07:14:29 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #chairing
07:14:29 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/10/20-chairing-irc
07:14:31 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #chairing
07:14:56 <koalie> meeting: Chair Training - Fifth episode: "Horizontal Review" (session 2)
07:15:16 <koalie> -> http://www.w3.org/2015/10/13-chairing-minutes.html Previous session (2015-10-13)
07:15:49 <koalie> agenda: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2015OctDec/0033.html
07:16:07 <koalie> koalie has changed the topic to: "horizontal review" chair training: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2015OctDec/0033.html
07:18:26 <koalie> chair: VirginieGalindo
07:18:51 <koalie> regrets: Nick_Telford-Reed
07:19:03 <koalie> regrets+ Jeff_Jaffe
07:35:56 <Florian_> Florian_ has joined #chairing
07:47:32 <chaals> chaals has joined #chairing
07:55:40 <Florian> Florian has joined #chairing
08:00:14 <koalie> present+ Coralie
08:00:18 <Judy> Judy has joined #chairing
08:00:27 <Florian> present+ Florian
08:02:15 <wseltzer_transit> present+ wseltzer
08:02:28 <virginie> virginie has joined #chairing
08:02:52 <koalie> scribenick: koalie
08:02:52 <Judy> present+ Judy
08:03:11 <r12a> r12a has joined #chairing
08:03:21 <Florian> Restarting computer then
08:03:28 <kevg> kevg has joined #chairing
08:04:29 <r12a> present+ r12a
08:04:39 <AdamCrofts> AdamCrofts has joined #chairing
08:04:40 <virginie> present+ virginie
08:04:43 <yoav> yoav has joined #chairing
08:04:46 <koalie> present+ NatashaRooney
08:04:54 <koalie> presents+ AndreasTai
08:05:01 <r12a> zakim, who's here?
08:05:01 <Zakim> Present: Coralie, Florian, wseltzer, Judy, r12a, virginie, NatashaRooney
08:05:01 <yoav> present+ yoav
08:05:03 <Zakim> On IRC I see yoav, AdamCrofts, kevg, r12a, virginie, Judy, chaals, Zakim, RRSAgent, wseltzer_transit, astearns, koalie, schuki
08:05:09 <koalie> present+ AndreasTai
08:05:21 <koalie> present+ RenatoIanella
08:05:32 <koalie> present+ AdamCrofts
08:05:56 <AdrianHB> AdrianHB has joined #chairing
08:06:08 <koalie> present+ Adrien
08:06:16 <koalie> present+ FlorianRivoal
08:06:28 <Florian> Florian has joined #chairing
08:06:40 <koalie> [15 people on call]
08:07:15 <koalie> -> http://www.w3.org/2015/10/W3C-transversal-review-101_13OCT2015.pdf Slides
08:07:23 <AdrianHB> s/present+ Adrien/present+ AdrianHB/
08:07:42 <renato> renato has joined #chairing
08:08:13 <renato_> renato_ has joined #chairing
08:08:18 <koalie> Topic: Objective of that hour (slide 1)
08:08:28 <koalie> VG: horizontal review are important for the web
08:08:48 <koalie> ... Horizontal review is about support of privacy, security, accessibility and internationalization
08:09:20 <koalie> ... all deliverables of the W3C are concerned
08:09:36 <koalie> ... wonder if it's OK in terms of accessibility, security, privacy and so on
08:10:02 <koalie> ... goal: Make a trustable web for all, that scales for business
08:10:19 <koalie> ... so we're spending some time with education and have identified some materials
08:10:24 <renato> help: should I be seeing the slides in the WebEx window??
08:10:28 <koalie> Topic: Why, when and how should you horizontally review ? (slide 4)
08:11:56 <koalie> Topic: Horizontal review mechanics (slide 5)
08:12:04 <koalie> VG: contact the appropriate reviewer
08:12:10 <koalie> ... share your timeline for your spec
08:12:44 <koalie> ... you may have an initial feeling of what you need some help on
08:12:47 <koalie> ... share that
08:13:21 <koalie> ... you know the technology so you probably know where you need attention
08:13:26 <renato_> renato_ has joined #chairing
08:13:37 <koalie> ... another good practice: identify a champion in your group to deal with the horizontal reviewer
08:13:47 <renato_> got it: http://www.w3.org/2015/10/W3C-transversal-review-101_13OCT2015.pdf
08:13:57 <koalie> present+ KevinGavigan
08:14:06 <koalie> present+ DanielPeintner
08:14:30 <koalie> Florian: with regards to the champion, isn't that naturally the editor?
