Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

16 May 2012


See also: IRC log


Vivienne, Shadi, Shawn, Simon, Christos, Peter, Markel
Giorgio, Shawn, Yeliz, Klaus


Mobile Topic Update (Yeliz, Peter, Simon)

Simon: symposium update on status ...

reviews due monday (email)

…advocates should sign up

…timeline we have a rebuttal - may be able to skip based on acceptance of 6 papers

…this could save us some time if so

…update on Wednesday and where we're up to on the mobile topic

<sharper> ISSUE: Mobile Topic - Scientific Committee Input - also combine with WAI CG

<trackbot> Created ISSUE-2 - Mobile Topic - Scientific Committee Input - also combine with WAI CG ; please complete additional details at http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/tracker/issues/2/edit .

sorry scribe was ask for a moment :(

<markel> sounds good

simon: we need to start using this so we don't forget stuff

<peter> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile_Accessibility,%20http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile

peter: two wiki pages for the mobile symposium
... do we need any updates to that?

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

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

shadi: scientific committe has lots of knowledge in this area. think of different modality for the symposium. also, bring to WAI CG, which will have input

simon: need more work on 1st one

… mobile one looks good

… mobile accessibility needs more work

… more flesh on the bones needed

… need more background

…add comments from scientific community ...

…this is the second draft

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask if http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile was just the draft for the webpage -- in which case, that should be clearly noted

…we put a lot of work into this one and I think it is is good (Mobile)

shawn: that information is old news (Mobile)

simon: main page, metric one still has it there

<shadi> +1 to shawn

shawn: need a link to latest version

<sharper> This is an internal planning page. Please see the main Website Accessibility Metrics Symposium page

simon: benchmarking page also has this on it - something like that would do

…ok we can do that

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2012/mobile/cfp

here is the mail posting for the CFP: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2012AprJun/0013

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2012/mobile/

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

simon: *updated wiki page for Mobile*

Current W3C Note Status (Giorgio, Markel, Josh, Shadi)

markel: regarding research note

…working on improving the sections

…added proceeding sections etc.

…link to new version

<markel> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics/note/ED-metrics-20120516

shawn: looks good (proceeding)

markel: have a few typos with author names

simon: I think its really nice. if we could ad to the referencing on how to..

markel: that would be great

simon: need to decide how to cite this document

…what's the process now?

…getting it approved etc.

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to suggest "Research Note on Web Accessibility Metrics" -> "Research Report on Web Accessibility Metrics"

shawn: suggest title change from * to research report on web accessibility .. don't need to have note type and I think research report would be stronger

markel: I'm accustomed to it but whatever you decide I also like research note

simon: technical note or technical report

<shawn> the type of document is a "W3C Working Group Note"

markel: we can go ahead with this

shawn: since establishing for the future would be good to come up with something now

<vivienne> I'm okay with either

simon: sure and I'll get that sent off

…not a technical report or better a research report?

…what do you think is stronger?

<vivienne> I like research

markel: I like research report

<christos> research report

<shadi> +1 to "research"

…since we're the RD group

simon: every likes research report

+1 rp

shawn: in email note type of documentis a "W3C Working Group Note"

simon: I think this looks excellent!

…(metrics note)

<shadi> [agree that "Research Note ... WG Note" is a little confusing, especially to those who speak W3C jargon]

<markel> :-)


shadi: cudos to the editors

<markel> thanks Shadi

…content is really great work

…set a nice bar for the next symposium

…regarding process, I'll make those edits to authors and other simple edits, so long as we have a WG decision

…for example the title change

…then we need to record in a next meeting that we have a consensus from a majority of the participants in good standing

…then I can proceed with the publication process

…only some of the marking will change

…different groups do this differently on determining consensus

…several possibilities to do this

…Simon it's up to you how to do this

<markel> I would do the thing which is faster

simon: I'll look at the pros and cons and of the different possibilities

shadi: I have a few past surveys that can be reused

simon: good

shawn: I prefer WBS or email

…everyone's answers are recorded and people not on the call can voice their support

shadi: I've seen WBS does seem more formal with better results

…email is another possibility with an email about speaking up now ..

….but I prefer WBS

…director needs to approve each publication

…takes a couple of days

…probably 2 weeks for full approval (?)

markel: I like simons suggestion about putting bib text on top of each paper

…improves citing

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/2011/metrics/paper1/

shadi: I can do this (bib text), do we want to add this after the reference or where?

markel: I would put it on top of the paper

simon: I agree

<vivienne> I'd also like it on the top

…front and centre very easy to reference

…the research report itself where we have the appendix is their anyway to put this citation at the top somewhere? or

shadi: what we have in appendix?

simon: how to cite the document itself - is it possible to add this so it doesn't get missed (eg. to the status of the document)

shadi: a little unusual

shawn: could we add it another section - how to cite this document?

simon: could go up with the editors section near the top

…would like near as top but without breaking any W3 rules

shadi: I know of an alternate version

…other wise the front matter of the document is strictly checked against the publication rules for consistency

…will double check if we can have this somewhere earlier

…WCAG did something similar

…I'll double check that

<markel> yes, thanks Shadi

<shadi> ACTION: shadi to check moving "how to cite this document" to the top of the research note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-21 - Check moving "how to cite this document" to the top of the research note [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2012-05-23].

