IRC log of eval on 2012-05-24

Timestamps are in UTC.

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