IRC log of rd on 2012-05-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:29:05 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #rd
13:29:05 [RRSAgent]
logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/23-rd-irc
13:29:07 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
13:29:09 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 7394
13:29:09 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_RDWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 1 minute
13:29:10 [trackbot]
Meeting: Research and Development Working Group Teleconference
13:29:10 [trackbot]
Date: 23 May 2012
13:29:18 [sharper]
Chair: Harper_Simon
13:30:07 [shadi]
zakim, clear agenda
13:30:07 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
13:30:22 [Zakim]
WAI_RDWG()9:30AM has now started
13:30:29 [Zakim]
+??P6
13:30:35 [vivienne]
zakim, ??P6 is me
13:30:35 [Zakim]
+vivienne; got it
13:30:45 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
13:30:45 [Zakim]
sorry, vivienne, muting is not permitted when only one person is present
13:30:48 [sharper]
zakim, please clear the agenda
13:30:48 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
13:30:54 [sharper]
zakim, agenda?
13:30:54 [Zakim]
I see nothing on the agenda
13:31:15 [Zakim]
+Shadi
13:31:32 [sharper]
Agenda+ Welcome & Logistics (Regrets, Agenda Requests, Comments)
13:31:32 [sharper]
Agenda+ Mobile Topic Update [Yeliz, Peter, Simon]
13:31:33 [sharper]
Agenda+ Current W3C Note Status [Simon] | Survey - https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/RDWG-Metrics/ | Title - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0034.html
13:31:33 [sharper]
Agenda+ Topic 3 Text Customization and Easy-to-Read - Online Symposia [Shawn] | Pre-Call - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_3_pre-call | Comments - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0033.html
13:31:33 [sharper]
Agenda+ Timelines / Schedule to 30th June 2013 [Simon]
13:31:35 [sharper]
Agenda+ Issues and Actions (Standing Item): https://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/tracker/
13:31:38 [sharper]
Agenda+ Any Other Business (Standing Item)
13:31:47 [sharper]
zakim, save agenda
13:31:56 [Zakim]
ok, sharper, the agenda has been written to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/23-rd-agenda.rdf
13:31:57 [sharper]
zakim, agenda?
13:31:58 [Zakim]
I see 7 items remaining on the agenda:
13:31:58 [Zakim]
1. Welcome & Logistics (Regrets, Agenda Requests, Comments) [from sharper]
13:31:58 [Zakim]
2. Mobile Topic Update [from Yeliz, Peter, Simon via sharper]
13:31:58 [Zakim]
3. Current W3C Note Status [Simon] | Survey - https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/RDWG-Metrics/ | Title - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0034.html [from
13:31:58 [Zakim]
... sharper]
13:32:00 [Zakim]
4. Topic 3 Text Customization and Easy-to-Read - Online Symposia [Shawn] | Pre-Call - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_3_pre-call | Comments -
13:32:03 [Zakim]
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0033.html [from sharper]
13:32:04 [Zakim]
5. Timelines / Schedule to 30th June 2013 [from Simon via sharper]
13:32:06 [Zakim]
6. Issues and Actions (Standing Item): https://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/tracker/ [from sharper]
13:32:09 [Zakim]
7. Any Other Business (Standing Item) [from sharper]
13:32:29 [Yehya]
Yehya has joined #rd
13:32:45 [sharper]
zakim, take up item 1
13:32:45 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Welcome & Logistics (Regrets, Agenda Requests, Comments)" taken up [from sharper]
13:33:03 [sharper]
regrets+ Miesenberge_Klaus
13:33:12 [sharper]
regrets+ O'Connor_Joshue
13:33:22 [sharper]
regrets+ Brajnik_Giorgio
13:33:33 [Zakim]
+Shawn
13:33:33 [sharper]
rrsagent, make logs public
13:33:33 [sharper]
rrsagent, draft minutes
13:33:33 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/05/23-rd-minutes.html sharper
13:33:46 [Zakim]
+Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
13:33:47 [sharper]
zakim, code?
