<scribe> scribe: janina

Real-time communication accessibility.

<Joshue108> JS: Need input from Judy before we go to CFC about the polyfils

<Joshue108> JB: I've nothing new to add.

<Joshue108> JS: Then we should go on hold.

<Joshue108> SH: I understood the same.

<Joshue108> JS: We have some preference for the penultimate version, where we try to satisfy some of Doms concerns.

<Joshue108> We may need people to read both.

<jasonjgw> Janina suggests we should compare and decide between the two most recent drafts.

<jasonjgw> Josh suggests we wish to flag that there are interim implementations, and that they are technically feasible.

Ultimate draft is here:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rqtf/2019Oct/0014.html

Penultimate draft is here:

<Joshue108> JW: I had hoped to come back to the use cases document also.

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rqtf/2019Oct/0009.html

Dom's last email on the subject:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rqtf/2019Oct/0013.html

<Joshue108> <agreement about the term polyfil being problematic if widely understood term>

<Joshue108> <josh draft>

<Joshue108> At the time of this publication, gateways that enable effective RTT support in

<Joshue108> WebRTC clients can be developed e.g. through a custom WebRTC data channel.

<Joshue108> This is deemed sufficient until

<Joshue108> such time as future standardized gateways are enabled via IETF protocols such as the SCTP data channel protocol and RFC 4103 Real-time text. This will need to be defined at IETF in conjunction with related work at W3C groups to effectively and consistently standardise RTT support internationally.

sh: Praise for Josh getting the language updated so promptly!

jgw: Moving to use cases doc ...
... asks for update

jo: Have a couple things to discuss
... need to discuss before editing the doc
... also need to talk process with Michael
... Think it's pretty much ready go as an FPWD
... Already a well reviewed draft
... I'm OK with that? Any different opinion?

jgw: Perhaps a quick local review to make sure we're ready for FPWD?

jo: Current doc is loaded with hrefs, more wiki format
... Need to move to a working doc format
... Could have editorial review as part of that migration

js: +1 to doc format

<jasonjgw> Janina supports developing it on note track.

jgw: I would prefer to wait for the reformat before reviewing for CfC posting
... So reformat; review; then CfC

Web Authentication.

<jasonjgw> Janina now has minutes from the relevant meeting at TPAC.

---Web Authentication & CAPTCHA Turing Testing (at the bottom of) https://www.w3.org/2019/09/20-webauthn-minutes.html

<jasonjgw> Janina is interested in the potential of Web authentication work to make interactive CAPTCHA unnecessary.

<Joshue108> JS: Users need protection from third parties.

<jasonjgw> Janina suggests APA should clarify what is requested and offering to assist.

<jasonjgw> Janina notes an error in the CAPTCHA document regarding internationalization support in CAPTCHA implementations.

<jasonjgw> Janina (responding to Scott): it's relatively easy to fix as an erratum, but testing it (with Google's ReCAPTCHA) is more complicated.

<jasonjgw> Scott suggests clarifying that there are multiple implementations.

<Joshue108> JW: So if we wish to refer to RECAPTCHA as something that does that we need verification..

<Joshue108> JS: There may be an issue with using multiple..

<Joshue108> as there may not be more than 2.

<Joshue108> SH: Limited implementations?

<Joshue108> JS: Thats good!

XR accessibility (including draft documents).

jgw: Want to ask Josh any specific questions we should address now?

<Joshue108> WebXR Standards and Accessibility Architecture Issues

jo: Took primer doc and changed it renaming it
... Closer to what the doc actually does, should be more useful

<Joshue108> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/WebXR_Standards_and_Accessibility_Architecture_Issues

jo: Believe it's tighter and closer to our purpose
... still more to tweak, but getting there

jgw: Please ping when ready for next review

jo: Not quite to the point of merging this doc into XAUR, but still considering that
... At a conf in UK next week

jgw: Away on the 30th

js: And the first week in November is the Workshop in Seattle

jgw: So we'll meet 23rd, but not 30th or Nov 6

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.154  of Date: 2018/09/25 16:35:56  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/jo: That's why the big bucks//
Default Present: jasonjgw, scott_h, Joshue, janina, SteveNoble
Present: jasonjgw scott_h Joshue janina SteveNoble Joshue108
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina
Found Date: 16 Oct 2019
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)