15:57:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
15:57:08 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-wai-wcag-irc
15:57:10 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:57:10 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #wai-wcag
15:57:12 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
15:57:12 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
15:57:13 <trackbot> Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
15:57:13 <trackbot> Date: 06 December 2016
15:57:22 <laura> laura has joined #wai-wcag
15:57:22 <Greg> Greg has joined #wai-wcag
15:57:53 <Avneesh> Avneesh has joined #wai-wcag
15:58:04 <mattg> mattg has joined #wai-wcag
15:58:27 <Avneesh> present+ Avneesh
15:59:02 <AWK> +AWK
15:59:07 <AWK> Zakim, agenda?
15:59:07 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
15:59:32 <marcjohlic> marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag
15:59:38 <AWK> agenda+ Charter discussion and changes
15:59:52 <AWK> agenda+ Survey of new SC proposals:  https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/NewSC_20161122/
16:00:49 <Judy> Judy has joined #wai-wcag
16:00:49 <Glenda> Glenda has joined #wai-wcag
16:01:01 <alastairc> present+ alastairc
16:01:16 <mattg> present+ mattg
16:01:24 <Glenda> present+ Glenda
16:01:25 <AWK> Chair: AWK, Joshue
16:01:26 <Lauriat> Lauriat has joined #wai-wcag
16:01:33 <davidmacdonald> Present+ davidmacdonald
16:01:35 <AWK> Zakim, who is on the phone?
16:01:35 <Zakim> Present: Avneesh, AWK, alastairc, mattg, Glenda, davidmacdonald
16:01:43 <AWK> +Joshue
16:01:44 <marcjohlic> present+ marcjohlic
16:02:02 <Lauriat> Present+ Lauriat
16:02:09 <KathyW> KathyW has joined #wai-wcag
16:02:16 <KathyW> present+ KathyW
16:02:28 <davidmacdonald> http://tinyurl.com/jmo9st4
16:02:41 <Greg> present+ Greg_Lowney
16:03:04 <Makoto> Makoto has joined #wai-wcag
16:03:09 <davidmacdonald> scribe: davidmacdonald
16:03:28 <lisa> lisa has joined #wai-wcag
16:03:46 <lisa> hey, can someone ping me the webex password. i cant get in
16:04:10 <laura> present+ Laura
16:04:10 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag
16:04:14 <Makoto> present+ Makoto
16:04:25 <lisa> thanks all, got it
16:04:45 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
16:05:15 <MichaelC> present+
16:05:33 <jeanne> present+ jeanne
16:05:41 <Judy> present+ Judy
16:06:11 <lisa> present+ lisa_seeman
16:06:42 <bruce_bailey> bruce_bailey has joined #wai-wcag
16:06:53 <AWK> Zakim, take up item 1
16:06:54 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Charter discussion and changes" taken up [from AWK]
16:07:27 <davidmacdonald> Discussion about charter review period ended Friday, Judy joined us
16:08:06 <davidmacdonald> We can characterize the comments of members but can't give specifics
16:09:12 <davidmacdonald> Total of 22 support, 10 changes, 1 not supported but not Formal obj. One who requires changes ... formal objection
16:09:21 <allanj> allanj has joined #wai-wcag
16:09:56 <davidmacdonald> AWK everyone supports the work for 2.1... some comments tallked about prioritizing movbile over low vision and coga
16:11:02 <davidmacdonald> there's a lost wjere we canndiscuss... so we want to discuss with the group here on call and then on list, chairs will use that information to respond in a way the WG supports
16:11:14 <KimD> KimD has joined #wai-wcag
16:11:15 <davidmacdonald> Some easy issues
16:11:35 <davidmacdonald> Adding DPIG to charter
16:11:42 <KimD> +KimD
16:12:26 <davidmacdonald> a number of times it cam up and has good wg support, and requests to change to scope, fairly straight forward
16:12:44 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #wai-wcag
16:12:51 <davidmacdonald> big things, important to figure out
