15:06:13 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #ag
15:06:13 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/04/18-ag-irc
15:06:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
15:06:18 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
15:06:18 <Zakim> ok, trackbot
15:06:18 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
15:06:18 <trackbot> Date: 18 April 2017
15:06:19 <AWK> Zakim, agenda?
15:06:19 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
15:06:19 <Zakim> 3. COGA: Support Personalisation SC [from AWK]
15:06:25 <laura> present+ Laura
15:06:36 <laura> Scribe: Laura
15:06:46 <AWK> Zakim, agenda+ TPAC – meeting in November. Book your hotel room!
15:06:46 <Zakim> agendum 4 added
15:06:50 <laura> Zakim, next item
15:06:50 <Zakim> agendum 4. "TPAC – meeting in November. Book your hotel room!" taken up [from AWK]
15:06:58 <bruce_bailey> present+ Bruce_Bailey
15:07:19 <MichaelC_> https://www.w3.org/2017/11/TPAC/
15:07:32 <laura> AWK: We are planning to meet.
15:07:46 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #ag
15:08:04 <Ryladog> Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea
15:08:10 <laura> AWK: Book your room now.
15:08:43 <JF> JF has joined #ag
15:08:43 <AWK> agenda+ Adapting text options survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results)
15:08:57 <JF> present+ JF
15:09:12 <JF> agenda?
15:09:14 <AWK> agenda+ Accessible Authentication: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq10
15:09:30 <AWK> agenda+ Resize Content: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq6
15:09:32 <Rachael> q+
15:09:42 <AWK> agenda+ Top items for week of April 16: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Top3_18Apr2017/
15:09:47 <AWK> ack ra
15:10:02 <laura> Racheal: What days are we meeting?
15:10:05 <Jake> Jake has joined #ag
15:10:16 <laura> AWK: Not known yet.
15:10:23 <Jake> Present+ Jake
15:10:44 <steverep> steverep has joined #ag
15:10:46 <laura> …Book for the week then adjust as needed.
15:10:53 <steverep> present+steverep
15:10:56 <AWK> +AWK
15:10:58 <AWK> Chair: AWK
15:11:50 <laura> Zakim, next item
15:11:50 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Adapting text options survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results)" taken up [from AWK]
15:12:06 <AWK> zakim, agenda?
15:12:06 <Zakim> I see 4 items remaining on the agenda:
15:12:07 <Zakim> 5. Adapting text options survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results) [from AWK]
15:12:07 <Zakim> 6. Accessible Authentication: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq10 [from AWK]
15:12:07 <Zakim> 7. Resize Content: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq6 [from AWK]
15:12:07 <Zakim> 8. Top items for week of April 16: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Top3_18Apr2017/ [from AWK]
15:12:11 <Wayne> q+
15:12:16 <bruce_bailey> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results#xq1
15:12:32 <Jake> Zakim, who is here?
15:12:32 <Zakim> Present: allanj, Laura, AWK, Glenda, Greg_Lowney, ScottM, JF, Katie_Haritos-Shea, MichaelC, KimD, jasonjgw, dboudreau, Lauriat, shwetank, Makoto, Melanie_Philipp, Detlev, Rachael,
15:12:37 <Zakim> ... Wayne, MikeGower, marcjohlic, Bruce_Bailey, Jake, steverep
15:12:37 <Zakim> On IRC I see steverep, Jake, JF, Ryladog, RRSAgent, AWK, Wayne, gowerm, KimD, marcjohlic, david-macdonald, Makoto, Lauriat, bruce_bailey, dboudreau, shwetank_, MelanieP, Rachael,
15:12:37 <Zakim> ... Detlev, Greg, Mike_Elledge, laura, allanj, ChrisLoiselle, Michael, kirkwood, Zakim, csarven, jasonjgw, yatil-away, trackbot
15:12:39 <laura> AWK: Laura sent a question to the list.
15:12:49 <laura> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017AprJun/0225.html
15:13:09 <laura> …The SC needs to be testable from the text of the SC, but the specific technique to accomplish it may vary by technology, which is why we have techniques.
