52:33 [oedipus]
GJR: yes, will ping if necessary
16:52:51 [oedipus]
action: clarification email for @summary for HTML WG chairs
16:53:05 [oedipus]
JB: @longdesc
16:54:07 [oedipus]
JB: LauraC been in touch -- was going to try to attend last part of call -- may need to try to stablize discussion and get clarification of things at this time that could send from this subgroup to chairs, see what chairs reply and depending on circumstances draft an FO
16:54:43 [oedipus]
JB: may make sense to work on other responses this week to get template and basis for future work
16:54:51 [judy]
16:55:43 [oedipus]
zakim, take up agendum 8
16:55:43 [Zakim]
agendum 8. "Recap of action items and timelines" taken up [from judy]
16:56:04 [oedipus]
RS: Steve and i will look at section on role="presentation" and @alt
16:56:17 [oedipus]
JB: Rich ok to scribe next week?
16:56:18 [Zakim]
16:56:19 [oedipus]
RS: yes
16:57:11 [oedipus]
JF: looking at meta generator to produce terse text; working with JB on alt poster
16:57:17 [oedipus]
GJR: @summary for table
16:57:30 [oedipus]
JB: scribe volunteer for 2 weeks from today?
16:57:40 [richardschwerdtfe]
richardschwerdtfe has left #text
16:57:46 [oedipus]
MR: won't be on call next week (bank holiday in UK)
16:58:01 [oedipus]
MR: won't be available for next 2 weeks
16:58:10 [oedipus]
JB: meeting next monday, same time, same IRC channel
16:58:23 [oedipus]
16:58:27 [Zakim]
16:58:27 [Lynn]
part #text
16:58:32 [Lynn]
Lynn has left #text
16:58:35 [Zakim]
16:58:37 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
16:58:42 [Zakim]
16:58:43 [Zakim]
16:58:51 [oedipus]
zakim, please part
16:58:51 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were John_Foliot, [IPcaller], +44.208.517.aaaa, Eric_Carlson, +1.617.300.aabb, Rich, Gregory_Rosmaita, Judy, Geoff_Freed, janina, MRanon,
16:58:51 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #text
16:58:54 [Zakim]
... Stevef, Lynn_Holdsworth
16:58:55 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
16:59:02 [janina]
janina has left #text
17:00:09 [oedipus]
present- +1.617.300.aabb, +44.208.517.aaaa, [IPcaller]
17:00:11 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
17:12:36 [oedipus]
s/VERY early in week/early in the week, and send these as clarification to the chairs; then see if reclarification is needed; and proceed with formal objections with expedited appeal as needed/
17:12:38 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
17:13:12 [oedipus]
s/part #text//
17:13:13 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
17:13:49 [oedipus]
present- MRanon
17:13:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate oedipus
17:17:33 [oedipus]
rrsagent, please part
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
I see 5 open action items saved in :
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: judy , geoff to look into figcaption & alt decision [1]
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Rich and Steve to draft reply to role="presentation" sub-decision for discussion at next week's meeting [2]
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Steve - add terse statement about role="presentation" to RS and JB's prose and repost to list [3]
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: JohnF, judy, sean work on reclarification email on poster-alt (alt-poster) [4]
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: clarification email for @summary for HTML WG chairs [5]
17:17:33 [RRSAgent]
recorded in