13:48:04 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #eval
13:48:04 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/24-eval-irc
13:48:06 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:48:06 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #eval
13:48:08 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 3825
13:48:08 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
13:48:09 <trackbot> Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
13:48:09 <trackbot> Date: 24 May 2012
13:48:46 <shadi> chair: Eric
13:48:49 <shadi> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012May/0028.html
13:49:32 <shadi> agenda+ Comments received
13:49:32 <shadi> agenda+ Possible Face to Face in Lyon France
13:49:32 <shadi> agenda+ Editor Draft new version
13:50:30 <shadi> regrets: Richard, Kostas, Samuel
13:50:42 <shadi> scribe: Shadi
13:53:13 <Detlev> Detlev has joined #eval
13:53:26 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
13:53:33 <Zakim> + +1.520.271.aaaa
13:54:28 <vivienne> vivienne has joined #eval
13:54:35 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has joined #eval
13:54:50 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #eval
13:55:19 <Zakim> +Shadi
13:55:28 <Zakim> + +1.978.443.aabb
13:55:35 <shadi> zakim, aaaa is Don
13:55:35 <Zakim> +Don; got it
13:55:47 <Zakim> +AndyS
13:56:11 <vivienne> zakim, +AndyS is me
13:56:11 <Zakim> sorry, vivienne, I do not recognize a party named '+AndyS'
13:56:15 <Kathy> zakim, aabb is Kathy
13:56:15 <Zakim> +Kathy; got it
13:56:24 <vivienne> zakim, AndyS is me
13:56:24 <Zakim> +vivienne; got it
13:57:15 <Zakim> + +31.30.239.aacc
13:57:32 <MartijnHoutepen> MartijnHoutepen has joined #eval
13:57:38 <shadi> zakim, aacc is MartijnHoutepen 
13:57:39 <Zakim> +MartijnHoutepen; got it
13:57:54 <Zakim> + +1.703.227.aadd
13:58:14 <MartijnHoutepen> zakim, mute me
13:58:14 <Zakim> MartijnHoutepen should now be muted
13:58:17 <vivienne> zakim, mkute me
13:58:17 <Zakim> I don't understand 'mkute me', vivienne
13:58:20 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
13:58:20 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
13:58:34 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
13:58:35 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
13:58:58 <korn> korn has joined #eval
13:59:08 <Zakim> + +1.301.975.aaee
13:59:22 <shadi> zakim, aadd is Ryladog 
13:59:22 <Zakim> +Ryladog; got it
13:59:29 <shadi> zakim, aaee is Liz
13:59:29 <Zakim> +Liz; got it
13:59:56 <Zakim> + +49.404.318.aaff
14:00:30 <Detlev> Zakim, aaff is Detlev
14:00:30 <Zakim> +Detlev; got it
14:00:54 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
14:00:54 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
14:01:21 <Mike_Elledge> Mike_Elledge has joined #eval
14:01:31 <vivienne> my singing would scare everyone away!
