Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

30 May 2012

See also: IRC log


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


Mobile Topic Update

SH: all reviewers should be able to see all the reviews
... sending email out to the scientific committee
... to discuss what is to be accepted vs rejected
... all probably acceptable except for one
... that does not really relate to mobile as such
... expecting choice by the "advocates"
... moving along and should have comments from the scientific committee by next week
... also going to ask the scientific committee to provide comments or abstracts

PT: anything we need to do?

SH: good idea to ask scientific committee for abstracts?

<Zakim> shadi, you wanted to ask who the advocates are ... are these the scientific committee?

SAZ: who are the "advocates"?

SH: the editors
... who are also the symposium chairs

SAZ: good idea to get input from the scientific committee
... but wondering what we will do with the input
... expectation that we have to include them?
... or can we draw from these?

SH: ask them to write paragraphs that we can include in the sorrounding text
... what do people think?

SAZ: maybe pose specific questions to the scientific committee
... like a mini questionnaire
... but make sure no expectation that we will publish as-is
... rather use as a resource

SH: concerned about timing
... rather open wording
... only 25 days left

<shawn> Dates from http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile_Topic_Timeline announcement of program 4 June; publication of accepted papers and registration opens 11 June

<vivienne> who is on the scientific committee?

<sharper> Scientific Committee

<sharper> Giorgio Brajnik (University of Udine)

<sharper> Joshue O Connor (CFIT)

<sharper> Vivienne Conway (Edith Cowan University)

<sharper> Tiago Guerreiro (University of Lisbon)

<sharper> Christos Kouroupetroglou (Altec)

<sharper> Klaus Miesenberge (University of Linz)

<sharper> Yehya Mohamad (Fraunhofer Gesellschaft)

<sharper> Ignacio Marín Prendes (CTIC)

<sharper> Henny Swan (BBC)

<sharper> Shari Trewin (IBM T.J. Watson Research Center)

<sharper> Markel Vigo (University of Manchester)

<vivienne> I like the Shadi's idea of asking the scientific committee for questions for the paper authors and additional questions following the presentations.

<sharper> Shadi Abou-Zahra (W3C/ERCIM)

SAZ: maybe split what we need now vs after the symposium
... maybe ask the scientific committee for questions to pose to the panelists

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say scientific committee could be included in panel and to say good to get more input, so nice to have beforehand (not sure why 3 spaces)

SAZ: then ask for further input after the symposium

SH: can work out the questions easily

SLH: good to have more input
... encourage scientific committee to provide more input
... agree not to automatically accept
... but likely will be useful input
... good to have as input into the material ahead of time
... but also for the material afterwards

SH: some may want to submit if we ask them to
... will look at getting further input
... everyone on the scientific committee will now get an email asking them for action

Current W3C Note Status http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0052.html


SH: got positive feedback for publication
... no objections received
... people happy with changes discussed
... nobody requested re-review

SAZ: can only move "how to cite this document" to the "introduction" section
... is that ok fr the editors and the group?

SH: fine by me

MV: would wish further up but fine by me

<vivienne> okay with me

SLH: don't like it in the introduction
... conceptually belongs in the abstract or near there
... now there are limitations
... can look into approval for exception

SAZ: could look into that

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to suggest at top one line with pointer to details

SAZ: people happy with this to be at discretion of SAZ and SLH?

SH: happy with that but should be as far above as possible

SLH: what if we have the one line with a hyperlink into the section of the page

SH: happy with whatever you can do within the W3C format
... just would prefer as far to the top as possible

MV: also happy as long as the bibtex link is prominent

<shawn> ACTION: Shawn - for Note see about getting citation at the top in doc meta data - maybe one line with link to How to cite this document details lower [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/30-rd-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-26 - - for Note see about getting citation at the top in doc meta data - maybe one line with link to How to cite this document details lower [on Shawn Henry - due 2012-06-06].

Editors for 'Easy to Read' http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-rd/2012May/0053.html

SH: asked for editors for Easy-to-Read
... Klaus and Andrea volunteered
... would be fourth topic

<vivienne> find with me

<shawn> saz: klaus advocating for context between easy-to-read and text customization

SAZ: not necessarily fourth topic

SH: initially wanted them as one topic
... then went back to separated topics
... but not happy to revert that again
... will talk more with the Coordination Group
... but last week we resolved to have two topics
... would like to keep until have more information to do otherwise

<shawn> saz: agree discomfort with back and forth. think we haven't had deep discussion. unfortunately Klaus have been unavailable.

SH: understand that issue and need the input to make more informed decision

MV: a little confused with all this
... why do we need to talk to the coordination group?

SH: coordination group is useful to inform about what we do
... and consider their input
... do not control individual decisions

MV: what are the concerns that they may have?

SH: no idea, may not be concerns
... want to make sure i get their input
... want to avoid the issue we had with the mobile call
... just to make sure that everything runs smoothly

<shawn> SAZ: ... @@ integrated more RDWG with WAI through Coordination Group ...

<markel> thanks for the clarifications - I was little bit confused with the role played by the Coordination Group.

<shawn> ... get RDWG strategic group within WAI to help direct and drive some of WAI work

SH: we know what the group has currently decided
... let's now see what Klaus and the Coordination Group have to say

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to note (for the record) that after more discussion, I do see some advantage of combining topics (whereas I was opposed to it before). I see pros & cons for each

'Text Customization' - Online Symposia | Pre-Call - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_3_pre-call

SLH: after further discussion see that there may be pros to have a common call for text customization and easy-to-read
... have pre-call ready except how it will relate to other related topics

SH: having relationship between them is a reasonable thing to do
... unsure how it should be carried out though
... one or two separare calls
... is it one note or two?
... in favor of your original idea of having two calls but linked
... with two notes and two papers

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say can decide WG Note one or two later -- but other decisions need to be made sooner

SLH: decision about one or two notes could come later
... how to do the call needs to be decided now
... could leave deicision on notes open if symposiums are in close proximity timewise

MV: was initially reluctant about two separate calls
... then was convinced with the idea of separated calls
... with two notes
... would show productivity and usefulness of the group

<shawn> saz: one idea - if do it totally separately, then we use both topics 3 & 4 in a related area, then are not working in other areas

SAZ: have a bottle neck on editors
... spreading out helps recruit editors

PT: HTML5 topics becoming interesting
... could start planning future future topics

SH: good point
... try to get the next 6 topics pre-organized
... developer-led topics would be useful
... may need to recruit editors

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Shawn - for Note see about getting citation at the top in doc meta data - maybe one line with link to How to cite this document details lower [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/05/30-rd-minutes.html#action01]
[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/05/30 19:00:50 $