Research and Development Working Group Teleconference

05 Sep 2012

See also: IRC log


Klaus, Shadi, Justin, Vivienne, Markel, Shawn, Annika, Yehya, Giorgio
Simon, Luz, Kerstin, Yeliz


E2R Call Status (10m) - http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/wiki/Topic_4_pre-call

saz: last week we accepted the e2r call

saz: no changes were notified to the meaning, but lots of improvements in legibility and understandability
... shifting of dates; we need to look again at the timeline

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

klaus: it would be good to get approval from rdwg on the new timeline

saz: overlap between e2r and text customization is by design, so that we can move papers around

saz: time for reviewing is fairly compressed

klaus: the most critical aspects is reviewing time; but it looks like being viable given that thereare 10 days for 1000words papers.
... will persuade reviewers to becompliant with the schedule

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask if that timeline means that there is no opportunity for papers submitted to e2r to move to tc4r (which is unlikely anyway)? SEPARATE POINT: chairs on each

shawn: is the timeline ok if the scientific committee finds that a paper needs to be moved between the two symposia?

<vivienne> Shawn, do you have any idea how many papers we should expect to review in that time frame?

shawn: T&C PC members should watch if there arepapers that should be moved

klaus: agreed and will make shawn aware of such a chance.

shawn: some people belong to both scientic groups and may be overloaded by revieweing for e2r and for t&c

giorgio corrects: shawn is concerned mainly for editors/chairs of T&C that will have to review fore2r

klaus: everything depends by the number of papers. 15-20 submissions to e2r will be manageable and we can avoid loading the chairs of T&C.
... if more than 20 then we will need all the scientific members

<Zakim> shawn, you wanted to clarify I DO support coordination of topics!

shawn: I do support coordination of topics

giorgio: if moe than 20 papers then I could beinvolved as a reviewer.

saz: shawn suggested capitalization of easy-to-read
... lowercase should be used as an adjective; when capitalized it is a topic

<Klaus> agreed (-:

saz: what is klaus' view?
... other questions?
... we received today comments from annika

<Klaus> tonight or tomorrow morning

saz: klaus, when will you be able to update?
... shawn, any restrictions?

shawn: I'm available
... we need to think (European perspective) whether morning or afternoon/evening is better? and end of week OK, or better on Monday?

saz: early CET afternoon might be better
... klaus, tomorrow morning is ok?

<Klaus> o.k.

(thanks shawn)

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

<Klaus> am ready for sending it out and also to other key interest groups

<shawn> [ Shawn has meeting at 7:00-8:00am Thursday, but will try to do announcements before or right after ]

<vivienne> yes, no problem

<shawn> [ for the record: Klaus & Yeliz did an AWESOME job of getting the tc4r call out right away!]

saz: everybody in rdwg is welcome to forward the announcement in any relevant list. but please coordinate with the wiki page to avoid duplications.

Metrics W3C Note Status (5m)

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/News/2012#entry-9551

saz: good news about the 1st publication of rdwg being out

<markel> :-)

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2012JulSep/0309.html

saz: it took longer than anticipated. Thanks to the editors
... we got some comments, and editors are asked to collect these comments and relay them back to the group for discussion
... questions?

markel: thanks for publishing and releasing the note.

yes, I'm very happy!

markel: I read some of the comments, and in the following weeks we will be working on that

saz: simon will have to monitor the timeline so that in the gaps we can discuss these things, as well as the draft of the mobile symposium

markel: once the deadline for comments is over, do we have some fixed deadlin to respond?

saz: any comments that come after the deadline should not be addressed.
... for responding to legitimate comments we have three months to close the publication.
... it's a good practice to acknowledge the comment asap.
... maybe by Dec or Jan we should get back all the comments and tell people how we addressed to each comment.
... it is important to give an opportunity to the commenter to view how we addressed the comment before the final publication
... I suggest the editors to be in close touch with simon
... other comments?
... people from rdwg are welcome to review the draft.

<markel> yes that sounds sensible

shawn: suggests that editors process the comments and bring to the group the digested solution.

I agree with shawn

saz: editors should decide what is worth to bring to the group


markel: some comments are sensible. other ones are like "why did you not addressed X or y?"
... we need to put a boundary on possiblechanges, but we as editors will try to decide that

saz: editors should at least bring the group attention to some of the comments
... please do a preprocessing and filter them
... most comments do not need discussion

Next Topic Discussions (10m)

saz: item 4 of agenda is a reminder. please look at the wiki and add topics or emend existing ones explaining why it is important. So that you get traction.
... and also consider if there could be editors willing to do the work

CfP Simplified Page Format (15m)

<vivienne> sorry, no idea

saz: not sure what it measn and peter is not with us. anybody familiar with this topic?

New Symposium Web Page Designs (5m)

<shawn> discussion page: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/RD_Symposia_Design

<shawn> final draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/rd/home.html

saz: the overall esign was accepted by the group, and it looks like being liked as well. thank you shawn.

shawn: there might be small bugs here and there

saz: we will incorporate this layout for all our symposia.

shawn: what is the optimal date for putting this layout live?
... my concern is for people who see first one layout and subsequently thenew one, and might be confused. When shall we switch over?

I said that I don't think it is a big issue.


<markel> asap too, it does not hurt

shawn: when shall we do the switch over?

<vivienne> shawn, is http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/rd/home.html the final design? I see some colour and link issues here.

saz: what do other people think?

<markel> it's inevitable to have people surprised, we cannot help it

saz: let's wait to complete it and then decide

<markel> surprised=confused

vivienne: hovering on a link the colors change very little

shawn: is that so important?
... visited vs unvisited should be rendered differently. But hovering is not such an issue.

vivienne: 2nd question: you are using serif font (I did not understood the words)

<shawn> giorgio: agree with Shawn. Tab focus is good. Vivienne is talking about hovering effect. Don't think need to make it more prominenet.

saz: vivienne please send your suggestions to shawn and CC to the group
... we need to close the call

saz: next time we will try a diffeereent teleconf tool!

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.136 (CVS log)
$Date: 2012/09/10 16:27:51 $