17:00:18 RRSAgent has joined #text 17:00:18 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/06/05-text-irc 17:00:24 chair: Judy 17:00:25 Team_(text)16:59Z has now started 17:00:32 +David_MacDonald 17:00:57 +JF 17:01:03 agenda+ Agenda review; identify scribe. 17:01:03 agenda+ Issue 30, longdesc: Timing concerns and expectations 17:01:03 agenda+ Issue 31b, buggy alts and buggy alt guidance: Remaining steps and timeline? 17:01:03 agenda+ Issues 31c, meta generator: JB & MS schedule work session to move ahead 17:01:03 agenda+ Issue 194, transcript: Remaining discrepancies resolved in Tuesday's teleconf? 17:01:04 agenda+ Issue 199, ARIA processing: Ted's reply on Michael's proposal still expected for 6/7? 17:01:05 agenda+ Issue 204, ARIA hidden: Sam responded on strength of anticipated RFC 2119 objection? 17:01:08 agenda+ Issue 203, media descriptors: JS checking TF support for Wiki proposal ahead of June 10 call for counter-proposals? 17:01:11 agenda+ Issue 205, canvas text editor: JS & JB documenting overlap on Action 217 intersection with Issues 201 & 205 17:01:13 agenda+ Confirm next meeting; identify next scribe; adjourn. 17:01:21 +Judy 17:01:28 zakim, who's here? 17:01:28 On the phone I see David_MacDonald, JF, Judy 17:01:29 On IRC I see RRSAgent, Zakim, Judy, JF, David 17:01:55 laura has joined #text 17:02:34 scribe: David 17:03:12 +Laura_Carlson 17:03:43 zakim, next item 17:03:43 agendum 1. "Agenda review; identify scribe." taken up [from Judy] 17:04:52 -Judy 17:05:15 janina has joined #text 17:05:15 +Judy 17:05:27 agenda? 17:05:39 Fighting with Zakim ... 17:06:04 +??P5 17:06:08 zakim, next item 17:06:08 agendum 2. "Issue 30, longdesc: Timing concerns and expectations" taken up [from Judy] 17:06:23 zakim, ??P5 is janina 17:06:23 +janina; got it 17:07:09 scribe: Judy 17:08:33 JB: Laura reminded us of the one-year anniversary of the HTML Co-Chairs' commitment to expedite Issue 30: Longdesc, which is still pending. Do have continued concerns about the time it has taken; had voiced concerns about the potential for delays from 204, which seems to have occured. 17:08:40 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-a11y/2012May/0149.html 17:08:51 s/occured/occurred/ 17:09:24 LC: Received email from Susan Taylor, Association of American Publishers, expressing concern. 17:09:45 JB: We've continued to hear concern as well. 17:10:21 JF: Heard more from HTML Co-Chairs? 17:10:57 JB: JS and JB raise it at each coord meeting, but 204 is in queue before it still. 17:11:17 LC: Will they be responding to my email? 17:11:56 JB: They seemed to prefer that JS or JB respond. 17:12:28 JS: We declined to reply, seems more their task; they wanted something more substantive to respond with, on 204, but there 204 is still hung up. 17:13:42 JB: We'd said this would probably happen with 204. 17:14:01 JS: Did anyone ever respond to AAP's letter? 17:14:15 LC: Got assigned bug status. 17:15:07 JB: Latest reason 204 is stuck? 17:15:37 JS: Pending Sam's response about strong objection, since after my email to the list last Thursday. 17:16:33 JB: I will include that reminder in my summary of the coordination call with H5CC's from yesterday. 17:17:38 zakim, next item 17:17:38 agendum 3. "Issue 31b, buggy alts and buggy alt guidance: Remaining steps and timeline?" taken up [from Judy] 17:17:44 scribe: David 17:19:10 JS: What is recap of next steps? 17:19:16 scribe: JF 17:19:40 JS: coordinating with David about how to present how wrong the guidance, and examples, are 17:20:35 JS: believe I am on top of it, but need to review some older emails. Believe Steve F was going to work on some alternative alt text - Action 54(?) 17:20:47 ultimately became Steve's authoring guide 17:21:25 however what seems to be lost is the reason for steve's doc - which was to remove the bad alt text+ 17:21:29 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/actions/54 17:21:55 DM: so can we pull out the old stuff and insert the new stuff, or remove the old stuff and point to Steve's doc 17:22:25 DM: so my task was to summarize what needed to be worked on in the HTML5 spec 17:22:28 JS: correct 17:22:37 JB: so next steps? 