15:13:15 <david-macdonald> Success Criteria - For each guideline, testable success criteria are provided to allow WCAG 2.0 to be used where requirements and conformance testing are necessary such as in design specification, purchasing, regulation, and contractual agreements. In order to meet the needs of different groups and different situations, three levels of conformance are defined: A (lowest), AA, and AAA (highest). Additional information on WCAG levels can be foun[CUT]
15:13:44 <laura> Andrew’s: email: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2017AprJun/0226.html
15:14:04 <JF> +1 to AWK
15:14:08 <laura> …need to make it testable from the text of the SC
15:14:22 <adam_solomon> adam_solomon has joined #ag
15:14:34 <LisaSeeman> LisaSeeman has joined #ag
15:14:47 <LisaSeeman> not manging to join the meeting
15:14:53 <laura> …Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/AdaptingTextSurvey/results
15:15:25 <laura> David: I've chose H and I because for J and K, I don't know how I could test an SC that requires ALL functionality and information to work regardless of what font or what background was overridden.
15:15:28 <Michael> zakim, ping AWK in 20 minutes
15:15:28 <Zakim> I don't understand 'ping AWK in 20 minutes', Michael
15:15:37 <laura> …needs to be testable.
15:15:41 <Michael> zakim, ping me in 20 minutes to tell AWK there is a timer
15:15:41 <Zakim> ok, Michael
15:15:58 <laura> …There has been a lot of discussion of wide vs. narrow. My suggestion has been that if a user can override one font or one background color or one text color, it is highly likely (but not certain) that they can over ride MANY others. On the other hand the testing and conformance statements for J would be impossible as far as I can see.
15:16:19 <Wayne> q+
15:16:20 <AWK> q?
15:16:29 <laura> Bruce: like 145 shift.
15:16:38 <marcjohlic> q+
15:16:48 <laura> Katie: strongly agree.
15:17:03 <AWK> ack w
15:17:10 <laura> …H is clear and testable as written.
15:18:09 <jon_avila> jon_avila has joined #ag
15:18:13 <laura> Wayne: did some research. font sizes are normative. Some are bigger. Variance is small.
15:18:15 <jon_avila> present+jon_avila
15:18:35 <laura> …could have one test for everything.
15:18:54 <Ryladog> q+
15:19:03 <laura> …could have ranges.
15:19:16 <AWK> ack ry
15:19:25 <laura> …need to look at the data.
15:19:26 <AWK> q+ ryladog
15:19:33 <AWK> ack marc
15:19:48 <laura> marc: agree with david.
15:19:54 <Wayne> q+
15:20:00 <JF> Q+ to ask about internationalization (CJK, etc.)
15:20:09 <laura> …really like D but bullets in H.
15:20:35 <AWK> q+
15:20:43 <AWK> ack ry
15:20:52 <laura> …if that is not an otion would go with H&I
15:21:07 <AWK> s/otion/sption
15:21:17 <AWK> s/sption/option
15:21:54 <AWK> ack wayne
15:21:55 <laura> Katie: don’t think it is for no reason. Can’t get into specific font types. Must work for all languages.
15:22:04 <LisaSeeman> in israel the populer fonts are things like "david"
15:22:10 <shwetank_> +1 to laura
15:22:19 <laura> wayne: has written a program to do it.
15:22:49 <laura> …been making a big problem out of nothing.
15:23:01 <AWK> ack jf
15:23:01 <Zakim> JF, you wanted to ask about internationalization (CJK, etc.)
15:23:02 <laura> …should send back to the LVTF.
15:23:18 <laura> JF: +1 to Katie
15:23:38 <jon_avila> we have differences already SC 1.4.8 has different requirements for CJK
15:23:39 <kirkwood> +1 also to Katie regarding naming font faces
15:23:40 <laura> JF: we are international organization.
15:23:43 <shwetank_> also devanagari for hindi and other indian languages
15:23:46 <AWK> ack AWK
15:23:47 <jon_avila> this has been done before in WCAG 2.0
15:23:55 <kirkwood> +1 to JF
15:23:59 <Wayne> Family	Girth	Girt32 Andale Mo--32	--32	-1 Arial	32	1 Arial Black	38	1.18 Avant Garde	--32	-1 Bookman	--32	-1 Century Schoolbook	35	1.09 Comic Sans MS	35	1.09 Consolas	35	1.09 Courier	38	1.18 Courier New	38	1.18 Euclid	35	1.09 Garamond	32	1 Georgia	35	1.09 Helvetica	32	1 Impact	28 	.87 Lucida Sans Typewriter	35	1.09 Palati—32	--32	-1 Tahoma	33	1.03 Times	32	1 Times New Roman	32	1 Verdana	38	1.18 Wide Latin	62	1.9
15:24:14 <laura> AWK: Trouble with naming fonts.
