15:27:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
15:27:25 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-irc
15:27:27 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:27:27 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #wai-wcag
15:27:29 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
15:27:29 <Zakim> I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
15:27:30 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
15:27:30 <trackbot> Date: 03 November 2015
15:27:48 <Joshue108> zakim, agenda?
15:27:48 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
15:28:02 <Joshue108> agenda+ TPAC Update
15:28:28 <Joshue108> agenda+ COGA Extension proposal review: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/cogaextreview/
15:28:41 <Joshue108> agenda+ Extension Requirements Survey (Update): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extension_req/
15:28:59 <Joshue108> Scribe list: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Scribe_List
15:38:41 <UnnamedUser491> UnnamedUser491 has joined #wai-wcag
15:41:35 <yatil> agenda+ Quickref Public Review Approval Survey
15:41:41 <yatil> agenda?
15:43:02 <Joshue> Joshue has joined #wai-wcag
15:43:31 <Joshue> zakim, agenda
15:43:31 <Zakim> I don't understand 'agenda', Joshue
15:43:35 <Joshue> zakim, agenda?
15:43:35 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
15:43:36 <Zakim> 1. TPAC Update [from Joshue108]
15:43:36 <Zakim> 2. COGA Extension proposal review: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/cogaextreview/ [from Joshue108]
15:43:36 <Zakim> 3. Extension Requirements Survey (Update): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extension_req/ [from Joshue108]
15:43:37 <Zakim> 4. Quickref Public Review Approval Survey [from yatil]
15:51:31 <laura> laura has joined #wai-wcag
15:52:31 <marcjohlic> marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag
15:56:35 <AWK> AWK has joined #wai-wcag
15:57:42 <AWK> Zakim, agenda?
15:57:42 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
15:57:43 <Zakim> 1. TPAC Update [from Joshue108]
15:57:43 <Zakim> 2. COGA Extension proposal review: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/cogaextreview/ [from Joshue108]
15:57:43 <Zakim> 3. Extension Requirements Survey (Update): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extension_req/ [from Joshue108]
15:57:44 <Zakim> 4. Quickref Public Review Approval Survey [from yatil]
16:00:41 <Mike_Elledge> Mike_Elledge has joined #wai-wcag
16:00:43 <AWK> trackbot, draft minutes
16:00:43 <trackbot> Sorry, AWK, I don't understand 'trackbot, draft minutes'. Please refer to <http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc> for help.
16:00:49 <AWK> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:00:49 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-minutes.html AWK
16:01:24 <AWK> rrsagent, set logs public
16:02:28 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #wai-wcag
16:02:40 <Kathy> present +Kathy
16:03:30 <yatil> present+ EricE
16:03:41 <yatil> s/ +K/+ K/
16:04:14 <laura> + Laura
16:04:32 <laura> present+ Laura
16:05:25 <Kenny> present+ Kenny
16:07:08 <Joshue> present+ Joshue
16:07:31 <adam_solomon> adam_solomon has joined #wai-wcag
16:08:14 <AWK> Scribe: Laura
16:08:31 <AWK> Mike will scribe next week!
16:08:52 <AWK> Chair: AWK
16:08:59 <laura> Zakim, next item
16:08:59 <Zakim> agendum 1. "TPAC Update" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:09:00 <AWK> Zakim, take up item 4
16:09:00 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Quickref Public Review Approval Survey" taken up [from yatil]
16:09:42 <AWK> Survey link: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/2015-10-quickref/
16:10:23 <laura> ric: Would like to open quick ref for public review.
16:11:15 <laura> Eric: Will be an email with details tommorrow.
16:11:36 <marcjohlic> present+ marcjohlic
16:12:28 <laura> s/ ric: Would/Eric: Would/
16:14:05 <laura> AWK: Be on the look out for the survey link.