17:23:48 JS: recollection is to take David's succinct and detail "problem" list, and turn it into bugs in bugzilla and maintain a table based on David's work 17:24:18 JS: Checked with Steve F, and we believe there are no other bugs - so we need to create them 17:24:29 DM: so I need to start a table with the following columns 17:24:47 JS: 1) David's bulletted list of wrong guidance 17:24:49 2) 17:25:03 2) Pointer to where in spec (i.e. section number) 17:25:21 3) any bugs filed on that point/issue (bugzilla) 17:25:39 4) where contradicts WCAG 2 or other W3C Recs 17:25:57 5) Comments as required 17:26:41 6) where in Steve's document this is addressed 17:26:52 (these are row headings for columns) 17:27:25 JB: and can we add another or aux table which singles out where there is bad alt text in the HTML5 spec 17:27:49 DM: WCAG @ group have also been reviewing Steve's doc, and there is some feedback forthcoming 17:28:06 s/WCAG @/WCAG 2/ 17:28:59 JB: we need to connect the dots with Steve's document which speaks to the guidance in the core HTML5 spec - pro or con? 17:29:16 DM: there may be a few overlaps, have not done a full cross-check to date 17:29:59 JB: I believe this is critical to do - to approach this holistically 17:30:58 LC: Josh Steve and Laura started this document - there are notes in the wiki, and in one of the drafts all that data is captured 17:30:59 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Action54AltAttribute 17:30:59 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Action54AltAttributeSecondDraft 17:31:00 s/holistically/holistically; if we comment on these in isolation, it will only add to the confusion. 17:31:00 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Action54AltAttributeThirdDraft 17:31:38 LC: in the third draft we forwarded it all to WCAG 17:31:57 I added comments - need to locate them 17:32:20 JB: perhaps JS and DM should review this as well and touch back to laura as required 17:34:35 JS: question - is there an email from the original chairs (Dan and Chris) that suggests that this was a task to replace the bad text with this 17:34:46 what was the understanding of the action? 17:35:35 JF: collectively this was an approach by a group of people 17:36:29 agenda? 17:37:16 JB: sounds like the history question should not be totally put aside 17:37:28 but I think we need to think about next steps forward 17:37:54 DM: will need at least another week or so - perhaps after the 15th 17:38:13 JB: there is a pending heartbeat publish coming soon, and a pending last Call 17:38:25 DM: so we need to do this now 17:38:29 JB: yes 17:38:40 DM: is a time-managment issue 17:39:05 DM: will work at it over the next couple of days then - can't make a promise but will apply best effort 17:39:19 DM could use some assistance with the bugs 17:39:34 JS: they are listed in Steve's recent email, can forward on 17:39:56 DM: that would be very helpful - cross-reference Steve's doc? 17:39:58 JS: yes 17:39:59 s/there is a pending heartbeat publish coming soon, and a pending last Call/there is a pending last Call/ 17:40:52 JB: it seems that initially it appeard to be written of SME - it needs to be more General Population targetted 17:42:11 zakim, next item 17:42:11 agendum 4. "Issues 31c, meta generator: JB & MS schedule work session to move ahead" taken up [from Judy] 17:42:21 scribe: David 17:42:25 ?me back to you sir 17:42:40 zakim, next item 17:42:40 agendum 4 was just opened, David 17:42:55 zakim, close item 4 17:42:55 agendum 4, Issues 31c, meta generator: JB & MS schedule work session to move ahead, closed 17:42:57 I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 17:42:57 5. Issue 194, transcript: Remaining discrepancies resolved in Tuesday's teleconf? [from Judy] 17:43:07 zakim, net item 17:43:07 I don't understand 'net item', JF 17:43:15 zakim, next item 17:43:15 agendum 5. "Issue 194, transcript: Remaining discrepancies resolved in Tuesday's teleconf?" taken up [from Judy] 17:45:37 jf: chales responded... 