Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

08 Aug 2012

See also: IRC log


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


Text Cust. CfP (30m) - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Text_Customization_Symposium_draft_page

<shawn> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Text_Customization_Symposium_draft_page#Call_for_Papers_2

shawn: edits have been received from Shadi for main symposium page. The other co-chairs will have edits as well. The text has been put into the wiki from the main symposium page. There are 2 sections TCFR main page and 2nd second is call for papers

shadi: having problem with definition of the call for papers
... very dependent on objectives and scope - which are part of the call

shawn: maybe not look at the first part as it was previously approved. Edits not yet integrated and chairs may have others. People should have already looked at it. Need to look at edits first

shadi: look at objectives. Pre-call is a placeholder, but we need to finalize the call and it would be useful to look at the objectives and scope as they are prt of the call for papers

shawn: has edits now that have not been integrated as of yesterday]

shadi: do you have questions about those comments - may be other opinions
... look at the page shawn has put in irc and look at it from a scientific perspective
... scope and objectives need to be looked at now

<shadi> [group reading material provided by Shawn until Simon and Markel join]

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Text_Customization_Symposium_draft_page#Call_for_Papers_2

simon: thoughts?

justin: what about character sets - don't see anything about this.

shawn: it would be interesting to see how different character sets are recognized

justin: we've had some problems with the different character sets - trying to make it accessible and scalable - something to keep in mind

shawn: shall we craft a question later?

simon: more comments?

shawn: have received some comments from Shadi that I haven't had a chance to integrate
... new comment at the top of the objectives - there had not been a lot of research on this topic and that by having it as separate we could encourage more research through this symposium. It may be too passive. Does it fit there, or should it be refined?

shadi: from own perspective, feel the objectives section needs more refining - some of the questions are very specific and pre-determined in their outcomes, whle others like the first one are really generic - more of a goal for the symposium
... call for papers - "we invite papers on..." very specific. Maybe a sub-heading "for this symposium we invite papers on the following". Maybe refine the questions more -make them less pointed

simon: comment?
... first line is more about the symposium - its more of a goal and could be included in the goals rather than in the objectives

<shadi> +1

<giorgio> +1

simon: the call will be emailed etc.

shawn: call for papers page and then there's the email that goes out. It was intended to be the web page and all of those details aren't needed in the email. Review policy etc don't need to be in the email.

simon: copyright can point to the page, but the review process should be known - encourages writers as they know about the peer-review etc
... people know fromthe start that there is rigour in the paper review process

vivienne: can you make the structure a little clearer in the objectives?

shadi: groups need a heading "we invite papers on", "additional materials required",. then questions are more illustrative. They would be some kind of section heading or theme

simon: anyone else?

shawn: will need to make some more changes and review draft - need 1 more review draft

simon: can you send it out to us?

shawn: today or at least this week

shadi: how many people are available to review by email?

<shawn> [ ftr, Peter reviewed it and added some feedback into the wiki that I incorporated]

simon: some people may not feel it needs more refining. People who think of submitting would just get on with it and not worry so much about the wording
... can we get it so that we can just send the review out this week, and then next week agree and send it out

shawn: yes, we can get it done for next week

shadi: other prerequisites other than agreeing call for papers is the allocation of the other co-chairs we were working on last week

shawn: updates on co-chairs - 2 are confirmed David Sloan, Kath Straub
... they both have strong research backgrounds and Kath has great usability experience

shadi: Simon can agree to visitors to teleconferences where the there are specific agenda items where needed
... if they want to join the group, they have to go through the correct procedure

Next Topic Discussions (25m)

<klaus> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_4_pre-call

klaus: draft to link to description to call for papers
... focus would be more on the language use itself - separates text customization from language use and uses challenging questions. Have a look at the practice in translation of information into easy to read - but little about methodology, guidelines and what is being done in practice
... additional question: models of easy to read in practice. Who performs the task etc. There is other text coming from other colleagues and this will be added. This is just a draft and Klaus would like input from the group. Asking for feedback

simon: we focus on shawn's call for paper and we spend 5 minutes next week to approve. We'll add 30 minutes next time for the E2R and by that time Klaus and his colleages will have their input.

shadi: appreciate Klaus' work. Initial reaction - seems very broad in scope. May need more structuring, particularly the objectives section. You may need to group things a bit more e.g. user needs, definition of rules, techniques. Maybe pose specific questions with other grouped under it.
... where has the scientific committee come from?

klaus: it has been copied & pasted

shadi: needs to be worked out separately
... regarding the symposium chairs - maybe need to look at a native speaker? On the user groups, people with cognitive problems - need to watch wording - disabilities not problems

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to say for E2R, Shawn will be on the Scientific Committee, but not Co-Chair :-) and to mention SC for one not the other

shawn: for the E2R I can be on the scientific committee, won't be on the chair.
... reminder -drafted a page for an invitation to the scientific committee

<shadi> [I'm happy to be on the scientific committee, not a co-chair]

<shawn> Vivienne: not on SC for e2r

vivienne: please remove me from the scientific committee as I'm not qualified in this

klaus: thought the scientific committee was to be the same as we were thinking we may have to switch people to the other symposium. Do I need to write to them?

shawn: we had talked about that some time ago (1) invited people who are specifically interested in Text customization not easy to read (2) its up to the chairs regarding moving papers. People may not be interested in both topics.

shadi: last week we talked about that - suggested the chairs would need to be well-coordinated and the individual scientific committees will review and the chairs may recommend moving a paper from one topic to the other. The chairs should be in each other's scientific committee. There could be separate scientific committees.

<shawn> timelines http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_3_Timeline

simon: will send a new agendy with more detail on E2R and please read the updated call for papers for Text Customization. If you're going to object, then make sure you've sent notice to Shawn.
... we'll look at Klaus' update more then also. If anyone has idea to participate in idea for topic 5&6.
... more business?

shadi: please give an action for people to review both call for papers.
... simon, can you send out a clear message after the call - please review.. by... Maybe be a bit more demanding.

simon: I'll send out a note for people to look at both of these and will include the URL's.

shawn: timelines: we discussed moving the paper deadline later and Klaus seems to be in support of that. Text customization chairs agree with that. Will revise timelines again and have a later deadline.

<shadi> +1 to later deadline! thanks for the work to make this happen shawn and klaus

shadi: research report - for editors, need to approve changes to bring to the group.

<giorgio> +1

simon: editors - markel and giorgio - good with that

shadi: discuss it again next week - will send message to group summarize changes that have been done. People will need to be reminded to have a look at it and make sure changes are approved for publication.
... please put it on the agenda

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/08/08 16:03:29 $