08:14:42 <koalie> VG: The objective depends on how heavy the work will be
08:14:47 <koalie> ... your editor can be the champion
08:15:10 <koalie> ... but someone in the group with a special interest in a11y, i18n, security or privacy, that might be that person
08:15:27 <koalie> ... It's important this person doesn't have thousands of things to do wrt the spec
08:16:16 <koalie> Florian: Bandwidth: my impression is that groups are heavily loaded already; is it practical to ask for review earlier given that things may change significantly?
08:16:25 <r12a> q+
08:16:49 <koalie> VG: earlier review is more to ensure the Group has on their todo list to care about horizontal review
08:16:53 <koalie> ... and raise awareness
08:17:06 <koalie> ... you don't want to have to change the whole spec if you seek review too late
08:17:46 <koalie> ... early review should not overload the expert, but start initiating the dialogue on awareness, education and accurate shaping of the technology happens when the spec matures
08:17:55 <koalie> Richard: you covered what I would have said
08:18:10 <koalie> ... as a representative of a review group (i18n) we're happier to do earlier reviews
08:18:22 <koalie> ... we'll have problems of load at each step anyway
08:18:34 <Judy> q+ to also support Virginie's reply with an example for accessibility
08:18:41 <koalie> ... if we can intersect at FPWD, we can spot areas that need to be worked on
08:18:51 <koalie> ... it's a quality principle
08:19:03 <koalie> ... do things up front to avoid problems further along in the process
08:19:31 <koalie> VG: review has to happen along the life of the spec you're delivering
08:19:33 <koalie> ack  next
08:19:36 <koalie> ack next
08:19:37 <Zakim> Judy, you wanted to also support Virginie's reply with an example for accessibility
08:19:47 <koalie> Judy: There is a bandwidth problem at any point
08:19:58 <renato> renato has joined #chairing
08:20:35 <koalie> ... but often we find people who thinks accessibility problems will arise as spec matures, but we find it's better to intersect earlier
08:20:45 <koalie> Topic: Reviews... (slide 6)
08:20:54 <koalie> VG: You have 4 reviews to conduct
08:21:03 <koalie> ... in addition to business as usual
08:21:17 <koalie> ... this is the guarantee of Open Web consistency
08:21:19 <koalie> ... so be brave
08:21:25 <koalie> ... you won't be alone
08:21:35 <koalie> ... ensure that those reviews happen with your champions
08:21:49 <koalie> ... What I suggest is that we review in next slides the horizontal domains
08:22:17 <koalie> ... let's see what is at stake and what materials will be at your hand
08:22:26 <koalie> Topic: Internationalization : I18n (slide 7)
08:22:35 <koalie> VG: To ensure that the technology supports text in any writing system of the world
08:22:35 <nigel> nigel has joined #chairing
08:22:50 <nigel> Present+ nigel
08:23:48 <koalie> Topic: I18n structure (slide 8)
08:23:55 <koalie> VG: Internationalization (i18n) is part of the Interaction Domain
08:24:11 <koalie> ... i18n IG, WG and Tag Set IG and some community groups
08:24:21 <koalie> ... ask your review to the Internationalization WG
08:24:33 <koalie> Topic: I18n support (slide 9)
08:24:38 <koalie> VG: resources
08:24:51 <koalie> -> http://www.w3.org/International/techniques/developing-specs-dynamic Internationalization Techniques:
08:25:09 <koalie> s/Techniques:/Techniques: Developing specifications/
08:25:20 <renato_> renato_ has joined #chairing
08:26:13 <koalie> VG: slide 10 has the list of people to contact in i18n
08:26:24 <koalie> ... Richard, would you like to add anything?
