IRC log of rd on 2011-08-18

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:51:07 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rd
14:51:07 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:51:09 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:51:11 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 7394
14:51:11 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_RDWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
14:51:12 [trackbot]
Meeting: Research and Development Working Group Teleconference
14:51:12 [trackbot]
Date: 18 August 2011
14:55:16 [sharper]
sharper has joined #rd
14:55:47 [sharper]
trackbot, start meeting
14:55:50 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:55:52 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 7394
14:55:52 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_RDWG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
14:55:53 [trackbot]
Meeting: Research and Development Working Group Teleconference
14:55:53 [trackbot]
Date: 18 August 2011
14:56:00 [sharper]
Chair: Harper_Simon
14:56:01 [sharper]
Agenda+ Welcome & Logistics (Regrets, Agenda Requests, Comments). Topic -
14:56:01 [sharper]
Agenda+ Question Review -
14:56:01 [sharper]
Agenda+ Review of Draft First Call
14:56:01 [sharper]
Agenda+ Any Other Business
14:56:13 [sharper]
zakim, save agenda
14:56:19 [Zakim]
ok, sharper, the agenda has been written to
14:56:24 [sharper]
zakim, take up item 1
14:56:27 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Welcome (Regrets, Agenda Requests, Comments)." taken up [from sharper]
14:57:03 [sharper]
regrets+ O'Connor_Joshue
14:57:03 [sharper]
regrets+ Brajnik_Giorgio
14:57:25 [sharper]
present+ Harper_Simon
14:58:34 [yeliz]
yeliz has joined #rd
14:58:49 [markel]
markel has joined #rd
14:59:40 [Zakim]
WAI_RDWG()11:00AM has now started
14:59:49 [Zakim]
14:59:58 [sharper]
regrets+ Thiessen_Peter
14:59:58 [sharper]
present+ Abou-Zahra_Shadi
15:00:21 [Zakim]
15:00:21 [sharper]
present+ Vigo_Markel
15:00:23 [Zakim]
WAI_RDWG()11:00AM has ended
15:00:26 [Zakim]
Attendees were
15:00:53 [Zakim]
WAI_RDWG()11:00AM has now started
15:01:03 [Zakim]
15:01:18 [sharper]
present+ Yesilada_Yeliz
15:02:46 [Zakim]
15:02:52 [sharper]
zakim, ??P55 is sharper
15:03:13 [sharper]
zakim, ??P36 is markel
15:03:19 [vivienne]
vivienne has joined #rd
15:03:35 [sharper]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:03:35 [sharper]
rrsagent, draft minutes
15:03:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate sharper
15:03:51 [Zakim]
+sharper; got it
15:04:05 [Zakim]
15:04:05 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:04:09 [Zakim]
+markel; got it
15:04:11 [yeliz]
zakim, ??P0 is yeliz
15:04:33 [Zakim]
15:04:42 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
15:05:17 [Zakim]
On the phone I see markel, sharper, ??P0, ??P17
15:05:27 [sharper]
zakim, ??P17 is really yeliz
15:05:32 [Zakim]
+yeliz; got it
15:05:35 [yeliz]
zakim, mute me
15:05:43 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
15:05:45 [sharper]
zakim, ??P0 is shadi
15:05:50 [yeliz]
zakim, mute me
15:06:21 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
15:06:52 [Zakim]
+yeliz; got it
15:06:58 [Zakim]
yeliz was already muted, yeliz
15:07:12 [Zakim]
yeliz should no longer be muted
15:07:18 [Zakim]
I already had ??P0 as yeliz, sharper
15:07:18 [sharper]
present+ Conway_Vivienne
15:07:29 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
15:07:44 [sharper]
zakim, ??P0 is really shadi
15:07:57 [sharper]
zakim, who is making noise?
