IRC log of au on 2012-10-01

Timestamps are in UTC.

18:55:50 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #au
18:55:50 [RRSAgent]
logging to
18:55:56 [Jan]
Zakim, this will be AUWG
18:55:56 [Zakim]
ok, Jan; I see WAI_AUWG()3:00PM scheduled to start in 5 minutes
18:56:02 [Jan]
Meeting: WAI AU
18:56:21 [Jan]
18:59:29 [jeanne]
jeanne has joined #au
18:59:42 [Zakim]
WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has now started
18:59:49 [Zakim]
19:00:58 [Zakim]
19:01:23 [jeanne]
trackbot, start meeting
19:01:25 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs public
19:01:27 [Zakim]
19:01:27 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be AUWG
19:01:28 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot, I see WAI_AUWG()3:00PM already started
19:01:28 [trackbot]
Meeting: Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
19:01:28 [trackbot]
Date: 01 October 2012
19:01:30 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jan
19:01:30 [Zakim]
+Jan; got it
19:02:10 [Jan]
zakim, [Microsoft] is really Cherie
19:02:10 [Zakim]
+Cherie; got it
19:02:42 [Zakim]
19:03:03 [Jan]
zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jutta
19:03:03 [Zakim]
+Jutta; got it
19:03:07 [Jan]
Chair: Jutta
19:03:09 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make logs public
19:03:14 [Jan]
Scribe: Jan
19:06:36 [Zakim]
+ +1.571.765.aaaa
19:07:46 [Greg]
Greg has joined #au
19:08:08 [Jan]
zakim, aaaa is really Greg
19:08:08 [Zakim]
+Greg; got it
19:10:13 [Zakim]
+ +1.970.349.aabb
19:10:57 [Jan]
zakim, aabb is really Sueann
19:10:57 [Zakim]
+Sueann; got it
19:11:24 [Jan]
Topic: 1. Voting on whether to publish the "Implementing ATAG 2.0" (NOTE) Editor's Draft as our required heart-beat publication.
19:11:47 [Zakim]
19:11:49 [Jan]
JT: As noted, this will give reviewers a sneak peek of changes we have made to the ATAG2 spec
19:11:59 [Jan]
JT: Taking vote
19:12:04 [Jan]
SN: Agree
19:12:10 [Jan]
CE: Fine
19:12:29 [jeanne]
+1 to publishing
19:12:45 [Jan]
Jan: +1
19:13:02 [Greg]
Greg says yes
19:13:22 [Jan]
TB: Is it aligned with LC?
19:13:46 [Jan]
JR: Not exactly, it does include changes we have made based on LC comments
19:13:54 [Jan]
TB: Should have note, could be confusing
19:14:02 [Jan]
JT: We can add a not explaining that
19:14:18 [Jan]
JT: The motion is passed, so we will publish...when can we?
19:14:40 [Jan]
JS: ASPA...probably next week...def before TPAC
19:14:53 [Jan]
JS: It was important not to muddle LC status of the rec track doc
19:15:16 [Jan]
Resolution: All agreed to publish the Implementing ATAG doc
19:16:12 [Jan]
TB: Extended teleconference on Oct 31?
19:16:26 [Jan]
JT: That was a proposal
19:17:01 [Jan]
JS: Last I remember we didn't agree on something
19:18:19 [Greg]
The last time we discussed a f to f was questioning the wisdom of holding one during hurricane season in Boca
19:18:39 [Jan]
JR: I think that text was from last year
19:19:36 [Jan]
JR: The main thing we need to do work on are the tests
19:19:52 [Jan]
JT: So the main thing we are doing is writing tests for the SCs
19:20:13 [Jan]
JT: We also need to gather evaluators and reviewers?
19:20:20 [Jan]
JS: Yes, that needs to be done.
19:21:01 [Jan]
JT: Implementors of ATAG2 and then evalutors/reviewers - people to check those implementations.
19:21:57 [Jan]
JT: Question is what kind of meeting do we need to put together all of this?
19:22:22 [Jan]
JS: I remember from wcag2 testing that there was not a lot of group work...there was a lot of coord and a lot of individual work...
19:22:47 [Jan]
JS: I could certainly see a meeting to draft and agree on CR exit conditions....but thats it for group work...
19:22:59 [Jan]
JS: What we really need is a run trhough of testing.
19:23:41 [Jan]
SN: Are you looking for people or implementations?\
19:23:49 [Jan]
JT: People
19:24:29 [Jan]
SN: So we have SCs with tests then we need implementations?
19:24:59 [Jan]
JT: So to clarify, you and I had been talking about gathering some people to do the testing.
19:25:34 [Jan]
JS: Right and then the WG needs to stand behind those testers
19:25:53 [Jan]
JR: Clarigy?
19:26:39 [Jan]
JS: Well, the WG reviews the work that the reviewers do and then they take a vote to say that we think we are done with CR.
19:27:06 [Jan]
JS: Would take at least 6 weeks after we vote to become a Rec
19:27:41 [Jan]
GP: How many implementations do we really need? Is it ok if we have one tool that meets just one SC... etc.
19:28:07 [Jan]
JS: Its a tricky answer...largely we decide that...but we have to be credible...we have to show implementations in the real world
19:29:18 [Jan]
JS: I know JB would like to see examples in various different market niches...blogs, CMSs,, LMSs, etc
19:29:58 [Jan]
GP: Our problem is a process issues....need to be able to track whether there is an example for SC...and then show where that is
19:30:17 [Jan]
GP: Until we get examples for each we cant move forward?
19:30:36 [Jan]
JS: Well, we can declare that certain SCs are "at risk".
19:30:49 [Jan]
JS: Need at least two examples,
19:31:20 [Jan]
JS: JR had that spreadsheet showing that
19:31:39 [Jan]
19:32:29 [Jan]
JR: There is a newer one...with more columns....I can update
19:32:42 [Jan]
JT: Great make sure to update the spreadhseet
19:33:03 [Jan]
JT: And people not working on the testing pls help with that
19:33:19 [Jan]
JT: Any other issues?
19:33:57 [Jan]
OK, then lets move to the 2 agenda items
19:34:09 [Jan]
Topic: 3. brief testing approach description (Jan)
19:34:16 [Jan]
19:40:37 [Zakim]
19:48:43 [Zakim]
19:49:49 [Zakim]
19:55:16 [jeanne]
19:56:42 [Greg]
I vote for Integration
19:57:01 [Greg]
Happy Thanksgivign
19:57:39 [Zakim]
19:57:40 [Zakim]
19:57:43 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make minutes
19:57:43 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jeanne
19:57:52 [jeanne]
zakim, bye
19:57:52 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees were Jeanne, Jan, Cherie, Jutta, +1.571.765.aaaa, Greg, +1.970.349.aabb, Sueann, Tim_Boland
19:57:52 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #au
20:00:24 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make minutes
20:00:24 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate jeanne
20:31:03 [Jan]
Jan has joined #au