08:26:53 <r12a> www-international@w3.org
08:26:56 <koalie> Richard: Yes, please do not write to me. You'll get better answers if you involve more people; www-international@w3.org
08:27:09 <r12a> pubic-i18n-core@w3.org
08:27:20 <koalie> ... if you want to engage the i18n WG before the review: public-i18n-core@w3.org
08:27:29 <koalie> ... Addison will schedule a review for you
08:27:34 <r12a> Internationalization Best Practices for Spec Developers
08:27:44 <koalie> ... today we'll public a FPWD of Internationalization Best Practices for Spec Developers
08:27:56 <koalie> s/public/publish/
08:27:57 <r12a> http://www.w3.org/International/techniques/developing-specs-dynamic
08:28:14 <koalie> Richard: hoping this will be a useful thing for you
08:28:22 <koalie> ... consult yourselves before talking to us
08:28:32 <koalie> ... we organised DOs and DONTs by task
08:28:56 <koalie> ... We're in the early stage of committing this to electronic paper, so you should feel free to discuss this with us
08:29:09 <koalie> ... but a checklist of this kind is useful for you in the early stages
08:29:22 <r12a> http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/openissues/
08:29:26 <koalie> ... another thing: if you interact with us, we'll raise issues on your list and our list; keep both lists copies
08:30:23 <koalie> ... one more thing: designate champions for horizontal reviews, but don't leave all the work related to i18n to that champion
08:30:41 <koalie> ... the whole of the wg should learn and next time they write a spec they have that knowledge
08:31:13 <koalie> Topic: Accessibility : A11y (slide 11)
08:31:27 <koalie> VG: Accessibility allows anyone – including the ones with disabilities – to access the Web
08:31:41 <koalie> ... Web accessibility supports social inclusion, but also improve SEO and device independence
08:31:50 <koalie> ... important for making a good web
08:32:15 <koalie> ... Accessibility targets web content, user agent, assistive devices, authoring tools, and evaluation tools
08:32:50 <koalie> Topic: A11y structure (slide 12)
08:33:01 <koalie> VG: WAI is responsible for accessibility at W3C
08:33:30 <koalie> ... keep in mind that as chair and editor, you'll need to ask your review to APA WG Accessible
08:33:35 <koalie> ... Platform Architectures (APA) WG
08:33:45 <koalie> ... formerly Protocols and Formats Working Group
08:33:54 <koalie> Topic: A11y support (slide 12)
08:34:05 <koalie> VG: Resources
08:34:06 <koalie> [[
08:34:12 <koalie> Draft best practices for developing specifications: 

08:34:12 <koalie> Web Technology Accessibility Guidelines
 http://w3c.github.io/pfwg/wtag/wtag.html
 Draft Checklist: http://w3c.github.io/pfwg/ wtag/checklist
08:34:15 <koalie> • 7/24 irc channel for discussion (but not complete review)
08:34:17 <koalie> – https://github.com/w3c/a11ySlackers
08:34:20 <koalie> ]]
08:34:40 <koalie> VG: Slide 14 has the list of people to contact in accessibility
08:35:11 <koalie> ... send your requests to wai-xtech@w3.org mailing list
08:35:19 <koalie> ... Judy, would you like to add a few words
08:35:27 <koalie> Judy: Thanks for the introduction, Virginie
08:35:33 <koalie> ... there are different groups in WAI
08:36:00 <koalie> ... two main contacts for accessibility review are Janina Sajka, chair of FPWG to become APA WG
08:36:06 <koalie> ... and Michael Cooper is the team contact
08:36:15 <koalie> ... there are a few mailing lists associated with APA
08:36:15 <Judy>     public-apa@w3.org: ordinary Working Group discussion;
08:36:15 <Judy>     public-apa-comments@w3.org: public comments on publication;
08:36:15 <Judy>     wai-xtech@w3.org: Working Group discussions involving a wider audience than the WG membership, and where specification review announcements and submissions are copied;
08:36:16 <Judy>     w3c-wai-ig@w3.org: announcements of Working Group activities including publications, key events, and specification reviews.
08:36:57 <koalie> Judy: there's one of the WG regular discussion, for comments on the work. wai-xtech is the one we recommend for horizontal reviews, as well as the WAI IG list
08:37:36 <renato> renato has joined #chairing
08:37:41 <koalie> ... there is a document: web technology accessibility guidelines (provisional name)
08:37:57 <koalie> ... about requirements for specs; that has a checklist
08:38:09 <koalie> ... this is a priority to complete this document in the next few month
08:38:14 <koalie> s/month/months/
08:38:25 <koalie> ... to allow self-checking for implications
08:38:39 <koalie> ... before asking review to APA
08:38:48 <koalie> ... but don't hesistate to contact us directly
08:39:00 <koalie> ... in addition, that group is to better liaise with other groups
08:39:29 <koalie> ... Groups, work with us, develop liaisons, ensure to coordinate back with APA
08:40:01 <koalie> q?
