Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

Welcome (Regrets, Agenda Requests, Comments).

sh: look at link to Wiki and thanks to Markel for updating it

yeliz, I didn't get that

mv: some contribution from Peter as well

yeliz: should the other editors be in place before this discussion?

sh: are we ready for a draft first call?

<markel> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3976331/webinar%20call.html

sh: we can get their additions when they come back
... agenda item 3

sa: not sure if it goes to the coordinator before announcement is sent to working group, especially this first one

sh: should we have a quick read through for first draft?

<markel> thanks

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

mv: clarificaton - is perceived accessibility and accessibility in use the same thing? yes - debate?
... research we could pursue is what people perceived about this question

<yeliz> Markel, excellent work as the first draft of the call and also the questions

sa: what conformance means in practice. Does perceived accessibility relate to ? sorry Shadi missed this
... sometimes surveys look at whether people like wcag rather than accessibility

mv: maybe research should clarify the position

<shadi> accessibility in use -- as perceived by the user

mv: what is the relationshp between perceived accessibility and accessibility in use

sa: do we mean 2 different things or 1 thing
... in usability it includes satisfaction. Maybe useless but still do all the functions.

mv: Shadi, I think you're right. Accessibility in use would be measured in terms of efficiency.

sa: that's the only thing I stumbled over
... WAI coordination group need to be notified

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
... or I could send an email to the gorup

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.

sh: are we doing to read this now?

<markel> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3976331/webinar%20call.html

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
... I'd like to have your opinion on what we can take out, or should we leave it as it is?

all: time taken to read wiki topic

<yeliz> yy: very minor typing mistake: source of the defition of white paper - "definition"

<markel> thanks!

<markel> sorry for the typos, there are some of them

<shadi> [goals/objectives]

<shadi> [participation]

<shadi> [contact information]

yeliz: some of these questions could be quite long. Would it be better to summarize?

<markel> I agree it's way too long

<yeliz> If it is too long, people won't read it

<yeliz> I think it's importance to give them a broad overview

<yeliz> for them to decide if they want to contribute or not

sh: we could have an abbreviated call that would be circulated and a longer one available explaining what we're expecting
... there are some minor english things I can go through with Markel

<yeliz> Why don't we use ACM style?

<yeliz> ACM has both word, and latex format

<markel> I would go for ACM too

sa: format has to be accessible

sh: create some form of html template so we get everything in the same format
... the working group note would be concise discussion of the paper? sorry Simon, missed some of that

sa: some form of html template for use

sh: is there a style for appendices and working group notes?

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.
... editors can just copy and paste it into working group notes
... just needs to be a structured html template

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/TR/HTTP-in-RDF/

sa: there aren't any particular requirements. Only heading 1 at the very top of the document
... everythng else is h2 below that

sh: h2 is the title to fit with the appendices

sa: h1 contribution to the ...

sh: we'd say 'appendix' and then go to h3

sa: each contribution could have its own appendix

sh: so we'll have their title as h2 and subtitltes as h3 (did I get this right?)

<shadi> <h1>Contribution to RDWG Teleconference Seminar on ...</h1>

<shadi> <h2>[title of contribution]</h2>

sh: can we get the raw html and grab it?

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2003/Editors/

sa: Markel and others see Editors home page link
... there is a generator for this content

<markel> :-)

sa: can't find it right now, I'll look it up and send it

mv: look at guidelines and you shouldn't find surprises if you adhere to the working group notes

sa: i'll work with you on formal requirements

mv: should all submissions follow this format?

sa: there is no requirement for submissions
... 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

mv: we're going to put the page limit at 2 pages

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
... it won't be too challenging if its a flat document of 2 pages

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.
... by end of next week's discussion so we can solicit contributions by end of September

<yeliz> +1

yeliz: Sorry Yeliz you're breaking up

<yeliz> I just have a comment about the call

<yeliz> I think we need to also make it more attractive to researchers

<yeliz> how would this be published? and as an author

<yeliz> how can I cite this

<yeliz> may be I am looking at it as a publication

<yeliz> but would be good to tell people

<yeliz> how this will be published

sh: I agree and make sure its up front and central

<yeliz> how people will get the credit

sh: I will work with Markel and take this into account

<yeliz> if you se what I mean

<yeliz> that's quite important for researchers, I think

sh: agreed.

<yeliz> sounds good to me

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

<yeliz> +1

like 'referencable'?

<yeliz> definitely, thanks markel

<yeliz> I also have another suggestion

sh: are we happy that these questions are expressive?

I think it's yeliz

<yeliz> sorry about that

<yeliz> Wouldnt be also useful to say that the scope is not limited to just these questions

sa: we have the main stuff on there, but have a bunch of editorial work. The objective of the seminar is not clear

<yeliz> as long as people submit an abstract related to the topic

<yeliz> would be good, I think

sa: the outcome needs to be highlighted more

<yeliz> ??

<markel> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/process.html#credits

sa: maybe better structuring, use of more headings

sh: agree. Put together like a normal call for papers
... we'll format it in a nicer way like a normal call for papers
... markel and I will work on this tomorrow together and put it to the group to see whether we agree.
... how to get this out?

mv: make the survey public?

sh: draft not exposed to public intially

sa: preference clearly attribute it as 'draft - work in progress'
... have it in standard w3c format

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.

<markel> +1 to Yeliz

sh: like the disclaimer for the w4a - and then its up to the scientific committee
... scientific committee will decide if it falls within the bounds

yeliz: good to keep it open as there may be questions we have not thought about

<yeliz> Keep it as open as possible

<yeliz> I agree

<yeliz> +1

<yeliz> I agree with Shadi

<yeliz> so keeping it open is good

sa: otherwise we may not get as many contributions as we hope

sh: markel and I will work on this tomorrow
... shadi can you send us the format?

<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to talk about timing

<yeliz> +1

sa: i'll send you also the template for the working group notes to use as a template for the submisions/contributions
... next week will be difficult due to absences
... maybe by the following week ie 30 August

sh: whenever we get the go-ahead to do the first call will be a deciding factor
... 1-10 September I'm on vacation

sa: make sure everyone is happy with the call and then work on the announcements