13:49:01 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #eval
13:49:01 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2011/10/27-eval-irc
13:49:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:49:03 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #eval
13:49:05 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 3825
13:49:05 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 11 minutes
13:49:06 <trackbot> Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
13:49:06 <trackbot> Date: 27 October 2011
13:53:39 <sinarmaya> sinarmaya has joined #eval
13:54:48 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
13:54:50 <Zakim> + +25430021aaaa
13:54:55 <Zakim> - +25430021aaaa
13:54:56 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
13:54:58 <Zakim> Attendees were +25430021aaaa
13:56:14 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #eval
13:56:33 <shadi> zaki, code?
13:56:38 <shadi> zakim, code?
13:56:38 <Zakim> the conference code is 3825 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), shadi
13:56:45 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
13:56:45 <Zakim> +Kathy
13:57:23 <Zakim> + +90700021aaaa
13:57:23 <Zakim> - +90700021aaaa
13:57:23 <Zakim> + +90700021aaaa
13:57:25 <Zakim> +??P7
13:57:43 <shadi> zakim, ??p7 is shadi
13:57:43 <Zakim> +shadi; got it
13:58:36 <shadi> zakim, aaaa is sinarmaya 
13:58:36 <Zakim> +sinarmaya; got it
13:59:20 <SarahSwierenga> SarahSwierenga has joined #eval
13:59:57 <Zakim> +shadi.a
14:00:26 <AmyChen> AmyChen has joined #eval
14:00:26 <dboudreau> dboudreau has joined #eval
14:00:50 <shadi> zakim, shadi.a is really Sarah
14:00:50 <Zakim> +Sarah; got it
14:01:00 <shadi> zakim, who is on the call?
14:01:00 <Zakim> On the phone I see Kathy, sinarmaya (muted), shadi, Sarah
14:01:19 <Zakim> +AmyChen
14:01:22 <Zakim> +dboudreau
14:01:34 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
14:01:34 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
14:01:43 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has joined #eval
14:02:26 <AmyChen> zakim, mute me
14:02:26 <Zakim> AmyChen should now be muted
14:02:42 <dboudreau> zakim, mute me
14:02:42 <Zakim> dboudreau should now be muted
14:02:55 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:03:29 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is Kerstin
14:03:29 <Zakim> +Kerstin; got it
14:03:32 <Zakim> +Eric
14:03:42 <kerstin> kerstin has joined #eval
14:04:39 <Liz> Liz has joined #eval
14:05:03 <Vincent> Vincent has joined #eval
14:05:17 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:05:19 <Zakim> On the phone I see Kathy (muted), sinarmaya (muted), shadi, Sarah, AmyChen (muted), dboudreau (muted), Kerstin, Eric
14:05:22 <Zakim> +Liz
14:05:34 <ericvelleman> Zakim, who is on the call
14:05:34 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the call', ericvelleman
14:05:35 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:05:42 <Zakim> + +1.514.487.aabb
14:05:49 <ericvelleman> Zakim, who is on the phone
14:05:49 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone', ericvelleman
14:06:01 <Zakim> + +1.502.632.aacc
14:06:01 <Vincent> Zakim, aabb is Vincent
14:06:03 <Zakim> +Vincent; got it
14:06:14 <dboudreau> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:06:14 <Zakim> On the phone I see Kathy (muted), sinarmaya (muted), shadi, Sarah, AmyChen (muted), dboudreau (muted), Kerstin, Eric, Liz, [IPcaller], Vincent, +1.502.632.aacc
14:06:16 <Vincent> Hi everyone
14:06:19 <agarrison> agarrison has joined #eval
14:06:19 <ericvelleman> Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:06:19 <Zakim> On the phone I see Kathy (muted), sinarmaya (muted), shadi, Sarah, AmyChen (muted), dboudreau (muted), Kerstin, Eric, Liz, [IPcaller], Vincent, +1.502.632.aacc
14:06:26 <dboudreau> :)
14:06:41 <Vincent> Strange noises on the phone
14:07:03 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
14:07:15 <Vincent> Zakim, mute me
14:07:15 <Zakim> Vincent should now be muted
14:07:28 <kerstin> zakim, mute me
14:07:28 <Zakim> Kerstin should now be muted
14:07:33 <agarrison> Call disconnected - I'll call back
14:08:15 <Zakim> +??P29
14:08:15 <ericvelleman> Who wants to scribe?
