<Avneesh> chari+

<Avneesh> chair+

Avneesh: first task work on definition of rationals to put in the wiki

<Avneesh> https://github.com/w3c/publ-a11y/wiki/Definitions-and-rationales-for-Accessibility-Metadata

scribe+

Avneesh: we can move on the definitions and editing them live

Madeleine: for writing definitions I used old documents
... screen-reader friendly: description on the Wiki
... it's not really formal

Avneesh: do we want to make it more formal?

George: I think it is clear

tzviya: I think part of the question is who is the audience
... will it go to Schema.org?

Avneesh: the audience are online bookstores (Ingram or Amazon)
... that want to display metadata on their websites

tzviya: Will we pass this document to other groups in W3C (e.g. WAI)

George: also libraries will use it

Bill_Kasdorf: I'm in a project, I think that less formal and more simple stuff is really useful to DSO

Avneesh: accessibility groups in W3C have an issue with the language they use

Madeleine: I think it should be less formal

Avneesh: for now let's keep it more userfriendly
... it's more guidance, then a standard specification

Madeleine: Rationale: Most available digital books include their content in true text and can report that they are screen reader friendly. Exceptions would include books where critical content is included only in images, such as graphs, charts, or equations presented as images, and books with a fixed appearance created by having an image of each page instead of true text.

Bill_Kasdorf: is it only about books or about resources in general?

Madeleine: the document is about "EPUBs" but we can use publication
... all the instances of "book" will be replaced with "publication"
... next is audiobook

Bill_Kasdorf: at the end of the definition why "it is not required to use the book"?

Madeleine: for example with images

Avneesh: the definition of audiobooks we decided was "significant content can be listened"

<tzviya> An Audiobook is a collection of audio resources grouped together by a reading order, metadata, and resources, all contained in a manifest.

tzviya: is it intended to cover audiobooks with the new specs in the W3C? or synchronized media?
... general assumption is it will not include images
... are we talking of all versions of audio or pre-packaged media?

Bill_Kasdorf: For me the primary mode of consumption is audio, it is not a supplement to a book

Madeleine: I will take out the work "entirely"

Avneesh: ok, good

Madeleine: rationale for audiobook

George: instead of "text" should we have "publication"?

Madeleine: yes, I will replace it

Avneesh: Nexxt: accessibility summary
... do we want be specific with teachers?

Madeleine: maybe that part can be in the rational instead of the definition

tzviya: I thinks it is better in the rationale

mgarrish: instead of teachers we can use "educators"

Madeleine: rationale
... I prefer "Must be before" instead of "can be made before"
... do we want to put "educators" in the rationale?

George: I think the definition will be used by Search Engines developers, maybe they will never see rationale

Bill_Kasdorf: do we want in the AccessibilitySummary to include what it is not accessible?

Avneesh: it is a different document: AccessibilitySummary document on how to write a good summary

Madeleine: EPUB Accessibility Conformance definition

Avneesh: do we need a more complex definition?
... compressed not complex :)
... may we have it more focused?

tzviya: is it correct? the value of the field will be "WCAG A/AA/AAA"?

Avneesh: right, or can be another specification

tzviya: what is the values of this definition can take?

mgarrish: it is always a URI: WCAG, EPUB Accessibility Guidelines, or other specifications

Madeleine: in the previous document we said that if it is a known URI (WCAG or EPUB Accessibility Guidelines), the UI should report the the LABEL and not the URI

tzviya: I agree with George, it is easy to abuse of this metadata
... if we make it flexible to point to any URI, it will be future proof

Avneesh: do we want "EPUB Accessibility Conformance" or without EPUB only "Accessibility Conformance" or only "WCAG"?

Madeleine: in EPUB Accessibility Guidelines you get more than in the WCAG (metadata, ecc.)

Avneesh: I think we should remove a little bit of "EPUB" name to make this document more future proof

mgarrish: I like the idea to generalize it, so we can make some changes in the future release

Madeleine: +1 for removing "EPUB"

tzviya: where will we remove "EPUB"?

Madeleine: only from the label

tzviya: ok

Avneesh: we can make this change, George can refine the definition

George: all this conformance in W3C can be very controversial
... with the European Accessibility Act it will be applied to all types of publications

Avneesh: George will also fix the rationale

Madeleine: Certified By definition
... do we want to remove "EPUB"?

Avneesh: sure

Bill_Kasdorf: I would say created or published, because usaly vendors created them

Madeleine: rationale
... do we want to generalize without pointing to a specific specification?

Avneesh: ok

Bill_Kasdorf: the metadata can be outside the publication

Madeleine: ok so "when the metadata about the publication"...

Avneesh: "declear" maybe is better than "describe"

Madeleine: Certifier Credential: description

tzviya: we should uniform the structure of the definition

Madeleine: rationale
... I think it is fine
... I would remove "and conforms to the Accessibility 1.0 specification"

crowd: yeah!

Madeleine: Certifier Report definition
... we can make it similar to the previous ones
... URL or URI?
... is a report or a list of features?

George: it can be any type of report

Madeleine: than there is the note "Let’s consider together whether to keep this comment or not"
... about "This is very important as accessibility metadata can be generated by anyone, while an authoritative web page ensures the quality of the work done. "
... we may remove "Third-party"

gpellegrino: it is more about authentication of the certification

Madeleine: what about "verify the accuracy of the metadata"?

Avneesh: it is more about authentication
... of the certification

George: the report can be very detail, or very short

<George> scribe+

<tzviya> scribe+ George

<George> We are going past the top of the hour. Several people had to drop off.

<George> finished certifier report

<George> moving to hazards

<George> We finished the hazards

<George> We will plan to meet next week at 14 UTC. Avneesh will check with Charles and Gregorio about their availability, and keep 15 UTC as a possibility.

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/od/of/
Present: Avneesh wendyreid mgarrish gpellegrino George tzviya Bill_Kasdorf Luis Perez Madeleine
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: gpellegrino
Inferring Scribes: gpellegrino

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


WARNING: No meeting title found!
You should specify the meeting title like this:
<dbooth> Meeting: Weekly Baking Club Meeting


WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


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.)