IRC log of eval on 2012-08-30
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 13:47:57 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #eval
- 13:47:57 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/08/30-eval-irc
- 13:47:59 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs world
- 13:47:59 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #eval
- 13:48:01 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be 3825
- 13:48:01 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 12 minutes
- 13:48:02 [trackbot]
- Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
- 13:48:02 [trackbot]
- Date: 30 August 2012
- 13:49:33 [MartijnHoutepen]
- MartijnHoutepen has joined #eval
- 13:53:28 [shadi]
- regrets: Tim, Alistair, Moe
- 13:53:32 [shadi]
- chair: Eric
- 13:55:45 [Detlev]
- Detlev has joined #eval
- 13:56:41 [Zakim]
- WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
- 13:56:48 [Zakim]
- +Shadi
- 13:57:45 [Liz]
- Liz has joined #eval
- 13:58:45 [Zakim]
- + +1.248.342.aaaa
- 13:59:17 [shadi]
- zakim, aaaa is Mike
- 13:59:17 [Zakim]
- +Mike; got it
- 13:59:40 [Zakim]
- +Detlev
- 13:59:41 [Zakim]
- +Liz
- 13:59:50 [Zakim]
- +MartijnHoutepen
- 14:00:05 [Detlev]
- Zakim, mute me
- 14:00:05 [Zakim]
- Detlev should now be muted
- 14:00:15 [Kathy]
- Kathy has joined #eval
- 14:00:31 [shadi]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Aug/0101.html
- 14:01:11 [MartijnHoutepen]
- Zakim, mute me
- 14:01:11 [Zakim]
- MartijnHoutepen should now be muted
- 14:01:15 [korn]
- korn has joined #eval
- 14:01:34 [MartijnHoutepen]
- ack me
- 14:01:38 [ericvelleman]
- ericvelleman has joined #eval
- 14:01:42 [Zakim]
- +Kathy_Wahlbin
- 14:01:47 [vivienne]
- vivienne has joined #eval
- 14:01:57 [Sarah_Swierenga]
- Sarah_Swierenga has joined #eval
- 14:02:08 [MartijnHoutepen]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:02:08 [Zakim]
- MartijnHoutepen should now be muted
- 14:02:20 [shadi]
- agenda+ Eval TF Comment #24 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730#c24
- 14:02:25 [Kathy]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:02:25 [Zakim]
- Kathy_Wahlbin should now be muted
- 14:02:26 [shadi]
- agenda+ Eval TF Comment #29 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730#c29
- 14:02:33 [Zakim]
- +Sarah_Swierenga
- 14:02:36 [shadi]
- agenda+ Eval TF Comment #32 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730#c32
- 14:02:52 [Zakim]
- +??P37
- 14:02:57 [vivienne]
- zakim, ??P37 is me
- 14:02:59 [Zakim]
- +vivienne; got it
- 14:03:03 [Zakim]
- +ericvelleman
- 14:03:15 [Zakim]
- +[IPcaller]
- 14:03:27 [shadi]
- agenda+ WCAG WG Comment #5 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c5
- 14:03:55 [shadi]
- agenda+ WCAG WG Comments #7 and #12 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c7 and http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c12
- 14:04:02 [shadi]
- agenda+ WCAG WG Comment #13 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c13
- 14:04:05 [shadi]
- agenda?
- 14:04:06 [Kerstin]
- Kerstin has joined #eval
- 14:04:52 [shadi]
- zakim, ipcaller is Kerstin
- 14:04:52 [Zakim]
- +Kerstin; got it
- 14:05:03 [shadi]
- scribe: Kerstin
- 14:05:10 [Kerstin]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:05:10 [Zakim]
- Kerstin should now be muted
- 14:06:08 [Zakim]
- +Peter_Korn
- 14:06:18 [Kerstin]
- Eric: Welcome everyone
- 14:06:18 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:06:21 [Kathy]
- sound fine
- 14:06:21 [shadi]
- Topic: Summary of Open Comments
- 14:06:21 [Detlev]
- fine
- 14:08:04 [korn]
- q+
- 14:08:10 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:08:30 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: Has everyone looked at the comments?