15:24:59 <JF> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CJK_fonts
15:25:47 <laura> …ineed to reasonable test.
15:25:57 <laura> wayne: I think we can.
15:26:19 <JF> Cyrillic fonts: https://www.linotype.com/6731/cyrillic.html
15:27:01 <laura> we can measure for each language.
15:27:29 <kirkwood> q+
15:27:38 <Greg> q+ to ask in what ways you anticipate pages will fail when fonts are changed
15:27:46 <JF> "There are over 800 fonts available through Google Fonts' main website" (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Fonts)
15:27:53 <Michael> q+ JamesN
15:27:54 <AWK> q+ james
15:28:00 <AWK> ack james
15:28:04 <AWK> ack kirkw
15:28:29 <laura> JK: Issue from coga.
15:28:38 <Wayne> q+
15:28:39 <AWK> ack greg
15:28:39 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to ask in what ways you anticipate pages will fail when fonts are changed
15:28:43 <laura> …trouble with naming fonts.
15:30:08 <gowerm> Let's just do H and K (to address concerns with specifying fonts) and get it out there.
15:30:11 <laura> Greg: Don’t understand the problem people are having with fonts.
15:30:38 <laura> Greg: don’t see the problem.
15:31:17 <JF> +1 to the "well designed" ideal
15:31:21 <Wayne> +1
15:31:24 <AWK> ack james
15:31:54 <laura> James: when a product doesn’t work it would be a bug against the product.
15:32:25 <Wayne> q+
15:32:35 <gowerm> q+
15:32:40 <AWK> ack wayne
15:32:54 <laura> …need requuirements on what the fonts need to support.
15:33:22 <laura> wayne: we can define tolerances.
15:33:42 <adam_solomon> present+ adam_solomon
15:33:53 <laura> …we need to reseach this for a few weeks.
15:33:58 <Mike_Elledge> pre
15:34:01 <david-macdonald> q+
15:34:04 <Mike_Elledge> Present+ Mike Elledge
15:34:05 <Rachael> q+
15:34:12 <AWK> zakim, close the queue
15:34:12 <Zakim> ok, AWK, the speaker queue is closed
15:34:29 <AWK> ack gowerm
15:34:49 <Greg> I don't think a page would fail because the user chooses a font that displays a lot of rectangles for characters. Every character would still be displayed, regardless of whether or not the user could understand it, and therefore it complies. An user's ability to read it is not part of the requirement.
15:34:57 <laura> MG: we are boiling the ocean.
15:35:04 <JF> Q+ to ask about the impact of this on ruby annotation... (https://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/)
15:35:05 <AWK> ack dav
15:35:07 <Ryladog> +1 to that
15:35:19 <laura> ...they are very similar.
15:35:39 <jon_avila> Agree with David
15:35:42 <laura> Dvid: then it will be in a narrow range.
15:35:42 <Zakim> Michael, you asked to be pinged at this time to tell AWK there is a timer
15:35:49 <AWK> ack r
15:36:26 <jon_avila> CSS does have rules
15:36:36 <steverep> q+ to comment about
15:36:47 <steverep> q-
15:36:50 <laura> Rachael: Phrasing is confusing on the intro statement.
15:37:12 <Detlev> Happy to shift support to H if language is addressed
15:37:31 <Wayne> +1
15:37:31 <laura> AWK: Font and color seem to be the problematic bullets.
15:37:48 <laura> …we could drop them.
15:37:54 <steverep> q+
15:38:27 <Mike_Pluke> Mike_Pluke has joined #ag
15:38:37 <laura> Steve: Would be okay with dropping font. But not color.
15:39:48 <laura> AWK: can anyone not live with H&I?