13:33:47 [Zakim]
the conference code is 7394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), sharper
13:34:18 [markel]
markel has joined #rd
13:34:27 [Zakim]
+??P15
13:34:34 [sharper]
zakim, ??P15 is sharper
13:34:34 [Zakim]
+sharper; got it
13:34:53 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
13:34:53 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne, Shadi, Shawn, Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, sharper
13:35:06 [Yehya]
Klaus/Johannes/Thomas is Yehya
13:35:14 [Zakim]
+??P16
13:35:34 [markel]
zakim, ??P16 is markel
13:35:34 [Zakim]
+markel; got it
13:35:35 [shadi]
zakim, ?? is Markel
13:35:36 [Zakim]
sorry, shadi, I do not recognize a party named '??'
13:35:54 [shadi]
scribe: Vivienne
13:36:02 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
13:36:02 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
13:36:09 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
13:36:09 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
13:36:34 [shawn]
shawn has joined #rd
13:36:40 [vivienne]
ack me
13:36:50 [sharper]
zakim, agenda?
13:36:50 [Zakim]
I see 7 items remaining on the agenda:
13:36:52 [Zakim]
1. Welcome & Logistics (Regrets, Agenda Requests, Comments) [from sharper]
13:36:52 [Zakim]
2. Mobile Topic Update [from Yeliz, Peter, Simon via sharper]
13:36:52 [Zakim]
3. Current W3C Note Status [Simon] | Survey - https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/RDWG-Metrics/ | Title - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0034.html [from
13:36:52 [Zakim]
... sharper]
13:36:54 [Zakim]
4. Topic 3 Text Customization and Easy-to-Read - Online Symposia [Shawn] | Pre-Call - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_3_pre-call | Comments -
13:36:55 [Zakim]
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0033.html [from sharper]
13:36:57 [Zakim]
5. Timelines / Schedule to 30th June 2013 [from Simon via sharper]
13:36:59 [Zakim]
6. Issues and Actions (Standing Item): https://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/tracker/ [from sharper]
13:37:02 [Zakim]
7. Any Other Business (Standing Item) [from sharper]
13:37:08 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
13:37:08 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
13:37:24 [vivienne]
ack me
13:37:26 [shadi]
zakim, take up next
13:37:26 [Zakim]
agendum 2. "Mobile Topic Update" taken up [from Yeliz, Peter, Simon]
13:37:37 [Zakim]
+??P17
13:37:45 [vivienne]
zakim, mukte me
13:37:45 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'mukte me', vivienne
13:37:48 [vivienne]
zakim, mue me
13:37:48 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'mue me', vivienne
13:37:53 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
13:37:53 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
13:37:57 [shawn]
zakim, who is on the phone?
13:37:57 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), Shadi (muted), Shawn (muted), Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, sharper, markel, ??P17
13:38:05 [vivienne]
SH: reviews all received back now
13:38:14 [yeliz]
yeliz has joined #rd
13:38:34 [vivienne]
SH: 3 editors assigned as advocates for the papers. We must now read them and discuss them next week.
13:38:39 [shadi]
zakim, ??p17 is probably Yeliz
13:38:39 [Zakim]
+Yeliz?; got it
13:38:55 [yeliz]
zakim, ??P17 is yeliz
13:38:55 [Zakim]
I already had ??P17 as Yeliz?, yeliz
13:38:58 [vivienne]
SH: we need to decide whether to read the papers or for the editors to take care of it
13:38:59 [shawn]
q+
13:39:02 [shawn]
ack me
13:39:04 [sharper]
ack sh
13:39:04 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
13:39:05 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should now be muted
13:39:06 [vivienne]
I'm happy for the editors to take it
13:39:22 [vivienne]
Shawn: what about the scientific committee's reviews
13:39:41 [vivienne]
SH: scientific committee have already given us that in the reviews, although most of them should be accepted
13:40:08 [shadi]
ack me
13:40:09 [shadi]
q+
13:40:14 [markel]
I'm happy with that
13:40:16 [shadi]
ack me
13:41:21 [vivienne]
sh: editors will then look at the reviews of the scientific committee and then based on the advocates, we invite the changes based on the reviews and accept/reject the papers based on what the advocates decide. We also ask the scientific committee for their thoughts as well.
