14:28:31 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #horizontal
14:28:31 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/09/21-horizontal-irc
14:28:40 <MichaelC_> meeting: Horizontal Review
14:28:47 <MichaelC_> chair: Janina Sajka
14:28:51 <MichaelC_> scribe: MichaelC
14:29:03 <MichaelC_> rrsagent, make log world
14:29:16 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #horizontal
14:29:22 <MichaelC_> scribeOptions: -final
14:30:58 <MichaelC_> agenda+ Techniques for effective horizontal review
14:31:12 <MichaelC_> agenda+ Tools
14:31:22 <MichaelC_> agenda+ Checklists
14:31:26 <addison> addison has joined #horizontal
14:31:40 <MichaelC_> agenda+ Potential new supports
14:31:54 <MichaelC_> agenda+ Process and procedure improvements
14:32:04 <MichaelC_> agenda+ Sharing effort
14:32:08 <addison> agenda?
14:32:14 <MichaelC_> agenda+ Follow-up
14:33:16 <MichaelC> agenda+ Impact statements
14:33:25 <MichaelC> agenda?
14:33:46 <MichaelC> agenda order 8, 1
14:34:01 <MichaelC> scribe: MichaelC
14:34:56 <addison> present+ addison
14:36:02 <r12a> r12a has joined #horizontal
14:36:06 <addison> agenda?
14:36:13 <renato__> renato__ has joined #horizontal
14:37:03 <MichaelC> present: Janina Sajka, Addison Phillips, Richard Ishida, Eric Eggert, Renata Iannella, Shadi Abou-Zahra, Francesco Martino, Peter Linss, Gottfried Zimmerman, Joshue O Connor, Matt King, Katie Haritos-Shea
14:37:24 <renato__> s/Renata/Renato
14:38:34 <MichaelC> present+ Alex_Russell, Wilco_Fiers
14:38:39 <MichaelC> zakim, next item
14:38:39 <Zakim> agendum 8. "Impact statements" taken up [from MichaelC]
14:38:43 <r12a> present+
14:39:24 <MichaelC> js: APA is moving towards asking for an ¨accessibility considerations¨ section as a routine part of specs
14:40:13 <MichaelC> point out some of the things that implementers need to be conscious of, even if that stuff is also woven into the spec
14:40:19 <MichaelC> present+ Alastair_Campbell
14:40:36 <MichaelC> ap: I worry those sections can be a ¨penalty box¨
14:41:21 <MichaelC> so for I18N wouldn´t want to do this
14:41:27 <MichaelC> but can see value for a11y
14:41:31 <r12a> regrets+ virginie
14:42:16 <MichaelC> present+ Travis_Liethead
14:42:58 <plinss> plinss has joined #horizontal
14:44:22 <MichaelC> pl: have seen less need for this because of normal reviews
14:44:46 <MichaelC> js: really useful to be able to say where the rub is
14:44:58 <MichaelC> pl: the self review questionnaire has been very helpful
14:45:39 <MichaelC> could provide some common pitfalls advice
14:45:43 <MichaelC> zakim, next item
14:45:43 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Techniques for effective horizontal review" taken up [from MichaelC_]
14:46:16 <MichaelC> js: checklist sounds like a good approach
14:46:23 <MichaelC> present+ Judy_Brewer
14:46:46 <addison> q+
14:47:02 <MichaelC> though APA also wants a full Web Technology Accessibility Guidelines
14:47:35 <r12a> q+
14:47:48 <MichaelC> jb: have heard that once a guide like that exists, the horizontal group can be disbanded
14:47:53 <r12a> https://www.w3.org/International/techniques/developing-specs?collapse&open=language
14:48:25 <MichaelC> there are still things the group needs to do, to address things that can´t be captured by a self review guide
14:48:30 <MichaelC> ack a
14:48:50 <MichaelC> ap: the guide helps to avoid basic mistakes
14:49:04 <MichaelC> and trigger questions earlier in the development process
14:49:09 <MichaelC> that´s valuable
14:49:33 <MichaelC> I worry about how to schedule reviews and interactions with WGs in a constructive manner
14:49:58 <MichaelC> there is the CR gate, but get review requests only then
14:50:02 <MichaelC> q+ janina
14:50:03 <MichaelC> ack r
14:50:22 <Francesco> Francesco has joined #horizontal
14:50:24 <MichaelC> then they are mad at us when we find issues and need to hold up the spec
14:50:40 <MichaelC> and difficult to schedule review for ourselves that way
14:51:01 <MichaelC> ri: we want to get groups to start thinking about things before we look at it
14:51:05 <MichaelC> ideally before FPWD
14:51:37 <MichaelC> but that doesn´t mean the checklist replaces our role
14:51:52 <MichaelC> in more comprehensive review
14:51:55 <MichaelC> ack j
14:52:04 <r12a> q+
14:52:09 <MichaelC> js: APA has also been impacted by urgent CR timeframe reviews
14:52:19 <addison> agenda?