15:08:28 [Zakim]
15:08:48 [Zakim]
+shadi; got it
15:08:54 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:08:56 [Zakim]
sharper, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Vivienne (25%)
15:09:12 [Zakim]
On the phone I see markel, sharper, shadi (muted), yeliz.a, Vivienne
15:09:21 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
15:09:23 [shadi]
zakim, unmute me
15:09:25 [Zakim]
Vivienne should now be muted
15:09:26 [Zakim]
shadi should no longer be muted
15:09:38 [shadi]
zakim, yeliz.a is really yeliz
15:09:40 [Zakim]
+yeliz; got it
15:09:43 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
15:09:44 [Zakim]
shadi should now be muted
15:09:45 [yeliz]
zakim, mute me
15:09:46 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
15:09:46 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
15:09:49 [Zakim]
On the phone I see markel, sharper, shadi (muted), yeliz (muted), Vivienne (muted)
15:10:18 [shadi]
ack me
15:12:09 [vivienne]
no problem
15:12:22 [vivienne]
zakim, unmute me
15:12:22 [Zakim]
Vivienne should no longer be muted
15:12:39 [Zakim]
15:12:51 [vivienne]
phone just died, will have to re-join
15:13:08 [sharper]
scribe: Conway_Vivienne
15:13:08 [sharper]
ScribeNick: vivienne
15:13:31 [Zakim]
15:14:01 [vivienne]
sh: look at link to Wiki and thanks to Markel for updating it
15:14:10 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
15:14:10 [Zakim]
yeliz should no longer be muted
15:14:23 [vivienne]
yeliz, I didn't get that
15:14:39 [vivienne]
mv: some contribution from Peter as well
15:15:31 [vivienne]
yeliz: should the other editors be in place before this discussion?
15:15:45 [vivienne]
sh: are we ready for a draft first call?
15:15:54 [markel]
15:16:11 [vivienne]
sh: we can get their additions when they come back
15:16:17 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
15:16:18 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
15:16:30 [vivienne]
sh: agenda item 3
15:17:25 [vivienne]
sa: not sure if it goes to the coordinator before announcement is sent to working group, especially this first one
15:17:42 [vivienne]
sh: should we have a quick read through for first draft?
15:18:19 [markel]
15:18:36 [vivienne]
sa: comment on Wiki - looks really great. Now its much more clear on how the test selection will work. Definitions need clarification - conformance vs in use
15:19:24 [vivienne]
mv: clarificaton - is perceived accessibility and accessibility in use the same thing? yes - debate?
15:19:52 [vivienne]
mv: research we could pursue is what people perceived about this question
15:20:15 [yeliz]
Markel, excellent work as the first draft of the call and also the questions
15:20:47 [vivienne]
sa: what conformance means in practice. Does perceived accessibility relate to ? sorry Shadi missed this
15:21:24 [vivienne]
sa: sometimes surveys look at whether people like wcag rather than accessibility
15:21:35 [vivienne]
mv: maybe research should clarify the position
15:22:19 [shadi]
accessibility in use -- as perceived by the user
15:22:21 [vivienne]
mv: what is the relationshp between perceived accessibility and accessibility in use
15:22:46 [vivienne]
sa: do we mean 2 different things or 1 thing
15:23:30 [vivienne]
sa: in usability it includes satisfaction. Maybe useless but still do all the functions.
15:24:07 [vivienne]
mv: Shadi, I think you're right. Accessibility in use would be measured in terms of efficiency.
15:24:32 [vivienne]
sa: that's the only thing I stumbled over
15:24:48 [vivienne]
sa: WAI coordination group need to be notified
15:25:21 [vivienne]
sh: I was waiting for us to get a bit more sorted. Once we got this to a bit more solid thing, I'm off to talk to them about it
15:25:38 [vivienne]
sh: or I could send an email to the gorup
15:26:11 [vivienne]
sa: wouldn't be bad to notify the group that we've selected a topic. I don't know when the next meeting is. Maybe by email.
15:26:50 [vivienne]
sh: are we doing to read this now?
15:27:06 [markel]
15:27:20 [vivienne]
mv: 2 things were to be done this week. One was updating the wiki and the other one was putting the link in for the first draft for the call
15:27:45 [vivienne]
mv: I'd like to have your opinion on what we can take out, or should we leave it as it is?
15:29:13 [vivienne]
all: time taken to read wiki topic
15:29:32 [yeliz]
yy: very minor typing mistake: source of the defition of white paper - "definition"
15:30:48 [markel]
15:31:01 [markel]
sorry for the typos, there are some of them
15:31:30 [shadi]
15:31:36 [shadi]
15:32:02 [shadi]
[contact information]
15:32:15 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute me
15:32:15 [Zakim]
yeliz should no longer be muted
15:32:19 [yeliz]
15:32:53 [vivienne]
yeliz: some of these questions could be quite long. Would it be better to summarize?