- 14:08:44 [vivienne]
- q+
- 14:08:50 [Kerstin]
- who was speaking?
- 14:08:56 [vivienne]
- q-
- 14:10:16 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: WCAG WG will discuss the comments of the WG, everyone is welcome
- 14:10:26 [shadi]
- q- korn
- 14:10:30 [shadi]
- zakim, take up next
- 14:10:30 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "Eval TF Comment #24 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730#c24" taken up [from shadi]
- 14:11:05 [Detlev]
- fine
- 14:11:09 [Kathy]
- fine
- 14:11:14 [Kerstin]
- Eric: changing resolution in 24
- 14:11:31 [MartijnHoutepen]
- +1
- 14:11:37 [vivienne]
- q+
- 14:11:42 [vivienne]
- ack me
- 14:11:42 [Kerstin]
- Change often in usually?
- 14:11:54 [Detlev]
- change usually into often
- 14:12:08 [Kerstin]
- Vivienne: is usually correct?
- 14:13:27 [Kerstin]
- Discussion between Peter and Vivienne upon 'usually' and 'often'
- 14:13:41 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:13:43 [vivienne]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:13:43 [Zakim]
- vivienne should now be muted
- 14:13:46 [Detlev]
- fine
- 14:13:50 [vivienne]
- okay with me
- 14:13:56 [Kerstin]
- Eric: propose to close, change into often and wait for comments
- 14:13:58 [shadi]
- zakim, take up next
- 14:13:58 [Zakim]
- agendum 2. "Eval TF Comment #29 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730#c29" taken up [from shadi]
- 14:14:40 [shadi]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120827#step1e
- 14:14:55 [shadi]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120827#step4b
- 14:15:17 [Detlev]
- q+
- 14:15:39 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin
- 14:15:50 [shadi]
- https://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20120730&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20120827
- 14:15:58 [Detlev]
- ack me
- 14:16:45 [shadi]
- DF: not clear what Step 1e means in practice
- 14:17:18 [vivienne]
- q+
- 14:17:21 [shadi]
- ...where to start and where to stop
- 14:17:22 [vivienne]
- ack me
- 14:17:30 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:17:37 [shadi]
- VC: confuses me as well
- 14:17:40 [Detlev]
- Zakim, mute me
- 14:17:42 [Zakim]
- Detlev should now be muted
- 14:17:53 [Zakim]
- +??P32
- 14:17:56 [Zakim]
- -??P32
- 14:18:16 [shadi]
- ...understand what it says but not sure what the implications are
- 14:18:24 [shadi]
- ...leaves me a bit confused
- 14:18:25 [vivienne]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:18:25 [Zakim]
- vivienne should now be muted
- 14:18:31 [Zakim]
- +??P32
- 14:18:41 [Kerstin]
- Kerstin has joined #eval
- 14:18:43 [Detlev]
- q+
- 14:19:12 [Kerstin]
- seems I'm back, so I can take over again
- 14:19:23 [vivienne]
- q+
- 14:19:29 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:19:29 [Kathy]
- q+
- 14:20:08 [Kerstin]
- Yes
- 14:20:21 [shadi]
- zakim, ??p32 is Kerstin
- 14:20:21 [Zakim]
- +Kerstin; got it
- 14:20:23 [Kerstin]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:20:23 [Zakim]
- Kerstin should now be muted
- 14:20:24 [Detlev]
- ack me
- 14:21:15 [shadi]
- SAZ: motivation of this section is for the Evaluation Commissioner to select certain techniques, such as from a government or provider
- 14:21:16 [Kerstin]
- Detlev: Issue was brought up by Alistair, Context unclear now,
- 14:21:17 [vivienne]
- ack me
- 14:21:24 [Detlev]
- Zakim, mute me
- 14:21:24 [Zakim]
- Detlev should now be muted
- 14:21:28 [shadi]
- q+
- 14:22:20 [Detlev]
- agree with Vivienne
- 14:22:27 [vivienne]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:22:27 [Zakim]
- vivienne should now be muted
- 14:22:41 [Kerstin]