2 people from Apple want a no change jf wants programmatic association because some authors want to hide the link 17:46:27 jf: there will be a wbs survey, the no change proposal will not be withdrawn 3 contenders, 6 in the mix 17:47:03 jf: sylvie available for 60 minutes tonight... 17:47:08 s/chales responded/The discussion is diverging again, strong push-back, people not understanding normal transcript behaviours, Charles responded to her/ 17:47:32 jb: if it stays diverged what is the next steps 17:48:06 jf: looking for consensus, ben objected, may not get consensus in task force 17:48:40 jb: i think that sylvia's draft proposal is in good shape... 17:49:20 s/jb/jf 17:50:06 jb:1) ted no chantge 2) ted id refs anchors on page, 3) sylvia transcript element 17:51:19 jb was asking about status of the more accessibility-supporting proposals, still not getting a clear picture 17:51:25 jb: engineers say cannot have link right out of element 17:51:54 zakim, next item 17:51:54 agendum 6. "Issue 199, ARIA processing: Ted's reply on Michael's proposal still expected for 6/7?" taken up [from Judy] 17:53:09 s/chales/chaals/ 17:53:39 JS: will check with Ted on action 219 in html wg 17:53:42 zakim, next item 17:53:42 agendum 7. "Issue 204, ARIA hidden: Sam responded on strength of anticipated RFC 2119 objection?" taken up [from Judy] 17:54:51 JB: summarize H5CC discussion yesterday and reping sam 17:54:54 zakim, next item 17:54:54 agendum 8. "Issue 203, media descriptors: JS checking TF support for Wiki proposal ahead of June 10 call for counter-proposals?" taken up [from Judy] 17:55:10 JS: yes, checking 17:55:11 zakim, next item 17:55:11 agendum 8 was just opened, Judy 17:55:20 zakim, close item 8 17:55:20 agendum 8, Issue 203, media descriptors: JS checking TF support for Wiki proposal ahead of June 10 call for counter-proposals?, closed 17:55:22 I see 2 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 17:55:22 9. Issue 205, canvas text editor: JS & JB documenting overlap on Action 217 intersection with Issues 201 & 205 [from Judy] 17:55:24 zakim, next item 17:55:24 agendum 9. "Issue 205, canvas text editor: JS & JB documenting overlap on Action 217 intersection with Issues 201 & 205" taken up [from Judy] 17:57:32 JB: summarizing the apparent cross-linked confusion that JS and JB researched after coord meeting H5CC yesterday; pending action for this afternoon 17:57:38 agenda? 17:57:45 zakim, close item 9 17:57:45 agendum 9, Issue 205, canvas text editor: JS & JB documenting overlap on Action 217 intersection with Issues 201 & 205, closed 17:57:47 I see 1 item remaining on the agenda: 17:57:47 10. Confirm next meeting; identify next scribe; adjourn. [from Judy] 17:58:26 ++1 17:59:01 JB: JS willing to chair? 17:59:06 JS: yes 17:59:11 JB: thanks! 18:00:19 -JF 18:00:20 -Laura_Carlson 18:00:21 -Judy 18:00:23 -janina 18:00:27 zakim, bye 18:00:27 leaving. As of this point the attendees were David_MacDonald, JF, Judy, Laura_Carlson, janina 18:00:27 Zakim has left #text 18:00:42 rrsagent, make log public 18:00:56 rrsagent, make minutes 18:00:56 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/05-text-minutes.html David 22:28:14 RRSAgent has joined #text 22:28:14 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/06/05-text-irc 22:28:23 zakim, room for 10 22:28:23 I don't understand 'room for 10', janina 22:28:29 zakim, room for 10? 22:28:30 ok, janina; conference Team_(text)22:28Z scheduled with code 2119 (A11Y) for 60 minutes until 2328Z 22:29:07 Team_(text)22:28Z has now started 22:29:14 +??P0 22:29:23 zakim, ??P0 is Janina_Sajka 22:29:23 +Janina_Sajka; got it 22:29:44 janina has left #text 22:29:50 -Janina_Sajka 22:29:51 Team_(text)22:28Z has ended 22:29:51 Attendees were Janina_Sajka 22:30:35 Team_(text)22:28Z has now started 22:30:42 +[Apple] 22:30:47 janina has joined #text 22:30:51 zakim, bye 22:30:51 leaving. As of this point the attendees were [Apple] 22:30:51 Zakim has left #text 22:31:10 janina has left #text 22:32:11 janina has joined #text 22:32:25 rrsagent, bye 22:32:37 zakim, bye 22:32:44 janina has left #text 22:39:22 janina has joined #text 22:39:24 zakim, bye 22:39:54 janina has left #text