See also: IRC log
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.
<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
+1
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
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
<vivienne> sorry, no idea
saz: not sure what it measn and peter is not with us. anybody familiar with this topic?
<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.
asap
<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!