14:08:27 <Tim> Tim has joined #eval
14:08:37 <agarrison> Zakim, ??P29 is me
14:08:37 <Zakim> +agarrison; got it
14:08:44 <Vincent> ack me
14:09:24 <Zakim> +Tim_Boland
14:09:28 <dboudreau> ack me
14:09:46 <Vincent> Zakim, mute me
14:09:46 <Zakim> Vincent should now be muted
14:10:04 <shadi> scribe: agarrison 
14:10:10 <Nethermind> Nethermind has joined #eval
14:10:11 <dboudreau> \o/ to alistair !!!
14:10:30 <Nethermind> hi, all :)  I'm here to learn what scribing means and looks like
14:10:46 <shadi> Topic: Methodology naming
14:10:49 <kerstin> thx alistair! 
14:11:59 <agarrison> Eric - Recap on short title
14:12:20 <shadi> q+ to talk about "website"
14:12:33 <dboudreau> q+ about using a nice sounding acronym
14:12:57 <agarrison> large agreement for waem
14:12:58 <dboudreau> q+ to talk about "nice sounding acronyms"
14:13:17 <AmyChen> =1
14:13:17 <ericvelleman> Q?
14:13:20 <AmyChen> +1
14:13:23 <ericvelleman> q?
14:14:22 <agarrison> shadi - people are not so convinced that naming is important.  Outreach aspects are important to consider.
14:14:51 <agarrison> shadi - using website might not be the most up to date term
14:15:17 <agarrison> shadi - web information systems was not opposed by EOWG
14:15:22 <AmyChen> +1
14:15:23 <kerstin> I asked some people to speak out WAEM in german, with strange results like wäm, waaaaaem, waaaaim :-)
14:15:40 <Nethermind> q+ to talk about reception of acronyms by business stakeholders in big business
14:15:47 <AmyChen> +1
14:15:49 <agarrison> shadi - what do people think of web information systems
14:16:07 <AmyChen> q+
14:16:07 <ericvelleman> q?
14:16:10 <Zakim> +Mike
14:16:28 <shadi> ack me
14:16:28 <Zakim> shadi, you wanted to talk about "website"
14:16:35 <agarrison> shadi - should web information systems be used in place of websites
14:16:35 <shadi> ack db
14:16:35 <Zakim> dboudreau, you wanted to talk about "nice sounding acronyms"
14:17:21 <Mike_Elledge> Mike_Elledge has joined #eval
14:18:06 <agarrison> dboudreau - WISE as an ackronym might be better than WAEM - for outreach the term needs to be captivating 
14:19:04 <agarrison> dboudreau - we should try for an ackronym which would sum up what we are trying to achieve
14:19:27 <ericvelleman> q?
14:19:42 <agarrison> eric - to get WISE we would need the term Web Information System
14:20:34 <shadi> ack ne
14:20:34 <Zakim> Nethermind, you wanted to talk about reception of acronyms by business stakeholders in big business
14:22:01 <AmyChen> ack me
14:22:09 <agarrison> elle - from big business perspective - ackronym needs to sum up what we are trying to achieve exactly.  Website as a term is dated, however, Web Information Systems might not be procise either
14:23:00 <AmyChen> I liked the short name WCAG-EM, gets away from needing acronym
14:23:01 <agarrison> speaker?  Possibly WCAG should come up with the ackroynm
14:23:04 <kerstin> +1 for  WCAG-EM
14:23:35 <ericvelleman> q?
14:23:36 <dboudreau> +1 for WCAG-EM unless we can come up with something more creative with either WISE, AWARE or EQUAL
14:23:38 <AmyChen> zakim, mute me
14:23:38 <Zakim> AmyChen should now be muted
14:23:52 <Nethermind> agree with AmyChen and dboudreau
14:24:03 <shadi> q?
