IRC log of eval on 2011-09-22

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:50:04 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #eval
13:50:04 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:50:06 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
13:50:06 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #eval
13:50:08 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 3825
13:50:08 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 10 minutes
13:50:09 [trackbot]
Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
13:50:09 [trackbot]
Date: 22 September 2011
13:50:15 [Zakim]
WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
13:50:22 [Zakim]
13:50:50 [vivienne]
zakimn, ??p9 is me
13:51:14 [vivienne]
zakim, ??P9 is me
13:51:14 [Zakim]
+vivienne; got it
13:51:21 [Kathy]
Kathy has joined #eval
13:56:42 [kerstin]
kerstin has joined #eval
13:57:18 [kerstin]
hi all, I need a few minutes to connect with skype, sorry
13:57:19 [Zakim]
+ +1.978.443.aaaa
13:57:39 [Detlev]
Detlev has joined #eval
13:57:41 [Kathy]
zakim, aaaa is Kathy
13:57:41 [Zakim]
+Kathy; got it
13:58:30 [EricVelleman]
EricVelleman has joined #eval
13:58:31 [Zakim]
13:59:39 [Zakim]
+ +31.30.239.aabb
14:00:17 [EricVelleman]
Zakim, aabb is me
14:00:17 [Zakim]
+EricVelleman; got it
14:00:26 [Kathy]
zakim, mute me
14:00:26 [Zakim]
Kathy should now be muted
14:00:30 [Zakim]
+ +1.517.432.aacc
14:00:35 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:00:35 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:00:40 [agarrison]
agarrison has joined #eval
14:01:29 [Zakim]
+ +1.415.298.aadd
14:01:56 [Zakim]
+ +49.404.318.aaee
14:02:17 [Zakim]
14:02:24 [Zakim]
+ +1.517.353.aaff
14:02:25 [shadi]
zakim, ??p34 is me
14:02:25 [Zakim]
+shadi; got it
14:02:36 [Sarah]
Sarah has joined #eval
14:02:57 [Detlev]
Zakim, aaee is me
14:02:57 [Zakim]
+Detlev; got it
14:03:16 [AmyChen]
AmyChen has joined #eval
14:03:35 [shadi]
zakim, aadd is AmyChen
14:03:35 [Zakim]
+AmyChen; got it
14:03:37 [Zakim]
14:03:44 [Ryladog]
Ryladog has joined #eval
14:03:49 [shadi]
zakim, aaff is Tim
14:03:58 [Zakim]
+Tim; got it
14:04:08 [shadi]
zakim, ??p39 is agarrison
14:04:12 [Zakim]
+agarrison; got it
14:04:18 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:04:20 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:04:26 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:04:28 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), Kathy (muted), Katie_Haritos-Shea, EricVelleman, +1.517.432.aacc, AmyChen, Detlev (muted), shadi, Tim, agarrison
14:05:09 [Zakim]
14:05:30 [Sarah]
Hello, I'm on the phone, too (Sarah Swierenga)
14:05:32 [LeonieWatson]
LeonieWatson has joined #Eval
14:05:37 [Zakim]
14:05:42 [EricVelleman_]
EricVelleman_ has joined #eval
14:05:58 [shadi]
zakim, aacc is Sarah
14:06:00 [Zakim]
+Sarah; got it
14:06:09 [shadi]
zakim, sarah has Mike
14:06:09 [Zakim]
+Mike; got it
14:06:17 [Zakim]
14:06:58 [shadi]
zakim, ipcaller is Kerstin
14:06:58 [Zakim]
+Kerstin; got it
14:07:14 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:07:14 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), Kathy (muted), Katie_Haritos-Shea, EricVelleman, Sarah, AmyChen, Detlev (muted), shadi, Tim, agarrison, Kerstin
14:07:16 [Zakim]
Sarah has Mike
14:07:37 [vivienne]
ack me
14:07:41 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:07:41 [Zakim]
Kerstin should now be muted
14:07:59 [Kathy]
zakim, unmute me
14:07:59 [Zakim]
Kathy should no longer be muted
14:08:04 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:08:04 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:08:27 [Kathy]
zakim, mute me
14:08:30 [Zakim]
Kathy should now be muted
14:09:53 [vivienne]
14:10:07 [Detlev]
Zakim, unmute me
14:10:07 [Zakim]
Detlev should no longer be muted
14:10:32 [Zakim]
14:10:45 [LeonieWatson]
zakim, ??p53 is LeonieWatson
14:10:46 [Zakim]
+LeonieWatson; got it
14:10:50 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:10:50 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:11:30 [kerstin]
zakim, unmute me
14:11:30 [Zakim]
Kerstin should no longer be muted
14:12:03 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:12:03 [Zakim]
Kerstin should now be muted
14:12:58 [vivienne]
I will
14:13:25 [shadi]
scribe: Leonie
14:13:27 [LeonieWatson]
scribe: LeonieWatson
14:13:30 [shadi]
scribenick: LeonieWatson
14:13:39 [LeonieWatson]
zakim, next item
14:13:39 [Zakim]
I see nothing on the agenda
14:13:57 [LeonieWatson]
Topic: Discussing requirements
14:14:38 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Replace critical path analysis by processes.
