14:46:16 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #eval
14:46:16 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/02/23-eval-irc
14:46:18 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:46:18 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #eval
14:46:20 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 3825
14:46:20 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes
14:46:21 <trackbot> Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
14:46:21 <trackbot> Date: 23 February 2012
14:49:49 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #eval
14:50:36 <MartijnHoutepen> MartijnHoutepen has joined #eval
14:52:18 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
14:52:25 <Zakim> +MartijnHoutepen
14:53:04 <shadi> regrets: Alistair
14:53:25 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #eval
14:53:44 <vivienne> vivienne has joined #eval
14:54:25 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:54:31 <vivienne> IPcaller is me
14:54:47 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
14:54:47 <Zakim> sorry, vivienne, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
14:55:09 <vivienne> +IPcaller is me
14:55:46 <vivienne> zakim, ipcaller is me
14:55:46 <Zakim> +vivienne; got it
14:55:52 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
14:55:53 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
14:55:59 <Zakim> +Kathy
14:56:46 <shadi> agenda+ Is there more than pass and fail?
14:56:50 <shadi> agenda+ Three different samples is that possible?
14:56:59 <shadi> agenda+ Evaluation clause 5
14:57:03 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
14:57:03 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
14:57:12 <Liz> Liz has joined #eval
14:57:53 <Zakim> +Liz
14:58:32 <Zakim> +Don
14:58:41 <Zakim> +Shadi
14:59:04 <Kathy> Hi Shadi
14:59:12 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:59:12 <Zakim> On the phone I see MartijnHoutepen, vivienne (muted), Kathy (muted), Liz, Don, Shadi
14:59:58 <Zakim> +Detlev
15:01:13 <Zakim> +Elle
15:01:51 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
15:02:02 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
15:02:31 <vivienne> I wont' be able to make it next week as I'll be out of town
15:02:41 <MartijnHoutepen> zakim, mute me
15:02:41 <Zakim> MartijnHoutepen should now be muted
15:02:43 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has joined #eval
15:02:54 <Elle> Elle has joined #eval
15:02:56 <MartijnHoutepen> I won't be there as well
15:03:02 <Richard> Richard has joined #eval
15:03:04 <shadi> chair: Eric
15:03:17 <MartijnHoutepen> ok
15:03:43 <shadi> agenda+ Next Meeting
15:03:54 <shadi> agenda?
15:04:07 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:04:17 <Detlev> Shadi could you repeat
15:04:21 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is Richard
15:04:36 <Zakim> +Richard; got it
15:04:40 <shadi> scribe: Richard
15:04:42 <Richard> Hi
15:04:44 <Zakim> +Eric_Velleman
15:04:54 <shadi> agenda?
15:06:06 <Detlev> Look at the last mail form Tim Borland:  the latest W3C WAI ATAG2.0 draft success criteria satisfaction options for conformance are: yes, no, not applicable
15:06:09 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 1
15:06:14 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/methodology/
15:06:34 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Is there more than pass and fail?" taken up [from shadi]
15:06:37 <Zakim> -Don
15:06:37 <Richard> Eric: new version with change log
15:07:03 <shadi> zakim, mute me
15:07:18 <shadi> Topic: Changes to the Methodology draft
15:07:31 <Zakim> +Don
15:07:39 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
15:07:41 <Detlev> yes
15:07:48 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone
15:07:50 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:07:53 <Zakim> -Richard
15:07:59 <Richard> Eric: Changes from Kerstin, added some things Richard reconnect
15:08:12 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:08:14 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone', shadi
15:08:17 <Zakim> On the phone I see MartijnHoutepen (muted), vivienne (muted), Kathy (muted), Liz, Shadi (muted), Detlev (muted), Elle, Eric_Velleman, Don, [IPcaller]
15:08:31 <shadi> ack me
15:08:34 <Richard> Richard -is on the phone he had to reconnest
15:08:46 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is Richard
15:08:55 <Zakim> +Richard; got it
15:08:57 <shadi> zakim, mute me
15:09:07 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
15:09:16 <Richard> Eric: Pass and fail discussion - do we want N/A as in WCAG 1
15:09:37 <shadi> ack me
15:09:43 <Detlev> Accordign to Tim, the latest W3C WAI ATAG2.0 draft success criteria satisfaction options for conformance are: yes, no, not applicable
15:09:50 <ericvelleman> q?
