Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

20 Jun 2012

See also: IRC log


Shawn, Vivienne, Klaus, Yeliz, Christos, Justin, Shadi, Giorgio
Simon, Yehya, Joshue, Markel, Charles


Round the room introductions

justin: Justin presenting himself

Klaus: presenting himself

vivenne: presenting herself

shawn: presenting herself

yeliz: presenting herself

christos: presenting himself

giorgio: presenting himself

shadi: presenting himself

Mobile Accessibility Symposium Preparations

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile_Accessibility#Symposium_Questions

yeliz; today we will be seeing the questionsfor the presenters in the panel

<yeliz> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Mobile_Accessibility#Symposium_Format

yeliz: presenting the structure of the symposium
... one question will be how their work relates to the symposium objectivs

<shawn> [ shawn hopes you will send questions to authors ahead of time :-]

yeliz: we prepared a list of questions for each paper
... I'd like us all to read the proposed questions and see if anybody has to add any questions
... is there any question you would like to ask?
... what do you think the ranking should be...?

<vivienne> ?

<vivienne> ?+

vivienne: question number 5 to be asked first

<giorgio> +1

<Klaus> +1

viv: question number one

<giorgio> giorgio would suggest 1,5 and 4

christos: number 1 and 5

shadi: number 1 we sould be able to clear the problems for security in mobile accessibility
... the other question relates to the objectives... we should focus on standards

giorgio: I wrote my preferences... 1 because it focuses on the problems and 5 ... it focuses on solutions

yeliz: q1, q5 and q4 are the more popular
... anything else to add for paper 1:


<shadi> [[Web Events http://www.w3.org/2010/webevents/

<shadi> WebApps http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/

<shadi> Device APIs WG http://www.w3.org/2009/dap/

<shadi> ]]

shadi: I just wrote on irc some of the groups looking into accesbility and security
... should be useful resources for the objectives question

yeliz: let's go to paper 2

shadi: would it be useful to see the objectives?
... we could ask about the relation with accessibility

yeliz: I can see the relationship although they do not talk about it... and we also have a question about thae

shadi: if we do work out the benefits for the accessibility of mediait would be quite usefull

<yeliz> Q6 - How does your work relate to accessibility?

<Klaus> for paper 2: q9 (my curiosity),q6,q5

<vivienne> I'd also like to hear their answer to the relationship to accessibility - particularly other types of users

christos: question number 2

giorgio: we could also extend q2 to explain benefits for each group of users

<giorgio> Do you have any sense of the scale of benefits we may expect if annotation of the media is easy and able to occur in parallel to its rendering? and for what user group? especialy forpeople with disabilities?

shadi: agree with giorgio and I'd like to ask q9

<shadi> [[WebVTT and TTML]]

shadi: I suggest maybe rephrase q9 to ask what are the benefit of HTML5 as a solution if you choose it

<vivienne> +1 to 2 & 9

<giorgio> ok with me: q2 and q9

<shadi> [[What are the accessibility benefits in HTML5 that lead you to select it as a solution?]]

yeliz: I suggest q2 and q9

<Klaus> +1


<shadi> +1

<Klaus> Colleagues, I have to leave for an other meeting, regrets.

yeliz: any comments on the objectives?

giorgio: if we stick with q2 and q9 we focus on benefits rather than problems as referred in objectives...
... we could either extend questions or rewrite the objectives

shadi: agree with giorgio

<vivienne> I like Giorgio's suggestion - better to bring out more of the benefits

<shadi> [[suggest adding "accessibility" to 1st sentence]]

yeliz: let's move on paper 3

vivienne: question1 was not explained well in the paper and q6 and 7...

christos: I'd also like to add q4

vivenne: they made some statements without many backing
... in the objectives ... we should also see where their research is now

yeliz: I'd like to go with q1 and q6

<vivienne> I'm good with that

yesliz: any other comments?

<giorgio> good with me

shadi: 1 is very important... 6 and 4 are related and meybe thay can be combined
... q7 is a bit out of scope so I'd keep that as the last question...

yeliz: let's move on paper 4

shadi: q2 and q3 seem very usefull

christos: I'd like to see q 4

vivienne: could we combine q2 and q4

giorgio: I 'd like to see q4 as a follow up on q2
... maybe start with q4 and continue on 2 and then maybe q3

yeliz: 2 and 4 can be combined and then go to q3

<vivienne> sounds good to me


<giorgio> sysmpoisum is mispelled

yeliz, let's move on paper 5

shadi: I really like q6 but is a little pointing... maybe softening it a bit

<vivienne> I really like #3 as well

<giorgio> q

shadi: 2 and 3 are also interesting

giorgio: in q6 I don't understand why the 2 statements are contradictory

<RDWG> i also thought 6 reads as a bit overly complex

<giorgio> I like it, shadi. thanks

shadi: some of the statements in the paper is that the increasing number of requirements is a major but we need some requirements too... and this raises complexity

yeliz: maybe we should rephrase it to focus on the tension and see how we can deal with it

<RDWG> so - not just about the tension, but if there is a tension at all

<yeliz> Do you think there is a tension between complex requirements of mobile context vs ...

<shadi> [[what suggestions do you have to address the tension between the increasing accessibility requirements resulting from the increasing complexity of mobile applications and development, and the need for less complex guidelines]

<RDWG> sounds better to me

<yeliz> simplicity requirements by design guideline

<yeliz> s

<yeliz> ?

<vivienne> +1 to that

<giorgio> +1 with yeliz

yeliz: maybe we should first ask if there is a tension and then ask how to deal with it


christos: q3

<shadi> +1


<vivienne> +1

<RDWG> +1

yeliz: start with q6 and continue with 3

giorgio: if we have time maybe we could ask q4

yeliz: if do not have additional questions fot he last part maybe we could start with the remaining questions


<giorgio> it's not a big deal.

shadi: I think q4 is a separate issue so I think q4 should be put further down the list

<vivienne> don't we have a topic on disabled user testing in the wiki?

shadi: i think there is a focus on wcag but there are many other standards and guidelines so we need to also keep them in mind especially in complex systems as mobile

yeliz: very useful comment shadi.... thanks
... is it a good idea to share this wiki page with the presenters before the symposium

<giorgio> I would go with "before the symposium"

<RDWG> before

<vivienne> I'd rather give them a general idea about the questions

a little bit before...

<vivienne> I don't know the idea of them reading their answers

maybe one day before

<RDWG> yes - but better than umming and ahhing on the day

yeliz: I am worried that they might prepare and write down their answers if we send them before

<shadi> +1 to yeliz

<yeliz> Thank you all so much for the great comments

<yeliz> :)

yeliz: we could send them before then and then see what happens and use it for the next symposium

<RDWG> nice to meet you all (justin)

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.133 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/06/21 09:14:43 $