13:41:47 [vivienne]
sh: we have only 6, so it's not as much problem as if there were 20 and we had to trim it down
13:42:21 [vivienne]
SA: the decision for acceptance would be only the editors, or the scientific committee?
13:42:32 [vivienne]
SH: based on the reviews of the scientific committee
13:43:07 [shawn]
[ Shawn thinks the decision for acceptance should be reviewed by the entire Scientific Committee ]
13:43:08 [vivienne]
SH: doing a review of each paper should give us a consensus and we should probably then accept it
13:43:28 [vivienne]
SA: I would prefer that the decision for acceptance should come from the scientific committee as a whole, not the editors
13:43:36 [vivienne]
SH: breaks the model for a standard conference
13:43:40 [markel]
q+
13:43:42 [vivienne]
SH: other thoughts?
13:44:02 [sharper]
ack ma
13:44:03 [shawn]
q+ to say option to review, but not requirement to review
13:44:17 [vivienne]
MV: if the scientific committee has to be involved in the last decision it involves them to have to read all of the papers. It is more democratic for the editors to make a decision based on our reviews
13:44:17 [shawn]
ack me
13:44:17 [Zakim]
shawn, you wanted to say option to review, but not requirement to review
13:44:18 [yeliz]
I agree withMarkel
13:45:01 [vivienne]
Shawn: think that W3C position as a broad-review org. it would be wise to have the option for review, but not necessarily the requirement for review. Give the SC the option to review but not the requirement
13:45:17 [vivienne]
SH: editors can make a recommendation and would allow a discussion
13:45:46 [shadi]
q+
13:45:46 [vivienne]
SH: seems strange to have to ask the SC to accept or not when we've already had 2 recommendations to accept and it's backed up by the editors
13:46:51 [vivienne]
Shawn: realistically after the formal review, the editor's recommendations, and the suggestions for accept/rejection, the SC will look at the list and make a decision on how they feel about it. They may have a reason to want to look at some of the papers.
13:47:09 [vivienne]
Shawn: SC will probably agree, but should have the opportunity
13:47:14 [shadi]
ack me
13:47:15 [vivienne]
SH: other thoughts?
13:48:03 [vivienne]
SA: think it's the process we used last time. The symposium chair prepares a list (excel sheet) where the papers are listed and the accept/rejection are visible to the SC and there is some discussion available.
13:48:11 [vivienne]
SA: felt it worked well last time
13:48:21 [vivienne]
SH: it wasn't the scientific committee - it was the core members
13:48:46 [vivienne]
SA: only the scientific committee people participated on the final call
13:49:03 [vivienne]
I wasn't on the call either, so it must have been just the SC
13:49:03 [shadi]
s/on the final call/on the calls
13:49:11 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
13:49:11 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should no longer be muted
13:49:18 [yeliz]
zakim, q+
13:49:18 [Zakim]
I see yeliz on the speaker queue
13:49:25 [sharper]
ack yel
13:50:12 [vivienne]
Yeliz: think it's fine for the editors to create an overview and it can be discussed with the SC members. What happens if not all the SC members can join the call - do we have to get other members? This time we have SC members who aren't in RDWG.
13:50:13 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
13:50:13 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
13:50:14 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
13:50:14 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should now be muted
13:50:38 [yeliz]
so all SC members will become advocates?
13:50:50 [vivienne]
SH: we should make use of the Open Conf. system to make the papers available anon. to the SC members so we can open it up. Open for discussion - maybe a week to see if there are problems
13:50:53 [shawn]
[ shawn thinks committee should be *invited* to participate in call to discuss, but do not have to. and also, that there is not a call to discuss unless needed ]
13:51:04 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
13:51:04 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should no longer be muted
13:51:22 [vivienne]
Shawn: that's good - if there are no concerns there doesn't need to be a call to discuss
13:51:30 [vivienne]
Yeliz: are all SC then advocates?
13:52:01 [vivienne]
Yeliz: think this is a good idea. A call will not be necessary if they all agree, or if they can work it out in discussions between themselves
13:52:12 [vivienne]
Yeliz: we then document this for the upcoming seminar
13:52:16 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
13:52:16 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should now be muted
13:52:28 [vivienne]
SH: seems to be sorted.
