17:47:45 RRSAgent has joined #au 17:47:45 logging to http://www.w3.org/2014/01/13-au-irc 17:47:52 Zakim, this will be AUWG 17:47:52 ok, Jan; I see WAI_AUWG()1:00PM scheduled to start in 13 minutes 17:47:57 Meeting: WAI AU 17:48:17 Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2014JanMar/0001.html 17:48:57 Chair: Jutta Treviranus 17:50:03 Regrets: Alex L., Tim B. (partial), Cherie E. 17:57:49 WAI_AUWG()1:00PM has now started 17:57:56 +Jeanne 18:00:42 Alastairc has joined #au 18:00:55 +[IPcaller] 18:01:05 +[IPcaller.a] 18:01:25 Jutta has joined #au 18:01:33 zakim, [IPcaller] is really Jan 18:01:33 +Jan; got it 18:01:45 +[IPcaller] 18:01:58 zakim, [IPcaller.a] is really Jutta 18:01:58 +Jutta; got it 18:03:01 scribe: Jan 18:03:08 JT: Welcome back eveybody 18:03:13 JT: Maybe short agenda 18:03:23 Topic: 1. Candidate Recommendation (CR) process update 18:03:38 JS: I had a goot chat with Michael Cooper this AM 18:03:49 JS: He has done a fair amount of work so far 18:04:13 JS: When WCAG went through CR in 2008, MC built a customized test tool for WCAG tester 18:04:21 JS: Really a wonderful custom tool 18:04:51 JS: originally i thought we would just take their tool and swap out the WCAG database with ATAG database 18:05:23 JS: But after talking about this, we decided that MC will built a new ATAG layer on top 18:05:57 JS: Can then start linking together ATAG SCs and WCAG SCs 18:06:17 JS: In some cases some specific WCAG SCs referenced 18:06:35 JS: SO how it will work....if someone submits form saying they want to be a tester 18:06:51 JS: They would then say something like we have video, we don't have flash etc 18:07:05 JS: Then test harness removes SCs that won't apply.... 18:07:21 JS: Can also specify will test level vs level AA 18:07:35 JS: They would then do tests and report results right there 18:07:55 JS: So then Jutta could see a report that for Tool X, here are the reults or 18:08:22 JS: Could see for ATAG 2.0 SCs, here's where we have tests and here's what passed and didn't 18:08:37 JS: Allows reconciliation between testers if results don't agree 18:09:08 JS: He has budgeted time each week to work on it. 18:09:31 JS: Though he has lots of other pressures as well...though so far so good. Continues to progress. 18:09:48 JS: But don't have firm commitment on when will be done. 18:10:02 JT: I guess we will get head up when ready to use? 18:10:15 JT: WHat can we do to help? 18:10:23 JS: Number of things still to do. 18:10:38 JS: We need to prepare all of the sample documents that testes can use. 18:10:49 JS: Sample of text. Sample of all different media types. 18:11:12 JS: If you look at tests, thre is a lot of content that people need. 18:11:27 JS: We also need to finalize the instructions for testers, 18:11:46 JS: Let me get list... 18:11:58 JT: Any questions for Jeanne? 18:12:21 JS: Needs to be public material with no copyrights 18:12:51 JS: We also need examples of known bad material 18:13:34 JS: One thing I wanted to use is W3C before and after demo than no one objected to me using 18:14:34 JR: ERT test cases? 18:14:48 JR: e.g. files from Chris R....pics of cat etc 18:15:07 JS: I've only seen tests cases maintained at Illinois 18:15:25 JS: Did not have content...descriptions of how to test 18:18:09 JR: Just a bit concerned if test files aren't in WCAG2 order 18:22:04 JR: e.g. to test ATAG 2.0's test requirement 18:23:40 Interesting resource for DOM testing: http://www.karlgroves.com/2013/09/06/web-accessibility-testing-tools-who-tests-the-dom/ 18:24:08 AC: Very complex...since some HTML5 things don't have techniques also DOM manipulation is an issue 18:25:53 +Tim_Boland 18:26:47 