19:57:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
19:57:45 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-wai-wcag-irc
19:57:47 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
19:57:47 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #wai-wcag
19:57:49 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
19:57:49 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
19:57:50 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
19:57:50 <trackbot> Date: 06 September 2012
19:59:00 <shadi> shadi has joined #wai-wcag
19:59:15 <shadi> zakim, code?
19:59:15 <Zakim> the conference code is 9224 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), shadi
19:59:27 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has now started
19:59:34 <Zakim> +Kathy
19:59:38 <Zakim> +Cooper
19:59:50 <Zakim> +Shadi
20:00:07 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has joined #wai-wcag
20:00:19 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
20:00:22 <Zakim> +Bruce_Bailey
20:00:33 <MichaelC> agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2012JulSep/0067.html
20:00:39 <MichaelC> chair: Loretta_Guarino_Reid
20:01:12 <Zakim> +Eric_Velleman
20:01:25 <Zakim> +Gregg_Vanderheiden
20:01:26 <Zakim> +David_MacDonald
20:01:37 <greggvanderheiden> greggvanderheiden has joined #wai-wcag
20:01:37 <MichaelC> agenda+ Conformance Evaluation Methodology Draft for 06 Sep 2012 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120906eval/results
20:01:44 <MichaelC> zakim, Microsoft is Cherie_Eckholm
20:01:44 <Zakim> +Cherie_Eckholm; got it
20:02:19 <Loretta> Loretta has joined #WAI-WCAG
20:02:53 <Loretta> \
20:02:57 <Zakim> + +1.206.544.aaaa
20:03:18 <David> David has joined #wai-wcag
20:03:18 <Zakim> +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
20:03:24 <robin> robin has joined #wai-wcag
20:03:53 <MichaelC> zakim, aaaa is Robin_Tuttle
20:03:53 <Zakim> +Robin_Tuttle; got it
20:03:54 <David> scribe: David
20:05:25 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120904
20:05:42 <shadi> q+
20:06:03 <ericvelleman> q+
20:06:15 <shadi> ack me
20:06:33 <ericvelleman> q-
20:07:37 <David> shadi: completely re-wrote front section to address issues brought up by WCAG WG, anticipate comments on scope, and in main body, but hoping framing and big issues hope we took care of it
20:07:38 <Zakim> +James_Nurthen
20:07:50 <shadi> zakim, mute me
20:07:50 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
20:08:26 <shadi> disposition of comments for more details: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG
20:08:36 <David> Loretta: we'll take 10-15 minutes to read it given that there are only 3 responses
20:08:53 <shadi> diff-marked version: https://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20120827.html&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20120904.html
20:09:40 <greggvanderheiden> CHANGE  "conformance of websites to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0  to   " conformance of the pages on website as a whole to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0"  or some such. 
20:09:41 <David> Loretta: will resume discussing at 4:20EST in 11 minutes
20:11:06 <MichaelC> #4 - I still want to talk about the relationship of documents, but can continue that discussion after publication
20:11:08 <MichaelC> #6 - do want to see continued work on the structure of requirements as the current one doesn't work for me, but ok for that to be a task for the next draft
20:11:43 <jamesn> Table of Contents: Overview sections says "3. Conformance Evaluation Procedure", should be "3. Evaluation Procedure"
20:12:01 <David> Would like clarification on: ↕extends the existing guidance ↕ for WCAG 2.0 
20:12:21 <MichaelC> #9 - I can take an action to propose the diagram I thought was needed
20:12:28 <MichaelC> for after this publication
20:18:56 <MichaelC> General comment - some of the comment dispositions indicate plans for future work or a specific desire for public feedback on the issue. Especially for the latter, would like to be sure we solicit that feedback, in the form of editorial notes or review questions. I see some ednotes there, but not sure they cover all the open questions.
20:20:01 <greggvanderheiden> add a step 3.3.3 1/2  (Between 3.3.3 and 3.3.4) <h> Include a random sampling of pages not already in structured sample </h>  In addition randomly choose an additional number of pages from the site equal to 1/3 of the number in the constructed sample so far (so that 25% of the final sample is random) to ensure that all pages have the possibility of being sampled (and therefore authors cannot just focus on the pages likely to be in the 
20:20:02 <greggvanderheiden> constructed sample). 