13:52:59 [vivienne]
Resolution: advocates make a recommendation based on the SC members and then open it for discussion to the SC members and then we report back to the main group
13:53:02 [yeliz]
+1
13:53:06 [vivienne]
+1
13:53:06 [sharper]
+1
13:53:07 [Yehya]
zakim, Klaus/Johannes/Thomas is Yehya
13:53:07 [Zakim]
+Yehya; got it
13:53:11 [Yehya]
+1
13:53:12 [shawn]
+1
13:53:28 [shawn]
RESOLUTION: advocates (Editors) make recommendations, provide to SciCommittee, who have one week to review and comment
13:53:31 [vivienne]
zakim, close item
13:53:31 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'close item', vivienne
13:53:41 [vivienne]
zakim, close item 2
13:53:41 [Zakim]
agendum 2, Mobile Topic Update, closed
13:53:42 [Zakim]
I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
13:53:42 [Zakim]
3. Current W3C Note Status [Simon] | Survey - https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/RDWG-Metrics/ | Title - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0034.html [from
13:53:42 [Zakim]
... sharper]
13:53:48 [shadi]
ack me
13:53:52 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
13:53:52 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
13:53:56 [vivienne]
zakim, take up item 3
13:53:56 [Zakim]
agendum 3. "Current W3C Note Status [Simon] | Survey - https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/RDWG-Metrics/ | Title -
13:53:59 [Zakim]
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0034.html" taken up [from sharper]
13:54:35 [shadi]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/RDWG-Metrics/results
13:54:38 [vivienne]
sh: survey and the title question. Select the survey URL and see the results on the right hand side.
13:55:41 [vivienne]
SH: 7 people support, 2 have comments - citation, couple of edits, Chaals - edits sent to Shadi
13:55:50 [vivienne]
SH: all think it's good to publish after editorial notes
13:55:52 [yeliz]
I haven't filled in the form
13:56:00 [yeliz]
but count me as "publish as it is"
13:56:27 [shadi]
ack me
13:57:07 [vivienne]
SA: they seem all editorial, so it's good to have the editorial review. Maybe some of the others the editors will want to bring back.
13:57:34 [vivienne]
SH: there were emails about the title - have choice Research Report or Research note -
13:57:40 [shadi]
[/me asking chaals to archive these comments publicly btw]
13:57:45 [vivienne]
SH: need a vote
13:57:47 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
13:57:47 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
13:58:03 [yeliz]
+1
13:58:04 [vivienne]
SH: +1 for people who would like to keep it as a research note
13:58:41 [shawn]
option 1: W3C Working Group Note. Research Note on XYZ Topic
13:58:43 [vivienne]
Shawn: it remains a W3C note, but the title would be either a research note or a research report
13:58:51 [shawn]
option 2: W3C Working Group Note. Research Report on XYZ Topic
13:58:59 [yeliz]
+1
13:59:22 [vivienne]
SH: next option - research report
13:59:24 [markel]
+1
13:59:25 [shadi]
+1 for research report
13:59:25 [vivienne]
+1
13:59:33 [shawn]
+1 but not strongly either way
14:00:09 [vivienne]
SH: we will call it a research report
14:00:17 [vivienne]
Resolution: calling it a Research Report
14:00:34 [yeliz]
yes, I am OK with this
14:00:41 [vivienne]
Resolution: it is now fit to publish with the indicated typographic changes
14:00:51 [shadi]
q+
14:00:55 [shadi]
ack me
14:01:20 [vivienne]
SA: just to make sure - Markel is the only editor - are you guys going to make the typographical changes and send Shadi the updated html
14:01:32 [vivienne]
Markel: do you have the last version available?
14:01:47 [vivienne]
SA: Can send it to you, or I can send it to you
14:01:56 [vivienne]
oops : download it or I can send it to you
14:02:18 [vivienne]
SA: pick up the current draft and make the editors while I look after moving it up
14:02:24 [vivienne]
Markel: will do it this week
14:03:23 [vivienne]
SA: this is now a formal resolution to publish despite the changes - does anyone want to see a final draft after the editors - changing the title and typographical changes which will be published for all, and the bib ref moved further up
14:03:39 [vivienne]
SA: does anyone need to see a draft?
