HTML Weekly Teleconference

30 Aug 2012





trackbot, start meeting

<trackbot> Date: 30 August 2012

<scribe> scribe: rubys

ACTION items due by Thursday, August 30

mjs: none

New Issues This Week

mjs: none, but still one outstanding tracker request

Items Closed Last Week

mjs: none

Items Closing This Week


<trackbot> ISSUE-131 -- Should we add a caret location API to canvas, or is the focus API sufficient? -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/131

mjs: call for consensus closes today; the call is to defer; the authors of the proposals agree with that approach; to date nobody has objected
... if you do object, please back a proposal or create a new one


<trackbot> ISSUE-201 -- Provide canvas location and hit testing capability to fallback content -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/201

mjs: CfC also closes today; we have a specific proposal that the participants agreed on; we did have an objection but that was withdrawn; there are no active objections
... if you do have an objection, time is short, we are not likely to be receptive to extensions to start with drafting an entirely new proposal


<trackbot> ISSUE-206 -- Should HTML5 have a meta generator exception to the alt requirement? -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/206

mjs: this is a call for consensus on only part of the issue; specifically to remove the exception. Once this is done, we will continue to proceed with the remainder of the issue. To date, we have some comments but no objection.
... questions or comments?


<trackbot> ISSUE-30 -- Should HTML 5 include a longdesc attribute for images -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/30

mjs: at the request of the team, the chairs granted extra time

sam: we had talks with Tim yesterday, and got direction to proceed UNLESS we hear back from Tim again before 5pm eastern

laura: I have worked on another version, but I don't know what the outcome of the TF meeting today is
... will the chairs allow for a call for consensus

sam: the plan is to proceed at 5pm eastern unless we have feedback from tim

mjs: (to laura) I would encourage putting that proposal forward. We might consider a day or two extension
... has the proposal been sent out to the task force?

laura: yes, they were supposed to have talked about it

mjs: the chairs will meet after the telecon

<paulc_> There were no objections on the TF to the current text but Judy informed the TF that there is more changes to be made.

plh: you will have feedback from the director before 5pm

judy: what was the issue?

<laura> New text: http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/Talk:ChangeProposals/InstateLongdesc

mjs: issue-30 and the call for updating change proposals that closes today
... laura indicated that the TF needs more time

<paulc_> TF minutes: http://www.w3.org/2012/08/30-html-a11y-minutes.html

judy: I was still on the other call; the updated language is in place for all issues but one. That one is to clarify the context of disputed 204 decision; that is pending input from the Director in response to the expedited Formal Objection.

<paulc_> There was NO objection on the TF meeting to the current revised proposal.

<paulc_> I took myself off the queue

mjs: we would be hesitant to allow unbounded extra time

judy: there may be a misunderstanded, this would not be unbounded, nor would it wait on a full resolution of 204, we expect this to be done in the short term.

paulc: if the Director decides not to act, would you still need more time?

judy: we still would need to put a brief clarifying sentence in place
... if he decides to act, we would also need to make changes; each of these is several business days

mjs: how much extra time?

judy: it depends on when the director would make a decision and what the decision is; 3 business days max

laura: would a call for consensus for the current text be on top of that?

judy: there wasn't a decision made in the call
... this proposal has already been supported twice, and the additional text doesn't change the substance, and nobody expressed an objection

we only need 48 business hours, which can be done in parallel and therefore under the 3 business day unbrella

judy: the decision may be tuesday, and we would need to add 3 business days from there

mjs: the director has indicated that if he provides any input, it will be by 5pm eastern today

plh: the director will respond by 5pm today

judy: I don't believe that the 5pm deadline came up before

sam: the 5pm deadline was given by PLH on the mailing list


<paulc_> and Judy was the first name in the To: field of that email

laura: mjs can you summarize what you think the plan is?

mjs: the chairs will wait for input from the director by 5pm eastern, and will proceed based on that direction

judy: this has to do with the progress on the Formal Objection


laura: if you hear from the director at 5pm when will we hear from the chairs?

mjs: probably sometime tonight

paulc_: I'll be on a plane

mjs: we will respect any input we give from the Director

sam: no later than 2pm eastern on Tuesday?

judy: no major objection, just some details that need to be worked

mjs: any other input related to issue 30?

Items Closing Next Week

mjs: none

New Calls this week

mjs: none

New Surveys this week

mjs: none yet, but issue 30 is coming soon unless we get input otherwise

Decisions this week

mjs: none

Other Business


<trackbot> ISSUE-150 -- consider reducing verbosity when talking about code points -- closed

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/150

mjs: these changes are done, ted asked for confirmation that the changes made are sufficient?


<trackbot> ISSUE-201 -- Provide canvas location and hit testing capability to fallback content -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/201

mjs: this was mentioned earlier, and the objection we got was withdrawn
... any other comments?


<trackbot> ISSUE-206 -- Should HTML5 have a meta generator exception to the alt requirement? -- open

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/206

mjs: there is continuing discussion on what replacement gain consensus.
... sam asked whether or not a warning would suffice as a teachable moment and be ok with validator developers?
... anything else to be discussed with regard to the renaming aspect?

janina: what I haven't gotten back to is whether any particular marking needs to persist with the document

mjs: please inject that into the email discussion
... any other comments related to 206?
... any additional other business items?

Scribe for next meeting

mjs: any volunteers?
... if you are a regular and haven't scribed before, it is a good experience
... moving on... if you want to volunteer, respond to the minutes


Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/08/30 16:38:25 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.136  of Date: 2011/05/12 12:01:43  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/msg/mjs/
Found Scribe: rubys
Inferring ScribeNick: rubys

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Apple Eliot J_Voracek Jedi Joshue108 Judy Lachy Lachy_ Laura_Carlson MFoladare MartinSoukup Microsoft Mike MikeSmith MikeSmith_ P7 Radhika_Roy Sam Stevef TravisLeithead aa aaaa abarsto adrianba adrianba_ davidb drublic drublic_ ed erikadoyle hober html-wg icaaq icaaq1 janina jaymunro jet johnlsheridan joined karl kennyluck kennyluck_ laura logbot mjs myakura nonge_ paulc paulc_ plh shepazu tantek tantek_ tmpsantos tpod trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-wg-announce/2012JulSep/0024.html

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 30 Aug 2012
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2012/08/30-html-wg-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]