18 November, 1999
4:00 - 5:00 PM EDT
Longfellow Bridge: (617-252-1038)
Status: Not done. Will work with Wendy + Charles - hope to release it
Status: Not done.
WC: Not easy while no consensus. Coming to it...
PJ When I have a space and I have a visual browser it pops up a blank tooltip, unlike when ther is a null alt. I'll post to list.
WC Maybe we should leave it to authors. Problem is that ER group wants to know what to check for.
PJ And developers don't know what to put into tools.
PJ Someone put a break element(<br>) in the middle of a link as a test case. HPR reads it as one, but it looks like two characters
CMN There is a PICS schema that Daniel Dardailler created. I would like to work on a checkpoint by checkpoint schema (since that would also be useful for AU to check relative priority checkpoints)
WC Have you seen Schematron?
CMN Yes, but I have used a different artchitecture (RDF, instead of XSLTs) for my complex version. I will send reference to PICS scheme - I suggest people use that for now.
Not done yet
Not done yet
Note sent to GL list today to confirm consensus
WC Have people looked at the "wish list? People should also look at UA charter, and I would like to make the process of how we work clearer. I would like to release monthly drafts, and want to find ways to get people more involved.
CMN I have got some potential contacts in the deafness community. They are unlikely to enjoy teleconferences. IRC may be an option
JW I haven't used it, but I have used talk and found it difficult
WC IRC is probably better than talk
CMN There is an emacs IRC client - we should look at using it.
WC WebCT has worked with University of Toronto to make accessible chat
JW I noly have Unix system
WC We should look for more developers, better variety of disabilities, XML, RDF, etc
JW In looking at XML it is easy to say that it must be possible to satisfy WCAG in any new XML language (although that would need some refinement).
WC That's an interesting idea. I wonder if we should schedule face 2 face with PF so we can get together and get crossover. I think Techniques are becoming outdated because they are so focussed on HTML
JW I think you'll find most PF participants are in this working group already.
WC Does all the information flow between the two groups?
JW I think it tends to unless there is mewmber-confidential work being done by PF.
WC e.g. all the work on SVG
CMN I'll post the reference tonight *grin*
WC We have had a problem getting flow from PF into the techniques document.
CMN It is unclear how the techniques document is updated.
WC We need people involved for editing.
PJ Is there a public mailing list, or can I write to the website, or how is it organised?
CMN It is possible to give write access to the document, but it is generated by some tools.
PJ Is this in the charter?
WC No, but I would like to put some of it there. I would like to use ETA (A W3C tracking tool) to maintain the open issue list. (for example)
JW improving the system for maintaing the issues list would help
WC I would like to get a lot more of the work happening on the list too.
/* discussion of process. For Process details see the Process Document.
JW Should we write a requirements document?
WC Yes, that makes sense.
CMN There is a balance to strike between writing clearly what we are doing and spending too much time talking about talking.
Copyright © 1999 W3C (MIT, INRIA, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark, document use and software licensing rules apply.