16:13:14 <davidmacdonald> zclear support for 2.1 concern that we getnit done soon, 18 month timeline
16:13:19 <Mike_Elledge> Mike_Elledge has joined #wai-wcag
16:13:21 <Rachael> Rachael has joined #wai-wcag
16:13:30 <davidmacdonald> Our current schedule is on track for that
16:13:36 <Rachael> present+ Rachael
16:13:38 <jeanne> s/getnit/get it/
16:13:57 <davidmacdonald> Silver... comments agains it in the WG, against Acessibility testing
16:13:59 <jeanne> s/ zclear/ Clear
16:14:30 <davidmacdonald> One concern for silver about user agent and authoring tools brought up again
16:14:50 <davidmacdonald> issue, incubating outside wg vs inside
16:15:24 <davidmacdonald> another collaboration with SC Human factors group a time line accessibioity for mobile
16:15:44 <jeanne> s/SC Human factors/ETSI Human Factors
16:15:59 <Ryladog> q+
16:16:04 <davidmacdonald> open for discussion
16:16:10 <Judy> q+
16:16:18 <AWK> ack ry
16:16:57 <davidmacdonald> Katie: aren't u glad knowbioity didn't add to comments, some will be challenge, collaboration wth other groups,
16:17:04 <Wayne> Wayne has joined #wai-wcag
16:17:05 <jeanne> q+ to discuss Silver comments
16:17:11 <davidmacdonald> AWK: in what way?
16:17:31 <davidmacdonald> Katie: getting approval from more bodies like government
16:17:50 <AWK> ack judy
16:17:53 <davidmacdonald> Joshue: I'm confused by that
16:18:10 <lisa> Q+
16:18:28 <davidmacdonald> Judy: certain requests for liasons and how that happens
16:18:34 <AWK> Charter draft: https://www.w3.org/2016/11/proposed-ag-charter
16:18:45 <davidmacdonald> Liasons to/from certain standards bodies.
16:18:46 <AWK> (that is the one that was commented on)
16:19:11 <davidmacdonald> comment for Gregg V.  that can happen when you coordinate consensus between two bodies
16:20:13 <laura> Gregg V’s email regarding coordination: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2016OctDec/0618.html
16:20:27 <davidmacdonald> Many years of observation, is a valid point. important and worthy goal to have liaisons, but have realistic expectations. We've done that with WCAg2ICT, was extraordinarily complex and carefully managed
16:21:38 <davidmacdonald> Judy: In a few instances we had where ac review came in did not support... need to be quick and agile, throught formal reviews otherwise takes a lot of cycles to sort out.
16:21:39 <AWK> ack je
16:21:39 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to discuss Silver comments
16:23:02 <Greg_> Greg_ has joined #wai-wcag
16:23:07 <davidmacdonald> Jeanne: A few things about silver comments. 1) haven't discussed it as TF, waiting for WG discussion. I'm ok without specifically calling out UA and authoring tools, important thing to address, but a more general statement, without the words that draw concerns
16:23:16 <Lauriat> +1
16:24:09 <Judy> s/we had where ac review came in did not support/WG participants may have supported the charter while in development but when AC review came in did not support/
16:24:18 <Judy> q+
16:24:35 <MyNickname> MyNickname has joined #wai-wcag
16:24:36 <alastairc> Question: would being in incubation reduce the resource compared to being in the WG?
16:24:37 <AWK> ack lisa
16:24:40 <davidmacdonald> we're clear on Silver, want tight relationship with WCAg WG, Silver will fail without that .... some advantages to being incubated, can bring in more researchers not presently, commu tity group for IT reasons and more flexibioity. Not opposed to incubator provided we maintain tight relationship with WG
16:25:04 <MyNickname> rrsagent, draft minutes
16:25:04 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-wai-wcag-minutes.html MyNickname
16:25:11 <davidmacdonald> Lisa:             coga and LVTF
16:25:28 <davidmacdonald> AWK: its being discussed whether we agree or not.