14:02:21 <Zakim> + +1.517.353.aagg
14:03:29 <Mike_Elledge> zakim,aagg
14:03:30 <shadi> zakim, aagg is Mike_Elledge 
14:03:31 <Zakim> + +31.30.239.aahh
14:03:32 <Zakim> I don't understand 'aagg', Mike_Elledge
14:03:36 <Zakim> +Mike_Elledge; got it
14:03:48 <MoeKraft> MoeKraft has joined #eval
14:04:04 <Zakim> +Peter_Korn
14:04:26 <kerstin> kerstin has joined #eval
14:04:58 <kerstin> hi all
14:05:01 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
14:05:13 <shadi> zakim, aahh is ericvelleman 
14:05:21 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:05:27 <shadi> zakim, take up next
14:05:34 <Zakim> On the phone I see Don, Shadi, Kathy (muted), vivienne (muted), MartijnHoutepen (muted), Ryladog, Liz, Detlev (muted), Mike_Elledge, +31.30.239.aahh, Peter_Korn
14:05:51 <Zakim> +ericvelleman; got it
14:06:03 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:06:11 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Comments received" taken up [from shadi]
14:06:13 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments
14:06:13 <Zakim> + +1.978.899.aaii
14:06:24 <shadi> zakim, aaii is Moe
14:06:48 <shadi> EV: compiled comments and also link to open comments from pre-publication
14:06:49 <Zakim> +Moe; got it
14:06:55 <shadi> ...will need to resolve each
14:07:04 <shadi> ...only 7 commenters but many comments
14:07:06 <Sarah_Swierenga> Sarah_Swierenga has joined #eval
14:07:18 <vivienne> yes, it's easy to follow - thanks Eric
14:07:25 <kerstin> sorry, need some time. skype-issues
14:07:48 <Zakim> + +1.517.927.aajj
14:08:01 <shadi> zakim, aajj is Sarah_Swierenga 
14:08:03 <Zakim> +Sarah_Swierenga; got it
14:08:05 <Kathy> yes
14:08:05 <vivienne> +1
14:08:06 <Detlev> sure
14:08:09 <MartijnHoutepen> +1
14:08:13 <Mike_Elledge> +1
14:08:14 <MoeKraft> +1
14:08:14 <Ryladog> =1
14:08:19 <Sarah_Swierenga> +1
14:08:40 <shadi> [Comment #20]
14:09:18 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120523#audience
14:09:38 <shadi> EV: maybe add a short text explaining the benefits for these audiences
14:10:07 <ericvelleman> q?
14:10:24 <shadi> KHS: maybe keep them as bullet to keep size small
14:10:25 <vivienne> q+
14:10:35 <shadi> ...maybe parenthesis but keep it concise
14:10:41 <shadi> ack viv
14:10:42 <ericvelleman> q?
14:10:51 <shadi> VC: very brief explanation
14:10:55 <shadi> q+
14:11:27 <shadi> ...maybe explaining that it would help cost assessment
14:11:40 <shadi> ...give a few very easy arguments
14:11:42 <shadi> ack me
14:11:43 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
14:11:43 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
14:11:46 <ericvelleman> 1?
14:11:49 <ericvelleman> q?
14:12:04 <shadi> [[who need a standardized approach for evaluation]]
14:12:23 <Ryladog> +1 with what what Shadi is saying
14:12:40 <Kathy> q+
14:12:47 <korn> q+
14:12:48 <Mike_Elledge> +1 also
14:12:51 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:12:51 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:13:00 <shadi> SAZ: think enough what we have now
14:13:07 <Kerstin> Kerstin has joined #eval
14:13:12 <shadi> ...not sure we should spend too much time on explaining rationale
14:13:53 <shadi> ack me
14:13:59 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:13:59 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:13:59 <ericvelleman> q?
14:14:01 <Kathy> ack me
14:14:21 <shadi> KW: in 1.3 we also have background reading
14:14:39 <shadi> ...could add more links there, for example the WAI business case
14:14:44 <ericvelleman> q?
14:14:51 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
14:14:51 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
14:14:52 <shadi> ...like how short and readable the section is
14:15:00 <shadi> ack korn
14:15:09 <shadi> PK: don't feel too strongly
14:15:13 <korn> q-
14:15:20 <shadi> ...hear the concerns, not very important
14:15:30 <aurelien_levy> aurelien_levy has joined #eval
14:15:37 <shadi> EV: like the background reading
14:15:41 <vivienne> I like Kathy's idea also
14:15:45 <MartijnHoutepen> +1
14:15:47 <shadi> ...will try to address without adding too much text
14:15:48 <Sarah_Swierenga> +1
14:15:49 <Mike_Elledge> +1
14:15:50 <aurelien_levy> sorry being late I will try to join the call
14:15:53 <Ryladog> +1
14:15:53 <shadi> ...agree?
14:15:59 <Detlev> does it belong there, really?
14:16:27 <ericvelleman> q?
14:16:30 <shadi> [no disagreement voiced]
14:16:39 <Sarah_Swierenga> we could add the business case link under the accessible web design section, so we don't need to add a new section there.
14:16:53 <shadi> [Comment #21]
14:17:20 <korn> q+
14:17:25 <ericvelleman> q?