15:09:54 <Mike_Elledge> Mike_Elledge has joined #eval
15:09:58 <Detlev> ack me
15:10:50 <Detlev> q+
15:11:00 <Zakim> +Mike
15:11:01 <Richard> Shadi: W3C though N/A is ambigous. Conetnet that does not need feartures conforms by virtue of not needing features
15:11:25 <vivienne> q+
15:12:04 <Richard> Shadi: If people feel strongly we could define N/A if so. Would need to make N/A almost, but not exactly a Yes
15:12:16 <Mike_Elledge> q+
15:12:27 <shadi> ack det
15:14:40 <Richard> Detlev: Please see comment on irc earlier. I think N/A should be included because it is already acceptable to W3C and it makes sense to our end users
15:14:42 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
15:14:42 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
15:15:13 <vivienne> zakim, ack me
15:15:13 <Zakim> unmuting vivienne
15:15:15 <Zakim> I see Mike_Elledge on the speaker queue
15:15:32 <Richard> Shadi: Wonders why W3C WCAG2 decided against N/A. We need to check
15:16:05 <shadi> s/Wonders why/Reminds that
15:16:36 <Richard> Vivien: Giving too many passes suggests they are nearer than they are, but N/A allows for them to better understand the real state of their website
15:16:54 <shadi> q+
15:16:59 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:16:59 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:17:20 <Richard> Eric: Does Shadi know of any discussions?
15:17:36 <Elle> I agree with Vivenne regarding N/A and false positive results - my apologies, all, but I've been called into another meeting - I will follow up and participate via email
15:17:42 <Zakim> -Elle
15:18:09 <Richard> Shadi: I will look more. I don't think we should stall. I would say attempt is as a draft and ask for input
15:18:10 <shadi> q-
15:18:46 <Richard> Mike:I think N/A very useful - but needs careful definition
15:19:23 <Richard> Eric: I propose we discuss this over the coming week and see what we come up with
15:19:35 <shadi> zakim, take up next
15:19:35 <Zakim> I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, shadi
15:19:40 <shadi> q?
15:19:45 <shadi> ack mike
15:19:48 <shadi> zakim, take up next
15:19:48 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Three different samples is that possible?" taken up [from shadi]
15:20:24 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:20:44 <Detlev> q+
15:20:51 <Detlev> ack me
15:20:51 <vivienne> q+
15:20:55 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is Kerstin
15:20:55 <Zakim> +Kerstin; got it
15:21:00 <shadi> q+
15:21:01 <Richard> Eric: Item 3 - 3 different samples. Some others think the three approach is a good idea. Does anyone else think it good or bad?
15:21:04 <Zakim> -Don
15:21:07 <ericvelleman> q?
15:21:32 <Kerstin> Kerstin has joined #eval
15:21:48 <Kerstin> zakim, mute me
15:21:48 <Zakim> Kerstin should now be muted
15:21:55 <Zakim> +Don
15:22:04 <Kerstin> sorry for delay
15:22:21 <Richard> Detlev: Possible misunderstanding of diference between sampling a web page and statistical sampling of more general things such as populations. Web pages have a common structure and limited in basic technology. 
15:22:35 <vivienne> zakim, ack me
15:22:35 <Zakim> unmuting vivienne
15:22:36 <Zakim> I see shadi on the speaker queue
15:22:48 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
15:22:48 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
15:23:55 <Richard> Viviene: I agree with most of what Detlev says. We are auditing the pages - but we are using three ways =of chosing teh pages we test. It is all about the choosing. Random alone would be useless
15:24:21 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:24:21 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:24:21 <shadi> ack me
15:24:23 <Richard> Viviene: Possible misunderstanding
15:24:25 <ericvelleman> q?
15:24:43 <Richard> Eric: We seem to agree that the three sample types are good
15:26:33 <ericvelleman> q?
15:26:49 <shadi> zakim, mute me
15:26:49 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
15:26:58 <Richard> Shadi: I think it is a matter of explaining it better. Thinks that Mike thinks we suggest using random to fill up number - this is not the case so our text needs clarifying
15:28:00 <vivienne> I think I prefer pages
15:28:03 <shadi> q+
15:28:08 <Richard> Eric: Resources- Confusion between resources and pages. Sometimes we call a page a resource, other times we say a page contains resources. Any thoughts?
15:28:12 <Kathy> q+
15:28:31 <Detlev> I#d use pages, states of pages, elements
15:28:32 <shadi> ack me
15:28:39 <vivienne> I think a page can include some resources
15:28:52 <shadi> [[A structured sequence of resources (of any type), for example an RDF sequence]]
15:29:06 <Richard> Eric. I can clarify when I write page or resource.
