19:45:29 RRSAgent has joined #au 19:45:29 logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-au-irc 19:45:35 Zakim, this will be AUWG 19:45:35 ok, Jan; I see WAI_AUWG()3:00PM scheduled to start in 15 minutes 19:45:41 Meeting: WAI AU 19:45:49 Chair: Jutta Treviranus 19:46:03 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2013JanMar/0039.html 19:46:28 Regrets: Sueanne N., Tim B., Greg P. 20:00:49 WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has now started 20:00:56 +[Microsoft] 20:02:53 +Jeanne 20:03:16 jeanne has joined #au 20:03:22 zakim, who is here? 20:03:22 On the phone I see [Microsoft], Jeanne 20:03:24 On IRC I see jeanne, RRSAgent, Zakim, Jan, trackbot 20:03:31 +[IPcaller] 20:04:00 zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jan 20:04:00 +Jan; got it 20:04:39 +[Microsoft.a] 20:05:04 zakim, [Microsoft] is really Cherie 20:05:04 +Cherie; got it 20:05:15 zakim, [Microsoft.a] is really Alex 20:05:15 +Alex; got it 20:09:53 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2013JanMar/att-0036/ATAG2-10April2012PublicWD-Tests-rev20130212.html 20:11:23 Topic: A.4.1.1 Content Changes Reversible (Minimum) 20:15:13 For web-based tools, the user agent's undo function(s) may be utilized. 20:15:37 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20130107-4/results#xq3 20:15:47 AL: add text to clarify that the web based authoring tool can use the user agent undo function 20:15:57 Topic: A.4.1.2 Settings Change Confirmation 20:18:44 +[IPcaller] 20:19:13 JR: this has changed substantially from the initial survey. 20:19:37 Examine the authoring tool (including in the documentation) for mechanisms to change any preference settings within that authoring tool user interface. If there are none, then select SKIP. 20:19:38 AL: include documentation for mechanisms 20:19:55 regrets+ Sueann, Greg, Tim 20:20:22 ... if not, select Skip 20:20:51 AL: Are we asking people to do exhaustive testing? Or generally for things to work? 20:21:26 ... for example, if they have many settings, and one passes, do we assume all pass? 20:25:47 JR: What if we had an e.g. for a settings tab? 20:26:22 JT: It would be bad design for User experience to have hundreds of mechanisms or preference settings on a tab. 20:27:03 AL: there could be 3 layers of settings, if it is web based. If it is inclusive, it is a lot of settings. 20:27:25 JR: I think 2 levels, where there is a settings session and perhaps a zoom control on the toolbar. 20:27:45 ... I wouldn't want to put a settings control with 20 items to loop 20 times. 20:28:22 +Tim_Boland 20:28:46 JS: SHouldn't we be leaving this to the discretion of the tester? We are telling them to test them, and let them decide what is the best way to test it. 20:29:45 JT: it also depends on the definition of a mechanism and how much to include? Whether you need a representative set, and assume that what works in one setting will work with others. 20:30:15 AL: Look at samples vs. exhaustive. DIfference in different environments. 20:31:23 Tim has joined #au 20:31:42 Topic: A.4.1.3 Content Changes Reversible (Enhanced): 20:31:46 JR: I will add an example of a user settings dialog 20:32:22 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2013JanMar/att-0036/ATAG2-10April2012PublicWD-Tests-rev20130212.html 20:33:18 AL: accept A. 4.1.3 20:33:24 Topic: A.4.2.1 Describe Accessibility Features: 20:33:30 Topic: A.4.2.1 20:33:50 JR: 7 accepts and a typo to fix 20:41:17 AL: This would be a tremendous amount of work 20:41:29 JS: Wouldn't this already documented for MS products? 20:42:00 AL: Yes, but not from an ATAG perspective. It would be very difficult to guarentee 100%. 20:42:57 JR: In the beginning, yes, but in the future, it would be part of standard bug checking. 20:43:02 + +1.561.582.aaaa 20:43:26 zakkim, aaaa is really Sueann 20:43:33 zakim, aaaa is really Sueann 20:43:33 +Sueann; got it 20:44:49 AL: If you have 100's of features and you have to check every one. 20:45:10 JR: I agree that we need to have a statement about sampling methodology at the top 20:45:25 JR: It's the same with WCAG testing, you have 100,000's of pages and you need to have some kind of sampling. 