16:25:28 <AWK> initial response: The development of Success Criteria for mobile use cases is critically important, but this is also accurate for low-vision and cognitive topics. For each, Task Forces have worked for the past year or more to ensure that proposed success criteria are available and ready to be incorporated into a WCAG 2.1 draft. In addition, important success criteria proposals related to digital publishing have been submitted by the Digital Publishing Interest Group
16:25:58 <Judy> s/throught formal reviews/throughout development of anything that will be undergoing formal AC review/
16:27:12 <Joshue108> Joshue108 has joined #wai-wcag
16:27:17 <davidmacdonald> AWK: we've done a lot of work to ensure we won't be helod back by Digital Pub and COGA and LV
16:27:44 <jeanne> s/some advantages to being incubated, can bring in more researchers not presently, commu tity group for IT reasons and more flexibioity. Not opposed to incubator provided we maintain tight relationship with WG/some advantages to being incubated, can bring in more researchers not presently in WCAGWG, community group provide IP advantages. Not opposed to community group provided we maintain
16:27:44 <jeanne> tight relationship with WG.
16:27:48 <AWK> Rest of AWK's response: While the working group understands the strong interest in mobile, the work done to date positions the group well to deliver support for the additional topics as well.
16:28:36 <MyNickname> q+
16:28:55 <davidmacdonald> Lisa: id strongly object to prioritizing which disabioity group is more important
16:28:55 <AWK> ack judy
16:29:57 <davidmacdonald> Judy: how to look at comments: Jeanne I'm not entirely clear what you mean with removing references to ATAG and UAG
16:30:27 <jeanne> q+ to answer Judy
16:31:28 <davidmacdonald> If yu want to scope in that area then I think it may be better to say that more clearly, but not give impression there can not be any platform discussion
16:32:36 <davidmacdonald> Judy: don't remove it to avoid lightning rod. It's important to unxerstand which comments are strongly held and which they felt they needed to make but not strong re
16:32:42 <davidmacdonald> rewuirements
16:33:25 <alastairc> s/rewuirements/requirements
16:33:48 <davidmacdonald> Judy: Also I would note that there continue to be misunderstanding, such as UA, the amoutnof support in User agents, still an opportunity to cover some things.
16:33:58 <AWK> ack jeanne
16:33:58 <Zakim> jeanne, you wanted to answer Judy
16:34:31 <real_Joshue108> -q
16:34:33 <real_Joshue108> q-
16:35:08 <real_Joshue108> q+
16:35:13 <real_Joshue108> ack MyN
16:35:13 <AWK> ack my
16:35:22 <laura> rrsagent, make minutes
16:35:22 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-wai-wcag-minutes.html laura
16:35:36 <davidmacdonald> Jeanne: want to clarify... we definately want Authoring and UA as part of Silver, going ahead with research. Woupdn't want to remove words to give impression that they are not in the scope... we can work with you to ensure they understand we are not doing UAAG 3 etc.
16:36:14 <real_Joshue108> ack real
16:36:18 <Judy> s/yu want/Silver TF wants/
16:36:33 <AWK> q+ to say that one of the main concerns was about WCAG having a bifurcated focus
16:36:50 <davidmacdonald> Joshue: I think I missed what Jeanne was saying... seems to be flexibility at this early stage.
16:36:56 <davidmacdonald> Jeanne: Yes
16:37:33 <davidmacdonald> Joshue: that's a releif ... we can dial those things in...
16:38:06 <davidmacdonald> Jeanne: I'm flexible. I wanted to not put in Authoring tools and UA this summer because its a trigger.