- Sorry, haven't understood ´what Vivienne said
- 14:22:46 [Kathy]
- ack me
- 14:22:52 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:23:19 [vivienne]
- Kerstin, I was just saying that I'd like someone to tell me why 3.1.5 step 1e is in there - doesn't make much sense to me
- 14:23:19 [Kerstin]
- Kathy: in Canada you can only use the sufficient techniques and not the advisory
- 14:23:36 [shadi]
- ack me
- 14:23:43 [Kathy]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:23:43 [Zakim]
- Kathy_Wahlbin should now be muted
- 14:23:47 [MartijnHoutepen]
- q+
- 14:23:47 [Kerstin]
- Kathy: better to refer just to the sufficient techniques
- 14:24:21 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: clarify the techniques issue with Alistair
- 14:24:24 [Zakim]
- -Mike
- 14:24:37 [korn]
- q+
- 14:24:39 [MartijnHoutepen]
- q-
- 14:25:13 [MartijnHoutepen]
- ack me
- 14:25:16 [vivienne]
- q+
- 14:25:32 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: when should we have a look at the techniques section again? bevor or after the working draft, more comfortable not before in a rush
- 14:25:58 [Kerstin]
- Who is speaking?
- 14:26:18 [MartijnHoutepen]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:26:18 [Zakim]
- MartijnHoutepen should now be muted
- 14:26:23 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:26:30 [shadi]
- s/clarify the techniques issue with Alistair/not sure this request came from Alistair alone
- 14:26:35 [Kerstin]
- Martijn: Implementation of scripting techniques as use case
- 14:27:40 [Kerstin]
- Eric: We could add a note to techniques section for the feedback of the public
- 14:27:46 [shadi]
- q+
- 14:27:55 [shadi]
- ack korn
- 14:28:35 [Kerstin]
- Peter: Explain in a note what the purpose is for specific feedback
- 14:28:40 [shadi]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120827#status
- 14:29:36 [Kerstin]
- Eric: We are lloking for feedback for all sections,
- 14:29:49 [shadi]
- q-
- 14:30:01 [Kerstin]
- ERic: and point to specific sections
- 14:30:20 [vivienne]
- ack me
- 14:30:53 [Zakim]
- -Sarah_Swierenga
- 14:30:55 [Kerstin]
- Vivienne: better a note for particularly this section
- 14:31:10 [Kerstin]
- Vivienne: we could improive the wording more
- 14:31:16 [Zakim]
- +Mike
- 14:31:46 [vivienne]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:31:46 [Zakim]
- vivienne should now be muted
- 14:31:58 [vivienne]
- I'm good with Eric's suggestion
- 14:32:02 [Detlev]
- fine with me
- 14:32:02 [Kerstin]
- Eric: We add a note, aksing specific to that section, discussing after the public review period, issue in tracker list
- 14:32:10 [Liz]
- +1
- 14:32:15 [shadi]
- RESOLVED: add editor note with brief description of what we are looking for to step 1e to ask for public review on this section and open an issue to discuss this issue further after publication
- 14:32:21 [Mike_Elledge]
- Mike_Elledge has joined #eval
- 14:32:22 [MartijnHoutepen]
- +1
- 14:32:26 [vivienne]
- +1
- 14:32:37 [Kerstin]
- ok, for me, even if I have reservations against testing techniques even, as optional
- 14:32:52 [shadi]
- [[add a pointer to this section from "status of this document" too]]
- 14:33:05 [Kerstin]
- Eric: close this point and come back after
- 14:33:37 [shadi]
- zakim, take up next
- 14:33:37 [Zakim]
- agendum 3. "Eval TF Comment #32 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730#c32" taken up [from shadi]
- 14:34:16 [Kerstin]
- Issue now "Accessibility Statement"
- 14:34:20 [shadi]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120827#step5b
- 14:34:50 [Kerstin]
- Eric we expected a lot of discussion, this is what happened. we made a change in the document, step 5b