14:24:15 <kerstin> +1 for dboudreau :-)
14:24:16 <shadi> q+
14:24:20 <dboudreau> zakim, mute me
14:24:20 <Zakim> dboudreau should now be muted
14:24:45 <agarrison> eric - the ackronym issue will continue to be discussed
14:24:52 <kerstin> waaaaaem :-) geman
14:25:06 <ericvelleman> q?
14:25:12 <dboudreau> at least with WCAG-EM, nobody needs to wonder about pronunciation… we've all learned to pronounce WCAG differently already ;p
14:25:13 <agarrison> eric - will try and finalise ackronym issue - place it on the agenda for next week
14:25:14 <Mike_Elledge> +1
14:25:35 <SarahSwierenga> +1 on voting on the narrowed list of names
14:25:45 <agarrison> shadi - probably not something which will reach a solution for next week
14:26:06 <agarrison> shadi - WCAG EM had alot of support
14:26:51 <agarrison> shadi - it is something which will require a lot of thought as for easier promotion a good ackronym is important
14:27:10 <AmyChen> including website/web information system in the subtitle would be good
14:27:24 <agarrison> shadi - more ideas - playing with other terms like Web Information System
14:28:09 <agarrison> eric - place it on agenda for next week
14:28:18 <ericvelleman> q?
14:28:32 <agarrison> eric - next point table of contents
14:28:45 <shadi> Topic: Table of contents
14:29:09 <agarrison> eric - there was low feedback on the table of contents, so lets discuss
14:29:20 <ericvelleman> q?
14:29:44 <agarrison> eric - no responses from "is this table of contents unusable"
14:30:59 <shadi> q-
14:31:01 <agarrison> eric - overview of table of contents - trying to frame the table of contents in terms of typical standards document
14:31:22 <agarrison> eric - no responses "is there anything missing"
14:31:48 <agarrison> eric - requirements document covers sections 1 - 5
14:32:03 <Nethermind> q+  regarding iterative process
14:32:06 <agarrison> eric - section 6 - expertise for evaluating
14:32:11 <Nethermind> q+
14:32:21 <AmyChen> q+
14:32:24 <ericvelleman> q?
14:33:19 <agarrison> Nethermind - question could be under 7.4 - is there anything which covers iterative checks. 
14:33:49 <Tim> q+
14:34:22 <dboudreau> ack me
14:34:39 <agarrison> Nethermind - recommendation - how to cover iterative testing (automated testing, user acceptance testing).
14:35:31 <ericvelleman> q?
14:35:35 <AmyChen> ack me
14:35:39 <Nethermind> q-
14:35:40 <dboudreau> q+ to talk about "production processes vs maintenance processes"
14:36:21 <agarrison> Amychen - iterative processes - weren't they covered in the scope. Possibly you might want to expand it in 7.4.  
14:36:44 <agarrison> Amychen - What was the discussion about splitting the methodology
14:37:27 <agarrison> Eric - we need to mention that people with disabilities our involved
14:38:11 <agarrison> Amychen - order of document is not as important as content.  What were the two things which people suggested splitting
14:38:35 <ericvelleman> q?
14:38:36 <agarrison> Eric - it was between technical part and overview - but this is something for later
14:38:46 <AmyChen> zakim, mute me
14:38:46 <Zakim> AmyChen should now be muted
14:39:12 <agarrison> Tim - important to encourage in document evaluation during development of web systems
14:39:38 <shadi> q?
14:39:42 <shadi> ack t
14:39:45 <vivienne> vivienne has joined #eval
14:40:05 <agarrison> Tim - are we looking at different roles of evaluators - possibly it could be difficult to fit all roles into the same document.
14:40:10 <Nethermind> agree RE: different roles and the expansion of this document, dboudreau has a good document for role based accessibility requirements
14:40:26 <Zakim> +??P39
14:40:26 <dboudreau> yep, i do ;p
14:40:40 <agarrison> Tim - normative and formative recommendations should be split out
14:40:44 <AmyChen> q+
14:40:49 <ericvelleman> q?
