See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 15 February 2013
<scribe> scribe: Mary_Jo_Mueller
<scribe> scribenick: MaryJo
<scribe> meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
<greggvanderheiden> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/remaining-3-scs
WCAG working group had some edits and updates to our last 4 SC. The proposed changes are marked up and highlighted in the web page (link above).
<korn> +1 to "programs" and to keeping it without parenthesis
A proposed note 8 was added to the 'set of software' definition to explain why we are adding 'program'.
<korn> Slight Note 8 edit suggestion: "Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software products as well as INDIVIDUAL software components AND THE SOFTWARE COMPONENTS in software-hardware products"
<alex_> +1 to Mary Jo
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to products that can be launched separately from each other. For the "set of" provision therefore "set of software programs" is used.
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to program that can be launched separately from each other. For the "set of" provisions therefore "set of software programs" is used.
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to a program that can be launched separately from each other. For the "set of" provisions therefore "set of software programs" is used.
<korn> 2.4.1, 2.4.5, 3.2.3, 3.2.4
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to programs that can be launched separately from each other. For the "set of" provisions therefore "set of software programs" is used (2.4.1, 2.4.5,
<greggvanderheiden> 3.2.3, and 3.2.4)
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to programs that can be launched separately from each other. For the "set of" provisions therefore "set of software programs" is used (success[CUT]
<greggvanderheiden> criteria 2.4.1, 2.4.5, 3.2.3, and 3.2.4)
<korn> One more suggestion: "Although THE TERM "software" is used..."
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to programs that can be launched separately from each other. For the provisions that use the phrase = "set of" (success criteria 2.4.1, 2.4.5, 3.2.3,
<greggvanderheiden> and 3.2.4) therefore "set of software programs" is used.
<korn> "For the four success criteria that use "set of" (2.4.1, 2.4.5, 3.2.3, 3.2.4), the term "set of software programs" is used."
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to programs that can be launched separately from each other. Therefore, for the provisions that use the phrase "set of" (success criteria 2.4.1, [CUT]
<greggvanderheiden> 3.2.3, and 3.2.4), the phrase "set of software programs" is used.
<greggvanderheiden> Note 8: Although the term "software" is used throughout this document because this would apply to stand alone software programs as well as individual software components and the software components in software-hardware combinations, the concept of 'Set of software" would only apply (by definition) to programs that can be launched separately from each other. Therefore, for the provisions that use the phrase "set of" (success criteria
<greggvanderheiden> 2.4.1, 2.4.5, 3.2.3, and 3.2.4), the phrase "set of software programs" is used.
<greggvanderheiden> (shown separately for the provisions that involve the phrase "set of", to make the substitutions easier to read)
<Loic> Just an editorial comment on note 2. There is "non-web environment" and it should be "non-web environments" (in plural)
The edits to SC 2.4.1 are acceptable to those on the call. For SC 2.4.5, Note 2 was also agreed upon.
<greggvanderheiden> NOTE 3: An example of the use of 'a software program that is part of process', that would meet the exception for this SC, would be one where programs are interlinked but the interlinking depends on program A being used before program B, for validation or to initialize the dataset etc.
Discussion on SC 2.4.5 Note 3 that doesn't seem to have yesterday's comments from the WCAG working group incorporated.
Documents don't need to be called out specifically, as the similarity to web pages is more obvious.
SCs 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 just had minor edits so these changes look acceptable.
RESOLUTION: Accept the WCAG working group proposed changes to the definition of 'set of software' and the last 4 SCs as updated in the meeting.
<korn> FYI https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/Jan232013/results
SC 1.1.1: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/Jan232013/results#xq2
There was general agreement that saying an SC 'automatically complies' is problematic. If the context of a SC doesn't apply because that type of content doesn't exist, then the requirements wouldn't be applicable.
It would be nice if we could made this clear in general for the document.
In the WCAG world, pass is used to say you don't fail the SC, meaning this includes any SC that are not applicable.
Maybe this can be addressed as part of the conformance model.
We also need to recognize there are some differences between M376 and WCAG2ICT where we use 'must' and M376 uses 'shall'.
M376 could address some of the inconsistencies in their provisions by explaining them.
We'll readdress 1.1.1 later so we can move on in this survey.
SC 1.4.4: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/Jan232013/results#xq3
<Mike_P> The Task Force agrees that it would be beneficial if the M376 text "Content that has ... ", in 1.4.4, is changed to "Content for which there are..." to align with WCAG2ICT.
For the resolutions we make on this survey in this meeting, we are agreeing to what the best solution would be. The resolution does not indicate that the WCAG2ICT or W3C take a formal position on M376, but that we individually can submit comments to M376.
We are just trying to capture the opinion of the experts so that we have a collective viewpoint. We can capture any changes to the WCAG2ICT with resolutions, and carefully word the viewpoint using the words 'The TF reviewed the similar language in M376, and it is our considered opinion that the best language to use here is XXX'.
<korn> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/comparison-to-m376
To start, we will log the consensus and proposed resolutions into the comparison table based on the survey.
The next meeting is Friday 22 Feb, same time.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137 of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: Mary_Jo_Mueller Found ScribeNick: MaryJo Default Present: Gregg_Vanderheiden, David_MacDonald, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Mike_Pluke, Judy, Shadi, Peter_Korn, MaryJo, Kiran_Kaja, Loic_Martinez Present: Gregg_Vanderheiden +1.512.255.aaaa David_MacDonald Andi_Snow_Weaver +0162859aabb Judy Shadi Peter_Korn MaryJo Kiran_Kaja Found Date: 15 Feb 2013 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/02/15-wcag2ict-minutes.html People with action items: WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]