IRC log of eval on 2011-09-15

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:01:38 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #eval
14:01:38 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:01:45 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:01:45 [Zakim]
+ +49.404.318.aacc
14:01:53 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Eric, +1.301.975.aaaa, ??P15, +1.978.261.aabb, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Shadi, +49.404.318.aacc
14:02:01 [shadi]
zakim, aacc is Detlev
14:02:11 [Zakim]
+Detlev; got it
14:02:24 [kathy]
zakim, aabb is kathy
14:02:32 [Zakim]
+ +1.248.342.aadd
14:02:39 [dboudreau]
dboudreau has joined #eval
14:02:41 [Zakim]
+kathy; got it
14:02:55 [Zakim]
+ +1.703.243.aaee
14:02:57 [ssirois]
zakim, ??P15 is ssirois
14:03:03 [Liz]
zakim, aaaa is liz
14:03:05 [dboudreau]
hi everyone, getting on the call asap
14:03:11 [Zakim]
+ssirois; got it
14:03:15 [Zakim]
+liz; got it
14:03:20 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:03:20 [ssirois]
Zakim, mute me
14:03:41 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Eric, liz, ssirois, kathy, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Shadi, Detlev, +1.248.342.aadd, +1.703.243.aaee
14:03:44 [Zakim]
ssirois should now be muted
14:04:28 [kostas]
kostas has joined #eval
14:04:35 [shadi]
zakim, aadd is Mike
14:04:36 [Zakim]
+Mike; got it
14:04:42 [Zakim]
+ +30231125aaff
14:04:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.514.312.aagg
14:04:50 [shadi]
zakim, aaee is Tim
14:04:50 [Zakim]
+Tim; got it
14:05:05 [dboudreau]
zakim, aagg is dboudreau
14:05:06 [Zakim]
+dboudreau; got it
14:05:08 [ssirois]
hi everyone, won't be talking on the phone line since i forgot my mic @ office and you don't want the feedback of my speakers+my laptop mic! ;)
14:05:28 [ssirois]
but i hear you! ;)
14:05:30 [Zakim]
14:06:23 [vivienne]
Zakim, ??p50 is vivienne
14:06:23 [Zakim]
+vivienne; got it
14:06:50 [kostas]
zakim aaff is kostas
14:07:11 [kostas]
zakim, aaff is kostas
14:07:11 [Zakim]
+kostas; got it
14:07:17 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:07:17 [Zakim]
On the phone I see Eric, liz, ssirois (muted), kathy, Katie_Haritos-Shea, Shadi, Detlev, Mike, Tim (muted), kostas, dboudreau, vivienne
14:07:23 [Vincent]
Vincent has joined #eval
14:07:25 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:07:25 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:07:25 [kathy]
zakim, mute me
14:07:27 [Zakim]
kathy should now be muted
14:07:59 [kathy]
zakim, unmute me
14:07:59 [Zakim]
kathy should no longer be muted
14:08:01 [Zakim]
+ +1.514.448.aahh
14:08:29 [dboudreau]
zakim, mute me
14:08:29 [Zakim]
dboudreau should now be muted
14:08:50 [shadi]
scribe: kathy
14:08:53 [Vincent]
Zakim, aahh is Vincent
14:08:53 [Zakim]
+Vincent; got it
14:09:17 [Vincent]
zakim, mute me
14:09:17 [Zakim]
Vincent should now be muted
14:09:58 [shadi]
14:10:04 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:10:04 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:10:14 [Zakim]
+ +90700004aaii
14:10:21 [shadi]
Topic: Discussion of the requirements
14:10:30 [Ryladog]
Ryladog has joined #eval
14:10:34 [shadi]
zakim, aaii is Emmanuelle
14:10:34 [Zakim]
+Emmanuelle; got it
14:10:58 [kathy]
Eric: requirements are on the W3C website
14:11:01 [shadi]
14:11:43 [kathy]
Eric: notes are being sent out as a word document
14:11:43 [shadi]
14:11:45 [sinarmaya]
sinarmaya has joined #eval
14:12:46 [kathy]
Eric: terminology has been discussed but not agreed upon by the group - need to review
14:13:20 [kathy]
Eric: start looking at chapter 1 - goals
14:13:56 [kathy]
Eric: discussion on terminology; these are used in the goals and requirements
14:15:06 [kathy]
Eric: is everyone ok with the section on goals
14:15:12 [Zakim]
14:15:12 [kathy]
Liz: asked about tolerence metrics and what that is
14:15:44 [dboudreau]
zakim, unmute me
14:15:44 [Zakim]
dboudreau should no longer be muted
14:15:53 [Detlev]
14:15:58 [dboudreau]
14:16:01 [kathy]
Eric: tolerence is the situation where you have many images and only one fails; then does this fail
14:16:48 [EricVelleman]
14:17:32 [Zakim]
14:17:36 [kathy]
Detlev - goals need to include independent verification; at least test results should be included to add credibility
14:17:42 [kostas]
14:18:50 [shadi]
ack det
14:19:02 [shadi]
ack db
14:19:18 [kostas]
14:19:27 [kathy]
Dbourdreau - goals should be described in terminology; tolerence metrics should be included
14:20:41 [EricVelleman]
14:20:42 [dboudreau]
zakim, mute me
14:20:43 [Zakim]
dboudreau should now be muted
14:20:52 [shadi]
ack k
14:21:21 [kathy]
Kostas: goals - critical path analysis; not sure if it should be requirement
14:21:51 [kathy]
Eric: scope is not much different
14:21:55 [shadi]
14:21:58 [shadi]
ack me
14:22:03 [kathy]
Eric: everyone agree on scope?