14:03:42 [yeliz]
not me, I am OK to have it published
14:03:45 [vivienne]
no
14:03:45 [shawn]
not me
14:03:50 [sharper]
no
14:03:53 [Yehya]
no
14:04:10 [markel]
q+
14:04:10 [vivienne]
SA: also send this out by email for those not present at this meeting - need to discuss any issues before publication
14:04:24 [vivienne]
should this be an action Shadi?
14:05:30 [vivienne]
zakim, close aggendum 2
14:05:30 [Zakim]
I don't understand 'close aggendum 2', vivienne
14:05:38 [markel]
q-
14:05:43 [vivienne]
zakim, close item 3
14:05:43 [Zakim]
agendum 3, Current W3C Note Status [Simon] | Survey - https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/RDWG-Metrics/ | Title -
14:05:45 [Zakim]
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0034.html, closed
14:05:45 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
14:05:45 [Zakim]
4. Topic 3 Text Customization and Easy-to-Read - Online Symposia [Shawn] | Pre-Call - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_3_pre-call | Comments -
14:05:46 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:05:47 [Zakim]
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0033.html [from sharper]
14:05:49 [vivienne]
zakim, take up item 4
14:05:51 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:05:53 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Topic 3 Text Customization and Easy-to-Read - Online Symposia [Shawn] | Pre-Call - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_3_pre-call | Comments -
14:05:58 [Zakim]
... http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0033.html" taken up [from sharper]
14:06:14 [vivienne]
SH: Shawn will take us through this
14:06:35 [shadi]
q+ to share insights from discussion with Klaus
14:07:01 [vivienne]
Shawn: big issue is to decide about pre-call whether 3&4 are together. We had some discussion on the list about idea on doing them together or separately. Simon should manage the discussion on that part
14:07:04 [shadi]
ack me
14:07:05 [Zakim]
shadi, you wanted to share insights from discussion with Klaus
14:09:28 [shawn]
q+ to suggest doing pre-call with topic 3 as is now. then to try to get the broader issues written up before the full call goes out.
14:09:46 [vivienne]
SA: talked with Klaus this week about it. Klaus feels that he shouldn't be holding up the text customization as it's ready to go, but he does feel it's important that the broader context is also addressed - 3 different aspects. Readability, understandability and lay-out/illustrations/graphics. There is a risk to miss out the inter-relationships between these. He wants to add those topics to
14:09:47 [vivienne]
the WIKI - interrelated topics so that when we go to the pre-call we can point to the WIKI that there are closely related issues and you can send your ideas/thoughts and future considerations. Maybe also think of the series of webinars. But the bottom line is not to hold up the text customization - doesn't want to hold it up for 304 weeks.
14:09:54 [vivienne]
3-4 weeks, not 304 weeks!
14:10:10 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:10:10 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:10:14 [shawn]
ack me
14:10:14 [Zakim]
shawn, you wanted to suggest doing pre-call with topic 3 as is now. then to try to get the broader issues written up before the full call goes out.
14:10:49 [vivienne]
Shawn - based on that input, I would suggest we do the pre-call for topic 3 as it is now, but try to make sure the broader issues are well written up before the final call goes out
14:11:00 [vivienne]
SH: the precall that is in the URL. Is it the up to date one?
14:11:12 [vivienne]
SH: there are 2 pre-call thoughts out there.
14:11:17 [vivienne]
Shawn: the topic 3 only
14:11:35 [shadi]
q+
14:11:35 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
14:11:36 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should no longer be muted
14:12:13 [vivienne]
Yeliz: not sure about the discussion. Idea is to go through this one for this topic and then have the other one.
14:13:13 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
14:13:13 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should now be muted
14:13:46 [vivienne]
SH: last week we decided it would be a combined topic - but we need to make this week's decision final.
14:14:05 [vivienne]
Resolution: this precall is for one topic
14:14:14 [vivienne]
Resolution: topic 3 only
14:14:19 [shadi]
ack me
14:14:53 [vivienne]
SA: Klaus talked about the risk of looking too narrowly and missing the broader context - especially if we are talking about cognitive abilities as well - such as layout.