14:52:26 <MichaelC> to forestall we look at specs published to TR on a regular basis
14:52:36 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #horizontal
14:52:53 <MichaelC> try to catch them early in the lifecycle
14:53:06 <MichaelC> has led to being able to get features into specs
14:53:24 <MichaelC> also to creation of specs that supplement with accessibility features
14:53:39 <Joshue108> Joshue108 has joined #horizontal
14:53:49 <Joshue108> present+ Joshue108
14:53:50 <MichaelC> we´re struggling now with API specs that lack plain explanation of what they do
14:54:02 <r12a> q-
14:54:05 <Travis> Travis has joined #horizontal
14:54:20 <slightlyoff> slightlyoff has joined #horizontal
14:54:29 <r12a> q+
14:54:34 <slightlyoff> q?
14:54:38 <slightlyoff> q+
14:54:51 <MichaelC> would like introductions etc.
14:54:53 <addison> q+
14:55:14 <MichaelC> gz: use cases really help
14:55:19 <r12a> https://www.w3.org/International/techniques/developing-specs?collapse&open=language
14:55:20 <MichaelC> we can review those and predict issues
14:55:26 <MichaelC> ack next
14:56:02 <MichaelC> ri: I think a checklist is much better than asking someone to read and remember a whole doc
14:56:28 <MichaelC> which takes time, working memory etc. that people less likely to advance
14:56:36 <MichaelC> checklist has do and don´t stuff
14:56:42 <MichaelC> ack next
14:57:06 <MichaelC> ar: +1 to plain language doc about what a spec does
14:57:15 <MichaelC> I recommend them being separate from the technical spec
14:57:31 <MichaelC> spec without this can lack design thinking
14:58:00 <yatil> yatil has joined #horizontal
14:58:02 <Judy> Judy has joined #horizontal
14:58:04 <MichaelC> specs can be hard to read, so having this material separately makes it easier to consume
14:58:05 <Judy> q+
14:58:12 <richardschwerdtfeger> richardschwerdtfeger has joined #horizontal
14:58:17 <MichaelC> ack next
14:58:31 <MichaelC> then they can dig deeper into the spec if they need
14:58:38 <MichaelC> ap: we don´t have a structured way of engaging
14:59:00 <richardschwerdtfeger> q?
14:59:01 <MichaelC> we don´t get a lot of unsolicited review requests, notification of work, etc.
14:59:15 <MichaelC> we have relationship with groups that tend to have known issues
14:59:17 <r12a> q+
14:59:26 <MichaelC> otherwise I only find out from routine publication announcements
14:59:52 <MichaelC> q+ to talk about setting cross review expectations
15:00:06 <MichaelC> ack j
15:00:34 <MichaelC> jb: what are mechanisms for discoverability of stuff outside spec?
15:00:57 <MichaelC> ar: put link at top of spec
15:01:32 <MichaelC> in design phase often start with explainer doc before spec
15:01:35 <MichaelC> which helps design
15:02:08 <MichaelC> jb: how does that help with impact statements?
