Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group Teleconference

Review of WCAG-EM

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2013Dec/0005

SAM: you're invited to review by Friday

SAZ: you're invited to review by Friday
... ... only review things necessary before publication, in the survey please distinguish what is necessary before publication and what can be done after that

CV: interesting but not possible before friday

Progress on Pointer Methods in RDF

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/TR/Pointers-in-RDF10/

SAZ: samuel has been reviewing the document and has improvement ideas, new pointers
... ... and contributing as an editor, looking into more detail on what can be improved
... plans to keep moving into completion of EARL

CV: will incorporate EARL export in the final release of their customer version, looking into the different parts

Update on Accessibility Support Database

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/accessibility-support/

SAZ: Accessibility Support Database developed through WAI-ACT, tool is complete and stable, test cases and results are being created
... if developers know which features are accessibility supported, developers will take that into account
... work more closely to EOWG...

Discussion of draft AERT (working title)

<shadi> http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/WD-AERT/ED-AERT

SAZ: [on previous topic] ... announcements will be made when WG are more comfortable with the work done

<shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2013Dec/0004.html

SAZ: comments by samuel were discussed last week, we had been discussing about wording in two particular features (2 and 3?)
... ... on consistency of words like can, should and may

http://www.w3.org/2013/12/04-er-minutes.html#item02

scribe: first point (of those comments) is closed

SAZ: second point commented by samuel was about the consistency of the tone
... passive tone adds formality but makes more difficult to read, active makes it easier to read but can be less formal

CV: the whole document in passive is not a good idea

SAZ: one thing is a matter how chatty and narrative versus how objective and concise; and another thing is active vs passive

SAM: it's a matter of consistency, I'm not inclining towards one and another

CV: has tried to avoid normative language... after shadi's

SAZ: we are trying to make it concise, non-normative, formal, and active

CV: got the point, will try to work on it (we did not get advances when discussing)

Next Meeting

regrets next week, with egyrs, will be http://www.w3c.es/Eventos/2013/DiaW3C/agenda

SAZ: no meeting next week, next meeting on Jan 8
... we need the final version of the draft of WCAG-EM to be approved by Thursday...

<egyrs> OK.

SAZ: ... need ERT members answer by email by Wed to say whether publication is approved

ok