14:14:51 [LeonieWatson]
EV: We'll use the term "complete processes"
14:15:06 [LeonieWatson]
EV: People asked for methodology to be cross tested. It's a good addition.
14:15:15 [Detlev]
14:15:23 [Detlev]
ack me
14:15:40 [LeonieWatson]
DF: Is it clear when we say we'll include reference to the test results?
14:15:54 [LeonieWatson]
EV: I can make it longer than this, agreed.
14:16:02 [LeonieWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:16:02 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LeonieWatson
14:16:06 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:16:06 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:16:14 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Can we add the reson for the methodology?
14:16:30 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Reasonable to add this.
14:16:47 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Do we want to add both preliminary and full evaluation in section goals?
14:16:58 [AmyChen]
14:17:01 [vivienne]
14:17:12 [Kathy]
14:17:15 [LeonieWatson]
EV: My proposal is to work on the full evaluation, and keep the preliminary evaluation out of this more formal way of doing things.
14:17:17 [kerstin]
14:17:39 [Ryladog]
14:18:13 [LeonieWatson]
AC: Will the full evaluation cover parts of a website or just complete websites?
14:18:25 [shadi]
Regrests: Liz, Vincent, Denis, Kostas, Tim
14:18:27 [agarrison]
Agree with Eric - concentrate on full evaluation
14:18:32 [shadi]
Regrets: Liz, Vincent, Denis, Kostas, Tim
14:18:33 [vivienne]
ack me
14:18:35 [LeonieWatson]
EV: I don't think a preliminary check would be suitable in the full methodology.
14:18:39 [shadi]
Chair: Eric
14:18:51 [shadi]
q- amy
14:19:00 [LeonieWatson]
VC: We need to be clear what the term preliminary check means.
14:19:29 [LeonieWatson]
VC: If we decide not to include preliminary checks, we need to be clear what it is we're not including.
14:19:31 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:19:31 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:19:32 [vivienne]
14:19:34 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Good addition.
14:19:38 [kerstin]
zakim, unmute me
14:19:38 [Zakim]
Kerstin should no longer be muted
14:19:41 [Kathy]
ack me
14:19:44 [shadi]
14:19:52 [EricVelleman_]
14:20:18 [LeonieWatson]
KW: For this methodology, I think we should focus on the full evaluation, but Vivienne's point is a good one.
14:20:25 [Kathy]
zakim, mute me
14:20:25 [Zakim]
Kathy should now be muted
14:20:52 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:20:52 [Zakim]
Kerstin should now be muted
14:20:58 [shadi]
q- kerstin
14:20:58 [Vincent]
Vincent has joined #eval
14:20:59 [EricVelleman_]
14:21:06 [shadi]
ack Ryladog
14:21:45 [Zakim]
+ +1.514.312.aagg
14:21:49 [LeonieWatson]
EV: A full evaluation could be applied to a page or a full site.
14:22:07 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Preliminary to me is an evaluation that gives a sense of the accessibility, rather than a full evaluation.
14:22:13 [Vincent]
zakim, aagg is Vincent
14:22:13 [Zakim]
+Vincent; got it
14:22:19 [shadi]
14:22:20 [LeonieWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:22:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LeonieWatson
14:22:24 [Vincent]
14:22:39 [shadi]
regrets -Vincent
14:22:52 [Vincent]
zakim, mute me
14:22:52 [Zakim]
Vincent should now be muted
14:23:29 [LeonieWatson]
KW: I wouldn't call that preliminary, it's a target full evaluation?
14:23:38 [kerstin]
14:24:00 [kerstin]
zakim, umute me
14:24:00 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'umute me', kerstin
14:24:23 [shadi]
ack kerstin
14:25:09 [LeonieWatson]
KP: It depends on the choice over whether to test 1, or 10 or some other number of pages.
14:25:19 [Detlev]
14:25:20 [LeonieWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:25:20 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LeonieWatson
14:25:30 [Tim]
Tim has joined #eval
14:25:51 [LeonieWatson]
EV: We'll add in a section about co-ordination with other groups.