14:17:33 <shadi> ack korn
14:17:50 <Zakim> +??P44
14:18:05 <shadi> EV: need to know everything to identify Ancillary Functionality
14:18:19 <shadi> PK: we use the term but don't define it
14:18:24 <shadi> ...need to define the term
14:18:40 <Detlev> q+
14:18:44 <aurelien_levy> ok i'm in the call
14:18:47 <shadi> EV: can't find it in the current version
14:18:55 <shadi> zakim, ??p44 is aurelien_levy 
14:18:55 <Zakim> +aurelien_levy; got it
14:19:10 <vivienne> q+
14:19:17 <ericvelleman> q?
14:19:19 <Detlev> ack me
14:19:20 <Mike_Elledge> Nope, not unless it's in the text
14:19:23 <Sarah_Swierenga> -1
14:20:04 <Mike_Elledge> Didn't find it in latest doc
14:20:10 <ericvelleman> q?
14:20:20 <vivienne> ack me
14:20:24 <korn> q+
14:20:27 <shadi> DF: often important term
14:20:39 <shadi> ...like the "like button" on facebook or such
14:20:51 <shadi> VC: think we replaced the term at some point
14:21:05 <shadi> ...but need to define it if it is there
14:21:06 <ericvelleman> q?
14:21:08 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
14:21:08 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
14:21:10 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
14:21:10 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
14:21:12 <Tim> Tim has joined #eval
14:21:55 <shadi> PK: as a concept may be useful to think about the term
14:22:03 <shadi> q?
14:22:06 <shadi> ack korn
14:22:26 <shadi> ...but doesn't make sense if we don't use the term
14:23:38 <ericvelleman> q?
14:24:22 <shadi> [Comment #22]
14:24:36 <ericvelleman> q?
14:24:52 <Zakim> +Tim_Boland
14:24:52 <shadi> q+
14:24:53 <aurelien_levy> i agree
14:24:59 <shadi> ack me
14:24:59 <Detlev> q+
14:25:23 <Kerstin> Kerstin has joined #eval
14:25:41 <Detlev> q-
14:25:49 <Kerstin> I follow via irc
14:25:55 <korn> q+
14:26:13 <ericvelleman> q?
14:26:15 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:26:15 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:26:36 <shadi> SAZ: may be useful if available to the evaluator, but not essential
14:26:45 <shadi> ...unlike tools used during evaluation
14:27:01 <shadi> ...important is to identify when what was tested
14:27:24 <shadi> ...but the developer has the necessary information about tools used to develop the website
14:27:33 <shadi> PK: not suggesting it is a requirement
14:27:42 <shadi> ....but can greatly help debugging
14:27:54 <ericvelleman> q?
14:28:01 <shadi> ...suggest optionally recording if the evaluator know the information
14:28:02 <Mike_Elledge> q+
14:28:06 <shadi> ack korn
14:28:20 <Zakim> -Peter_Korn
14:28:20 <ericvelleman> q?
14:28:33 <shadi> ack m
14:28:54 <Kathy> q+
14:28:58 <shadi> ME: agree with optional noting of information that an evaluator may know
14:29:04 <Kathy> ack me
14:29:08 <korn> korn has left #eval
14:29:27 <shadi> KW: may also need to record any changes made to the library
14:29:39 <Mike_Elledge> +1
14:29:56 <shadi> q+
14:30:10 <shadi> EV: see this more related to development than evaluation
14:30:11 <shadi> ack me
14:31:32 <shadi> SAZ: think easy to do with a 2-sentence paragraph in section 5.a possibly
14:31:38 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
14:31:38 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
14:31:39 <Sarah_Swierenga> +1 to Shad's comment
14:31:43 <ericvelleman> q?
14:31:48 <shadi> ...just a reminder to evaluators to record the information that they may have
14:31:49 <Sarah_Swierenga> I mean Shadi
14:32:03 <shadi> ...without requiring that, as many may not have this information
14:32:09 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:32:09 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:32:45 <shadi> [Comment #25]
14:33:13 <ericvelleman> q?
