15:34:15 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #a11y-bugs
15:34:15 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/01/10-a11y-bugs-irc
15:34:30 <lwatson> rrsagent, set logs world-visible 
15:34:44 <lwatson> Meeting: WAI HTML-A11y Bug Triage weekly meeting
15:34:57 <lwatson> Chair: Léonie Watson
15:35:17 <lwatson> agenda: this
15:35:26 <lwatson> agenda+ Identify Scribe
15:35:32 <lwatson> agenda+ New bugs review
15:35:37 <lwatson> agenda+ Actions review
15:35:43 <lwatson> agenda+ Needs more info bugs
15:35:50 <lwatson> agenda+ Won't fix bugs
15:35:55 <lwatson> agenda+ Fixed bugs
15:36:01 <lwatson> agenda+ be done
15:36:09 <lwatson> Zakim, save agenda
15:36:16 <Zakim> ok, lwatson, the agenda has been written to http://www.w3.org/2012/01/10-a11y-bugs-agenda.rdf
15:48:17 <hhillen> hhillen has joined #a11y-bugs
16:01:12 <David> David has joined #a11y-bugs
16:01:21 <David> testing
16:02:07 <David> I'm here too
16:03:18 <lwatson> Zakim, save agendazakim, next item
16:03:24 <lwatson> zakim, next item
16:03:41 <Zakim> I don't understand 'save agendazakim, next item', lwatson
16:03:55 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Identify Scribe" taken up [from lwatson]
16:04:04 <lwatson> scribe: Hans Hillen
16:04:04 <hhillen> scribe: hhillen 
16:04:31 <hhillen> Zakim, close item
16:04:33 <Zakim> I don't understand 'close item', hhillen
16:04:39 <hhillen> Zakim, next item
16:04:39 <Zakim> agendum 2. "New bugs review" taken up [from lwatson]
16:04:43 <lwatson> zakim, take up item 2
16:04:43 <Zakim> agendum 2. "New bugs review" taken up [from lwatson]
16:05:09 <hhillen> LW: EZ, are there any new bugs?
16:05:17 <Joshue108> Joshue108 has joined #a11y-bugs
16:06:20 <hhillen> EZ: There was one that might be related to a11y, but I'll look into that one further
16:06:23 <lwatson> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15488
16:06:55 <hhillen> Zakim, next item
16:06:55 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Actions review" taken up [from lwatson]
16:07:32 <hhillen> LW: Were there any actions from last week?
16:08:05 <hhillen> MC: We grouped wont fix bugs into tracker issue
16:08:43 <hhillen> Zakim, next item
16:08:43 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Needs more info bugs" taken up [from lwatson]
16:09:10 <hhillen> LW: I sent emails around xmas to people about their needs info bugs 
16:09:25 <hhillen> LW: Cynthia and Steve we responsive, haven't heard from the rest
16:09:42 <hhillen> LW: I'll bring it up on Thursday's TF meeting 
16:09:59 <MichaelC> present: David_MacDonald, Léonie_Watson, Hans_Hillen, Joshue_O_Connor, Everett_Zufelt
16:10:14 <MichaelC> present+ Michael_Cooper
16:11:40 <hhillen> MC: The most important thing for me is to know is: what are the tracker issues that we need by this Friday 
16:13:06 <hhillen> MC: Text Alternatives, Keyboard access, ARIA mapping, Canvas, Media would be the most important ones to get tracker issues for
16:13:35 <hhillen> MC: Then there is conformance, Feature request, miscellaneous 
16:13:58 <hhillen> MC: what we should do now is look at the remaining bugs and determine do we want a tracker issue
16:14:30 <hhillen> LW: Can you remind be what 'creating a tracker issue' would mean?
16:16:10 <hhillen> MC: It means that we're not happy with the resolution of the bug and want to escalate it. In my mind the needs info ones have the shakiest grounds to be escalated, because the responsibility was with us. It's the wont fix ones that we're on clear grounds for: the editor said "no" and we don't agree with it.
16:16:40 <hhillen> MC: We also need to look at the 14 bugs with "invalid" status
16:17:00 <hhillen> Zakim, next item
16:17:00 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Won't fix bugs" taken up [from lwatson]
16:17:21 <MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=HTML+WG&keywords=a11ytf&bug_status=RESOLVED&resolution=WONTFIX
16:17:56 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13429
16:19:43 <hhillen> MC: We can say it looks like it's going through process or we can say that we won't escalate it 
16:20:04 <hhillen> JC: Is this political more than technical?