14:41:14 <Tim> http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/qaframe-primer
14:41:20 <dboudreau> http://alpha.gcwwwtemplates.tbs-sct.ircan.gc.ca/theme-clf2-nsi2/accessRespBreakdown-eng.html Accessibility responsibility breakdown (WCAG 2.0)
14:41:30 <shadi> zakim, ??p39 is vivienne 
14:41:30 <Zakim> +vivienne; got it
14:41:40 <agarrison> dboudreau - this is what elle was referring to.
14:41:41 <Tim> QA Framework Primer - #3 Role-Based View
14:42:08 <agarrison> dboudreau - this could be a way to split the methodology into roles.  
14:42:26 <Nethermind> dboudreau, totally agree
14:42:55 <agarrison> dboudreau - often asked why there is not a seperate evaluation method for development and maintainenace of web systems.  
14:43:41 <agarrison> eric - could be a problem to solve later in the evaluation methodology
14:44:00 <agarrison> eric - should also keep in mind roles
14:44:05 <ericvelleman> q?
14:44:11 <shadi> ack db
14:44:12 <Zakim> dboudreau, you wanted to talk about "production processes vs maintenance processes"
14:44:33 <agarrison> dboudreau - also we discussed preliminary and deeper evaluations
14:44:42 <dboudreau> q-
14:44:50 <AmyChen> ack me
14:44:56 <agarrison> eric - this was not the same thing as iterative 
14:45:32 <dboudreau> zakim, mute me
14:45:32 <Zakim> dboudreau should now be muted
14:45:41 <agarrison> amychen - conformance claim should be made when the website is built.  Is there a wiki or some way to all look at the documents we are creating
14:46:15 <agarrison> eric - we are planning to put all this information in a webpage - however, shadi mentioned a wiki
14:46:25 <agarrison> amychen - wiki would be great
14:46:30 <Kathy> that would be great
14:46:34 <Nethermind> agreed
14:46:43 <Nethermind> it's hard for me to follow email threads
14:47:03 <agarrison> shadi - wiki could be made for the group, it can over complicate things however
14:47:37 <Kathy> q+
14:47:51 <agarrison> shadi - sometimes it does not allow public to tell the difference between raw content and agreed content
14:48:27 <agarrison> eric - it would be good to allow everyone to add things directly, with content edited
14:49:08 <agarrison> shadi - editing / acknowledgements takes a lot of resource 
14:49:18 <Mike_Elledge> Could be very useful for collaboration...identifying our edits with our initials wld also permit discussion...
14:49:26 <agarrison> eric - like mailing list as its easier
14:50:02 <agarrison> amychen - commenting on document would be more active if wiki was used
14:50:32 <ericvelleman> q?
14:50:33 <Kathy> ack me
14:50:37 <agarrison> eric - I will think about wiki to see how much work is envolved - on agenda for next time
14:51:16 <shadi> q+
14:51:22 <agarrison> kathy - email could be made easier with clearer threads 
14:51:36 <AmyChen> +1
14:51:43 <Nethermind> +1
14:51:43 <dboudreau> +1 to kathy though it's always been a problem in every W3C WG
14:51:46 <agarrison> eric - agree, it is difficult to follow threads currently
14:51:54 <ericvelleman> q?
14:52:00 <agarrison> shadi - agree also
14:52:18 <agarrison> rrsagent, make minutes
14:52:18 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/10/27-eval-minutes.html agarrison
14:52:40 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
14:52:40 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
14:53:00 <agarrison> shadi - better to send more emails if it allows subjects to remain clear - with clear threads
14:53:41 <ericvelleman> q?
14:53:48 <shadi> q-
14:54:04 <agarrison> shadi - Eric and shadi to think about how best to manage changes to documents etc...