16:16:16 <laura> Zakim, next item
16:16:16 <Zakim> agendum 1. "TPAC Update" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:17:23 <laura> AWK: Asking people who attended for anything relavant.
16:17:36 <yatil> s/public review./public review. Please review the Quickref and note any objections for bringing it to a broader audience for a public review./
16:17:58 <laura> MichaelC: Only one at TPAC. Not sure of what would be relevant to this group.
16:18:28 <laura> MichaelC: People are looking for new versions coming down the pike.
16:19:11 <laura> …Coga did a presentation which would need WCAG support.
16:19:24 <laura> …some would be best practices.
16:19:51 <laura> …Best practices seemed to be a recurring theme.
16:19:52 <Joshue> q?
16:19:57 <Joshue> q+
16:20:49 <laura> …APA and the platform group are now in existence. Soe we will be working with them.
16:21:25 <Joshue> ack me
16:21:27 <laura> …APA will be making more use of IG.
16:22:36 <laura> JOC: Discusses Best practices vs SC.
16:23:34 <Joshue> JOC: It strikes me that best practices may need to become a category or output of the WCAG WG in tandem with any new SCs, guidelines and techniques.
16:23:55 <AWK> zakim, agenda?
16:23:55 <Zakim> I see 3 items remaining on the agenda:
16:23:56 <Zakim> 1. TPAC Update [from Joshue108]
16:23:56 <Zakim> 2. COGA Extension proposal review: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/cogaextreview/ [from Joshue108]
16:23:56 <Zakim> 3. Extension Requirements Survey (Update): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extension_req/ [from Joshue108]
16:24:01 <Joshue> q?
16:24:11 <Rakesh> Rakesh has joined #wai-wcag
16:24:28 <laura> MichaelC: Relevant to us: Developers want to do the wrong thin even if a right thing is available.
16:24:41 <Mike_Elledge> q+
16:24:47 <Joshue> ack mike_ell
16:25:06 <laura> JOC: Needs to be relevant and practical.
16:26:10 <laura> ME: Asks if need more examples or find info more easily.
16:26:43 <laura> MichaelC: Devs want to be able to copy and paste.
16:27:41 <laura> MichaelC: Hard for Devs to pic the right technique.
16:28:29 <laura> s/ pic the right technique./Eric: pick the right technique./
16:28:58 <AWK> Next TPAC is in Lisbon Portugal, last week of September 2016
16:29:24 <laura> s/ Eric: pick the right technique./pick the right technique./
16:29:29 <AWK> zakim, next item
16:29:29 <Zakim> agendum 2. "COGA Extension proposal review: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/cogaextreview/" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:29:50 <Joshue> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/cogaextreview/results
16:30:42 <laura> AWK: We want to get some initial comments.
16:32:04 <MichaelC> q+
16:32:23 <laura> AWK: Fires Draft. Kind of wrapped up with next survey item regarding extension requirements.
16:33:10 <laura> MichaelC: Survey should have been more of a review thing.
16:33:28 <AWK> ack m
16:33:47 <MichaelC> Potential review questions:
16:33:48 <laura> s/ Fires Draft/First Draft/
16:34:05 <MichaelC> * Comments on specific candidate SC
16:34:12 <MichaelC> * Comments on specific proposed best practices, issues, etc.
16:34:27 <MichaelC> * How will things fit into potential new WCAG guidelines frameworks
16:34:53 <laura> JOC: Agrees.  Survey could be structured differently.
16:34:54 <MichaelC> * What constraints continue to impact what COGA stuff can become part of guideilnes
16:35:16 <MichaelC> * What issues with changing levels of SC, given there were particular reasons they landed where they did
16:35:36 <Joshue> LC: Good draft, with good themes.
16:35:47 <Joshue> LC: We need to think about SCs and how to direct the conversation.
16:36:26 <laura> AWK: Reviews survey comments.
16:37:05 <Joshue> q?
16:37:49 <laura> MichaelC: Need to look at it more granularly and from different angles.