<shadi> ACTION: shadi to add bibtex information to each paper [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-22 - Add bibtex information to each paper [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2012-05-23].

<shawn> ACTION: Shawn add to http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/rd/SP-design BibTex [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action03]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-23 - Add to http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/rd/SP-design BibTex [on Shawn Henry - due 2012-05-23].

shadi: back to the papers

…right next to the title we have a note about the contribution to the symposium

scribe: perhaps change it so we can add citing info here

<markel> that sounds good to me

…something temporary now until we have the new design in place

simon: so long as people can cite immediately and change later when we get the new design - thats fine with me

shadi: I'll work with shawn on this and discuss with the group next week

Text Customization Topic

Simon: we should be talking about the pre call now

…with a view to release this pre-call

<shadi> ACTION: shadi to work with shawn on updating the highlight note at the top of the paper contributions [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action04]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-24 - Work with shawn on updating the highlight note at the top of the paper contributions [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2012-05-23].

…look at the pre cal with the above url and the other thing to do is whether or not to release internal to the W3C or to all the other channels

<vivienne> ok

<christos> ok

shawn: 1) relation to easy to read

…potential topic overlap with easy to read

…email some issue with combining text customization or not

…one issue is timing, where easy to read hasn't which would delay the announcement

…another issue is the focus on text customization if we combined it, it may get over shadowed

…question back in march of whether enough submissions have 10 yes and 4 might

…another potential for chairs if they want to develop easy to read and propose it as the next symposium

…if so we could note this as coming up next

simon: 1) combination of easy to rease
... how many people supper this?

vivienne: understand what shawn was saying but I think a lot of overlap exists between the two topics

shawn: vivian I think that their related that it may make sense to do them one after the other

…text customization has a specific focus

…while they have relation they may compliment each other nicely by going one after the other

…klaus said it would be good to have it one after the other, then came back with 3 ideas for symposiums

shadi: on one side shawn convinced me that content wise text cost. is a topic on its own

…related to certain types of disabilities

…on the other hand the more focus it is to get sufficient contributions

scribe: trouble with this in the past

…in previous discussions with andrea she has concern that having separate symposiums may draw away participation

<vivienne> is it possible that the same authors would be involved in both?

…while having next symposium can announce the next - to have a pre announcement

simon: I agree that that might be a good idea

…would like to make a decision on the topic

markel: if we have 2 symposiums, we may postpone the queued one

simon: no decision yet

…question now is do we want to split these topics up

…based on submissions etc.

<shadi> +.075

…proposal that text customization runs on its own (+1 if yes)

<shawn> +1 to text customization on it's own

<shadi> +0.75

<vivienne> sorry, really not sure - leaning towards -1

.5 leaning towards combining

<christos> -1

<markel> -1

<markel> Shadi only integers :-)

shawn: my concern is the points I've mentioned

…would like to hear more about the -1's

<markel> my rationale: we should try to get as much submissions as possible

<markel> considering the decline in submissions from symposium 1 to 2

…one issue is timing and the other is that text cust. not get overshadowed

<christos> I think there is a important overlap between the two...

<shadi> [responding to markel: topic 2 was broader than topic 1!]

<christos> (I lost audio connection)...

peter: may lose easy to read in the future

markel: when you have 14 ppl waiting to submit we try to max the submissions

…some are likely to get rejected

…would like to see the relationship between two topics

shawn: second bit is for readability

…the title

shadi: not convinced that the latter two arguments is the only factor in getting more submissions

<markel> definitely

shadi: to peter's point we can get to easy to read

…deserves its own topic

…they are related topics but we can talk about how they relate and what we want to get out of the two separate options

simon: can I make a suggestion, put a join CFP with both topics and run them right after the next

…nothing will be overshadowing the other

<vivienne> I really like Simon's idea. If we get tons of submissions, then we split it, if we don't, then run them together

shadi: like it

…broad call to attract a lot of people

simon: continue topic 4/5 will just run in its place

…mark el's concern will be addressed

<shadi> +1.25 to simon's idea ;)

<vivienne> makes me happy

scribe: shawn's concern will be addressed since separate topics

shawn: can we get the people to edit the other one asap?

simon: could pre call in and have a couple of topics being both - a light touch pre call

…then do a more thorough one

scribe: don't want to delay it - max next week if other's can't do it

shawn: with a pre call do we need to have the dates and other info set?

simon: in the pre call only need to give an overview of background etc.
... then move to a bigger discussion with the chairs
... pre call is just an email to the coordination group
... and email lists on the wiki

shawn: ok - happy to draft the framework but will need content

…from klaus and andrea

simon: could you talk to them?

shadi: yes
... shawn can you get the pre call started

shawn: yes

simon: can we delay and decide next week about the pre call

shadi: agreed

<shawn> Would love for RDWG participants to comment over the next few days on http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0023.html & http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0022.html

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: shadi to add bibtex information to each paper [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: shadi to check moving "how to cite this document" to the top of the research note [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: shadi to work with shawn on updating the highlight note at the top of the paper contributions [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action04]
[NEW] ACTION: Shawn add to http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/rd/SP-design BibTex [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/16-rd-minutes.html#action03]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/05/23 13:10:46 $