15:39:52 <MelanieP> MelanieP has joined #ag
15:40:08 <Detlev> +1 can live with H& I
15:40:23 <Mike_Pluke> present+ Mike_Pluke
15:40:48 <laura> Katie: leave the bullets.
15:41:00 <laura> …get it out there.
15:41:32 <laura> …more input is helpful.
15:42:37 <laura> AWK: concerns about font.
15:42:43 <JF> I can live with "H", but I am opposed to "I"
15:42:59 <laura> steve: what are the objections to color?
15:43:13 <laura> AWK: David had issues.
15:43:35 <gowerm> Nope, Bruce, I can hear fine
15:43:43 <KimD> *It's ok for me Bruce
15:44:14 <JF> +1, we cannot "forbid" stupidity...
15:44:26 <laura> David: okay with color bullet.
15:44:50 <laura> wayne: could compute color.
15:45:11 <david-macdonald> "If the technology being used has the ability to override text styles, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows:" To address Rachel's wording concern perhaps this "If the technologies relied upon allow the text styles to be overridden, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows:"
15:45:15 <Greg> +1 to allow user flexibility even if they can choose configs they cannot use
15:45:35 <Greg> s/they can choose/the user can choose/
15:45:48 <laura> JF: don't restrict the user.
15:46:02 <LisaSeeman> q+
15:46:40 <jon_avila> Agree.  Stupid was poor choice or word
15:47:10 <Greg> That is why I don't like saying just one or two color choices, or fonts: we should not allow a page to conform just by providing two predesigned color schemes, which would certainly not support a sufficiently wide range of users.
15:47:21 <Greg> s/colo choices/color choices/
15:48:33 <laura> Laura: Text is : If the technology being used has the ability to override text styles, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows: font family to one different font family
15:50:08 <Greg> As I've said before, it would help to separate the question of the main paragraph wording from that of the list wording.
15:51:16 <jon_avila> but we need a failure on how to mark icon fonts properly and if they don't mark it properly then it fails
15:52:28 <Detlev> q+
15:52:34 <Detlev> q-
15:52:54 <Greg> Wayne, a well-designed page should not break when a wide font is selected: if it's well designed nothing will overlap.
15:52:59 <laura> Wayne: Don't think the language works.
15:54:06 <laura> AWK: Font seems to be holding us up.
15:54:34 <laura> David: think we are clear to move forward.
15:55:31 <kirkwood> present+
15:55:35 <laura> MG: Maybe  H and K?
15:55:54 <JF> I can support H & K
15:56:56 <laura> AWK reads H&K
15:57:00 <david-macdonald> If the technologies relied upon allow the text styles to be overridden,
15:57:13 <AWK> instead of "If the technology being used has the ability to override text styles"
15:57:14 <Greg> I will not veto H, but I strongly prefer J's bullets on fonts and colors to those of H.
15:58:21 <laura> David: amandment to H "If the technologies relied upon allow the text styles to be overridden, text styles of the page can be overridden without losing essential content or functionality as follows:”
15:58:41 <marcjohlic> q+
15:59:20 <steverep> q+
15:59:58 <laura> AWK: K would require a widget.
16:00:46 <laura> GL: intent is requiring a widget.
16:01:51 <laura> AWK: K doesn’t require a widget.
16:02:43 <laura> AWK: lets talk about this on Thursday.
16:02:57 <laura> Zakim, next item
16:02:57 <Zakim> agendum 6. "Accessible Authentication: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/#wbsq10" taken up [from AWK]
16:03:07 <bruce_bailey> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/results#xq10
16:04:11 <gowerm> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCs_April_11/results
16:04:11 <laura> AWK reads results
16:04:44 <laura> Lisa: Kind of surpised. Gave people 2 options.
16:05:30 <gowerm> q+
16:05:40 <jamesn> jamesn has joined #ag
16:05:53 <jamesn> q?
16:05:56 <ChrisLoiselle> ChrisLoiselle has left #ag
16:05:57 <jamesn> q+
16:05:58 <laura> Lisa: Tons of mechanisms that people can use to conform.
16:06:04 <Ryladog> q+
16:06:08 <JF> QW+ to ask that we have this particular SC reviewed by the W3C Security WG
16:06:21 <JF> Q+
16:06:22 <laura> …seems to have stepped back.