16:37:49 <Joshue> q+
16:38:05 <Joshue> ack me
16:38:37 <laura> AWK: Need to get a sense of magnitude.
16:39:45 <laura> JOC: Think about the structure of review. Should step back from this initial pass.
16:39:52 <Joshue> q?
16:39:58 <MichaelC> q+
16:40:11 <AWK> ack m
16:40:11 <laura> AWK: Anything we should discuss now?
16:41:02 <laura> MichaelC: Might be useful to have a joint meeting with COGA to talk through issues.
16:41:57 <laura> AWK: Anyone on the call a COGA participant?
16:42:15 <laura> MichaelC: No.
16:43:10 <laura> AWK: Chairs will send out an email soon and arrange a joint call.
16:43:43 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #wai-wcag
16:43:56 <jamesn> rrsagent, make minutes
16:43:56 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-minutes.html jamesn
16:44:37 <AWK> zakim, next item
16:44:37 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Extension Requirements Survey (Update): https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extension_req/" taken up [from Joshue108]
16:45:10 <laura> AWK: Much discussion on list regarding extensions.
16:45:14 <AWK> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/extension_req/results
16:46:18 <laura> AWK: Discussion seems to be around testability and SC.
16:47:10 <laura> AWK: Reviews survey results. No much new.
16:48:24 <Joshue> q?
16:48:33 <Kathy> q+
16:48:40 <AWK> acl kath
16:48:43 <AWK> ack kath
16:48:49 <laura> AWK: May not able to require No conflict between extensions.
16:49:19 <laura> Kathy: Much is theoretical at this point.
16:50:29 <laura> …Preferences and personalization may come into play.
16:50:48 <laura> …We should strive for no conflict between extensions. And discuss if they occur.
16:51:21 <Joshue> q?
16:51:30 <MichaelC> q+
16:51:44 <laura> JOC: Agree. That is reasonable.
16:51:48 <Mike_Elledge> +1
16:51:49 <AWK> ack m
16:51:52 <jamesn> q+
16:52:59 <laura> MichaelC: Disagree. If we look into the future it is not practical.
16:53:10 <laura> …not a smooth path forward.
16:53:56 <laura> …Devs would have to choose between groups.
16:54:25 <Kathy> q+
16:54:39 <AWK> ack james
16:54:41 <laura> …Need to not to favor user groups. Need to haromize.
16:55:47 <MichaelC> Allowing conflicts mean we can´t roll extensions into a future version of guidelines, unless we resolve the conflicts at that time or drop something, introducing a backwards compatibility problem
16:55:52 <laura> s/ haromize. /harmonize. /
16:56:10 <MichaelC> and it runs us into picking favored user groups, problems for regulators, less harmonization, etc.
16:56:38 <MichaelC> if we truly think conflict is unavoidable, we should make a careful framework for it in a post WCAG 2.0 world that address the considerations
16:57:01 <MichaelC> having conflicting extensions on a WCAG 2.0 base without considering those issues will lead us into a lot of trouble down the road
16:57:25 <laura> James: Discusses what is a conflict.
16:58:20 <MichaelC> q+ to raise issue of W3C acceptance
16:58:59 <laura> James: Extension to extension conflict will be inevitable.
16:59:23 <AWK> ack kathy
17:00:40 <laura> Kathy: There is even conflict in the same user group. That is why COGA is working on personalization.
17:01:35 <laura> Kathy: We need to define what is a conflict.
17:01:43 <AWK> ack mich
17:01:43 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to raise issue of W3C acceptance
17:03:45 <AWK> q+
17:03:46 <laura> MichaelC: We need to be forward thinking and realistic as to what the larger community will and won’t accept.
17:04:54 <laura> …we can get some pre-shopping around.  Get early public review.
17:04:56 <AWK> ack me
17:05:18 <AWK> http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2-req/
17:05:26 <laura> … we need to be responible.