14:22:17 [Detlev]
14:22:19 [kathy]
Shadi: should be the methology itself not the task force
14:23:38 [sinarmaya]
I was expecting that the "scope" was the scope of the methodolofy too.
14:23:38 [kathy]
Shadi: frame with sub-heading coordination with other groups
14:23:43 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:23:45 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:23:54 [EricVelleman]
14:24:41 [shadi]
ack d
14:25:05 [dboudreau]
14:25:17 [dboudreau]
ack me
14:25:24 [kostas]
14:25:25 [dboudreau]
14:26:00 [kathy]
Detlev: add to scope; full lifecycle from building to maintaining; should be spin offs to extend more than a single evaluation
14:26:17 [kathy]
Eric: Detlev to draft ideas
14:26:30 [shadi]
ack k
14:26:44 [kathy]
Kostas: reason why we need the methology is missing
14:27:20 [kathy]
Eric: Kostas to provide text as to why
14:28:13 [shadi]
ack db
14:28:19 [Ryladog]
14:28:26 [kathy]
Dbordreau: methodology should have preliminary evaluation (approach different than the full evaluation). Have multiple versions for quick eval; simple and easy on representative sample
14:28:47 [kathy]
Eric: good idea; add to scope
14:28:48 [EricVelleman]
14:29:10 [dboudreau]
zakim, mute me
14:29:11 [Zakim]
dboudreau should now be muted
14:29:28 [shadi]
14:29:33 [shadi]
ack r
14:29:53 [kathy]
Ryladog (katie): agrees with Kosta; sampling methodology should be a separate document as it is a different process
14:30:18 [kathy]
Eric: should be included in the metholodology. Sampling is required for all evaluations
14:31:09 [shadi]
ack t
14:31:21 [kathy]
Tim: Authoring tools working group has information on previews; we should include this in our methodology and be consistent with
14:31:41 [shadi]
ack me
14:31:46 [kathy]
Eric: Tim will send link and text summary. This will be included in the document
14:32:01 [EricVelleman]
14:32:41 [kathy]
Shadi: this is ok to add to the document; evaluation process where does it start? this will determine the scope of the authoring tools work
14:33:10 [Detlev]
14:33:50 [kathy]
Shadi: preliminary or light weight evaluation - need to be considerate about that and we need guideance for both. Scope needs to reflect what we can do
14:34:06 [kathy]
Eric: should include both scenarios
14:34:13 [vivienne]
14:34:20 [dboudreau]
ack me
14:34:25 [vivienne]
ack me
14:34:28 [dboudreau]
14:34:32 [vivienne]
14:34:42 [kathy]
Eric: should include 1 page evaluation but this will follow WCAG
14:35:03 [kathy]
Shadi: this metholodology should include small and large websties
14:35:09 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:35:09 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:35:12 [shadi]
ack me
14:35:19 [vivienne]
14:35:30 [shadi]
ack d
14:36:05 [kathy]
Detlev: same approach can be used for preliminary and full evaluation. All about selecting pages
14:36:13 [Ryladog]
14:36:46 [shadi]
ack d
14:37:24 [kathy]
Denis: preliminary evaluation should not be a requirement; nice to have to give context but not required
14:38:41 [kathy]
Denis: agrees with Detlev about the selection of pages; preliminary evaluation can be used to check to see if the site is ready for review
14:38:49 [shadi]
ack r
14:39:00 [Vincent]
14:39:02 [dboudreau]
zakim, mute me
14:39:02 [Zakim]
dboudreau should now be muted
14:39:05 [Vincent]
ack me
14:39:12 [kathy]
Katie: sampling, preliminary and full blown are three different approaches
14:39:16 [Vincent]
14:39:20 [Vincent]
14:39:30 [dboudreau]
+1 to targeting a specific component
14:39:47 [shadi]
q+ Mike
14:40:27 [shadi]
ack v
14:41:05 [kathy]
Vincent: preliminary is not the right name; idea is to get a quick evaluation
14:41:46 [Vincent]
mute me
14:41:50 [dboudreau]
"quick shot evaluation" instead of preliminary?