20:45:51 TB: The Evaluation Task Force has issues with Sampling and they are discussing them. 20:46:08 JR: Please go back to them and ask them to look at representative sampling. 20:46:33 JT: There are many strategies for representative sampling, please ask them to look at it. 20:46:50 TB: There are ways the statistical sampling can be written into the requirements. 20:47:07 JR: If anyone has links to sampling apps, please send it to the list. 20:47:47 JT: Once you have the parameters set out, then you can apply the methods used in any sampling of a data set. 20:48:08 JR: The apps usually have a structure of things always used, down to things used less and less. 20:48:18 JT: That would be the parameter for the sampling. 20:48:38 JR: I would use that as information to put in a introduction to sampling. 20:49:02 TB: One of the NIST statisticians has done work in this area for a project similar to WCAG. 20:49:18 JT: In the area of software quality assurance, there is a lot of work that has been done. 20:49:23 Topic: A.4.2.2 Document All Features 20:49:57 AL: accepts 20:50:05 Topic: B.1.1.1 Content Auto-Generation After Authoring Sessions (WCAG) 20:50:24 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20130107-4/results#xq8 20:50:32 JR: All accepted in the survey 20:53:26 AL: Wording seems "squishy" uses "try" 20:53:47 JR: Instead of adding content where the author may have introduced error. 20:53:56 AL: then shouldn't it be static test. 20:54:20 Sueann has joined #au 20:54:26 JR: We have talked about this before, it could be an empty string, or it could be a pdf. 20:54:33 AL: I'm ok with it. 20:55:17 Topic: Re-chartering AUWG 20:55:23 Scribe: Jan 20:55:25 http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2010/auwg_charter.html 20:55:34 JS: Our WG has a charter 20:55:41 Last chartered 2010 20:55:46 Expires June 30 20:55:57 We need to have a new first draft by Mar 15 20:56:20 The most important thing we need to do as a group is to set the miletsones 20:56:36 As you can see last time the milestones were way off 20:56:43 We had expected a LC in 2010 20:57:05 I would like everyone to please look at what it will take 20:57:25 Once we finiosh these tests and exit criteria we are then into CR 20:58:06 To get into PR we will need 2 products that demonstrate the overall feasibility...we are talking about multiple products in 6 different categories 20:58:29 And write a report... 20:58:35 How long will it take us? 20:58:48 JT: Are you thinking we should come up with those today? 20:59:24 JS: No but I'd like any of the major vendors considering submitting products to consider how long 20:59:32 JT: Should we do this with a survey? 20:59:42 JS: OK 20:59:43 JR: +1 20:59:50 Action: Jeanne to create a survey to ask the group the milestones for CR? 20:59:50 Created ACTION-384 - Create a survey to ask the group the milestones for CR? [on Jeanne F Spellman - due 2013-03-04]. 20:59:58 TB: Do we need different types of prooducts? 21:00:21 JS: Maybe we can discuss next week... 21:00:28 JS: We need to have overall examples 21:01:06 JS: WCAG just had to find 2 different sites for each level 21:01:18 JS: More complicated for authoring tools.... 21:01:31 JS: So perhaps...example of a blog, example of a translation toll, etc. 21:01:38 -Tim_Boland 21:02:25 JS: Can this be articulated in a survey? 21:02:40 s/JS/JT 21:02:52 JT: OK, we have reached top of the hour 21:03:11 -Alex 21:03:17 -Sueann 21:03:22 -Jeanne 21:03:26 -Cherie 21:04:29 -[IPcaller] 21:04:32 -Jan 21:04:33 WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has ended 21:04:33 Attendees were Jeanne, Jan, Cherie, Alex, [IPcaller], Tim_Boland, +1.561.582.aaaa, Sueann 21:09:03 RRSAgent, make minutes 21:09:03 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-au-minutes.html Jan 21:09:11 RRSAgent, set logs public 21:09:18 Zakim, bye 21:09:18 Zakim has left #au 21:09:24 RRSAgent, bye 21:09:24 I see 1 open action item saved in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-au-actions.rdf : 21:09:24 ACTION: Jeanne to create a survey to ask the group the milestones for CR? [1] 21:09:24 recorded in http://www.w3.org/2013/02/25-au-irc#T20-59-50