16:20:35 <hhillen> MC: It's more political. The more we escalate, there more we're seen as a pain
16:20:58 <hhillen> MC: So we need to make sure to not escalate too many issues 
16:21:12 <hhillen> MC: If we do escalate, we have to make sure we push the solution
16:22:25 <hhillen> HH: It's more of a usability issue than an accessibility issue 
16:23:00 <hhillen> MC: that sounds like we shouldn't escalate for now
16:23:24 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13524
16:24:26 <hhillen> MC: This seems to be the only drag & drop issue that we don't know is ok. We think the htnl5 drag & drop is in order now, but we didn't take this bug into account then
16:25:29 <hhillen> MC: I'm proposing not to escalate this as no one else has talked about this issue, the original filer can escalate if he/she wants to
16:26:03 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10873
16:26:25 <hhillen> MC: This one was filed by EZ
16:27:52 <hhillen> MC: We should have triage this as a feature request 
16:29:07 <hhillen> MC: We should get feature requests in a requirements page somewhere, but not escalate it because it's too late in the process for that 
16:29:45 <hhillen> MC: I do agree with the bug though, I would like a tooltip attribute
16:31:19 <hhillen> EZ: I'm indifferent about which direction it goes, it's not a really high priority, and some point this feature should be added, but it doesn't have to be right now.
16:31:41 <hhillen> MC: The a11y community has never written up an html wish list for html
16:31:47 <hhillen> MC: This could be the start of that 
16:32:07 <hhillen> MC: Once we have that wish list, we could start to shop fro those features 
16:34:22 <hhillen> MC: If we like that idea we can start shopping it up, see where we would house such a group and start recruiting. With that in mind we can stop pursuing feature request bugs for immediate escalation
16:34:30 <Zakim> -??P7
16:35:53 <hhillen> MC: We also tagged about 7 bugs as conformance 
16:36:10 <hhillen> LW: What was the condition for 'conformance'?
16:36:31 <hhillen> MC: Bugs about allowing or not allowing particular markup in particular situations 
16:39:08 <hhillen> LW: SO is it just a issue for the validator, or are there other effects?
16:39:24 <hhillen> HH: THere could be other effects, if the browser decides not to implement a non-conformant feature
16:39:33 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9485
16:39:53 <hhillen> MC: I don't want to escalate this one
16:40:19 <hhillen> EZ: HTML5 should take its guidance from WCAG, but it shouldn't be tied to it
16:40:56 <hhillen> EZ: It should be odd to create a dependence between the two, wcag should only be used as guidance 
16:41:16 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10906
16:42:57 <hhillen> MC: We can document this in the mapping guide, but it sounds to me we don't support this bug 
16:51:28 <hhillen> MC: I'll reopen this bug and move it to the HTML a11y api component 
16:51:44 <hhillen> MC: That means that this bug won't be dropped but it won't be escalated either 
16:51:53 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13442
16:54:39 <hhillen> LW: I don't think this is one we need to escalate 
16:55:00 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13548
16:55:39 <hhillen> MC: I agree with cynthia but I don't think this is a high priority
16:56:51 <hhillen> MC: We're not escalating this one
16:57:48 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13561
16:58:28 <hhillen> MC: I'll reopen it, and assign it to Cynthia
16:58:40 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13638
16:59:29 <hhillen> MC: We already decided we don't want to crow the spec to wcag
16:59:40 <hhillen> MC: or UAAG
17:00:05 <hhillen> LW: This one doesn't need escalation
17:00:45 <hhillen> MC: We could get a preamble for this 
17:01:03 <hhillen> MC: We could create our own bug for it 
17:01:35 <hhillen> MC: Wait, There is a link to UAAG already, so we don't have to do this after all 
17:01:36 <hhillen> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13639
17:01:36 <Zakim> -??P34
17:03:28 <hhillen> MC: No need to escalate this 
17:03:46 <hhillen> MC: That clears the wont fix bugs from last week
17:06:43 <hhillen> MC: We'll schedule an extra (last) meeting this thursday at 7PM CET, to finish the remaining bugs
17:07:40 <MichaelC> zakim, room for 6 tomorrow at 1p?
17:07:40 <Zakim> I don't understand your question, MichaelC.
17:07:56 <MichaelC> zakim, room for 6 tomorrow at 1:00 p?
17:07:59 <Zakim> ok, MichaelC; conference Team_(a11y-bugs)18:00Z scheduled with code 26632 (CONF2) tomorrow at 13:00 for 60 minutes until 1900Z; however, please note that capacity is now overbooked
17:08:55 <Zakim> -??P41
17:08:56 <Zakim> -??P52
17:08:59 <Zakim> -David_MacDonald
17:09:01 <Zakim> -??P10
17:09:02 <Zakim> WAI_PFWG(HTML_TF)11:00AM has ended
17:09:04 <Zakim> Attendees were David_MacDonald
17:09:45 <hhillen> RRSAgent, make minutes
17:09:45 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/01/10-a11y-bugs-minutes.html hhillen
18:34:08 <Joshue> Joshue has joined #a11y-bugs