16:07:18 <laura> …to james, no one is saying we should encourage the ability to retrieve a password.
16:07:52 <laura> James: reset is okay. Drop the word retrieve. Easy to fix.
16:08:02 <Kathy> Kathy has joined #ag
16:08:13 <AWK> ack gower
16:08:14 <laura> Lisa: Happy to change that word.
16:08:15 <Kathy> present+ Kathy
16:08:17 <jamesn> ack me
16:08:51 <laura> MG: Problems clarifying with the 2 bullets
16:09:02 <laura> …Do you have examples?
16:09:06 <Rachael> q+
16:09:51 <laura> Lisa: Yes. W3C password. Sends me a link. Can be sent to form. Can be a token.
16:10:17 <AWK> isn't a method that uses a token requiring copying information?
16:10:28 <laura> Lisa: Facebook & Google conform on the 2nd bullet.
16:11:08 <Mike_Pluke> q+
16:11:08 <laura> Lisa: Banks could have biometrics.
16:11:30 <Greg> q+ to say the issue about "retrieve" may actually be about the ambiguity introduced by "or". I don't think it is intended to mean both have to be supported, just at least one of them. It could be reworded to clarify that.
16:11:45 <laura> Lisa: many site are conforming.
16:12:19 <AWK> ack ryla
16:12:34 <Ryladog> Suggestion: "Accessible Authentication Methods: A mechanism is available to reset any authentication method that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information."
16:12:41 <laura> Lisa: to Josh, have spoken to other WG.
16:12:54 <AWK> ^does not rely?
16:13:53 <AWK> s/^does not rely?/
16:14:03 <AWK> ack JF
16:14:04 <Wayne> +1
16:14:05 <laura> Katie: could reword.
16:14:15 <shwetank_> I like katie/david's suggestion
16:14:20 <jamesn> q+
16:14:46 <Wayne> q+
16:14:48 <laura> JF: Different levels of security. Need to be mindful.
16:15:03 <AWK> ack rach
16:15:25 <KimD> +1 to JF - different levels, based on target audience perhaps?
16:15:27 <laura> Rachael: seems we have lost info.
16:15:50 <laura> …”retireve or”
16:16:21 <AWK> ack mike
16:17:18 <AWK> ack greg
16:17:18 <Zakim> Greg, you wanted to say the issue about "retrieve" may actually be about the ambiguity introduced by "or". I don't think it is intended to mean both have to be supported, just at
16:17:20 <laura> MK: need to be clear. Important and doable
16:17:22 <Zakim> ... least one of them. It could be reworded to clarify that.
16:17:51 <david-macdonald> A mechanism is available to reset or retrieve authentication information that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information.
16:18:17 <laura> Greg: the “or” introduces an ambiguity.
16:18:38 <jasonjgw> q+
16:18:45 <AWK> ack jamesn
16:18:50 <marcjohlic> I like the rewrite - but I don't like "retrieve" in there - and think to AWK's point we should better define "that"
16:19:14 <Mike_Pluke> +1
16:19:15 <JF> +1 to JamesN
16:19:20 <gowerm> +1 to removing "retrieve"
16:19:23 <AWK> ack way
16:19:24 <marcjohlic> +1 to james - drop "retrieve"
16:19:28 <laura> James: object to the word retrieve.
16:19:29 <shwetank_> +1 to James
16:19:43 <AWK> ack jason
16:19:53 <laura> Wayne: agree with James.
16:20:40 <Ryladog> q+
16:20:49 <AWK> ack ry
16:20:51 <laura> Jason: Would responding to personal questions qualify?
16:21:01 <laura> Katie: there are options.
16:21:07 <Greg> I agree with Jason: personal questions tend to require memorization even if that's not the author's intention.
16:21:19 <david-macdonald> A mechanism is available to reset authentication information that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information.
16:21:27 <laura> …doesn't have to be memorization.
16:21:39 <Greg> That could be addressed in the supporting documents as a specific failing example.
16:21:50 <laura> Lisa: Jason, should be a failure.
16:22:35 <laura> …has to be something that doesn't rely on memory.
