<trackbot> Date: 05 August 2015

preview agenda with items from two minutes

<janina> scribe: janina

cs: Noting a Google and Mozilla effort re creating a Web API. Will follow up and try to get them involved with WAPA and IndieUI

rs: SVG Mapping Guide, hopefully by end of month.

ARIA.Next Items

<ShaneM> scribenick: ShaneM

Discussion of DPub and concerns about A11Y

tzviya: lots of groups working on A11Y. A chief concern now.
... while things have not been used much in the past, they are being used extensively now.
... covered in our note

richardschwerdtfeger: there is a bunch of concern about litigation and learning system publishers are very aware

janina: There isn't specific requirements for things like describedat or whatever. The requirement is to be able to make the materials available.
... longdesc or describedat are really easy for browsers to implement. I dont see publishers asking for specific technology, they just need a solution.
... longdesc is out there now. alternatives that are proposed are not necessarily adequate.
... so why not just stick with longdesc as it is. describedat offers one thing that longdesc doesn't - you can annotate on any element
... we have not developed extensive use cases for why that is a good feature

richardschwerdtfeger: the initial impetus for describedat came from SVG.
... Gerardo Capriel (sp?)
... it is in the SVG2 spec at the moment.

cyns: My goal with describedat was to end the political fight about longdesc.

janina: and that didn't work unfortunately.

tzviya: The note that the DPUB IG sent to PF - does it spell out the use cases where longdesc is not sufficient?

janina: I don't think it does. It is pretty much about images.

tzviya: we tried to give some examples where longdesc might not be sufficient - where richer markup is needed.

janina: I will re-read.

<tzviya> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-1.1/states_and_properties#aria-describedat

tzviya: I will work with the group who wrote the note to get some better examples.

<tzviya> wrong link, https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Jul/0042.html

richardschwerdtfeger: I want to keep the drama to a minimum. Vote based upon the information that is provided.
... do we have enough support from publishers.

janina: judy might want to talk ahead of the task force meeting so that we can ensure that everything is covered.

richardschwerdtfeger: we will need a really good minute taker

janina: tzviya can go forward with invitations to the meeting.

richardschwerdtfeger: do I need to add anyone else specifically to the list of invitees?

tzviya: Just copy the dpub group and I will forward

richardschwerdtfeger: I could copy the ePub list.

tzviya: I will take care of forwarding.

richardschwerdtfeger: ARIA 1.1 issues should be wrapped in the next month or two
... after the 13 August meeting we are going to start talking about test harnesses.

janina: making good progress

richardschwerdtfeger: Joanie is doing a great job as editor.

Rechartering Progress

<MichaelC> updated draft APA charter

janina: we have redrafted charters based upon balloting. Formal objections to both.

MichaelC: only the APA charters have changes of note
... scope section was redundant and confusing - asked to clarify without changing meaning.
... restructured within 4 groupings...
... avoiding major rewording to about a third go-around with the AC.

richardschwerdtfeger: where are task forces mentioned?

MichaelC: I don't have a section like that in the APA and ARIA charters

janina: Task Forces are covered in the communications section

Ryladog: Do we need to mention additional task forces and other deliverables (e.g., the web payments user accessibility requirements)

janina: you could reasonably add Web Payments

MichaelC: I didnt mention it in the charter draft...

janina: sure - you didn't know about it yet.

MichaelC: additional things are covered in the "including but not limited to" clause so we shouldn't make substantive changes.

janina: yes. dont make changes that will cause a re-review.

MichaelC: there will be a web page that describes all the deliverables. That can be expanded as needed.

cyns: a primary microsoft concern is that we produce "how to" and "requirements" documents.

Ryladog: security group has a sort of checklist document with questions other groups should ask themselves. Should we do that?

janina: Is that WTAG?

MichaelC: That is what WTAG is meant to do.

cyns: I like the idea of a question format.

MichaelC: I feel the need for a comprehensive document. But checklists are important to working groups.
... we should have a checklist sooner than later so working groups have something to work with in the near term.
... fill in and expand the check list going forward.

Ryladog: shouldn't PF be writing that?

janina: yes. and it is in the charter.

cyns: it may not be clear from the charter that we are doing this.

MichaelC: Judy likes WTAG

ShaneM: Wouldn't clarifying trigger a re-review?

MichaelC: If it is just a clarification then it might not. Need guidance on that.
... i don't know how to clarify things that a) we don't know ourselves, and b) without being massively wordy.

richardschwerdtfeger: The Cognitive stuff seems buried. There is already a task force. Why isn't it featured?

MichaelC: part of it might be that the group is part of the APA, but the deliverables might come out of WCAG and ARIA.

richardschwerdtfeger: but COGA is important to industry. Cognitive accessibility is the next big thing.

MichaelC: Document does mention the deliverables and the taskforce.
... trying to avoid making substantive changes.

richardschwerdtfeger: I am just wondering of it should be a bullet under the areas of work being done.

MichaelC: that would be a more substantial change - we can propose it and see what people say.

janina: I am concerned that featuring one group will cause other groups to come forward and say "why isn't my group featured?"

richardschwerdtfeger: yes but cognitive goes way beyond the 'content'. It is a very broad topic.

janina: the charter is just about what we are spending time on and what we expect to publish.
... I am not to worried if something doesn't appear here prominently.
... we have other ways to promote work as it is developed.

ShaneM: does anyone actually look at the charter other than us?

<Ryladog> Security and Privacy Questionnaire (fro spececifications) draft document: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy_and_security_questionnaire

janina: Maybe. But we need to try to be clear. I prefer to under promise and over deliver.

cyns: would a CAUR be a good thing to do for cognitive?

MichaelC: the charter allows us to work on cognitive and thats all we need.
... the question I was asked is does the reorganization lose any meaning.

cyns: The AURs aren't really called out and they are valiable.

MichaelC: at the time this was written we didnt have the other AURs on our radar.

cyns: maybe we could say "develop additional accessibility user guides / requirements"

<Ryladog> Self-Review Questionnaire: Security and Privacy: https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/

MichaelC: Maybe. see if it clarifies and doesnt trigger a new review
... I don't know what edits might trigger a new review.

<richardschwerdtfeger> ?

MichaelC: changes to work style are documented on the new web site.

<Zakim> ShaneM, you wanted to ask about names

<MichaelC> Proposed Decision Policy for APA

MichaelC: PF has been operating under an informal decision policy.

janina: thats only because we never wrote it up. But we have a 48 hour policy etc. and kept that in the charter. It is basically our current practice.
... email archives are important. we do lots of things to help find things in our email. structuring subjects is a key tool

MichaelC: I have been writing a tool that sees minutes and updates the links to minutes on a page. An update to this will look for resolutions and capture those as well.

cyns: there are people who really want us to use github for discussions

MichaelC: we are attempting to accommodate everyone's desires. But just as we can't do only e-mail, we can't do only github

cyns: the use case to think about is how to link all of them.

janina: on going project. A 'bias' is just that. Any time you have one it is going to a problem for someone else.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.140  of Date: 2014-11-06 18:16:30  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/neede.d/needed./
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina
Found ScribeNick: ShaneM
ScribeNicks: ShaneM, janina
Present: janina Tzviya_Siegman Joanmarie_Diggs Rich_Schwerdtfeger Katie Haritos-Shea MichaelC Cyns Rich ShaneM
Found Date: 05 Aug 2015
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/08/05-pf-minutes.html
People with action items: