14:44:52 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #eval
14:44:52 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/03/15-eval-irc
14:44:54 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
14:44:54 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #eval
14:44:56 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 3825
14:44:56 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)11:00AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes
14:44:57 <trackbot> Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
14:44:57 <trackbot> Date: 15 March 2012
14:45:25 <shadi> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Mar/0030.html
14:45:30 <shadi> chair: Eric
14:49:04 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #eval
14:51:17 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)11:00AM has now started
14:51:24 <Zakim> +??P6
14:51:32 <vivienne> zakim, ??p6 is me
14:51:32 <Zakim> +vivienne; got it
14:51:41 <Zakim> + +1.450.682.aaaa
14:51:50 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
14:51:50 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
14:52:02 <ssirois> zakim, aaaa is me
14:52:02 <Zakim> +ssirois; got it
14:54:03 <Zakim> + +49.404.318.aabb
14:54:17 <KathyW> KathyW has joined #eval
14:55:03 <Detlev> Zakim, aabb is Detlev
14:55:03 <Zakim> +Detlev; got it
14:55:40 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
14:55:40 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
14:55:44 <Zakim> +Kathy
14:55:51 <Detlev> hi
14:56:35 <KathyW> Zakim, mute me
14:56:35 <Zakim> sorry, KathyW, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
14:56:36 <Zakim> +Shadi
14:57:06 <shadi> zakim, kathy is Kathyw
14:57:06 <Zakim> +Kathyw; got it
14:57:11 <ssirois> zakim, who is on the phone
14:57:11 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the phone', ssirois
14:57:24 <ssirois> zakim, who is on phone
14:57:24 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on phone', ssirois
14:57:50 <ssirois> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:57:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see vivienne (muted), ssirois, Detlev (muted), Kathyw, Shadi
14:58:16 <Liz> Liz has joined #eval
14:59:24 <Zakim> + +1.301.975.aacc
14:59:41 <Zakim> +Don
14:59:53 <shadi> zakim, aacc is Liz
15:00:08 <Zakim> +Liz; got it
15:00:32 <Detlev> I'm fine with scribing
15:00:58 <Detlev> Zakim, unmute me
15:00:58 <Zakim> Detlev should no longer be muted
15:01:12 <Sarah_Swierenga> Sarah_Swierenga has joined #eval
15:01:16 <vivienne> ack me
15:01:20 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has joined #eval
15:01:54 <Zakim> +Eric_Velleman
15:01:57 <Detlev> wish you sweet dreams to
15:02:09 <KathyW> zakim, mute me
15:02:09 <Zakim> Kathyw should now be muted
15:02:13 <Zakim> +Sarah
15:02:31 <agarrison> agarrison has joined #eval
15:02:51 <agarrison> Hi, going to be a few minutes late ;-(
15:03:31 <ericvelleman> Hello to you all
15:03:36 <ericvelleman> Did I get the times in the agenda right?
15:03:50 <ssirois> zakim, mute me
15:03:50 <Zakim> ssirois should now be muted
15:03:52 <shadi> scribe: Detlev
15:04:04 <Zakim> +??P58
15:04:14 <Detlev> Eric: introduces agenda
15:04:15 <ssirois> zakim, what is on the agenda?
15:04:15 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
15:04:23 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:04:23 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:04:36 <ericvelleman> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments
15:04:38 <shadi> zakim, ??p58 is Kerstin
15:04:38 <Zakim> +Kerstin; got it
15:04:47 <richard> richard has joined #eval
15:04:47 <Detlev> Eric: looking at comments received on WCAG-EM draft
15:05:09 <Kerstin> Kerstin has joined #eval
15:05:31 <Detlev> Eric: draft won't be published until comments are addressed
15:05:44 <Kerstin> zakim, mute me
15:05:44 <Zakim> Kerstin should now be muted
15:05:54 <Detlev> Shadi: yes go through comments linearly
15:05:56 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
15:06:10 <Zakim> +[IPcaller.a]
15:06:26 <Detlev> Shadi: comments more urgent / interesting for discussion up front
15:07:08 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is Richard
15:07:08 <Zakim> +Richard; got it
15:07:17 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller.a is Alistair
15:07:17 <Zakim> +Alistair; got it
15:07:39 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#c48
15:07:44 <Zakim> + +1.502.632.aadd
15:07:53 <shadi> zakim, aadd is Elle
15:07:53 <Zakim> +Elle; got it
15:08:11 <Detlev> Eric: Comment 48: setting scope unneccessarily restrictive: discussion
15:08:25 <Tim> Tim has joined #eval
15:08:28 <KathyW> Yes , the time was right in the agenda
15:08:57 <Elle> Elle has joined #eval
15:09:12 <Zakim> -Elle
15:09:21 <Detlev> Eric: explains rationale of section 2.1
15:09:32 <Zakim> +Elle
15:09:32 <richard> q
15:09:39 <ericvelleman> q?
15:09:40 <shadi> q+ richard
15:09:48 <ericvelleman> q?
15:09:52 <shadi> ack richard
15:10:50 <Detlev> Richard: The whole website evaluationm should include everything; you can do parts eparately, but not exclude parts
15:10:57 <ericvelleman> q?
15:11:21 <Detlev> Richard: refers to library example that must not be excluded
15:13:04 <shadi> Detlev: some sites would never meet the requirements without exemption
15:13:24 <shadi> q+
15:13:43 <shadi> Eric: relates to partial conformance?
15:13:53 <shadi> Detlev: not sure, would need to read
15:14:03 <Detlev> Detlev: reiterartes argument for exceptions
15:14:31 <vivienne> doesn't partial conformance only apply to part of a page that is third-party?
15:14:33 <Detlev> Eric: suggests that partial conformance would address the problem
15:14:46 <shadi> ack me
15:14:49 <ericvelleman> q?
15:15:16 <Detlev> Shadi: partial conformance relates to reporting phas, not scoping phase
15:15:35 <agarrison> 100% agree with Shadi
15:15:47 <Detlev> +q
15:16:13 <Detlev> Shadi: explains use of parial conformance in reporting phase
15:16:34 <shadi> ack detlev
15:16:49 <shadi> Detlev: clients want recognition for their work
15:16:54 <shadi> ...want a seal
15:17:00 <shadi> q+
15:17:17 <shadi> ...hard to say you will never get there
15:17:23 <Kerstin> q+
15:17:38 <shadi> ack me
15:17:56 <Kerstin> q-
15:18:08 <ssirois> q+
15:18:09 <Detlev> Detlev: expands the argument for exceptions for conformance claims
15:18:31 <Kerstin> agree with shadi
15:18:44 <Detlev> Shadi: makes an argument for conformance yes/no
15:19:12 <Kerstin> zakim, mute
15:19:13 <Zakim> I don't understand 'mute', Kerstin
15:20:22 <Detlev> Shadi: thinks the issue belongs into the section on reporting
15:20:24 <vivienne> q+
15:20:41 <ssirois> ack me
15:20:47 <ericvelleman> q?
15:22:26 <Detlev> Samuel: listing each part that may be excempt is harder to understand then a positive statement, thinks current version is fine
15:22:37 <vivienne> ack me
15:22:41 <ssirois> zakim, mute me
15:22:41 <Zakim> ssirois should now be muted
15:24:25 <Detlev> Vivienne: scope should clearly state what is being evaluated, otherwise it may be fragmented; in reporting, one could explain why the entire website is not conformant, same for 3rd party content
15:24:52 <shadi> q+ to suggest resolution of adding some notes in the scope section describing the rationale and pointing to the relevant parts in the reporting section
15:25:07 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:25:07 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:25:14 <shadi> ack me
15:25:14 <Zakim> shadi, you wanted to suggest resolution of adding some notes in the scope section describing the rationale and pointing to the relevant parts in the reporting section
15:25:19 <Zakim> -Don
15:25:24 <Detlev> Vivienne: the methodogy should focus on the whole site because otherwise people would take their pick at will to exclude bits
15:26:10 <Zakim> +Don
15:26:37 <Detlev> Shadi: issue closed, comments could moved to reporting section, rationale in scope could be added to clarify that
15:27:48 <agarrison> q+
15:27:51 <Sarah_Swierenga> + sarah
15:27:53 <Elle> I support that approach
15:27:54 <richard> +1
15:27:54 <KathyW> That is good
15:27:57 <vivienne> +1
15:28:14 <Detlev> RESOLUTION: issue 48: issue closed, comments could moved to reporting section, rationale in scope could be added to clarify that
15:28:27 <vivienne> I think we need to be as clear as possible
15:28:37 <Elle> If we keep it concise, I think a reference to the Reporting section is helpful
15:28:40 <Zakim> -Don
15:29:07 <Detlev> Alistair: Maybe additional note unnecessary tzo keep text concise
15:29:08 <Zakim> +Don
15:30:21 <Kerstin> probably not forever
15:30:28 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#c84
15:30:48 <Detlev> Next point isuue 84 (Amy Chen)
15:31:28 <Detlev> Shadi: Since Amy is not formal participant (anymore) issue need not be adressed, but should be, nevertheless
15:31:54 <Detlev> Shadi: parphrases Amy's point (refer to her comments)
15:31:57 <Zakim> -Don
15:32:38 <Zakim> +Don
15:33:41 <ssirois> q+
15:33:41 <shadi> [[Exception: The methodology can be applied to clearly separable areas of a single website, such as to the public and restricted area of a website or the front-end and back-end of a web-based tool, provided that this scope matches the evaluation goals and the context of website use; read more in section 3 Step 1: Define the Evaluation Scope of the evaluation procedure.]]
15:33:49 <ericvelleman> q?
15:34:17 <Elle> +1
15:34:41 <richard> +1
15:34:46 <vivienne> +1
15:34:47 <Sarah_Swierenga> +1
15:34:47 <KathyW> +1
15:34:48 <shadi> q- agarrison 
15:34:49 <ssirois> +1
15:34:50 <Detlev> +1
15:34:54 <agarrison> +1
15:34:56 <Tim> +1
15:34:58 <Liz_> Liz_ has joined #eval
15:35:03 <ssirois> ack
15:35:08 <shadi> ack ssirois 
15:35:09 <Liz_> +1 for Liz
15:35:35 <ericvelleman> those were +1's for keeping exception in section 2.1
15:35:36 <Detlev> RESOLUTION: issue 84: Keep: The methodology can be applied to clearly separable areas of a single website, such as to the public and restricted area of a website or the front-end and back-end of a web-based tool, provided that this scope matches the evaluation goals and the context of website use; read more in section 3 Step 1: Define the Evaluation Scope of the evaluation procedure.
15:35:40 <ericvelleman> q?
15:35:47 <Kerstin> +1
15:36:17 <ssirois> zakim, mute me
15:36:17 <Zakim> ssirois should now be muted
15:36:27 <Elle> agreed, +1 with editorial comments
15:36:29 <Detlev> Samuel: quailfies his +1 the backend front-end issue is addressed
15:37:18 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#c20
15:37:47 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#c52
15:38:13 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#i2
15:39:23 <Detlev> Discussion of issues 63 (Loretta), 20 (Kerstin), and 52 (Detlev)
15:39:39 <Kerstin> q+
15:39:45 <Kerstin> zakim, unmute me
15:39:45 <Zakim> Kerstin should no longer be muted
15:39:52 <shadi> ack kerstin
15:39:59 <Detlev> Shadi: suggests that issues can be resolved editorially
15:40:24 <Detlev> Kerstin: not sure, depends on what those edits will be
15:40:46 <Detlev> Eric: General idea: techniques are not the checkpoints?
15:41:51 <Detlev> Kerstin: yes, if techniques are marked as optional, there is still the danger that they will used (seen as mandatory), so even optional use is dangerous
15:42:21 <Detlev> Kerstin: proposes top move mention of techniques from this section to reporting section
15:42:47 <Detlev> Shadi: could be useful if site owner marks techniques that have been used in implementation
15:43:09 <Detlev> Kerstin: but then the test refers to techniques
15:43:17 <Detlev> Shadi sees no problem with this
15:43:17 <agarrison> I'm 100% for the current text - possibly with a little editorial work
15:43:30 <Detlev> Eric: suggests rephrasing, publishing to list
15:43:43 <Kerstin> zakim, mute me
15:43:43 <Zakim> Kerstin should now be muted
15:43:51 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#i3
15:44:18 <Kerstin> I agree with having a look at the edit
15:44:23 <Detlev> RESOLUTION issue 63, 20, 52: rephrasing, publishing to list
15:45:39 <Detlev> Shadi: issue id 54, 55
15:46:12 <ssirois> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#54
15:46:18 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#c55
15:47:31 <Detlev> Detlev paraphrases sampling issue "just to of each"
15:47:35 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120306#step2c
15:47:36 <Zakim> -Liz
15:48:20 <Detlev> Shadi: Explains  the overlap of functions and templates
15:48:39 <Detlev> Shadi: The more diverse the templates, the wider the sample will get
15:49:07 <ericvelleman> q?
15:49:34 <Detlev> RESOLUTION: issue 54, 55: try to clarify editorially misunderstandings and publish to list
15:49:45 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#i4
15:49:52 <vivienne> q+
15:50:02 <vivienne> q-
15:50:31 <Detlev> Shadi: comments on "elemental" web pages, likes Don's suggestion of "common" web pages
15:50:35 <Elle> +1 for common
15:50:42 <agarrison> +1 for common
15:50:44 <Sarah_Swierenga> +1 for "common"
15:50:51 <Detlev> +1
15:50:54 <KathyW> +1
15:50:58 <richard> +1 for common
15:51:07 <vivienne> +1
15:51:23 <Kerstin> +1 with description what "common" exactly means
15:51:34 <ssirois> +1 for elemental, but you shall ignore  me if i'm alone! ;) just think elemental sounds more powerfull to my French ears
15:51:36 <vivienne> 26, 43, 47, 81, 25, 27
15:51:50 <Detlev> RESOLUTION: issue 26: change elemental web pages to common web pages
15:51:57 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments#i5
15:51:59 <Elle> +1
15:52:40 <Detlev> Shadi: Issue of document incompleteness: several people suggested that one should delay publication
15:52:47 <ssirois> q+
15:53:22 <agarrison> +1 for earliest possible publication
15:53:22 <Detlev> Shadi: there is a risk of misunderstandings if published in incomplete state, but the advantage is getting more public input outside perspectives
15:53:33 <Elle> +1 for earliest possible publication as well
15:53:57 <vivienne> q+
15:53:59 <Detlev> Detlev: withdraws objection to publication
15:54:03 <ericvelleman> q?
15:54:06 <ssirois> ack
15:54:11 <shadi> ack ssirois 
15:54:25 <richard> q+
15:55:14 <ericvelleman> q?
15:55:14 <Detlev> Samuel: Thought this discussion would close section 1, 2, 3 and work two more weeks on 4 and 5 before publication
15:55:31 <Detlev> Samuel: agrees to publish soon
15:55:38 <ssirois> zakim, mute me
15:55:38 <Zakim> ssirois should now be muted
15:55:39 <ericvelleman> q?
15:55:41 <Detlev> +q
15:55:42 <vivienne> ack me
15:55:45 <Elle> so, is the question on whether to wait for 4 and 5 before publication?
15:55:50 <shadi> ack vivienne 
15:56:34 <Elle> +1 for vivienne's comments
15:56:36 <shadi> [[there were formal comments to update the abstract and status of the document sections, to clarify the current status]]
15:56:39 <Detlev> Vivienne: is in favour of publishing as soon as possible, this is work in prgress, we are looking for more input and will get valuable input. Benefits outweight problems
15:56:43 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
15:56:43 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
15:57:21 <Detlev> Shadi: some comments on updating the abstract to make clear where the methodology fits in the big picture
15:57:23 <shadi> ack richard 
15:57:32 <ericvelleman> q?
15:57:36 <shadi> zakim, who is making noise?
15:57:46 <Zakim> shadi, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Detlev (15%), Eric_Velleman (63%), Richard (15%)
15:57:49 <Sarah_Swierenga> +1 for Vivienne's suggestion that we publish soon
15:57:59 <ericvelleman> q?
15:58:00 <Detlev> Richard: Thins the discussion points to a (slight) delay, to put in more content
15:58:27 <agarrison> Lets move for a resolution on publishing
15:58:45 <ericvelleman> q?
15:58:54 <shadi> ack detlev
15:59:23 <Elle> can we vote on publication?
15:59:24 <Detlev> Richards: Thinks additional content might prevent misunderstandings of still ill defined issues
16:00:07 <Detlev> Detlev: is ready to agree to puiblication
16:00:38 <Detlev> Eric: Thinks it is valuable to get more input for the draft
16:00:42 <agarrison> +1 publish
16:00:50 <ssirois> +1 publish
16:00:56 <Sarah_Swierenga> +1
16:00:57 <Elle> +1 (with qualifying introductory copy that explains its state, especially 4 and 5)
16:01:01 <vivienne> +1
16:01:02 <KathyW> +1
16:01:03 <richard> -1 do not publish yet
16:02:02 <ericvelleman> +1 publish
16:02:22 <Detlev> No resolution to publish right now
16:02:36 <Kerstin> first want to see the edits before I give my +1
16:02:41 <Elle> have to go to another meeting, apologies!  <exiting call>
16:02:46 <Zakim> -Elle
16:03:03 <Detlev> RESOLUTION: group approves publishing priovided that comments are addressed.
16:03:18 <Elle> +1 for ssirois having the best vocabulary of the call :)
16:03:32 <vivienne> zakim, unmute me
16:03:32 <Zakim> vivienne should no longer be muted
16:03:37 <Detlev> Eric: not all yellow comments were discussed
16:03:49 <Zakim> -Don
16:04:09 <Detlev> Shadi: those issues that were not discussed should be resolved on the mailing list
16:04:41 <Detlev> Shadi: please give input today + tomorrow on outstanding issues, fresh draft early next week.
16:05:04 <Detlev> Eric: Shadi and Eric will publish frsh version.
16:05:17 <Detlev> Eric: thanks to all, closes call.
16:05:19 <ssirois> zakim, unmute me
16:05:19 <Zakim> ssirois should no longer be muted
16:05:21 <agarrison> Goodbye ;-)
16:05:23 <Kerstin> bye
16:05:26 <Zakim> -ssirois
16:05:28 <Zakim> -Sarah
16:05:28 <KathyW> bye
16:05:29 <Zakim> -Richard
16:05:30 <Zakim> -Eric_Velleman
16:05:31 <vivienne> -vivienne
16:05:31 <Sarah_Swierenga> bye
16:05:31 <Zakim> -Shadi
16:05:33 <Zakim> -Alistair
16:05:34 <vivienne> vivienne has left #eval
16:05:35 <Zakim> -Detlev
16:05:36 <richard> quit
16:05:37 <Zakim> -vivienne
16:05:39 <Zakim> -Kerstin
16:05:41 <Zakim> -Kathyw
16:05:43 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)11:00AM has ended
16:05:43 <Zakim> Attendees were vivienne, +1.450.682.aaaa, ssirois, +49.404.318.aabb, Detlev, Shadi, Kathyw, +1.301.975.aacc, Don, Liz, Eric_Velleman, Sarah, Kerstin, Richard, Alistair,
16:05:47 <Zakim> ... +1.502.632.aadd, Elle
16:48:51 <ssirois> ssirois has left #eval
18:18:38 <Zakim> Zakim has left #eval