16:38:41 <Judy> s/to cover some things/to cover some things, for instance some of that scope may be needed for mobile./
16:39:11 <davidmacdonald> Joshue: let's frame it in as exploratory work
16:39:12 <Wayne> q+
16:39:27 <AWK> q-
16:39:55 <davidmacdonald> Joshue: pushing back COGA is anathema
16:40:01 <AWK> ack way
16:40:58 <davidmacdonald> Wayne: The TFnon COGA and LV aware of what can be done by authors and what can't be done, part of our research can be useful, for intervention at user agent and authoring tool
16:41:42 <real_Joshue108> q?
16:41:42 <davidmacdonald> Its becaue harder to program solutions because there wasn't... harder problem to fex than 8 years ago.
16:41:44 <Mike_Elledge> q+
16:41:51 <AWK> ack mike
16:41:56 <real_Joshue108> s/becaue/become
16:42:04 <real_Joshue108> s/fex/fix
16:42:14 <davidmacdonald> Mike: Can you elaborate onnthat wayne
16:42:54 <davidmacdonald> Wayne: with content... foreground images done with CSS bg, very popular now
16:43:23 <alastairc> q+
16:43:51 <AWK> ack al
16:44:04 <davidmacdonald> greying out inactive elemtns acceptable that wouldn't have been if this was in WCAG 2. the longer we wait the longer this authoring mistakes wilwl continue
16:44:29 <davidmacdonald> Alestair: if Silver is in incubation does that reduce rsources
16:44:50 <jamesn> q?
16:45:00 <jamesn> q+ Judy
16:45:04 <Wayne> s/wilwl/will
16:45:21 <davidmacdonald> AWK; no staff support, they are not obligated to follo w
16:45:27 <davidmacdonald> 3C process
16:45:48 <davidmacdonald> AWK: Not as much support.
16:45:49 <AWK> ack ju
16:45:50 <real_Joshue108> s/onnthat/on that
16:46:26 <davidmacdonald> Judy: Commu ity groups set up not to have staff, but we can make an exceotioen. Funded time, funding constraints...
16:46:46 <davidmacdonald> Hard evennto use the exception
16:47:01 <davidmacdonald> disclosed in funding page
16:47:41 <real_Joshue108> s/Commu ity/Community
16:47:44 <davidmacdonald> AWK: Notnsure where this leaves us.
16:47:55 <real_Joshue108> s/exceotioen/exception
16:48:14 <real_Joshue108> s/Notnsure/Not sure
16:48:30 <davidmacdonald> AWK: what's the timeline for resolution of charter comments
16:49:53 <davidmacdonald> JUDY: Three formal objections. typically, not just a few emails, its unpredictable, certain things important such as expidicious disposition, need to carefully listen to and consider all comments Maybe not just remove things, balance and weigh them.
16:50:24 <davidmacdonald> May need one on one discussions and mailing list
16:50:53 <davidmacdonald> If you get anninvite ... pay attention to it and join discusssion
16:51:08 <davidmacdonald> W3C mindfull of concernand balancing comments.
16:52:49 <davidmacdonald> hard tobpredict how long... some questions may go to the director and his schedule
16:53:32 <real_Joshue108> q?
16:53:32 <davidmacdonald> q+
16:54:11 <Ryladog> q+
16:54:17 <davidmacdonald> awk: how do people feel about that?
16:54:23 <real_Joshue108> ack
16:54:25 <AWK> ack d
16:54:40 <davidmacdonald> no
16:54:44 <davidmacdonald> im talking
16:54:45 <real_Joshue108> me np
16:55:13 <davidmacdonald> sorry go on... i;ll fgigurte it out
16:55:21 <AWK> ack ry
16:55:39 <davidmacdonald> can someone scribe
16:55:52 <AWK> Katie: if we have to do ACTF and Silver to CG's I would prefer not to, but we could
16:56:05 <Judy> q+
16:56:06 <AWK> ... very opposed to COGA/LV taking lower priority
16:56:24 <real_Joshue108> AWK: What do you mean about a shorter timeline?
16:56:32 <real_Joshue108> KHS: Some are saying 18 months
16:56:32 <Judy> q?