08:40:21 <koalie> Topic: Privacy (slide 15)
08:41:08 <koalie> VG: User activity is considered something that could be private
08:41:24 <koalie> ... privacy domain helps W3C ensure the web platform doesn't harm the user's privacy
08:41:35 <koalie> ... includes tracking user, fingerprinting of the machine, and the API design
08:41:44 <koalie> Topic: Privacy structure (slide 16)
08:41:55 <koalie> VG: Privacy at W3C http://www.w3.org/Privacy/
08:42:07 <koalie> ... Ask review to Privacy Interest Group
08:42:17 <koalie> Topic: Privacy support (slide 17)
08:42:21 <koalie> VG: Resources
08:42:28 <koalie> [[
08:42:29 <koalie> (draft) Guidelines
08:42:29 <koalie> – Fingerprint guidance for editors
08:42:29 <koalie> • http://w3c.github.io/fingerprinting-guidance/
08:42:29 <koalie> – TAG review questionnaire (covering security and privacy)
08:42:31 <koalie> • https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/
08:42:33 <koalie> ]]
08:43:45 <koalie> VG: slide 19 has a list of contacts
08:44:03 <koalie> ... you should contact Christine Runnegar runnegar@isoc.org and Tara Whalen tjwhalen@gmail.com the co-chairs of PING
08:44:11 <koalie> .... Nick Doty is the team contact
08:44:32 <nigel> q+
08:44:33 <koalie> ... sending an e-mail to Christine or Tara initiates your review
08:44:38 <koalie> ack next
08:45:06 <koalie> Nigel: I wonder if all the reviews are needed only when APIs are being specified?
08:45:19 <koalie> VG: As soon as you're getting a technology specified, you should ask reviews
08:46:03 <koalie> VG: chaals raised a good question during session 1 last week
08:46:22 <koalie> ... if my privacy review demonstrate that my technology isn't good, what happens?
08:46:30 <koalie> ... Wendy said the spec may not go to REC
08:46:50 <Florian> unlike i18n, for privacy we should raise questions to the chairs directly, not to the IG mailing list?
08:46:52 <koalie> ... so have in mind that technology that doesn't go through review or has negative feedback is at risk of not being finalised
08:47:16 <koalie> [Coralie: Florian, yes]
08:47:34 <koalie> Topic: Security (slide 18)
08:48:00 <koalie> VG: this is about making sure to prevent security leaks on the Web
08:48:19 <koalie> ... security activity aims to adapt the web security model with new features and special care in the API design
08:48:37 <koalie> Topic: Security structure (slide 20)
08:48:53 <koalie> VG: Security at W3C http://www.w3.org/Security/
08:49:02 <koalie> ... Reviews must be asked to Security Interest Group and TAG
08:49:22 <koalie> ... at the moment, the TAG is active on security aspects
08:49:30 <Florian> q+
08:49:37 <koalie> Topic: Security support (slide 21)
08:49:42 <koalie> VG: resources
08:49:44 <koalie> [[
08:49:49 <koalie> (draft) Guidelines
08:49:49 <koalie> – TAG review questionnaire (covering security and privacy)
08:49:49 <koalie> • https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/
08:49:50 <koalie> ]]
08:50:10 <koalie> VG: This is a draft but a good starter to raise questions and trigger discussions in your group(s)
08:50:20 <koalie> ... slide 22 has contacts
08:50:22 <koalie> [[
08:50:29 <koalie> Web Security chair
08:50:29 <koalie> – Virginie Galindo virginie.galindo@gemalto.com
08:50:29 <koalie> • TAG co-chairs
08:50:29 <koalie> – Dan Applequist appelquist@gmail.com – Peter Linss peter.linss@hp.com
08:50:29 <koalie> • Security team contact:
08:50:32 <koalie> – Wendy Seltzer wseltzer@w3.org
08:50:34 <r12a> q+
08:50:34 <koalie> ]]
08:50:38 <koalie> ack next
08:50:59 <koalie> Florian: We have been using the TAG self-assessment questionnaire in the CSS WG
08:51:10 <koalie> ... I wasn't aware that the TAG wanted people to engage with the TAG
08:51:21 <koalie> ... we have TAG members in the CSS WG but I haven't heard about that
08:51:58 <koalie> VG: experts in security are more in the TAG than Security Interest Group
08:52:13 <koalie> ... e.g. Mark Nottingham, Yan Zhu
08:52:41 <koalie> ... I'm trying to get more expert to the Security Interest Group
08:52:56 <koalie> ... but that the moment, security is a "poor" domain, lacking volunteers to perform reviews
08:53:12 <koalie> ack next
08:53:13 <Florian> q-
08:53:39 <koalie> Richard: I wanted to say two things; we're restricted in the number of people able to do i18n reviews
08:53:43 <AdrianHB> AdrianHB has joined #chairing
08:54:00 <koalie> ... if you're aware of anyone in your companies willing to help, please let us know and we'll be happy to have them on board
08:54:25 <koalie> ... Another thing is that we'll read your specs with our understanding. Some specs are hard to read.