15:29:18 <ericvelleman> q?
15:29:33 <Kathy> ack me
15:29:35 <Mike_Elledge> q+
15:29:45 <MartijnHoutepen> +1 for pages
15:29:49 <Richard> Shadi: Eiter we use the two words as interchangeable or we need to retink
15:29:52 <vivienne> Can we also clarify whether we refer to "URL" or "URI"?
15:29:57 <Tim> Tim has joined #eval
15:30:13 <Mike_Elledge> +1 for page elements
15:31:07 <Richard> Viviens: Pages are more understandable to our users. Eric has suggested "elements" as bits within a page . Prefer Pages and elements. If we use "resource" it needs careful definition
15:31:35 <Richard> Eric: I will make some changes to see how it work. We can put resources back if we need to
15:31:54 <Detlev> That was Kathy who said that, not "Viviens"
15:32:00 <Richard> Shadi:We can put a small clarification of web-page
15:32:03 <Kathy> zakim - mute me
15:32:07 <ericvelleman> q?
15:32:12 <shadi> s/Viviens/Kathy
15:32:36 <shadi> q- mike
15:32:41 <shadi> zakim, take up next
15:32:41 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Evaluation clause 5" taken up [from shadi]
15:32:45 <Richard> Eric: Clause 5 - Evaluation - three levels
15:34:27 <Detlev> +q
15:34:37 <Richard> Eric: Cut into 1) Order, 2) Criterea - I added stuff here with a seperate section about stop critera - this is for discussion.
15:35:21 <Richard> Eric: we have to allow for when a series of pages present nothing new - ie we can go somehwre else
15:35:33 <Kathy> q+
15:36:15 <Richard> Eric:What do you think of stop criterea? 4.3 ?
15:36:18 <Detlev> ack me
15:36:20 <ericvelleman> q?
15:36:24 <Zakim> +Tim_Boland
15:38:03 <Richard> Detlev: Not sure I understand what they are. From aconformance point of view just 1 fail might be OK - but it is important to check if the error is truly accross the whole site or just those in one section
15:38:10 <Kerstin> q+
15:38:47 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
15:38:47 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
15:38:49 <Richard> Detlev: This would make it esier for corrections if user knows which areas need attention and which do  not
15:38:57 <vivienne> q+
15:39:36 <Kathy> ack me
15:39:40 <Richard> Eric: Compare Global and regional errors- perhaps part of this discussion
15:40:11 <ericvelleman> q?
15:41:33 <Richard> Kathy: We mention point of severity. If an error prevent complete use then everything fails : after evaluating just one page by silverlight it was clear that the whole thing was not accessible - so it was pointless doing four more pages
15:41:52 <Detlev> I'd be more comfortable having fewer pages checked fully...
15:42:19 <Richard> Eric: We have to decide if it is global or regional.
15:42:38 <Kerstin> zakim, unmute me
15:42:38 <Zakim> Kerstin should no longer be muted
15:42:47 <Richard> Kathy: If it becomes absolutely clear that it can't be evaluated then I stop
15:42:50 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
15:42:55 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
15:44:17 <Richard> Kerstin: I don't like "scores". We can check individual items. When I have cheked 3 or 4 tables I make a list and give a note and tell client he needs to check all other instances.
15:44:44 <Kerstin> zakim, mute me
15:44:44 <Zakim> Kerstin should now be muted
15:45:01 <vivienne> ack me
15:45:03 <Kerstin> I don't believe in "scores" ;-)
15:45:10 <Richard> Eric: It must be possible to say "this is always wrong". - but impact of some regional areas can be serious
15:45:48 <Kerstin> q+
15:46:57 <Detlev> Re-checking is much quicker than the first check!
15:47:20 <Kerstin> zakim, unmute me
15:47:20 <Zakim> Kerstin should no longer be muted
15:47:21 <Richard> Viviene: I just copy comment each time so it is not a lot of hard work. But I agree that we can tell user that many pages have same error and expect user to check all other occurancies. But if you use a score and want accurate statisticsthen you have to check and comment on every page
15:47:23 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:47:23 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:48:10 <Kerstin> zakim, mute me
15:48:10 <Zakim> Kerstin should now be muted
15:48:27 <Richard> Kerstin: For me Pass/Fail is enough.  But for objectivity perhaps we need more
15:48:40 <Detlev> yes.