14:33:15 <vivienne> q+
14:33:19 <Mike_Elledge> suggest "person or persons"
14:33:20 <vivienne> ack me
14:33:49 <shadi> EV: think always important to know who did the evaluation
14:34:05 <shadi> VC: maybe do optional, even though it is helpful to know the person
14:34:09 <ericvelleman> q?
14:34:10 <vivienne> zakim, mute me
14:34:10 <Zakim> vivienne should now be muted
14:34:13 <aurelien_levy> +q
14:34:22 <shadi> ack me
14:34:30 <ericvelleman> q?
14:34:42 <shadi> ack aur
14:34:46 <Mike_Elledge> q+
14:34:59 <shadi> AL: need to the name of the person
14:35:13 <shadi> ...and the tools they are using
14:35:17 <Sarah_Swierenga> agree that we need a person's name - otherwise how does anyone know who to contact?
14:35:26 <shadi> EV: tools should be covered within the report
14:36:01 <shadi> AL: if public report, need to know who did the audit
14:36:09 <shadi> ...and the tools they used
14:36:44 <ericvelleman> q?
14:36:50 <shadi> EV: report does not imply it is public or not
14:37:06 <shadi> AL: WCAG proposes a public conformance statement
14:37:20 <shadi> q+
14:37:44 <Kathy> q+
14:38:02 <shadi> ...tools not in the template
14:38:12 <shadi> ...commissioner also missing
14:38:19 <shadi> EV: you may be right, will check
14:38:42 <shadi> AL: maybe also need a contact address of public statements
14:39:16 <ericvelleman> q?
14:39:18 <shadi> EV: will add some of these, and also make some optional
14:39:39 <shadi> ack m
14:39:51 <shadi> ME: maybe person or persons?
14:40:07 <shadi> ...also maybe different term for "Evaluation Commissioner" as it sounds very formal
14:40:15 <shadi> ...not common terminology
14:40:33 <ericvelleman> q?
14:40:35 <shadi> ack me
14:41:23 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/template.html
14:41:47 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:41:47 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:42:01 <ericvelleman> q?
14:42:03 <Kathy> ack me
14:42:14 <shadi> SAZ: think there are times when the entity carying out the evaluation is an organization rather than a person
14:42:35 <shadi> ...also check the WAI Template for reporting
14:43:01 <shadi> KW: good to know the owner of the report in addition to who carried it out
14:43:21 <shadi> q+
14:43:36 <ericvelleman> q?
14:43:38 <shadi> ack me
14:44:33 <Kathy> q+
14:44:37 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:44:37 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:44:53 <ericvelleman> q?
14:44:55 <Kathy> ack me
14:45:10 <shadi> SAZ: think need to distinguish more between [contractual] report versus public conformance statement
14:45:30 <shadi> PW: maybe need to identify the purpose, to better adapt it
14:45:36 <shadi> ...maybe provide several
14:45:56 <shadi> EV: not sure what the difference is between the three options
14:46:15 <shadi> ...need to look at it more closely to better reflect their respective goals
14:46:53 <Kathy> zakim, mute me
14:46:53 <Zakim> Kathy should now be muted
14:46:54 <shadi> ...i'll add what we have from this discussion but will probably need to come back to this discussion
14:46:56 <aurelien_levy> there is also different audiance for the reporting
14:46:59 <ericvelleman> q?
14:47:13 <shadi> [Comment #19]
14:47:34 <ericvelleman> q?
14:48:02 <shadi> EV: can't find the text
14:48:16 <shadi> ...will keep for later when peter is here
14:48:33 <shadi> [Comment #5]
14:49:32 <shadi> EV: we don't current talk about aggregating results
14:49:43 <Detlev> q+
14:49:49 <Detlev> ack me
14:50:19 <shadi> DF: could be sites that are evaluated in pieces
14:50:37 <shadi> ...breaking down needs to be addressed
14:50:54 <shadi> ...also another comment about not requiring evaluation for entire sites
14:51:42 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
14:51:42 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
14:52:11 <shadi> EV: currently not possible to exclude sub-sections
14:52:14 <shadi> q+
14:52:20 <shadi> ack me
14:52:44 <Detlev> q+
14:54:01 <Detlev> ack me
14:54:09 <shadi> SAZ: we don't address aggregation of parts in any way
14:54:32 <shadi> ...for example if we have all the portlets evaluated, how can we make a statement about the entire portal?