17:05:55 <MichaelC> q+
17:06:12 <MichaelC> q+ to say we need to ask express review question
17:06:23 <laura> AWK: Yes, we can do some of the things Michael explained.
17:06:28 <Joshue> q+
17:06:42 <AWK> ack michael
17:06:42 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say we need to ask express review question
17:07:00 <laura> …may be a problem to pin ourselves in.
17:07:01 <jamesn> +1
17:07:06 <AWK> ack jo
17:07:12 <Joshue> ack me
17:08:23 <laura> JOC: We just don’t know at this point what conflicts will occur.
17:08:30 <AWK> AWK wonders if the mobile TF has thought about whether any of the items in the COGA document would be conflicting
17:08:34 <laura> …but we have to walk a line.
17:09:28 <laura> MichaelC: We don’t know everything yet so maybe we should defer some decisions.
17:10:27 <MichaelC> but I´m still worried about a mindset, if we allow conflicts now we will simply allow them; if we don´t, we´ll try harder to avoid them and reopen the conflict decision only if absolutely necessary
17:11:01 <Joshue> q+
17:11:45 <laura> AWK: Need guidance at the outset so we are not reactive. But rather proactive.
17:11:50 <Joshue> ack me
17:12:29 <laura> JOC: Want to create a roadmap.
17:13:45 <laura> Adam: Agree with Kathy.
17:14:47 <laura> AWK: Sounds like we should draft some new language regarding conflict.
17:15:27 <laura> AWK: Need to listen to people on the call and on the list.
17:15:48 <Joshue> +1 to sounding good.
17:15:51 <Kathy> +1
17:16:08 <laura> Laura: +1
17:16:09 <marcjohlic> +1  agree
17:17:09 <laura> AWK: Another question regarded levels.
17:17:47 <Kathy> q+
17:17:55 <laura> …Discusses survey results.
17:17:59 <AWK> ack kath
17:18:26 <laura> Kathy: What do we mean by levels?
17:19:35 <laura> AWK: If we had an extension that moved levels form AA to A, There would be no rationale for that extension to have a level.
17:21:07 <laura> Kathy: Provides mobile example using the WCAG model.
17:21:41 <Joshue> q?
17:23:06 <Joshue> q?
17:23:12 <Joshue> q+
17:24:30 <Joshue> ack me
17:24:42 <laura> Kathy: Mobile TF wants to prioritize levels within the extension.
17:26:52 <laura> [Missing what JOC said]
17:27:54 <laura> Kathy: Mobile put some things into best practices.
17:29:11 <Joshue> JOC: Its interesting to hear Kathys comments, that she has a strong preference for using levels to signify critical or more important SCs in the mobile TF extension model.
17:29:23 <laura> AWK: Need to check with COGA and low vision TF regarding levels.
17:30:07 <laura> AWK: Discuss doc on list.
17:30:57 <laura> rrsagent, make minutes
17:30:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-minutes.html laura
17:32:58 <laura> s/ relavant /relevant /
17:34:08 <laura> s/ Soe we will be/So we will be/
17:34:51 <laura> s/ Hard for Devs toEric: pick the right technique./Hard for Devs to pick the right technique./
17:35:24 <laura>  rrsagent, make minutes
17:35:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-minutes.html laura
17:36:57 <laura> s/relavant/relevant/
17:38:20 <laura> rrsagent, make minutes
17:38:20 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-minutes.html laura
17:39:30 <laura> s/ relavant/relevant/
17:39:53 <laura> rsagent, make minutes
17:40:03 <laura> rrsagent, make minutes
17:40:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-minutes.html laura
17:40:54 <laura> trackbot, end meeting
17:40:54 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:40:54 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been EricE, Laura, Kenny, Joshue, marcjohlic
17:41:02 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:41:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/11/03-wai-wcag-minutes.html trackbot
17:41:03 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
17:41:03 <RRSAgent> I see no action items