- 14:35:19 [korn]
- q+
- 14:35:26 [shadi]
- [[The website owner commits to ensuring the accuracy and validity of the accessibility statement;]]
- 14:35:39 [vivienne]
- I don't see that statement in the draft
- 14:35:40 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:35:44 [shadi]
- was: [[The website owner commits to removing any valid issues known to them within 10 business days;]]
- 14:36:06 [Kerstin]
- Peter: I'm not comfortable with the wording
- 14:36:09 [shadi]
- q+
- 14:36:15 [shadi]
- ack korn
- 14:37:17 [Kerstin]
- Peter: the findings should be solved in a review period
- 14:37:17 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:37:54 [shadi]
- ack me
- 14:38:02 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: the conclusion in the email thread was not to delete it
- 14:38:22 [korn]
- "Provide an option Evaluation Conclusion Statement" perhaps
- 14:38:29 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: discussion: removing the section or improving the wording
- 14:38:31 [korn]
- s/option/optional
- 14:39:02 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: motivation was to avoid statements like: I tested it 5 years ago
- 14:39:11 [korn]
- q+
- 14:39:45 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: Idea is to give guidance to accessibility statement accoding to WCAG2
- 14:40:03 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: and to be sure that statements ar valid and up to date
- 14:40:54 [Kerstin]
- Peter: didn't say that there was a consenses
- 14:41:42 [Kerstin]
- Peter: compare with WCAG, where it says 'conformance' and not 'accessibility statement'
- 14:41:57 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:42:03 [korn]
- q-
- 14:42:06 [shadi]
- [[Accessibility Statement]] -> [[Methodology Conformance Statement]]
- 14:42:29 [Detlev]
- q+
- 14:42:31 [vivienne]
- q+
- 14:42:40 [shadi]
- [[make clear that this is a public conformance statement]]
- 14:42:42 [Detlev]
- ack me
- 14:42:43 [Kerstin]
- Korn: Yes and make sure that it is a public statement
- 14:43:07 [Kerstin]
- Detlev: not sure if conformance statement gives the right idea
- 14:43:21 [Mike_Elledge]
- q+
- 14:43:56 [vivienne]
- ack me
- 14:44:37 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: no one can control what people are doing with WCAG-EM
- 14:45:26 [Kerstin]
- Detlev: very little advice about how to test, except the optional techniques
- 14:45:58 [Kerstin]
- Vivienne: is not in favor of leaving the statement
- 14:46:02 [Detlev]
- Zakim, mute me
- 14:46:02 [Zakim]
- Detlev should now be muted
- 14:46:43 [shadi]
- ack mike
- 14:46:45 [vivienne]
- zakim, mute me
- 14:46:46 [Zakim]
- vivienne should now be muted
- 14:46:55 [Kerstin]
- sorry, didn't get the point of what Vivienne says
- 14:47:15 [korn]
- q+
- 14:47:27 [Kerstin]
- Mike: the accessibility is useless to have it there
- 14:47:33 [Detlev]
- agree with Mike
- 14:47:59 [Kerstin]
- Mike: the accessibility statement is useless to have it there (correction of scribed sentence before)
- 14:48:23 [shadi]
- q+
- 14:48:32 [shadi]
- ack korn
- 14:49:20 [Kerstin]
- Peter: this is not a conformance claim
- 14:49:21 [shadi]
- ack me
- 14:50:26 [shadi]
- [[Provide an Accessibility Statement (optional)]] -> [[Statements of Website Conformance (Optional)]]
- 14:50:32 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: idea of statement rather than claim is to avoid misunderstandings before of the wordings in WCAG2, WCAG-EM and so on
- 14:51:10 [shadi]
- [[An accessibility statement shall be provided.]] -> [[A website conframcne statement according to this methodology shall be provided.]]