20:20:20 <greggvanderheiden> oops
20:20:40 <Zakim> -Bruce_Bailey
20:20:40 <greggvanderheiden> that should go AFTER 3.3.4  which would make it 3.3.5
20:22:53 <greggvanderheiden> even though you say other techniques can be used -- this seems to contradict that
20:22:54 <greggvanderheiden> For each web page a WCAG 2.0 Success Criterion is:
20:22:54 <greggvanderheiden> Met when for each applicable instance of the WCAG 2.0 Success Criterion on the web page at least one Sufficient Technique is identified to be applicable, and no Common Failure is identified to be applicable;
20:22:55 <greggvanderheiden> Not met when for any applicable instance of the WCAG 2.0 Success Criterion on the web page at least one Common Failure is identified to be applicable;
20:24:18 <greggvanderheiden> don't understand the scoring -- sounds like a bad idea but not sure I understand
20:24:52 <David> Wondering about this: This definition of target users and tools must meet the terms defined in WCAG 2.0 Level of Assistive Technology Support Needed for "Accessibility Support" and must be used throughout the evaluation. For example, it is not possible to evaluate some pages with one set of tools and other pages with another set. Accessibility support must be uniform throughout a single website .
20:25:09 <greggvanderheiden> change PRIMARY to  COMMON in this 
20:25:10 <greggvanderheiden> Common Functionality
20:25:11 <greggvanderheiden> Primary functionality of a website including tasks that users of a website carry out to perform this functionality.
20:25:12 <greggvanderheiden> Note: Examples of functionality include "selecting and purchasing a product from the shop area of the website", "filling and submitting the form provided on the website", and "registering for an account on the website".
20:25:26 <greggvanderheiden> or just remove PRIMARY
20:26:10 <greggvanderheiden> the primary function of amazon is to buy something 
20:26:22 <greggvanderheiden> but if all other functions were inaccessible/
20:26:23 <greggvanderheiden> ?
20:27:03 <greggvanderheiden> and what does buying mean -- can most of the page or most of the pages be inaccessible and you still can buy things? 
20:27:18 <David> wondering about: Basic pass/fail "...and for large-scale evaluations with less resources to explore the details of individual websites . " (3.1.2)
20:27:32 <Zakim> +Bruce_Bailey
20:32:43 <ericvelleman> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120904#step3
20:34:56 <Loretta> Shadi, the only comments in the survey other than supporting publication is a typo.
20:35:21 <David> GV: would like random sampling approach discussed between 3.3.3 and 3.3.4
20:35:34 <shadi> q+
20:36:04 <Loretta> ack B
20:37:04 <shadi> ack me
20:37:25 <David> BB: Vernacular understanding of random, vs common understanding... 
20:38:18 <greggvanderheiden> q+
20:38:24 <greggvanderheiden> q+
20:39:20 <David> Shadi: not as simple as adding another section.... we might add language about random to the steps, selecting web pages with distinct types... can we kick this discussion down the road and place the topic in a note for this version
20:39:28 <Loretta> ack g
20:39:36 <Loretta> q+
20:40:31 <ericvelleman> q+
20:40:33 <David> GV: not suggesting ONLY random, some structure is certainly necessary, but have no random sample raises issue of "representative" 
20:42:14 <shadi> zakim, mute me
20:42:14 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
20:42:23 <David> Shadi: agree... but suggest random and structured... adding a new section would be a significant change... delay etc...
20:44:17 <David> GV: perhaps discuss the note providing some indication of possible ways that you might address the random question... that will get comments that are helpful
20:44:54 <Loretta> ack me
20:45:02 <David> Loretta: should we do another iteration, we have to approve it... or go to draft now knowing that more will need to be added...
20:45:47 <shadi> ack me
20:46:24 <shadi> zakim, mute me
20:46:24 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
20:46:30 <Loretta> ack e
20:48:21 <David> eric: we had sampling in previous draft... tons of discussion and we pulled it, for more discussion
20:49:42 <shadi> q+
20:49:47 <David> here's the diff https://www.w3.org/2007/10/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20120827.html&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20120904.html
20:49:54 <shadi> ack me
20:50:30 <David> James: concerned about the word conformance
20:51:40 <David> shadi: distinction Section 5 was conformance to THIS methodology... but "conformance" instances in the doc should relate to WCAG not this methodology
20:52:12 <shadi> zakim, mute me
20:52:12 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
20:53:05 <shadi> q+
20:53:24 <David> GV: web sites don't conform to WCAG pages do, can't talk about web sites that way... 
20:55:20 <David> shadi: "with reasonable confidence"
20:56:47 <shadi> ack me
20:58:18 <David> Loretta: I think the conformance issues are addressed ... unless a few of the 97 current instances of "confidence" got through
20:58:35 <David> s/confidence/conformance
21:00:02 <Zakim> -Cherie_Eckholm
21:01:02 <shadi> "It extends the existing guidance for WCAG 2.0 but it does not define additional WCAG 2.0 requirements nor does it replace or supersede it in any way"
21:01:05 <shadi> ack me
21:01:52 <David> GV: we'll let it go for now... remembering this conversation
21:02:27 <shadi> [[extends -> complements]]
21:04:44 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/track/actions/5
21:05:04 <MichaelC> action: cooper to work with Kathy on improved process diagram for the Evaluation Methodology process flow
21:05:05 <trackbot> Created ACTION-179 - Work with Kathy on improved process diagram for the Evaluation Methodology process flow [on Michael Cooper - due 2012-09-13].