15:48:49 <Kathy> yes
15:48:49 <vivienne> ack me
15:49:10 <Richard> Eric: Many of you do evaluations for real. Some of you take all pages individually
15:49:36 <Kerstin> don't know why I'm on the speaker queue, don't want to say something
15:49:48 <Detlev> same
15:49:51 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:49:51 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:49:54 <Detlev> yes
15:50:01 <Kathy> ack me
15:50:03 <Richard> Viviene: Yes I score every page. I give score points to each error and can total at the end
15:50:19 <Richard> Kathy: I also look at all teh check points
15:50:34 <Richard> Q+
15:50:47 <vivienne> I do the same as Kathy when I am working for clients
15:50:55 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
15:50:55 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
15:50:57 <Kerstin> zakim, unmute me
15:50:57 <Zakim> Kerstin should no longer be muted
15:51:10 <shadi> q- ker
15:51:15 <shadi> ack richard
15:52:28 <Detlev> q+
15:53:24 <Kathy> q+
15:53:31 <Kerstin> zakim, mute me
15:53:31 <Zakim> Kerstin should now be muted
15:53:42 <Detlev> ack me
15:54:43 <vivienne> q+
15:55:35 <Richard> Richard:I check is sequence. Run special checks over a range of pages; For example check that the keyboard works on a sequence of pages and enavle the completeion of tasks etc. Then do the sanme without CSS ro see structure etc andthe without ime=ges to seeif it works wu=itout images (there are sutable aklt tags
15:55:44 <shadi> +1
15:55:57 <Kerstin> we must describe procedure for be sure that the test is reliable
15:56:28 <Richard> Eric: Detlev is amore a statistical thing, what we and richard do is more generic.
15:56:44 <Richard> Detlev: Either way we still fill up the list of scs
15:56:58 <Kerstin> I'm on the generic side of the evaluators ;-)
15:57:05 <Kathy> ack me
15:57:10 <Richard> Detlev: Good idea to check each element , SC
15:57:20 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
15:57:20 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
15:57:43 <Kerstin> q+
15:58:15 <Richard> Kathy: How I di it depends upon teh type of site. For a task based site s=do as Richard by following tasks using different technologies, I also agree with Detlev taht we must have a checklist
15:58:21 <vivienne> ack me
15:58:28 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
15:58:28 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
15:59:47 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:59:54 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:59:54 <Richard> Viviene:Diferent types of page need different methods. You need to actially use the technoogy - such as screen reader or keyboard etc. You still follow structure to make sure you don't miss anything
16:00:14 <Richard> Eric: We need to cover - Stop Criterea,
16:00:57 <vivienne> Eric, are we able to share the draft with others to get their viewpoint?
16:01:05 <Richard> IEric: Please walk throgh the changes I made and discuss also on scoring. It is crucial to get this clear - thanks
16:01:14 <MartijnHoutepen> ack me
16:01:14 <Kerstin> zakim, unmute me
16:01:20 <shadi> ack me
16:01:50 <Zakim> Kerstin should no longer be muted
16:02:00 <Kerstin> q- ker
16:02:06 <Richard> Shadi: Some of us a CSUN but you should do weell withiout us :)
16:02:21 <vivienne> bye now
16:02:24 <vivienne> -vivienne
16:02:26 <Richard> Bye
16:02:43 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has left #eval
16:02:54 <Richard> Quit
16:03:30 <Zakim> -Tim_Boland
16:03:36 <Zakim> -Don
16:03:49 <Zakim> -Kathy
16:03:52 <Zakim> -Kerstin
16:03:56 <Zakim> -vivienne
16:03:58 <Zakim> -Detlev
16:04:00 <Zakim> -Mike
16:04:07 <Zakim> -Eric_Velleman
16:04:10 <Zakim> -Richard
16:04:14 <Zakim> -Shadi
16:04:18 <Zakim> -Liz
16:09:09 <Zakim> -MartijnHoutepen
16:09:12 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
16:09:13 <Zakim> Attendees were MartijnHoutepen, vivienne, Kathy, Liz, Don, Shadi, Detlev, Elle, Richard, Eric_Velleman, Mike, Kerstin, Tim_Boland
16:12:32 <shadi> trackbot, end meeting
16:12:32 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
16:12:33 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
16:12:40 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:12:40 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/02/23-eval-minutes.html trackbot
16:12:41 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
16:12:41 <RRSAgent> I see no action items