12:57:23 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #er
12:57:23 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/02/20-er-irc
12:57:25 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:57:25 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #er
12:57:27 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 3794
12:57:27 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG()8:30AM scheduled to start in 33 minutes
12:57:28 <trackbot> Meeting: Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group Teleconference
12:57:28 <trackbot> Date: 20 February 2013
13:30:49 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()8:30AM has now started
13:30:56 <Zakim> +Shadi
13:32:55 <carlos> carlos has joined #er
13:33:25 <Zakim> +Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
13:34:40 <cstrobbe> cstrobbe has joined #er
13:35:22 <shadi> zakim, code?
13:35:22 <Zakim> the conference code is 3794 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), shadi
13:36:33 <Zakim> + +49.711.892.3.aaaa
13:36:41 <cstrobbe> zakim, +49.711 is cstrobbe
13:36:41 <Zakim> +cstrobbe; got it
13:37:03 <shadi> Topic: Requirements for AERT
13:37:18 <shadi> CV: would like to focus on the code developers
13:37:31 <shadi> SAZ: do we have the resources to do that?
13:37:47 <shadi> CV: give an overall introduction
13:37:58 <shadi> ...not do implementation plan for each requirement
13:38:18 <shadi> ...introduce what the major problems are
13:39:00 <shadi> SAZ: what exactly would be a "major problem"?
13:39:16 <shadi> CV: issues on interpreting techniques and failures
13:39:29 <shadi> ...developers often don't understand that
13:39:38 <shadi> ...so many ways to implement checks
13:39:54 <shadi> ...problems when you are developing an authoring tool
13:40:20 <shadi> ...explain what support is needed
13:40:22 <shadi> ...for example rendering the DOM
13:42:31 <shadi> CS: seems developers may the primary audience
13:42:45 <shadi> ...not sure how we can address "managers"
13:43:23 <shadi> CV: prefer developers or end-users
13:43:33 <shadi> ...difficult to define what the "managers" are
13:44:33 <shadi> SAZ: end-users are not our primary target audience for this
13:44:46 <shadi> ...have EO resource "selecting web accessibility evaluation tools"
13:44:56 <shadi> ...will also be updated along with this
13:45:15 <shadi> ...but here our focus is not end-users
13:45:18 <shadi> CS: think also procurers would fit into a separate document
13:49:15 <shadi> SAZ: explaining techniques and failures should also not be the main focus of our document
13:49:19 <shadi> ...think it is on WCAG WG radar already
13:49:35 <shadi> ...maybe summarize from eval tool developer perspective
13:49:47 <shadi> ...and reference existing WCAG resources
13:50:14 <shadi> CV: it is one of the most important issues that eval tool developers have
13:50:51 <shadi> CS: not all Success Criteria have common failures
13:51:26 <shadi> ...sometimes deemed not necessary when it is just the inverse of the Success Criteria
13:51:38 <shadi> ...but maybe out of date with the evaluation methodology
13:52:55 <shadi> SAZ: evaluation methodology does not go into that level of detail
13:53:15 <shadi> ...not sure if we have the bandwidth to develop failure techniques
13:53:25 <shadi> ...need something less broad but still significant progress in the field
13:53:41 <shadi> CS: would need to convince WCAG WG on the need for failure techniques anyway
13:56:59 <shadi> SAZ: last week we talked about a "framework" with a list of features that tools could have
13:57:15 <shadi> ...broad selection of possibilities
13:57:30 <shadi> ...developers could explore how their tools could support these features
13:57:55 <shadi> CV: that alone may be not too attractive
13:59:19 <shadi> ...missing failure techniques is a big issue for tool developers
13:59:41 <shadi> ...also explaining the overall evaluation process and where testing fits in
14:00:24 <shadi> ...need to consider white-box, black-box, and other sorts of testing
14:01:52 <shadi> SAZ: think dialog now with WCAG WG on updating guidance on techniques and failures
14:02:16 <shadi> ...need to bring in our perspectives into this discussion
14:02:23 <shadi> ...but not take up the development of failures ourselves
14:02:50 <shadi> CV: not shortcoming of WCAG but need explanation from eval tool developer perspective
14:03:18 <shadi> CS: would that list of features be for developers or for procurers?
14:06:23 <shadi> SAZ: think it has dual role but we probably want to primarily focus on developers
14:07:04 <shadi> ...but this same list of features could be reused in the "selecting web accessibility evaluation tools" and "web accessibility evaluation tools list" resources of EOWG
14:07:18 <shadi> ...to address other audiences such as end-users, procurers, etc
14:09:26 <shadi> SAZ: how about if this list of features was embedded into overall description of the evaluation process, the different types of testing and when they typcially take place in the evaluation process, and "profiles" of types of web accessibility evaluation tools?
14:09:34 <shadi> CV: could try that approach
14:10:39 <shadi> CS: would the description of the evaluation process be part of the document?
14:10:49 <shadi> SAZ: yes, but from a tool developer perspective
14:12:04 <shadi> [methodology Step 1.d and 4.c]
14:13:37 <shadi> SAZ: need to keep overall background concise
14:13:47 <shadi> ...focus needs to be on the features and profiles
14:14:04 <shadi> ...gives targets for eval tool developers to strive towards
14:16:02 <shadi> CV: will send update by this Friday
14:16:26 <shadi> Topic: Approval of WCAG-EM publication as updated Working Draft
14:17:27 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20130219
14:17:46 <shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20130208
14:18:01 <shadi> http://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20130208&doc2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FER%2Fconformance%2FED-methodology-20130219
14:21:27 <shadi> CS: how long will the commenting period be?
14:21:34 <shadi> SAZ: think 3 or 4 weeks
14:23:18 <shadi> RESOLUTION: approval to publish as updated Working Draft
14:23:56 <shadi> Topic: Next meeting
14:24:02 <shadi> no meeting next week
14:24:30 <shadi> next meeting March 6th
14:24:40 <shadi> next meeting March 13th
14:24:56 <shadi> s/next meeting March 13th/no meeting March 13th
14:25:03 <shadi> meeting again on March 20th
14:25:39 <shadi> trackbot, end meeting
14:25:39 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
14:25:39 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Shadi, Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, +49.711.892.3.aaaa, cstrobbe
14:25:41 <Zakim> -cstrobbe
14:25:42 <Zakim> -Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
14:25:47 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:25:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/20-er-minutes.html trackbot
14:25:48 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
14:25:48 <RRSAgent> I see no action items
14:25:49 <Zakim> -Shadi
14:25:50 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()8:30AM has ended
14:25:50 <Zakim> Attendees were Shadi, Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, +49.711.892.3.aaaa, cstrobbe