14:25:56 [shadi]
ack detlev
14:26:21 [Zakim]
14:26:41 [LeonieWatson]
DF: Shadi has provided a scope that does nicely. Tim suggested checking it against other existing definitions.
14:27:17 [LeonieWatson]
EV: In section scope we should add members of the group involved in other sepcifications, for example ATAG. This was agreed.
14:27:37 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:27:37 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:27:40 [AmyChen]
14:28:02 [LeonieWatson]
EV: We decided to keep unique interpretation, but need to change the description.
14:28:11 [EricVelleman_]
14:28:29 [LeonieWatson]
AC: I like "unambiguous" better than "unique".
14:29:12 [LeonieWatson]
EV: There was a requirement for independent verification and quality control.
14:29:25 [Detlev]
14:29:28 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Would this be a good requirement to add?
14:29:30 [AmyChen]
14:29:33 [LeonieWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:29:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LeonieWatson
14:29:35 [vivienne]
I'm okay with it
14:29:39 [Detlev]
ack me
14:29:45 [EricVelleman_]
14:30:33 [melledge]
melledge has joined #eval
14:30:38 [LeonieWatson]
DF: Looking at conformance statements for WCAG, it says a list of URIs should be included to which the claim relates. This means a conformance claim has to be backed up by this list.
14:30:53 [Detlev]
14:31:02 [shadi]
14:31:16 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:31:16 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:31:18 [shadi]
q- amy
14:31:54 [LeonieWatson]
AC: Could we change the wording to say "this methodology can be used by a party providing independent verification...".
14:32:10 [LeonieWatson]
EV: The idea is to say that this methodology supports independent verification.
14:32:16 [LeonieWatson]
AC: Needs to be more clear.
14:32:24 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Agreed, we'll look at that.
14:32:46 [LeonieWatson]
KW: Say "may" instead of "can"?
14:33:10 [LeonieWatson]
DF: Are these requirements supposed to be estable?
14:33:40 [LeonieWatson]
EV: I'm not sure other W3C documents are always testable, so I don't think we have to be formal about it.
14:34:01 [Detlev]
14:34:17 [LeonieWatson]
SA: The more clear we are, the less ambiguity we'll have.
14:34:50 [LeonieWatson]
s/DF: Are these requirements supposed to be estable?/TB: Are these requirements supposed to be testable?/
14:35:04 [LeonieWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:35:04 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LeonieWatson
14:35:26 [LeonieWatson]
SA: We need to balance between spending too much time on requirements, and having them too ambiguous to use.
14:35:58 [LeonieWatson]
SA: Ideally yes, requirements should be testable though.
14:37:23 [Detlev]
ack me
14:37:31 [Detlev]
14:37:44 [shadi]
ack detlev
14:38:33 [LeonieWatson]
DF: Two things have been mixed up. Independent verification is required by the WCAG conformance claim guidance, whether our requirements can be tested or backed up is a different thing.
14:39:05 [LeonieWatson]
rssagent, make minutes
14:39:36 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:39:36 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:41:00 [LeonieWatson]
EV: So we had Tim's remark about testability of requirements, and Detlev's remark about conformance claims under WCAG.
14:41:29 [LeonieWatson]
rrsagent, make minutes
14:41:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate LeonieWatson
14:41:30 [EricVelleman_]
14:41:30 [Detlev]
14:43:37 [LeonieWatson]
Me: The methodology and the requirements are separate things. We need to be mindful of that.
14:44:22 [LeonieWatson]
EV: Not sure we can have a requirement for objectivity?
14:44:31 [vivienne]
14:44:40 [shadi]
scribe: vivienne
14:45:13 [LeonieWatson]
Scribe: Vivienne
14:45:15 [vivienne]
EV: should we add objectivity as a requirement if there is a clear way of representing it?
14:45:27 [Zakim]
14:45:30 [vivienne]
EV: maybe we need some more discussion on this
14:46:00 [shadi]
14:46:02 [Detlev]
14:46:09 [shadi]
q- later
14:46:10 [vivienne]
EV: added J - validity. Could be an extra requirement
14:46:17 [EricVelleman_]
14:46:20 [shadi]
ack me
14:47:14 [vivienne]
SA: EARL is a machine-readable way of writing, but doesn't add to the result. It does not provide more validity. EARL would supplement human-readable reports
14:48:08 [vivienne]
SA: re validity issue. 2 types of validity. Methodology is check conformance to WCAG 2. This is slightly different from validity of accessibility itself.