16:56:33 <real_Joshue108> q?
16:56:34 <AWK> ack Judy
16:56:53 <alastairc> scribe: alastairc
16:57:35 <Wayne> q+
16:58:09 <alastairc> Judy: There may be a possibility that the mobile priority comments are due to some work going on in europe, it's complex, but there is some mobile accessibility work going on in EU, which will intersect. However, clock hasn't started on that work yet. The assumptions from charter comments might not be correct, we might be able to address those.
16:58:38 <Ryladog> Also opposed to a shorter than 3 year timeline for follow-on versions
16:59:14 <alastairc> Judy: I don't think the comments on LVTF/COGA were negative on those areas, it was just pressure from elsewhere on the mobile side. I hope it is possible to relieve that pressure. It is important to listen to concerns raised, and why people are saying them, and what's the best way.
16:59:56 <AWK> ack W
17:00:05 <Judy> s/clock hasn't started on/clock may not have started on/
17:01:10 <real_Joshue108> q?
17:01:13 <alastairc> Wayne: If we proceed with mobile without LV/Cog, we'll have an incomplete standard that's as incomplete as before. We were aiming to fill holes, if we don't address those issues then mobile devices will go down the same path as the current standards.
17:01:17 <KathyW> q+
17:01:30 <davidmacdonald> q+
17:02:33 <alastairc> Josh: Welcome back btw! We don't want to see that happen, there might be some pressure for mobile (positively), but it is still being discussed. Certainly as a group we don't prioritise that way.
17:02:47 <Judy> s/might not be correct,/about timing -- /
17:02:48 <MichaelC> q+ to talk about managing work
17:02:53 <real_Joshue108> ack kathy
17:04:01 <AWK> +1 to KW's comments
17:04:15 <Ryladog> +1
17:04:17 <Judy> [JB Kathy's point is very important and we need to capture this for the dialog with commenters.]
17:04:31 <Wayne> +1 I get it
17:04:45 <alastairc> KathyW: There were three task forces, but when we came up with the SCs, co-ordinating between the groups. Under those labels the SCs don't apply just under that label. Even if we said mobile had to be pushed forward, I would caution that the labels map to those don't cover everything for that label. E.g. some mobile ones came under other labels. Not wise to segment and say we should prioritise mobile, it would be very difficult to do.
17:05:03 <real_Joshue108> ack david
17:05:38 <AWK> q+ Judy
17:06:16 <alastairc> David: Was talking with someone about EN5419 (mandate 376?), the concern is that there is a lot of pressure to update that for mobile. There's an organisation working on that. It is very 'hot', if they produce mobile guidelines we'll get fragmentation.
17:06:47 <AWK> s/EN5419 (mandate 376?)/EN 301549
17:07:05 <Ryladog> EN301549
17:07:34 <KathyW> q+
17:07:56 <alastairc> David: I've been meeting with Canadian Gov, persuading that they should use WCAG. There is a huge gap with mobile, though, trying to prevent fragmentation.
17:08:02 <real_Joshue108> ack michae
17:08:02 <Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to talk about managing work
17:08:02 <alastairc> Josh: We just need to get at it!
17:08:46 <real_Joshue108> q+ to say we need to message about the work we have done, people are unaware
17:08:49 <real_Joshue108> +1 to MC
17:08:52 <alastairc> MichaelC: I interpreted some of the motivation as a concern about being able to do all three areas at the same time, so they were looking to prioritise. Kathy's comments back that up. In terms of time management, just express that we can do it.
17:08:55 <real_Joshue108> ack judy
17:09:07 <davidmacdonald> Scribe: David
17:09:46 <alastairc> Judy: It is not simply a matter of interest in EU, there was a parliamentary proceeding that mentioned the accessibility standard that mentioned there wasn't enough coverage, so the EU standards org was asked to cover it.