15:33:24 [markel]
I agree it's way too long
15:33:44 [yeliz]
zakim, mute me
15:33:44 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
15:33:54 [yeliz]
If it is too long, people won't read it
15:34:01 [yeliz]
I think it's importance to give them a broad overview
15:34:10 [yeliz]
for them to decide if they want to contribute or not
15:34:13 [vivienne]
sh: we could have an abbreviated call that would be circulated and a longer one available explaining what we're expecting
15:34:44 [vivienne]
sh: there are some minor english things I can go through with Markel
15:34:57 [yeliz]
Why don't we use ACM style?
15:35:07 [yeliz]
ACM has both word, and latex format
15:35:21 [markel]
I would go for ACM too
15:35:43 [vivienne]
sa: format has to be accessible
15:35:58 [vivienne]
sh: create some form of html template so we get everything in the same format
15:36:30 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
15:36:30 [Zakim]
yeliz should no longer be muted
15:36:41 [yeliz]
15:36:54 [vivienne]
sh: the working group note would be concise discussion of the paper? sorry Simon, missed some of that
15:37:05 [vivienne]
sa: some form of html template for use
15:37:21 [vivienne]
sh: is there a style for appendices and working group notes?
15:38:23 [vivienne]
sa: I could easily whip up a template, but the idea is we should just have it as html. As long as it's properly structured it should be fine.
15:38:48 [vivienne]
sa: editors can just copy and paste it into working group notes
15:39:08 [vivienne]
sa: just needs to be a structured html template
15:39:41 [shadi]
15:39:46 [vivienne]
sa: there aren't any particular requirements. Only heading 1 at the very top of the document
15:40:20 [vivienne]
sa: everythng else is h2 below that
15:40:45 [vivienne]
sh: h2 is the title to fit with the appendices
15:41:04 [vivienne]
sa: h1 contribution to the ...
15:41:24 [vivienne]
sh: we'd say 'appendix' and then go to h3
15:41:40 [vivienne]
sa: each contribution could have its own appendix
15:42:05 [vivienne]
sh: so we'll have their title as h2 and subtitltes as h3 (did I get this right?)
15:42:07 [shadi]
<h1>Contribution to RDWG Teleconference Seminar on ...</h1>
15:42:27 [shadi]
<h2>[title of contribution]</h2>
15:42:50 [vivienne]
sh: can we get the raw html and grab it?
15:43:16 [shadi]
15:43:29 [vivienne]
sa: Markel and others see Editors home page link
15:44:01 [vivienne]
sa: there is a generator for this content
15:44:21 [markel]
15:45:21 [vivienne]
sa: can't find it right now, I'll look it up and send it
15:45:48 [vivienne]
mv: look at guidelines and you shouldn't find surprises if you adhere to the working group notes
15:46:01 [vivienne]
sa: i'll work with you on formal requirements
15:46:14 [vivienne]
mv: should all submissions follow this format?
15:46:22 [vivienne]
sa: there is no requirement for submissions
15:46:53 [vivienne]
sa: we're trying to make your life easier by integrating it into the working group notes. It will be better to hve the submittors put it in the format
15:47:07 [vivienne]
mv: we're going to put the page limit at 2 pages
15:48:16 [vivienne]
sa: we will be putting a disclaimer on the submitted contributions. It will be obvious it's a contributed appendix. Those kind of minor things will not be an issue, but its important to having heading structure, and accesibility
15:48:36 [vivienne]
sa: it won't be too challenging if its a flat document of 2 pages
15:49:30 [vivienne]
sh: we need to get this progressed in short time. Can Markel nd I get it to a more condensed format for the call and then a more verbose call with all the information on it. We need to announce this pretty soon.
15:49:49 [vivienne]
sh: by end of next week's discussion so we can solicit contributions by end of September
15:49:50 [yeliz]
15:50:13 [vivienne]
yeliz: Sorry Yeliz you're breaking up
15:50:22 [yeliz]
I just have a comment about the call
15:50:36 [yeliz]
I think we need to also make it more attractive to researchers
15:50:51 [yeliz]
how would this be published? and as an author
15:51:04 [yeliz]
how can I cite this
15:51:14 [yeliz]
may be I am looking at it as a publication
15:51:25 [yeliz]
but would be good to tell people
15:51:28 [yeliz]
how this will be published
15:51:33 [vivienne]
sh: I agree and make sure its up front and central
15:51:47 [yeliz]
how people will get the credit
15:51:50 [vivienne]
sh: I will work with Markel and take this into account
15:51:52 [yeliz]
if you se what I mean
15:52:03 [yeliz]
that's quite important for researchers, I think
15:52:13 [vivienne]
sh: agreed.