14:15:23 [vivienne]
SA: Simon was talking to other groups - is there input from this?
14:15:32 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
14:15:32 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should no longer be muted
14:15:36 [yeliz]
zakim, q+
14:15:36 [Zakim]
I see yeliz on the speaker queue
14:15:37 [vivienne]
SA: Klaus have this as a topic, but make it broader
14:16:16 [yeliz]
zakim, q+
14:16:16 [Zakim]
I see yeliz on the speaker queue
14:16:21 [vivienne]
SH: the group may or not decide to go with this idea - need to decide about 2 calls, or 2 seminars close together showing the inter-relationships
14:16:22 [shadi]
q+
14:16:39 [shadi]
ack y
14:16:41 [vivienne]
SH: we should be able to link these together in a note
14:17:21 [vivienne]
Yeliz: there is no need to limit ourselves to limit ourselves to 1 topic. We can always have broader topics later. Another one could use the results of this up-coming seminar.
14:17:57 [shawn]
+1 to Yeliz that the results from this symposium on a specific topic provides input into the symposium on the broader issues
14:18:04 [vivienne]
Yeliz: this is not the last seminar, so why should we make it broader and slow down the process. Have this one and follow up seminars later
14:18:05 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
14:18:05 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should now be muted
14:18:08 [shadi]
ack me
14:18:50 [shawn]
q+ to suggest she make minor revision to scope section to leave open the possibility of the broader symposium
14:19:55 [vivienne]
SA: agree with Yeliz and Klaus also. The general idea is to keep the topic as is. We haven't talked about follow-up - will it be the next seminar or later down the road. Sugggesitons - have a rough idea that we can mention in the pre-call - ie is this the first one in a series - should be mentioned in the pre-call. Some people who are interested and want to submit, we should be able to have a
14:19:55 [vivienne]
plan. Second suggestion: this plan should be discussed with the WAI coordination group for better perspective.
14:19:58 [shawn]
ack me
14:19:58 [Zakim]
shawn, you wanted to suggest she make minor revision to scope section to leave open the possibility of the broader symposium
14:20:00 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:20:00 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:21:25 [vivienne]
Shawn: in the scope it points to related topics. If we are thinking of something broader we can change that section - may be addressed in an up-=coming symposium. For now keep it a bit vague and edit it as plans firm up. Timing - hoping to do precall 2 weeks ago, do we need to wait another week for pre-call, or can we do it now with the idea that the static email will have little information but
14:21:25 [vivienne]
point to the page as it is refined?
14:22:17 [vivienne]
SH: Timing needs to be right and they are related topics. I favour that we say they are related and that easy to read will be next and that papers submitted to this call and we feel should be part of the easy to read then they might be forwarded on to those editors.
14:22:48 [shadi]
q+
14:22:52 [shadi]
ack me
14:22:58 [vivienne]
SH: I propose I send it to the coordination group to see what they think. Why do we need to talk to the coordination group about why the group needs to be involved withthis
14:23:09 [vivienne]
SA: less process, more content.
14:24:03 [vivienne]
SH: I want to see if we are going to combine it or not. We'd like their input about the 2 topics we will run next to each other - we are grateful for their suggestions. We can tell them there will be 2 calls with mentions in the note. We will send them the pre-call next week.
14:24:22 [shawn]
q+ to say text customization has been mentioned in CG
14:24:35 [vivienne]
SA: get their input before we send the pre-call - and get their input. We shouldn't issue the pre-call or call before the topic has passed
14:24:40 [shawn]
ack me
14:24:40 [Zakim]
shawn, you wanted to say text customization has been mentioned in CG
14:24:45 [shawn]
4 April
14:25:07 [vivienne]
Shawn: 4 April we took it to CG and they were given the link to the draft symposium page which has not changed significantly changed since then
14:25:49 [vivienne]
SH: in that case, maybe we don't need to go through that loop - they can give us some background or resources. But if they have already had it, don't know why we need to send it back
14:26:20 [vivienne]
SA: going to directly talk to CG
14:26:41 [vivienne]
SH: will write an email today and ask for their input. mention we sent it to them on 4 April.