14:48:41 [vivienne]
EV: we are focusing on the way that the evaluation results are documented. It is not validity of doing the tests.
14:49:11 [EricVelleman_]
14:49:11 [vivienne]
SA: maybe we're having trouble with the term validity
14:49:13 [Detlev]
ack me
14:51:08 [vivienne]
DF: it is important to have validity in there. It is validity of the conformance to the requirements in WCAG. That would need to be tested and re-tested all the time for the claim you make for a site - is it true? If you re-test or have another definition you may see that the site is not valid because you left something out. It needs to be grounded by use-cases where you can see how that
14:51:08 [vivienne]
works for that section of technology. Is our claim valid and can be backed up by user testing?
14:51:16 [vivienne]
EV: do you mean that user testing is obligatory?
14:51:37 [vivienne]
DF: it has a way of linking the technology in WCAG and those assessments for the techniques.
14:51:52 [melledge]
14:52:01 [vivienne]
EV: is that not covered in WCAG 2 itself?
14:52:16 [kerstin]
14:52:38 [vivienne]
DF: it is in the glossary and conformance, but a methodology may not include that. I think it's important to create a model case base.
14:53:14 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:53:14 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:53:49 [kerstin]
Zakim, unmute me
14:53:49 [Zakim]
Kerstin was not muted, kerstin
14:53:49 [vivienne]
ME: having case studies or examples is a good idea. It would support that
14:54:20 [vivienne]
Kerstin: validity is important. It should be clear that we measure against the conformance level and not anything else
14:54:28 [EricVelleman_]
14:54:33 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:54:33 [Zakim]
Kerstin should now be muted
14:54:37 [shadi]
q- m
14:54:39 [shadi]
q- k
14:55:10 [vivienne]
EV: I will do an update and send it to Shadi after this meeting.
14:55:21 [shadi]
Topic: Face to Face meeting
14:55:59 [vivienne]
EV: re face to face meeting at CSun or elsewhere? Where to host the meeting? Please send information to Shadi if you can host the meeting at CSUN or elsewhere?
14:57:15 [vivienne]
SA: face to face meeting are useful to groups working. But it might be too early now, maybe February-April and we should have lots of work by then. If you're interested in hosting such an event let Shadi know. Need a meeting space with coffee etc.
14:57:53 [vivienne]
EV: any other business?
14:58:38 [vivienne]
EV: thanks to all who participate in online discussions.Please keep up that work.
14:58:52 [vivienne]
14:58:54 [Zakim]
14:58:55 [Kathy]
14:58:56 [Zakim]
14:58:57 [kerstin]
14:58:57 [Zakim]
14:58:58 [vivienne]
vivienne has left #eval
14:58:58 [Zakim]
14:58:59 [Zakim]
14:58:59 [Vincent]
Thank you, bye
14:59:00 [Zakim]
14:59:00 [Zakim]
14:59:02 [Zakim]
14:59:05 [Zakim]
14:59:09 [Zakim]
14:59:13 [Zakim]
14:59:15 [Zakim]
14:59:20 [Zakim]
14:59:22 [Zakim]
WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
14:59:24 [Zakim]
Attendees were vivienne, +1.978.443.aaaa, Kathy, Katie_Haritos-Shea, +31.30.239.aabb, EricVelleman, +1.517.432.aacc, +1.415.298.aadd, +49.404.318.aaee, +1.517.353.aaff, shadi,
14:59:26 [Zakim]
... Detlev, AmyChen, Tim, agarrison, Mike, Kerstin, LeonieWatson, +1.514.312.aagg, Vincent, Tim_Boland
14:59:28 [Vincent]
15:00:49 [shadi]
tracbot, make logs world
15:01:04 [shadi]
trackbot, make logs world
15:01:04 [trackbot]
Sorry, shadi, I don't understand 'trackbot, make logs world'. Please refer to for help
15:01:08 [shadi]
trackbot, make minutes
15:01:09 [trackbot]
Sorry, shadi, I don't understand 'trackbot, make minutes'. Please refer to for help
15:01:10 [shadi]
trackbot, make logs world
15:01:10 [trackbot]
Sorry, shadi, I don't understand 'trackbot, make logs world'. Please refer to for help
15:01:35 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
15:01:39 [shadi]
rrsagent, make minutes
15:01:39 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate shadi
15:01:46 [shadi]
rrsagent, make logs world
15:01:47 [EricVelleman_]
EricVelleman_ has left #eval
16:01:53 [shadi]
trackbot, end meeting
16:01:53 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:01:53 [Zakim]
sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
16:01:54 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:01:54 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:01:55 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:01:55 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items