15:52:46 [yeliz]
sounds good to me
15:52:47 [vivienne]
sh: each of the accepted papers, after review, will be an appendix within the main w3C notes and referencable the same way as other proceedings
15:52:52 [yeliz]
15:53:12 [vivienne]
like 'referencable'?
15:53:24 [yeliz]
definitely, thanks markel
15:53:32 [yeliz]
I also have another suggestion
15:53:38 [vivienne]
sh: are we happy that these questions are expressive?
15:53:51 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
15:53:51 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
15:53:53 [vivienne]
I think it's yeliz
15:53:59 [yeliz]
sorry about that
15:54:28 [yeliz]
Wouldnt be also useful to say that the scope is not limited to just these questions
15:54:39 [vivienne]
sa: we have the main stuff on there, but have a bunch of editorial work. The objective of the seminar is not clear
15:54:42 [yeliz]
as long as people submit an abstract related to the topic
15:54:46 [yeliz]
would be good, I think
15:54:49 [vivienne]
sa: the outcome needs to be highlighted more
15:54:50 [yeliz]
15:55:00 [markel]
15:55:08 [vivienne]
sa: maybe better structuring, use of more headings
15:55:27 [vivienne]
sh: agree. Put together like a normal call for papers
15:55:44 [vivienne]
sh: we'll format it in a nicer way like a normal call for papers
15:55:50 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute me
15:55:50 [Zakim]
yeliz should no longer be muted
15:56:23 [vivienne]
sh: markel and I will work on this tomorrow together and put it to the group to see whether we agree.
15:56:34 [vivienne]
sh: how to get this out?
15:56:38 [vivienne]
mv: make the survey public?
15:56:55 [vivienne]
sh: draft not exposed to public intially
15:57:10 [vivienne]
sa: preference clearly attribute it as 'draft - work in progress'
15:57:23 [vivienne]
sa: have it in standard w3c format
15:57:39 [shadi]
q+ to talk about timing
15:57:50 [shadi]
ack y
15:58:12 [vivienne]
yeliz: if people have research of findings in related topics, they can still submit it even though they are not addressing the questions exactly as listed.
15:58:17 [markel]
+1 to Yeliz
15:58:34 [vivienne]
sh: like the disclaimer for the w4a - and then its up to the scientific committee
15:58:49 [vivienne]
sh: scientific committee will decide if it falls within the bounds
15:59:05 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
15:59:09 [Zakim]
yeliz should now be muted
15:59:11 [vivienne]
yeliz: good to keep it open as there may be questions we have not thought about
15:59:13 [yeliz]
Keep it as open as possible
15:59:20 [yeliz]
I agree
15:59:22 [yeliz]
15:59:29 [yeliz]
I agree with Shadi
15:59:35 [yeliz]
so keeping it open is good
15:59:35 [vivienne]
sa: otherwise we may not get as many contributions as we hope
15:59:57 [vivienne]
sh: markel and I will work on this tomorrow
16:00:05 [vivienne]
sh: shadi can you send us the format?
16:00:12 [shadi]
ack me
16:00:13 [Zakim]
shadi, you wanted to talk about timing
16:00:15 [yeliz]
16:00:42 [vivienne]
sa: i'll send you also the template for the working group notes to use as a template for the submisions/contributions
16:01:09 [vivienne]
sa: next week will be difficult due to absences
16:01:26 [vivienne]
sa: maybe by the following week ie 30 August
16:01:57 [vivienne]
sh: whenever we get the go-ahead to do the first call will be a deciding factor
16:02:10 [vivienne]
sh: 1-10 September I'm on vacation
16:02:33 [vivienne]
sa: make sure everyone is happy with the call and then work on the announcements
16:02:45 [yeliz]
sounds great
16:03:03 [yeliz]
16:03:03 [vivienne]
bye now
16:03:05 [markel]
thanks VC
16:03:10 [Zakim]
16:03:13 [Zakim]
16:03:15 [Zakim]
16:03:15 [vivienne]
vivienne has left #rd
16:03:20 [markel]
markel has left #rd
16:03:24 [shadi]
trackbot, end meeting
16:03:24 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:03:24 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been sharper, markel, Vivienne, shadi, yeliz
16:03:25 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:03:25 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:03:26 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:03:26 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items