14:54:36 <agarrison> eric - proposal to take table of contents, format it and put it into a document online
14:55:13 <agarrison> eric - which is best way to discuss, should be take it section by section
14:55:27 <dboudreau> +1 to breaking it down yes
14:55:44 <AmyChen> +1
14:55:44 <agarrison> eric - we need to flesh out the different sections using the discussion list
14:56:01 <shadi> Topic: Any other business
14:56:04 <shadi> q+
14:56:39 <ericvelleman> q?
14:56:41 <agarrison> eric - any other business, 1) we have been gathering information about different evaluation methodologies, keep sending in well documented evaluation methods
14:57:05 <ericvelleman>  <http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Website_Accessibility_Evaluation_Methodologies>
14:57:22 <agarrison> shadi - wiki of research and development groups will include links to all the collected evaluation methods
14:57:27 <Mike_Elledge> q+
14:58:04 <ericvelleman> q?
14:58:04 <agarrison> eric - 2) use cases and scenarios - it would be useful to make links to these also
14:58:22 <Nethermind> q+
14:59:00 <agarrison> shadi - different use cases for people conducting evaluations or reasons for having an evaluation conducted would be useful to collect
14:59:21 <ericvelleman> q?
14:59:25 <shadi> q-
14:59:27 <agarrison> shadi - these could be useful when testing the applicability of the method we create
15:00:19 <agarrison> shadi - reminder about daylight saving in Europe - and the shift in US time for meeting, one week later the US will then shift also
15:00:36 <ericvelleman> q?
15:00:50 <agarrison> Mike - confused between level of detail to provide
15:01:23 <agarrison> Mike - we have concentrated on public methods, but it would be useful to share methods that we use
15:01:39 <agarrison> eric - sharing methods would be good
15:02:04 <agarrison> mike - we have been focusing on the public domain, but would be willing to share internal methods
15:02:07 <dboudreau> Sorry, i need to run to another meeting that started 2 minutes ago… have a great day all, sorry to leave so abruptly
15:02:13 <ericvelleman> q?
15:02:15 <Zakim> -dboudreau
15:02:20 <shadi> q- mi
15:02:25 <shadi> ack ne
15:02:34 <agarrison> elle - more templated method the better 
15:02:37 <agarrison> rrsagent, make minutes
15:02:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/10/27-eval-minutes.html agarrison
15:02:51 <Mike_Elledge> Bye everyone!
15:02:54 <kerstin> bye
15:02:57 <sinarmaya> bye, thanks :)
15:02:57 <Zakim> -Sarah
15:02:58 <Zakim> -Tim_Boland
15:02:58 <Zakim> - +1.502.632.aacc
15:03:00 <Vincent> Bye
15:03:01 <agarrison> no problem
15:03:01 <AmyChen> thanks everyone, bye!
15:03:02 <Zakim> -Kathy
15:03:05 <Zakim> -Mike
15:03:07 <sinarmaya> sinarmaya has left #eval
15:03:09 <SarahSwierenga> bye!
15:03:15 <Zakim> -Eric
15:03:17 <Zakim> -sinarmaya
15:03:19 <Zakim> -shadi
15:03:21 <Zakim> -agarrison
15:03:22 <Zakim> -Vincent
15:03:33 <Zakim> -AmyChen
15:03:35 <Zakim> -Liz
15:03:42 <Zakim> -vivienne
15:03:45 <Zakim> -Kerstin
15:03:45 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has left #eval
15:03:47 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
15:03:49 <Zakim> Attendees were Kathy, +90700021aaaa, shadi, sinarmaya, Sarah, AmyChen, dboudreau, Kerstin, Eric, Liz, [IPcaller], +1.514.487.aabb, +1.502.632.aacc, Vincent, agarrison, Tim_Boland,
15:03:53 <Zakim> ... Mike, vivienne
15:04:45 <dboudreau> dboudreau has left #eval
15:05:09 <shadi> trackbot, end meeting
15:05:09 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:05:09 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
15:05:10 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:05:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2011/10/27-eval-minutes.html trackbot
15:05:11 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:05:11 <RRSAgent> I see no action items