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
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]
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]
13:59:41 [Zakim]
13:59:50 [Zakim]
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]
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]
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
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
14:02:33 [Zakim]
14:02:36 [shadi]
agenda+ Eval TF Comment #32
14:02:52 [Zakim]
14:02:57 [vivienne]
zakim, ??P37 is me
14:02:59 [Zakim]
+vivienne; got it
14:03:03 [Zakim]
14:03:15 [Zakim]
14:03:27 [shadi]
agenda+ WCAG WG Comment #5
14:03:55 [shadi]
agenda+ WCAG WG Comments #7 and #12 and
14:04:02 [shadi]
agenda+ WCAG WG Comment #13
14:04:05 [shadi]
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]
14:06:18 [Kerstin]
Eric: Welcome everyone
14:06:18 [ericvelleman]
14:06:21 [Kathy]
sound fine
14:06:21 [shadi]
Topic: Summary of Open Comments
14:06:21 [Detlev]
14:08:04 [korn]
14:08:10 [ericvelleman]
14:08:30 [Kerstin]
Shadi: Has everyone looked at the comments?
14:08:44 [vivienne]
14:08:50 [Kerstin]
who was speaking?
14:08:56 [vivienne]
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" taken up [from shadi]
14:11:05 [Detlev]
14:11:09 [Kathy]
14:11:14 [Kerstin]
Eric: changing resolution in 24
14:11:31 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:11:37 [vivienne]
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]
14:13:43 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:13:43 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:13:46 [Detlev]
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" taken up [from shadi]
14:14:40 [shadi]
14:14:55 [shadi]
14:15:17 [Detlev]
14:15:39 [Zakim]
14:15:50 [shadi]
14:15:58 [Detlev]
ack me
14:16:45 [shadi]
DF: not clear what Step 1e means in practice
14:17:18 [vivienne]
14:17:21 [shadi]
...where to start and where to stop
14:17:22 [vivienne]
ack me
14:17:30 [ericvelleman]
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]
14:17:56 [Zakim]
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]
14:18:41 [Kerstin]
Kerstin has joined #eval
14:18:43 [Detlev]
14:19:12 [Kerstin]
seems I'm back, so I can take over again
14:19:23 [vivienne]
14:19:29 [ericvelleman]
14:19:29 [Kathy]
14:20:08 [Kerstin]
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]
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]
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]
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]
14:24:37 [korn]
14:24:39 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:25:13 [MartijnHoutepen]
ack me
14:25:16 [vivienne]
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]
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]
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]
14:29:36 [Kerstin]
Eric: We are lloking for feedback for all sections,
14:29:49 [shadi]
14:30:01 [Kerstin]
ERic: and point to specific sections
14:30:20 [vivienne]
ack me
14:30:53 [Zakim]
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]
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]
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]
14:32:26 [vivienne]
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" taken up [from shadi]
14:34:16 [Kerstin]
Issue now "Accessibility Statement"
14:34:20 [shadi]
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]
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]
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]
14:36:15 [shadi]
ack korn
14:37:17 [Kerstin]
Peter: the findings should be solved in a review period
14:37:17 [ericvelleman]
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]
14:39:02 [Kerstin]
Shadi: motivation was to avoid statements like: I tested it 5 years ago
14:39:11 [korn]
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]
14:42:03 [korn]
14:42:06 [shadi]
[[Accessibility Statement]] -> [[Methodology Conformance Statement]]
14:42:29 [Detlev]
14:42:31 [vivienne]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
14:55:20 [shadi]
ack korn
14:55:27 [Kerstin]
Peter: would like to develop the suggestion of Shadi further
14:55:28 [shadi]
14:55:37 [shadi]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
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]
15:06:13 [vivienne]
ack me
15:06:14 [Mike_Elledge]
15:06:16 [Zakim]
15:06:19 [Zakim]
15:06:19 [Zakim]
15:06:20 [Zakim]
15:06:21 [Zakim]
15:06:22 [Zakim]
15:06:23 [Zakim]
15:06:28 [Zakim]
15:06:30 [MartijnHoutepen]
MartijnHoutepen has left #eval
15:09:23 [Zakim]
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 trackbot
15:13:50 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
15:13:50 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items