14:41:52 [shadi]
ack m
14:42:30 [shadi]
14:42:36 [kathy]
Mike: accessibility problems are identified and the document needs to indicate the issue types; do we want to have two different sets of criteria
14:44:06 [Zakim]
14:44:07 [Vincent]
Kakim, mute me
14:44:16 [kathy]
Mike: single page, sampling page, full site review - what is the difference in approach
14:44:21 [Vincent]
Zakim, mute me
14:44:21 [Zakim]
Vincent should now be muted
14:44:38 [kathy]
Eric: do we need preliminary evaluation
14:44:41 [shadi]
ack me
14:44:47 [dboudreau]
ack me
14:44:53 [dboudreau]
14:46:18 [kathy]
Shadi: two types of preliminary evaluations - less technical and technical preliminary review
14:46:46 [kathy]
Shadi - we are talking about experts conducting the evaluation
14:46:56 [shadi]
ack d
14:48:26 [kathy]
Denis: preliminary is not non-technical evaluation; still need to verify the page and need the level of technical knowledge but small set of things that are being checked
14:49:24 [kathy]
Denis: it is for people to get the general picture
14:49:39 [dboudreau]
zakim, mute me
14:49:39 [Zakim]
dboudreau should now be muted
14:49:41 [kathy]
Eric: Move on to the target audience
14:49:42 [ssirois]
i don't know if I would use words like "light" or "less", that may leave the client with the idea that the evaluation has no value. i like "quick shot" expression more. making it quick doesn't make it less "accessible", just not looking at ALL points.
14:50:23 [kathy]
Eric: send other target audiences over email
14:51:15 [kathy]
Eric: requirements - section on terminology; look to see what needs explanation. If on W3C then we will use that. If not the group will write up
14:51:36 [kathy]
Eric: 15 requirements were discussed on the list; please react to that
14:52:34 [dboudreau]
ack me
14:52:36 [kathy]
Eric: should we have unique interpretation in the requirements
14:52:43 [kathy]
Detlev: yes
14:53:02 [Zakim]
14:53:06 [kathy]
Eric: should we take this out? Anyone disagree
14:53:28 [kathy]
Denis: taking it out would leave a hole
14:54:03 [kathy]
Eric: R08 - tried to make it more clear; R11 - a lot of discussion on naming
14:54:29 [kathy]
Eric: we need to discuss these three on the mailing list; do we need change of text/naming; should they be split
14:54:39 [Detlev]
14:54:40 [kathy]
Eric: please also give feedback on the other items
14:55:05 [shadi]
zakim, close queue
14:55:05 [Zakim]
ok, shadi, the speaker queue is closed
14:55:12 [kathy]
Eric: missing - transparency? Discussion thread will be started
14:55:24 [Detlev]
14:55:37 [shadi]
ack m
14:55:41 [kathy]
Mike: agree with the previous comment on unique interpretation would leave a hole
14:55:44 [Ryladog]
14:55:52 [shadi]
zakim, open queue
14:55:53 [Zakim]
ok, shadi, the speaker queue is open
14:56:39 [kathy]
Katie: questions on critical path - WCAG it is referred to workflow; we should follow the WCAG terminology
14:56:55 [Detlev]
14:57:16 [kathy]
Detlev: conformance is called complete processes
14:57:28 [shadi]
ack d
14:57:28 [kathy]
Eric: Katie will research the WCAG terminology
14:58:15 [kathy]
Eric: most of the requirements were agreed on. Let's concentrate on the others
14:58:31 [vivienne]
thanks, bye.
14:58:33 [Zakim]
15:01:59 [Vincent]
15:01:59 [ssirois]
thank you all, see you on the list! ;)
15:02:00 [kathy]
15:02:02 [vivienne]
vivienne has left #eval
15:02:24 [Zakim]
15:02:26 [Zakim]
15:02:28 [Zakim]
15:02:36 [Zakim]
15:02:39 [Zakim]
15:02:42 [Zakim]
15:02:44 [Zakim]
15:02:46 [Zakim]
15:02:48 [Zakim]
15:02:54 [Zakim]
15:03:15 [shadi]
trackbot, end meeting
15:03:22 [Zakim]
15:03:26 [Zakim]
WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
15:03:28 [Zakim]
Attendees were Eric, +1.301.975.aaaa, Katie_Haritos-Shea, +1.978.261.aabb, Shadi, +49.404.318.aacc, Detlev, +1.248.342.aadd, kathy, +1.703.243.aaee, ssirois, liz, Mike,
15:03:33 [Zakim]
... +30231125aaff, +1.514.312.aagg, Tim, dboudreau, vivienne, kostas, +1.514.448.aahh, Vincent, +90700004aaii, Emmanuelle
15:17:41 [ssirois]
ssirois has left #eval
16:02:56 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
16:03:00 [shadi]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:03:00 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate shadi
16:36:27 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
16:36:29 [shadi]
rrsagent, make minutes
16:36:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate shadi
16:36:41 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
17:00:58 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #eval
17:35:36 [trackbot]
trackbot has joined #eval
17:37:45 [shadi]
rrsagent, bye
17:37:45 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items