21:05:18 <MichaelC> action-179: See also https://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/track/actions/5
21:05:18 <trackbot> ACTION-179 Work with Kathy on improved process diagram for the Evaluation Methodology process flow notes added
21:06:57 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120904#step4b
21:07:02 <shadi> q+
21:07:14 <David>  ↕extends the existing guidance ↕ for WCAG 2.0  will be changed to "compliments the existing...."
21:08:56 <David> q+
21:09:59 <shadi> q?
21:10:33 <shadi> ack me
21:12:17 <David> GV: Concerned "WCAG Sufficient Techniques" may be perceived as required
21:13:22 <greggvanderheiden> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/intro.html
21:14:30 <David> GV: maybe we should take an action item to add a common failure discussion http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/intro.html
21:16:37 <Loretta> Perhaps you mean "documented sufficient techniques"?
21:16:46 <shadi> "WCAG 2.0 Layers of Guidance"
21:17:06 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#intro-layers-guidance
21:18:39 <David> GV: need to fix this section before it goes out... 3.4.2
21:18:55 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120904#step1e
21:19:42 <David> Shadi: 3.1.4 needs to be read in context (3.1.5)
21:20:31 <David> s/3.1.4/3.4.2
21:22:04 <David> Action: Gregg to make suggested editorial changes to 3.4.2 regarding Sufficient Techs
21:22:04 <trackbot> Created ACTION-180 - Make suggested editorial changes to 3.4.2 regarding Sufficient Techs [on Gregg Vanderheiden - due 2012-09-13].
21:22:25 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120904#step5c
21:24:45 <shadi> Research Report on Web Accessibility Metrics - http://www.w3.org/TR/accessibility-metrics-report/
21:24:50 <shadi> q+
21:25:57 <David> gv: need to remove applicable ... because all SCs are applicable 3.3.2 etc...
21:27:20 <David> GV: Definition of common functionality: .... change PRIMARY to COMMON in this 
21:27:27 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120904#functionality
21:27:28 <shadi> ack me
21:27:47 <David> q-
21:28:12 <MichaelC_> MichaelC_ has joined #wai-wcag
21:29:44 <Zakim> -James_Nurthen
21:32:29 <Zakim> -Robin_Tuttle
21:33:57 <David> shadi: can't test EVERY function, therefor better to test main functionality
21:34:25 <shadi> s/better to test main/need to sample
21:37:38 <David> GV: suggests frequency rather than primary
21:38:39 <David> Shadi: can we remove primary until next
21:41:15 <shadi> [[
21:41:17 <shadi>     Web pages from distinct common functionality, as identified per 3.2.2 Step 2.b: Identify Common Functionality of the Website;
21:41:17 <shadi>     Web pages from distinct types of web pages, as identified per 3.2.3 Step 2.c: Identify the Variety of Web Page Types;
21:41:17 <shadi>     Web pages with distinct web technologies, as identified per 3.2.4 Step 2.d: Identify Technologies Used in the Website.
21:41:20 <shadi> ]]
21:42:17 <David> Shadi: Web pages from distinct common functionality, as identified per 3.2.2 Step 2.b: Identify Common Functionality of the Website;Web pages from distinct types of web pages, as identified per 3.2.3 Step 2.c: Identify the Variety of Web Page Types;
21:42:19 <David> 	Web pages with distinct web technologies, as identified per 3.2.4 Step 2.d: Identify Technologies Used in the Website.
21:42:55 <David> eric: used to be "key functionality" 
21:43:49 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120904#step2b
21:52:50 <David> GV: two important things need to change... introduce random samples, remove primary... to something like frequent or important etc..
21:55:24 <David> eric: I think we can change two things... that will help... we can add a note about random samples, and can remove primary and editorial choose something ... to get it out... change extends to compliment.
22:00:44 <shadi> ack me
22:06:42 <Zakim> -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
22:06:45 <Zakim> -Bruce_Bailey
22:06:46 <Zakim> -Shadi
22:06:46 <Zakim> -Eric_Velleman
22:06:48 <Zakim> -Kathy
22:06:48 <Zakim> -David_MacDonald
22:06:49 <Zakim> -Cooper
22:06:55 <Zakim> -Gregg_Vanderheiden
22:06:56 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
22:06:56 <Zakim> Attendees were Kathy, Cooper, Shadi, Bruce_Bailey, Eric_Velleman, Gregg_Vanderheiden, David_MacDonald, Cherie_Eckholm, +1.206.544.aaaa, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Robin_Tuttle,
22:06:56 <Zakim> ... James_Nurthen
22:07:16 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
22:07:16 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/09/06-wai-wcag-minutes.html MichaelC
22:18:07 <ericvelleman> ericvelleman has left #wai-wcag
23:31:51 <MichaelC> MichaelC has joined #wai-wcag