15:02:31 <MichaelC> ar: gives good orientation so you can figure out what you might need
15:02:33 <Judy> q+
15:02:38 <MichaelC> ack r
15:02:46 <MichaelC> q+ to say explainers help us a lot
15:03:07 <MichaelC> ri: we don´t undertand all the technologies at W3C
15:03:14 <MichaelC> have to go through learning curve when reviewing new specs
15:03:20 <MichaelC> the explainer help with that
15:03:25 <MichaelC> but we still have to get into the spec
15:03:43 <MichaelC> and when they are just bare algorithms, hard to follow even with the explainer
15:03:52 <MichaelC> just a short para at the top could help
15:03:56 <MichaelC> tl: code comments
15:04:01 <MichaelC> ri: es
15:04:09 <MichaelC> and examples really help
15:04:15 <MichaelC> tl: @
15:04:21 <MichaelC> s/es/yes/
15:04:25 <slightlyoff> here's the Intersection Observer explainer: https://github.com/WICG/IntersectionObserver/blob/gh-pages/explainer.md
15:04:49 <MichaelC> ri: so want more than a link to explainer, do need some of that material in context
15:05:05 <MichaelC> ap: explainers and spec can get out of sync
15:05:06 <slightlyoff> and the spec: https://wicg.github.io/IntersectionObserver/
15:05:24 <MichaelC> ack me
15:05:24 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to talk about setting cross review expectations and to say explainers help us a lot
15:06:08 <slightlyoff> here's the Service Worker explainer doc: https://github.com/w3c/ServiceWorker/blob/master/explainer.md
15:06:29 <slightlyoff> and the spec (maintained in the same repo): https://w3c.github.io/ServiceWorker/
15:07:03 <r12a> q+
15:07:04 <MichaelC> mc: @@ setting cross review expectations
15:07:06 <MichaelC> ack j
15:07:39 <MichaelC> jb: get that spec developers don´t want to clutter spec, but also hear the value for additional info
15:07:50 <slightlyoff> here's the background sync explainer: https://github.com/WICG/BackgroundSync/blob/master/explainer.md
15:07:54 <MichaelC> do we have evidence about how the approaches work?
15:08:05 <slightlyoff> and the spec: https://wicg.github.io/BackgroundSync/spec/
15:08:17 <MichaelC> ri: the link to explainer is also great, just also need some inline guidance
15:08:33 <MichaelC> jb: we´re guessing right now about which approach works
15:08:43 <MichaelC> q+ janina
15:09:01 <MichaelC> think the impact statement in the spec can trigger attention and interest
15:09:15 <MichaelC> we haven´t tested these ideas
15:09:15 <MichaelC> ack r
15:09:27 <MichaelC> ri: have considered requesting teleconferences with spec developers
15:09:35 <MichaelC> for them to explain the features
15:09:53 <MichaelC> because of when we don´t understand the techology well
15:10:01 <MichaelC> the link at the top to explainer would also help
15:10:15 <MichaelC> we´ve done some recent reviews with embedded examples, much easier to review
15:10:20 <MichaelC> leads to better comments
15:10:25 <MichaelC> ack next
15:10:34 <MichaelC> js: strong +1 to RI
15:10:58 <MichaelC> explanation helpful, conversation can be a good idea
15:11:11 <addison> q+
15:11:22 <MichaelC> where we have common issues, we try to recruit participants in our group with domain knowledge
15:11:36 <MichaelC> lost a couple key ones this week though :(
15:11:51 <Joshue108> Joshue108 has joined #horizontal
15:11:57 <MichaelC> q+ to mention embedding into tech groups
15:12:02 <MichaelC> ack a
15:12:24 <MichaelC> ap: get that spec owners don´t want stuff that is extranneous to implementers
15:13:07 <MichaelC> don´t want create extra work for them for uncertain reason
15:13:11 <r12a> q+
15:13:19 <Judy> q+
15:13:51 <MichaelC> I´d like to know WGs how we can help them with our horizontal review
15:13:52 <r12a> agenda+
15:13:58 <r12a> agenda?
15:14:21 <Judy> q+
15:14:55 <MichaelC> q- later
15:14:57 <r12a> https://www.w3.org/International/review-request
15:15:13 <MichaelC> r@: what is a recommended procedure?
15:15:21 <MichaelC> ri: ^ is our documented recommendation
15:15:23 <MichaelC> ack r
15:16:08 <MichaelC> I suggest maybe the other horizontal groups might want to create a document like this
15:16:16 <MichaelC> ap: Process doesn´t have many points
15:16:29 <MichaelC> avoid pain by following techniques
15:16:56 <MichaelC> ri: github labels allow us to get notification of things that specs tag
15:17:07 <Judy> q?
15:17:58 <MichaelC> ack j
15:18:13 <MichaelC> jb: there´s always requests to solicit horizontal review early and often
15:18:21 <MichaelC> but those can be wishes
15:18:40 <MichaelC> want procedures and tools to help reify that
15:18:42 <MichaelC> q+ janina
15:18:43 <addison> q+
15:18:48 <MichaelC> q- later
15:19:17 <r12a> q+
15:19:34 <MichaelC> js: need for explaining the IDL growing
15:19:43 <MichaelC> we can´t impose some of our requests
15:19:58 <MichaelC> want to explore what W3C-wide practices should be recommended
15:20:05 <MichaelC> can TAG help with that?