08:54:46 <koalie> ... if you put things in algorithmic form without adding a description, this makes it hard for us to understand it well enough
08:55:01 <koalie> ... if you have examples in your specs, that is extreeeemely helpful for us
08:55:10 <koalie> ... try to make your specs as readable as possible
08:55:17 <koalie> ... we'll make better reviews.
08:55:19 <nigel> q+ to ask, if the spec isn't readable, is your review response "do more work"?
08:55:20 <koalie> ... thanks.
08:55:49 <koalie> ack next
08:55:50 <Zakim> nigel, you wanted to ask, if the spec isn't readable, is your review response "do more work"?
08:56:07 <Judy> +1 to Richard's request to consider readability of your specifications; this can even reduce the number of times that a specification may need review. It saves time for horizontal reviewers, as well as for the eventual implementers of your specification(s).
08:56:13 <Judy> q+
08:56:16 <koalie> Nigel: coming back to Richard's point, if we're asking someone to read and understand a spec, readability is very important.
08:56:33 <koalie> ... what is the appropriate response from a review group to a spec they find hard to understand?
08:56:59 <koalie> ack next
08:57:02 <koalie> Judy: Great question
08:57:24 <koalie> ... this is going to become more specific whether a group has secured a review
08:57:34 <virginie> +1 to schuki, I read mike west specs as novels :)
08:57:59 <renato> URLs for Mike West's specs?
08:57:59 <koalie> Judy: and decide whether there are features that could become a barrier
08:58:10 <koalie> Judy: typically, we'd send back a request for clarification
08:58:27 <koalie> ... that may cause lag in getting accessibility feedback to the group
08:58:37 <virginie> exemple of security spec edited by Mike West : http://www.w3.org/TR/SRI/
08:58:46 <koalie> Judy: right now it's a practical concern
08:59:08 <koalie> Judy: as we come up with clearer systems for director's review and more mature document stages
08:59:08 <Florian> q+
08:59:23 <koalie> Judy: implementers would benefit from a clear writing as well
08:59:30 <koalie> Zakim, close the queue
08:59:30 <Zakim> ok, koalie, the speaker queue is closed
08:59:34 <koalie> ack next
08:59:52 <koalie> Florian: It's genuinely useful feedback if my spec isn't clear; do tell me
09:00:07 <r12a> +1 to Florian's point
09:00:16 <virginie> +1 to Florian
09:00:47 <r12a> ie. that if horizontal review groups can easily read specs, how can we expect the wider public to review
09:01:13 <koalie> Topic: Thank yous (slide 23)
09:01:14 <r12a> s/can easily/can't easily/
09:01:21 <koalie> VG: Thanks to all the people who made that presentation possible
09:01:26 <koalie> Coralie Mercier, Judy Brewer, Léonie Watson, Wendy Seltzer, Felix Sasaki, Richard Ishida, Keiji Takeda, Nick
09:01:44 <koalie> s/Nick/Nick Doty, and... you/
09:01:54 <koalie> s/Coralie/Virginie: Coralie/
09:02:05 <koalie> VG: please, don't forget to evangelise in your own group(s)
09:02:11 <koalie> ... that there are 4 reviews to conduct
09:02:18 <koalie> ... Thanks for your time and listening
09:02:45 <AdrianHB> thanks
09:02:49 <nigel> Thanks!
09:02:54 <yoav> Thanks! :)
09:03:02 <yoav> yoav has left #chairing
09:03:07 <koalie> [no audio recording this time]
09:03:23 <koalie> RRSagent, make minutes
09:03:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/10/20-chairing-minutes.html koalie
11:35:03 <Zakim> Zakim has left #chairing
11:57:37 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #chairing
12:13:16 <tzviya> tzviya has joined #chairing
12:22:32 <koalie> RRSAgent, make logs public
12:23:26 <koalie> s/<koalie> ->/<koaliie> ->/G
12:23:27 <koalie> RRSagent, make minutes
12:23:27 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/10/20-chairing-minutes.html koalie
12:32:47 <r12a> r12a has left #chairing
12:57:50 <Judy> Judy has joined #chairing
12:58:20 <chaals> chaals has joined #chairing
13:35:27 <ShaneM> ShaneM has joined #chairing
13:35:37 <ShaneM> ShaneM has left #chairing