Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

03 Nov 2011

See also: IRC log


Shadi, Peter, Mario, Markel, Giorgio, Simon
Vivienne, Christos, Yeliz


Editors update on submissions and preparations

giorgio: have received 15 submissions but 2 false submissions ...

1 cancelled the other 2 wrong submissions - leave 12

submissions ...

I collected all the author information in a spreadsheet and will send to the chairs soon and a list of reviewers...

would like to be clear about issues such as conflict of interest ...

will send out a map of submissions ...

<markel> it was clear

(for scribbing should each line prefix the speaker?)

simon: could you give me a summary ...

giorgio: …goes over summary...

<markel> :-)

Need 4 other people for submission for which Markel is the author

<markel> do you already have them?

<markel> Integration of Web Accessibility Metrics into a Semi-Automatic evaluation process

girogio: goes over titles of submissions...

giorgio: they talk bout web accessibility metrics

simon: have you a feel for how well the submissions fit in with the broader aim of the Wiki

giorgio: haven't read the submissions yet

simon: will you handle the admin details of the sumbissions

giorgio: Markel created a reviewing template

markel: I wrote a text file for reviewers and asses quality based on defined criteria from past weeks.

…if a deadline concern because of scheduling (too early vs too late)

…can we schedule another slot

shadi: yes its possible

simon: good idea

(shadi your breaking up)

simon: wil work on it

…takes 2 to 3 days to setup a phone meeting bridge

previous scribe line: replace simon with shadi

giorgio: could be a meeting on Wed 9th

…another could be next RD meeting

<markel> +1

simon: agrees

<shadi> +1


simon: going out on txt file but how will coordinate?

…will be some kind of wiki or doc?

markel: initially email with template and then reviewers have to send back to group

simon: ok for now, perhaps open conf in the future

giorgio: would have been great to have an electronic system in place but the overhead was too much for now.

…email should work

…we have 12 papers and reviewed at least 3 times … (lots of work to do :)

…used this criteria so chairs get some work

…goes over details of who's doing what...

….waiting on your feedback

simon: sounds good

…next time sort something out in advance

…what about length of reviews?

…writing an in-depth review might be rough

giorgio: not much reason for a detailed review because quite a short paper

markel: agrees
... I would be able to put template on irc

simon: sounds good

<markel> Paper title:

<markel> Authors:

<markel> _______________________________

<markel> Paper review:

<markel> _______________________________

<markel> Mark with an X how the paper satisfies the following criteria. You can find the definition of the criteria at http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Paper_Selection_Criteria:

<markel> 1. Relevance/appropriateness

<markel> [ ] disagree

<markel> [ ] mild disagreement

<markel> [ ] neutral

<markel> [ ] mild agreement

<markel> [ ] agreement

<markel> 2. Contribution/significance

<markel> [ ] disagree

<markel> [ ] mild disagreement

<markel> [ ] neutral

<markel> [ ] mild agreement

<markel> [ ] agreement

<markel> 3. Clarity/presentation

<markel> [ ] disagree

<markel> [ ] mild disagreement

<markel> [ ] neutral

<markel> [ ] mild agreement

<shadi> zakim unmute mario

<markel> [ ] agreement

<markel> 4. Soundness/correctness

<markel> [ ] disagree

<markel> [ ] mild disagreement

<markel> [ ] neutral

<markel> [ ] mild agreement

<markel> [ ] agreement

<markel> 5. Impact

<markel> [ ] disagree

mario: time is too short to make system but we could use open conf system

<markel> [ ] mild disagreement

<markel> [ ] neutral

<markel> [ ] mild agreement

<markel> [ ] agreement

…used in CSUN and works well

<Joshue108> Apologies!

<markel> 6. Generality of results and claims

<markel> [ ] disagree

<markel> [ ] mild disagreement

<markel> [ ] neutral

<markel> [ ] mild agreement

<markel> [ ] agreement

<markel> 7. Relation to other work

<markel> [ ] disagree

<markel> [ ] mild disagreement

<markel> [ ] neutral

<markel> [ ] mild agreement

<markel> [ ] agreement


<markel> [ ] Accept

<markel> [ ] Accept with minor revisions

<markel> [ ] Reject

<Joshue108> I got caught up and missed meeting...

simon: it works well and has a fast setup period and also know Robert at open conf and could help us out

shadi: put me in contact with Robert for details on how

…mario had warned me about using a conf system

…the submission was not going well with read access and confidentiallity

simon: I'll do that

markel: agrees about open conf

…but lets leave it for the next time

simon: pleased with the submissions and since a very specific call this is encouraging that people wanted to write these papers and send them to us

… encouraging for future submissions

mario: if 12 submissions are ok is it possible to hear them all in symposium?

simon: that would be my feeling but not sure what editors think?

giorgio: yes I think we could accept all of them

…no more than 10 minutes each

…I would review them anyway with criteria

…to use as a filter

mario: wanted to know if have enough time

simon: think will have enough time or make time
... even if run out of time still accept them if possible

markel: I think we have more than enough time but we shouldn't accept anything

<giorgio> I agree with markel

…lets be cautious based on minimal quality

simon: agrees

…encouraged because I know a lot of the authors

shadi: on the positive note, is at W3C planning meeting, and has been approached by

…technical planery meeting

…approached by 2 or 3 people that wanted to write a paper

simon: talk of RD there?

<markel> i'm lost, to write a paper about what?

shadi: has been promoting it and an agenda update

…even though a focussed call still received attention and suspect people willow ant to listen in on the symposium

simon: can only get better

markel: more details about who approached you shadi

shadi: interested in subject and wanted to write a paper but ran out of paper


giorgio: should we decide on names of additional reviewers?

simon: trust you guys to decide on editors

shadi: are they outside group?

giorgio: yes

shadi: we want to recognize them and give credit

giorgio: if we want to be clear about conflict of interest it would be better if Markel wouldn't know

simon: agrees

…can give credit in note

mario: would appreciate to be among regular reviewers

giorgio: yes

(should I put a command in for that?)

Look Over New Topic Proposals

<sharper> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki

simon: want to say something about new topics on wiki?

<markel> that sounds good

shadi: would like to report on discussion with (missed who) and working on markup languages

simon: is on wiki?

shadi: no discussion was yesterday

…3D web consortium

<markel> Is it this one? http://www.web3d.org/realtime-3d/

…they've been working on accessibility of 3D stuff

shadi: suggest have one of 3D join us as a guest on upcoming call

<markel> that'd be great

…to introduce work for potential interest

simon: yes and could they add to our wiki?

…could suggest research work

…as opose to a suggestion

shadi: yes am following up on proposal and putting up generic research topics

…they also have a topic for a symposium

…why would like to have them join in as a guest to introduce topic(s)

…3D and virtual reality stuff

(lost a bit)

…and are very aware of accessibility and want to get invovled

simon: sounds good

…especially if they already have some ideas

…especially if they could put something on the wiki to reference while they're talking

simon: 9 new topics on wiki

…do we want to create a survey?

…any that look interesting

CSS3 perhas


but its perhaps too rough


simon: perhaps and touch events

…accessibility security

<sharper> 12http://www.w3.org/community/cssacc/

…css accessibility community group and liaison with them might be interesting

…Steve Falkner is doing a lot of the CSS3 work

simon: ok to move on?

markel: are we running a survey?

…agree with shadi perhaps too cold

…can use next thursday?

simon: thing about survey is that last time it got things going

…it would go off to entire list an non-attendees could respond

simon: next thursday is reserved for scientific community?

markel: yes

giorgio: yes


simon: goes over submission details

…then return to wiki discussion

markel: sounds good

<shadi> +1

<Mario-Batusic> yes

<giorgio> +1

simon: everyone happy?


<sharper> +1

simon: will send out an email for the scientific committee

…could someone send me a list of the scientific ...

giorgio: is in call for paper

…somewhere in wiki

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics/cfp.html

simon: will add one more to list - mario
... will send this out … 12 submissions … list of titles ...

giogrio: note sure what to do with 12 submissions

simon: will put titles of submissions in email

…more of an advertising thing

…reaching out to list to try to get participation from large companies

giorgio: breaking confidentiality?

…making public

<markel> i would only announce the accepted ones

simon: topics on agenda anyways so is public already
... will think about it

giorgio: details about paper not public

simon: titles are public

<markel> oh yeah

…in munutes

<markel> i did that

mario: submissions shouldn't be public before accepted

simon: public in IRC


markel: sorry yes

shadi: (will take them off the minutes)

…are planning to make 17 nov announcement when agenda ready

…here are the accepted papers addition participants are welcome to participate by phone

(lost rest)

<giorgio> good

simon: if will remove titles from minutes then don't need in email

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2011/11/03 18:54:31 $