14:26:43 [shawn]
[ Shawn agrees it would be good for Simon to directly contact CG and ask for input -- I 'm just not sure we need to wait on the rpe-call. ]
14:26:51 [vivienne]
SA: good for CG to have it as an agenda item
14:27:46 [vivienne]
SH: see if we get any comments back from them to open this up. Tell them we hope to send out the precall in a week's time, we haven't received comments and we're presuming it's okay. If there is a problem SH will have talked to them.
14:28:15 [vivienne]
SA: okay, good idea. Point back to the 4 April and ask about their comments.
14:28:19 [shawn]
q+ to say pre-call vs. more details
14:28:27 [vivienne]
SH: that way we can get the precall out in good time
14:28:29 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:28:29 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:28:34 [shawn]
ack me
14:28:34 [Zakim]
shawn, you wanted to say pre-call vs. more details
14:28:40 [vivienne]
SH: Shawn do you have the URL
14:29:26 [shadi]
q+ to object to the pre-call
14:29:43 [shadi]
ack me
14:29:44 [Zakim]
shadi, you wanted to object to the pre-call
14:29:47 [vivienne]
Shawn: I'll send it to you. We have a pre-call with a static email which only points to the page for more info. The page for more info we can continue to update. How soon can we approve the pre-call that we can't change vs the more detail. Tell CG we're planning to send the pre-call, but let us know if you have comments on the symposium deails we can continue to refine
14:30:14 [vivienne]
SA: precall does not mention the related topics - is in the scope section. It has changed since then.
14:30:26 [vivienne]
Shawn: I have taken an action to change that based on info from Klaus
14:30:34 [vivienne]
SA: precall is not ready to go out yet
14:30:52 [yeliz]
I tink the precall is ready
14:30:57 [vivienne]
Shawn: precall doesn't say anything about the details - do we have to add info to that as opposed to the symposium page
14:31:25 [vivienne]
SA: add that we are aware that there are other related topics and for someone interested in other topics is there something they can do - need to be clear
14:31:35 [vivienne]
Shawn: we don't have anything to point them to yet
14:31:37 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
14:31:37 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should no longer be muted
14:31:43 [yeliz]
zakim, q+
14:31:43 [Zakim]
I see yeliz on the speaker queue
14:32:13 [vivienne]
SH: insteadof having something to point them to, this makes up the first of related seminars including Easy to Ready which will be announced fairly quickly - and link to WIKI page.
14:32:36 [shadi]
q+
14:32:37 [vivienne]
Yeliz: why do we need to say this in the pre-call?
14:32:41 [shadi]
ack y
14:32:53 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
14:32:53 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should now be muted
14:32:53 [shadi]
ack s
14:33:16 [shawn]
q+
14:33:25 [vivienne]
SA: I don't think it's a good idea to leave readers confused - we are trying to build up credibility and we need to be as clear as possible and not leave any reader confused about the work/scope and where they can contribute
14:33:29 [yeliz]
zakim, q+
14:33:29 [Zakim]
I see shawn, yeliz on the speaker queue
14:33:55 [sharper]
ach sh
14:33:58 [sharper]
ack sh
14:34:13 [vivienne]
Shawn: don't want to leave people confused, need to get it out soon and revise the scope. This is a pre-call - if you're interested, here's where you go for more information. Info on a broader topic will be coming up. More details will follow...
14:34:26 [yeliz]
I agree with Shawn
14:34:35 [sharper]
ack y
14:34:37 [yeliz]
zakim, unmute yeliz
14:34:37 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should no longer be muted
14:35:12 [vivienne]
Yeliz: i agree with Shawn and Shadi - not confuse people. But I don't think this precall is confusing people. As long as the precall says you will be receiving more info in a month's time
14:35:19 [shawn]
ACTION: Shawn update Scope to be more clear that there may be broader topic info coming soon
14:35:19 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-25 - Update Scope to be more clear that there may be broader topic info coming soon [on Shawn Henry - due 2012-05-30].