15:20:36 <MichaelC> jb: it can be hard for W3C to change practice even when there´s agreement on the changes
15:20:43 <MichaelC> ack j
15:20:49 <MichaelC> q- later
15:21:13 <MichaelC> ap: I made some request in Process 2015
15:21:30 <MichaelC> for a formal gate, before CR, to ensure we reviewed
15:22:00 <MichaelC> absent the formal gate, chairs miss it and CR becomes the only oe
15:22:03 <MichaelC> s/oe/one/
15:22:12 <MichaelC> which is too late
15:22:33 <MichaelC> jb: what happened with that proposal?
15:22:37 <MichaelC> ap: nothing
15:22:52 <MichaelC> hope to re-raise it
15:23:07 <MichaelC> there was a time for us when all we could do was emergency reviews
15:23:21 <MichaelC> which compromised quality
15:23:34 <MichaelC> ack a
15:23:36 <MichaelC> ack r
15:24:04 <MichaelC> ri: under new W3C structure, Ralph has responsibility for ensuring horizontal reviews happen
15:24:15 <MichaelC> he´s not here but planning to work on that
15:24:30 <MichaelC> PLH is already pinging I18N for reviews in his new role
15:24:41 <MichaelC> so hopefully the new organization will help
15:24:42 <MichaelC> q-
15:24:57 <MichaelC> want to continue discussion so we can have coordinated recommendations
15:24:59 <MichaelC> to give to ralph
15:25:09 <MichaelC> for process, guide, training
15:25:42 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/21-horizontal-minutes.html addison
15:26:31 <Judy> +1 to document recurring HR hiccoughs
15:26:42 <MichaelC> mc: I also want to ensure ongoing coord
15:27:05 <MichaelC> maybe we want a list to collate our discussions, which sometimes are sporadic
15:27:22 <MichaelC> ri: Ralph should be instigating that
15:27:48 <MichaelC> jb: +1 to a list
15:29:18 <MichaelC> ri: MC and I might be specialists, we need some from the other horizontal areas too
15:29:25 <MichaelC> mc: can we go ahead with a list?
15:30:15 <alastairc> alastairc has joined #horizontal
15:30:21 <MichaelC> jb: take to Ralph
15:30:27 <MichaelC> ri: +1
15:30:50 <MichaelC> mc: ok, so we don´t know specific next steps yet, but expect there will be some
15:31:04 <MichaelC> ri: also note Virginie Galindo updating the chair training
15:32:19 <MichaelC> you should work with her on getting some thoughts in
15:32:28 <MichaelC> mc: hopefully also through Ralph
15:33:15 <renato> renato has joined #horizontal
15:33:24 <MichaelC> so I hope we will be able to increase our coordination and announce next steps soon
15:33:29 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
15:33:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/21-horizontal-minutes.html MichaelC
15:34:31 <renato> renato has joined #horizontal
15:34:33 <MichaelC> s/agenda order 8, 1//
15:35:05 <MichaelC> s/agendum 1. "Techniques for effective horizontal review" taken up [from MichaelC_]//
15:35:30 <MichaelC> s/agendum 8. "Impact statements" taken up [from MichaelC]//
15:35:44 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make log world
15:36:10 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
15:36:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/09/21-horizontal-minutes.html MichaelC
15:37:36 <renato> renato has joined #horizontal
15:38:29 <MichaelC> zakim, bye
15:38:29 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees have been Janina, Sajka, Addison, Phillips, Richard, Ishida, Eric, Eggert, Renata, Iannella, Shadi, Abou-Zahra, Francesco, Martino, Peter,
15:38:29 <Zakim> Zakim has left #horizontal
15:38:32 <Zakim> ... Linss, Gottfried, Zimmerman, Joshue, O, Connor, Matt, King, Katie, Haritos-Shea, Alex_Russell, Wilco_Fiers, r12a, Alastair_Campbell, Travis_Liethead, Judy_Brewer, Joshue108
15:38:33 <MichaelC> rrsagent, bye
15:38:33 <RRSAgent> I see no action items