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2013OctDec/att-0043/ATAG2-CR-Tests-20131206.html 18:33:40 JR: Perhaps deal with at the top of test procedure, you should say that the test procedure is X, doesn't include DOM manipulation checks. If there is DOM manipulation, you should account for that... 18:35:51 AC: Idea to ground the too;'s requirements against the type of editing that the tool can actually do (e.g. if it can do DOM manipulation or can't) 18:36:36 AC: Might need caveat that if templates include scripts that do DOM manipulation, the chjecker should account for that 18:36:51 TB: Checker should be able to account for that 18:37:31 JS: ex. EasyChirp checker will be quite simple, since the things that can be edited are quite simple (text tweets) 18:39:26 JR: Think we should keep calm and carry on.... 18:39:53 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2013OctDec/att-0043/ATAG2-CR-Tests-20131206.html 18:40:35 JR: Should we start to distribute these 7 tools to our member to create? 18:40:44 1. Web Content Accessibility Test Procedure (Level A, AA, AAA): 18:40:49 2. Platform Accessibility Service Test Procedure: 18:40:54 3. User Agent Accessibility Test Procedure (Level A only): 18:41:11 4. Accessible test content file (Level A, AA, AAA): 18:41:17 5. Non-accessible test content file (Level A, AA, AAA): 18:41:23 6. A selection of separate pieces of content: 18:41:30 7. List of "accessible content support features" (may be created during testing): 18:42:03 JT: Might be good assignment to send to the list as well. 18:42:15 JR: I will send out to the list 18:42:21 JT: Great 18:42:37 JT: Everyone should respond by next meeting 18:43:04 JR: I have not received new reports or implementations, Please send to me as usual. 18:43:12 Topic: 2. Implementation report update (Jan) 18:43:17 JR: I have not received new reports or implementations, Please send to me as usual. 18:43:23 Topic: 3. Re-chartering update 18:43:28 JS: No update. 18:43:35 Topic: 4. Other issues? 18:44:00 JS: Wonder about the group doing a sample test as a sanity check for the group. 18:44:13 JS: Before we get people lined up etc. 18:44:23 AC: I think this is a good idea 18:44:29 JR: +1 18:44:34 TB: Sounds good 18:45:07 JS: Maybe the existing doc with a couple extra columns 18:45:30 AC: Does that exist or need creating? 18:45:44 JS: Exists...see table in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2013OctDec/att-0043/ATAG2-CR-Tests-20131206.html 18:46:06 JS: Would help us understand if our basic concept was doable. 18:46:50 JS: I had someone go through Drupal to eval ATAG 2.0 and it went ok 18:46:56 s/JS/AC 18:47:13 AC: I could have them do this as well as a comparison 18:47:27 JT: How do we get this started? 18:48:01 JR: Maybe we pick a simplish tool 18:48:20 AC: Easychirp 18:48:31 JT: Great 18:49:40 JR: TinyMCE 18:50:46 http://www.tinymce.com/tryit/full.php 18:52:11 JR: I think someone should head this up and draw others in to help out 18:52:55 JR: Maybe I can chunk some tasks 18:53:17 JR: MDID Students? 18:53:33 JT: We have some keen students 18:53:40 JR: I can brief them 18:54:00 JS: Will help us determine what support info is needed. 18:55:10 -Tim_Boland 18:55:17 -Jeanne 18:55:23 -Jan 18:55:24 -Jutta 18:55:29 Next meeting: January 20 18:55:32 -[IPcaller] 18:55:33 WAI_AUWG()1:00PM has ended 18:55:33 Attendees were Jeanne, Jan, [IPcaller], Jutta, Tim_Boland 18:55:57 RRSAgent, make minutes 18:55:57 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2014/01/13-au-minutes.html Jan 18:56:02 RRSAgent, set logs public 18:56:08 Zakim, bye 18:56:08 Zakim has left #au 18:56:13 RRSAgent, bye 18:56:13 I see no action items