16:23:05 <dboudreau_> dboudreau_ has joined #ag
16:23:05 <Ryladog> "Accessible Authentication Methods: A mechanism is available to reset any authentication method that relies upon a user's ability to memorize or recall information."
16:23:28 <laura> …to katie, okay with removing retrieve
16:23:49 <dboudreau_> +1 to removing “retrieve” as well
16:23:51 <jamesn> isn't coming in a mechanism?
16:24:22 <laura> Lisa: Requiring reset seems to put burden on author.
16:24:36 <laura> …we have given people an option.
16:24:38 <Wayne> A mechanism ... operate authentication...?
16:24:51 <Wayne> q+
16:25:05 <AWK> ack wayne
16:25:05 <laura> …at a loss why this hasn’t gotten through.
16:25:06 <david-macdonald> q+
16:25:11 <marcjohlic> q+
16:25:34 <marcjohlic> q-
16:26:18 <laura> wayne: wondering if the terms are the problem. Maybe use operate authentication?
16:26:31 <Mike_Pluke> q+
16:26:43 <laura> ..without having to rely on memory.
16:26:48 <LisaSeeman> q+
16:26:51 <AWK> ack david
16:26:58 <JF> Would a link "Forgot my password" be sufficient?
16:27:15 <JF> Q+
16:27:28 <LisaSeeman> if the reset the password does not rely on  memory you are ok
16:27:28 <laura> David: could live with in with his edit on the second bullet.
16:27:31 <Greg> q+ to say I'm somewhat concerned that the choice of two bullets can lead to sites requiring people having to go through a password reset procedure every time they need to log in, because that's easier for the author than providing a method that does not require memorization. Also, it should be "at least one of" rather than "one of".
16:27:54 <AWK> ack mike
16:28:04 <laura> …open to let it go to public review with his suggestion.
16:28:07 <LisaSeeman> Andrew can we go for a quick revote, if we take out the word reset
16:28:28 <laura> MP: Maybe an add exception.
16:28:32 <AWK> There's no such thing as a quick revote!
16:28:32 <jasonjgw> q+
16:28:40 <LisaSeeman> a hands up +1
16:28:40 <AWK> zakim, close the queue
16:28:40 <Zakim> ok, AWK, the speaker queue is closed
16:28:53 <Ryladog> +1 to another SC for that
16:29:08 <Greg> Sites not allowing reset due to security concerns is not a problem, as the site can comply with the first bullet instead.
16:29:11 <jamesn> I totally agree with JF that this needs further review from security groups - but think that can maybe happen once it goes into FPWD.
16:29:20 <AWK> ack lisa
16:29:43 <laura> MP: Maybe SC with new across the board text. not tied to authentication.
16:30:24 <laura> AWK: Lisa make edits and send it to the list.
16:31:46 <AWK> RESOLUTION: leave open
16:31:55 <laura> andrew will followup with Lisa and SC manager.
16:32:32 <LisaSeeman> present+
16:32:34 <Michael> present+
16:32:39 <david-macdonald> PRESENT + DAVIDMACDONALD
16:32:40 <dboudreau> present+
16:32:46 <LisaSeeman> present+ lisa seeman
16:32:52 <AWK> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:32:52 <Zakim> Present: allanj, Laura, AWK, Glenda, Greg_Lowney, ScottM, JF, Katie_Haritos-Shea, MichaelC, KimD, jasonjgw, dboudreau, Lauriat, shwetank, Makoto, Melanie_Philipp, Detlev, Rachael,
16:32:55 <Zakim> ... Wayne, MikeGower, marcjohlic, Bruce_Bailey, Jake, steverep, jon_avila, adam_solomon, Elledge, Mike_Pluke, kirkwood, Kathy, LisaSeeman, Michael, seeman
16:32:57 <david-macdonald> PRESENT+ DAVID
16:32:59 <laura> rrsagent, make minutes
16:32:59 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/04/18-ag-minutes.html laura
16:33:08 <Mike_Elledge> bye all
16:39:21 <laura> bye.
16:42:47 <kirkwood__> kirkwood__ has joined #AG
17:18:04 <kirkwood__> kirkwood__ has joined #AG
17:24:47 <KimD> KimD has left #ag
18:49:36 <shwetank> shwetank has joined #ag