17:10:36 <alastairc> ... they are very aware that W3C is working on it, and they want to co-ordinate. There is a process in place with timelines. But the timelines are not yet activated, so we believe that there may be some delays, and we have some leeway.
17:11:11 <davidmacdonald> Judy: Parlimentary ... european commission ETSI is addressing it, it is a process, very aware that we are working on it, they may have some delays on their end. regarding, the issue that there are 68 candidate SC. and timeline, realistic concern.
17:11:38 <alastairc> ... for roll-in of LV & Cog, there are many different SCs, and the potential impact on timelines of doing these together, it is fair to look at the commenters concerns. Kathy's point about integration is very valid to raise, but there is a lot of work to move through that much material for a normative standard.
17:11:55 <real_Joshue108> ack Kath
17:12:39 <davidmacdonald> Kathy: Everybody is looking for mobile, and guidelines, we know there is nothing that is stricktly mobile but we need a mobile view ie in quick reference
17:13:33 <Judy> s/so the EU standards org/so the European Commission was directed to address it/
17:13:35 <real_Joshue108> ack rea
17:13:35 <Zakim> real_Joshue, you wanted to say we need to message about the work we have done, people are unaware
17:13:49 <alastairc> s/Kathy's comments back that up/Kathy's comments back up that we need to
17:14:26 <davidmacdonald> Joshue: some comments don't see the good work were doing
17:14:26 <MichaelC> s/Scribe: David//
17:14:32 <Judy> s/Palimentary ... european commission ETSI is address it/The European Commission in turn asked the European Standards Organizations (ESOs) to address it/
17:15:17 <MichaelC> scribe: davidmacdonald
17:15:35 <davidmacdonald> Zakim, next item
17:15:35 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Survey of new SC proposals:  https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/NewSC_20161122/" taken up [from AWK]
17:15:46 <Judy> s/on their end/on their end, but they're very aware of W3C work on mobile accessibility, and want to coordinate with us./
17:16:41 <laura> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/NewSC_20161122/results
17:16:42 <real_Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/NewSC_20161122/result
17:16:53 <alastairc> Issues https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/9 / https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/10
17:17:27 <real_Joshue108> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/3
17:17:33 <real_Joshue108> https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/2
17:20:18 <jamesn> q+
17:20:27 <real_Joshue108> ack jame
17:21:25 <Ryladog> q+
17:21:29 <davidmacdonald> q+
17:22:18 <lisa> lisa has joined #wai-wcag
17:22:22 <lisa> q+
17:23:11 <real_Joshue108> ack ryla
17:24:00 <alastairc> So each SC is assigned, someone who manages the feedback on that SC.
17:24:05 <real_Joshue108> ack david
17:25:00 <jamesn> q+ I think it covers #3 too
17:25:50 <Ryladog> q+
17:26:32 <real_Joshue108> ack lisa
17:27:50 <alastairc> q+
17:30:03 <real_Joshue108> ack ryla
17:32:34 <real_Joshue108> ack alas
17:34:55 <alastairc> Please - anyone who is interested in the contrast ones, please see my email to the list yesterday...
17:35:33 <laura> bye
17:35:36 <Mike_Elledge> Bye everyone!
17:35:37 <laura> laura has left #wai-wcag
17:37:34 <real_Joshue108> rrsagent, make minutes
17:37:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-wai-wcag-minutes.html real_Joshue108
17:37:43 <real_Joshue108> trackbot, end meeting
17:37:43 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
17:37:43 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Avneesh, AWK, alastairc, mattg, Glenda, davidmacdonald, Joshue, marcjohlic, Lauriat, KathyW, Greg_Lowney, Laura, Makoto,
17:37:46 <Zakim> ... Katie_Haritos-Shea, MichaelC, jeanne, Judy, lisa_seeman, KimD, Rachael
17:37:51 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
17:37:51 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/06-wai-wcag-minutes.html trackbot
17:37:52 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
17:37:52 <RRSAgent> I see no action items