- 14:52:19 [Kerstin]
- Eric: thinks this didn't solve what Peter says
- 14:53:12 [Kerstin]
- think this is not for the protocoll or? ;-)
- 14:53:43 [Detlev]
- good point, Eric
- 14:53:53 [Kerstin]
- Eric: if we take it out, there will we no public feedback
- 14:54:14 [korn]
- q+
- 14:54:24 [Kerstin]
- Eric: would prefer keep it in to see the reaction
- 14:54:43 [Kerstin]
- Eric: Or put a remark, that we are not sure about the section
- 14:55:15 [shadi]
- q+
- 14:55:20 [shadi]
- ack korn
- 14:55:27 [Kerstin]
- Peter: would like to develop the suggestion of Shadi further
- 14:55:28 [shadi]
- q-
- 14:55:37 [shadi]
- q+
- 14:55:43 [shadi]
- ack me
- 14:55:48 [Kerstin]
- Peter: I'm against public review of the text as it is
- 14:56:20 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: think no one was in favor of writing a statement like this
- 14:56:59 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: intend is a a11y statement according to this methodology
- 14:57:24 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: we should add the forgotten word "according to this methodology"
- 14:57:24 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 14:57:46 [Detlev]
- (dazed and confused now...)
- 14:57:53 [Kerstin]
- can't scribe and speak
- 14:58:07 [vivienne]
- I'd like to see it left as is, but just add the 'according to this methodology' bit
- 14:58:13 [Mike_Elledge]
- q+
- 14:58:32 [Liz]
- Add "according ---" and left as is.
- 14:58:46 [shadi]
- ack mike
- 14:59:19 [Kerstin]
- Mike: conformance with wcag2 is adressed there
- 15:01:03 [Kerstin]
- Mike: does conformance claim is part of wcag-em?
- 15:01:36 [korn]
- q+
- 15:01:48 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: wcag2 is page per page , claim is just for pages
- 15:02:17 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: the author is responsible for the claim
- 15:02:58 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: idea is, if you follow the methodology, you can make conformance claim
- 15:03:26 [ericvelleman]
- q?
- 15:03:59 [Kerstin]
- Peter: finish the statement and post it on the mailing
- 15:04:56 [Kerstin]
- Shadi: hope next week we will be ready for publication of the next working draft
- 15:05:20 [Zakim]
- -Peter_Korn
- 15:05:24 [Kerstin]
- Eric: end of the call
- 15:05:41 [vivienne]
- bye now - thanks for trying to clear up some muddy water
- 15:05:41 [Detlev]
- bye
- 15:05:45 [korn]
- korn has left #eval
- 15:05:46 [Kathy]
- thanks, bye
- 15:05:53 [MartijnHoutepen]
- zakim, unmute me
- 15:05:53 [Zakim]
- MartijnHoutepen should no longer be muted
- 15:06:07 [Kerstin]
- bye
- 15:06:13 [vivienne]
- ack me
- 15:06:14 [Mike_Elledge]
- bye
- 15:06:16 [Zakim]
- -Kathy_Wahlbin
- 15:06:19 [Zakim]
- -Liz
- 15:06:19 [Zakim]
- -Mike
- 15:06:20 [Zakim]
- -vivienne
- 15:06:21 [Zakim]
- -MartijnHoutepen
- 15:06:22 [Zakim]
- -Shadi
- 15:06:23 [Zakim]
- -Kerstin
- 15:06:28 [Zakim]
- -ericvelleman
- 15:06:30 [MartijnHoutepen]
- MartijnHoutepen has left #eval
- 15:09:23 [Zakim]
- -Detlev
- 15:09:25 [Zakim]
- WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
- 15:09:25 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Shadi, +1.248.342.aaaa, Mike, Detlev, Liz, MartijnHoutepen, Kathy_Wahlbin, Sarah_Swierenga, vivienne, ericvelleman, Kerstin, Peter_Korn
- 15:13:41 [shadi]
- trackbot, end meeting
- 15:13:41 [trackbot]
- Zakim, list attendees
- 15:13:41 [Zakim]
- sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
- 15:13:49 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, please draft minutes
- 15:13:49 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/30-eval-minutes.html trackbot
- 15:13:50 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, bye
- 15:13:50 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items