14:35:20 [yeliz]
zakim, mute yeliz
14:35:20 [Zakim]
Yeliz? should now be muted
14:35:50 [vivienne]
SH: we will have to wait a few days-a week for email to CG. Vote: do we think the precall needs changing?
14:36:11 [vivienne]
SH: add additional text from the scope and objectives that talks abou the Easy to Read aspects.
14:36:35 [vivienne]
SA: we need to have a plan - will we have a 2nd one on ETR or what. We need to be able to mention our plan so that it is clear to the reader.
14:37:04 [markel]
..as long as we have editors to do so
14:37:23 [vivienne]
SA: do you have the editors and the committment for the next one? Is Klaus alone or are others working with him?
14:37:47 [yeliz]
I think we should not wait
14:37:51 [vivienne]
Shawn: it's going to take a few weeks to define those things? Do we wait a minimum of 2-4 weeks to sort this out? Do we need to wait the pre-call for this?
14:37:54 [yeliz]
it will take time to finalise details
14:37:56 [yeliz]
+1
14:38:16 [vivienne]
Agreement with Shawn's statement: Yeliz
14:38:33 [shawn]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:38:33 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), Shadi, Shawn, Yehya, sharper, markel, Yeliz? (muted)
14:38:34 [vivienne]
No, that we just me scribing
14:38:43 [vivienne]
I think I'd like to see more clarification on a plan
14:39:01 [markel]
I would wait until we have editors
14:39:05 [markel]
for the next topic
14:39:16 [markel]
yes
14:39:49 [vivienne]
If we are mentioning something about the next topic, we don't have the editors etc. for the next one sorted out yet. I don't see the point.
14:40:08 [vivienne]
Shawn: the pre-call wouldn't have anything - vague. Scope - we might have...
14:40:10 [Yehya]
q+
14:41:09 [shawn]
ack y
14:41:42 [shadi]
q+
14:41:45 [shadi]
ack me
14:41:48 [vivienne]
Yehya: agree with Markel. We can only mention other topics if we really have the editors and when we will have the topic. Maybe don't say anything about it, or we will have to be clear on when it will happen.
14:42:20 [vivienne]
SA: we can work on lining up the next topic - talk with Klaus to see if you want to pair him with someone else. We can work out the plan more with Klaus over the next week.
14:42:59 [vivienne]
SH: on the Wiki the ETR on is also written by Andrea, so we need to ask both people (including Shadi) would you be interested in being an editor?
14:43:15 [vivienne]
SA: not sure at this stage. I've not considered myself as an editor for that topic.
14:44:05 [vivienne]
SH: I'll send out an email to list asking for editor for ETR. If we can't get an editor, so we shouldn't be holding up a topic when we can't get editors sorted. Get discussion this week. Need to get precall moving next Wednesday once we have topics back from cR
14:44:11 [markel]
bye!
14:44:17 [vivienne]
SH: closing call now and will email.
14:44:20 [markel]
markel has left #rd
14:44:25 [vivienne]
bye now
14:44:28 [Zakim]
-markel
14:44:29 [Zakim]
-sharper
14:44:29 [Zakim]
-Shadi
14:44:31 [Zakim]
-Shawn
14:44:32 [Yehya]
bye
14:44:33 [Zakim]
-vivienne
14:44:35 [sharper]
sharper has left #rd
14:44:35 [vivienne]
vivienne has left #rd
14:44:36 [Zakim]
-Yehya
14:49:53 [Zakim]
disconnecting the lone participant, Yeliz?, in WAI_RDWG()9:30AM
14:49:57 [Zakim]
WAI_RDWG()9:30AM has ended
14:49:58 [Zakim]
Attendees were vivienne, Shadi, Shawn, sharper, markel, Yeliz?, Yehya
14:50:43 [shadi]
trackbot, end meeting
14:50:43 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
14:50:43 [Zakim]
sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
14:50:51 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:50:51 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/05/23-rd-minutes.html trackbot
14:50:52 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
14:50:52 [RRSAgent]
I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/23-rd-actions.rdf :
14:50:52 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Shawn update Scope to be more clear that there may be broader topic info coming soon [1]
14:50:52 [RRSAgent]
recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/23-rd-irc#T14-35-19