14:54:47 <shadi> ...different from exclusion, which is a separate discussion
14:54:52 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:54:52 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:55:14 <shadi> DF: two tiers, one conformance oriented and one developer oriented
14:55:30 <shadi> ...some kind of score about how "well" one scored
14:55:34 <ericvelleman> q?
14:55:37 <shadi> q+
14:55:58 <shadi> ack me
14:56:10 <Detlev> Zakim, mute me
14:56:10 <Zakim> Detlev should now be muted
14:57:04 <ericvelleman> q?
14:57:17 <shadi> SAZ: have that concept in section 5.c
14:57:28 <vivienne> q+
14:57:39 <shadi> ...still need to fill it with an algorithm
14:57:42 <vivienne> q-
14:58:13 <shadi> EV: will work out these discussions into change suggestions
14:58:30 <shadi> ...then bring back to the group to decide on before implementing it into the document
14:58:35 <shadi> zakim, take up next
14:58:35 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Possible Face to Face in Lyon France" taken up [from shadi]
14:58:57 <ericvelleman> 29-30 Oktober in Lyon
14:59:06 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/EvalTF_TPAC2012/results
14:59:11 <vivienne> yieah!
14:59:21 <ericvelleman> I would go to Perth
14:59:54 <ericvelleman> Could TPAC this year and other continent next year
15:00:32 <ericvelleman> Shadi: we have a room at the TPAC
15:01:09 <ericvelleman> Shadi: EOWG will be there and we could maybe create a joint meeting. Also WCAG WG may be there so we could do cross polling
15:01:41 <ericvelleman> Shadi: All fill out the form
15:01:47 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/EvalTF_TPAC2012/
15:01:59 <vivienne> it's a great venue
15:03:12 <Detlev> bye
15:03:13 <vivienne> bye now
15:03:16 <MartijnHoutepen> bye bye
15:03:17 <Kathy> bye
15:03:17 <Zakim> -Ryladog
15:03:17 <MoeKraft> bye
15:03:17 <aurelien_levy> thanks
15:03:19 <Zakim> -Tim_Boland
15:03:19 <Sarah_Swierenga> bye for now. have a good week.
15:03:20 <Zakim> -Don
15:03:21 <Zakim> -Sarah_Swierenga
15:03:23 <Zakim> -vivienne
15:03:23 <Zakim> -Mike_Elledge
15:03:24 <Zakim> -Moe
15:03:24 <Zakim> -Shadi
15:03:26 <Zakim> -Kathy
15:03:26 <Mike_Elledge> bye
15:03:27 <Zakim> -aurelien_levy
15:03:29 <Zakim> -Detlev
15:03:32 <vivienne> vivienne has left #eval
15:03:33 <Zakim> -ericvelleman
15:03:34 <Zakim> -Liz
15:03:53 <Zakim> -MartijnHoutepen
15:03:54 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
15:03:54 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.520.271.aaaa, Shadi, +1.978.443.aabb, Don, Kathy, vivienne, +31.30.239.aacc, MartijnHoutepen, +1.703.227.aadd, +1.301.975.aaee, Ryladog, Liz, +49.404.318.aaff,
15:03:54 <Zakim> ... Detlev, +1.517.353.aagg, +31.30.239.aahh, Mike_Elledge, Peter_Korn, ericvelleman, +1.978.899.aaii, Moe, +1.517.927.aajj, Sarah_Swierenga, aurelien_levy, Tim_Boland
15:04:14 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has left #eval
15:53:04 <shadi> trackbot, end meeting
15:53:04 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:53:04 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
15:53:12 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:53:12 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/05/24-eval-minutes.html trackbot
15:53:13 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:53:13 <RRSAgent> I see no action items