IRC log of wai-wcag on 2004-12-02

Timestamps are in UTC.

21:02:40 [RRSAgent]: RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
21:02:44 [ChrisR]: chris ridpath, my voice is not coming through
21:02:45 [Michael]: rrsagent, make logs world
21:02:58 [ChrisR]: I'll dial back in and try again
21:03:03 [Zakim]: -fyergeau
21:03:26 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, who's on the phone?
21:03:26 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Avi, Yvette_Hoitink, Alex_Li, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Michael_Cooper, Bengt_farre
21:03:48 [Zakim]: +[Microsoft]
21:03:54 [Zakim]: +fyergeau
21:04:10 [rellero]: Today I cannot use dialpad, I will follow only with irc
21:04:10 [Zakim]: +John_Slatin
21:04:12 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, [Microsoft] is MikeBarta
21:04:12 [Zakim]: +MikeBarta; got it
21:04:21 [ben]: ben has joined #wai-wcag
21:04:26 [Zakim]: +Becky_Gibson
21:04:30 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, fyergaeu is Chris_Ridpath
21:04:30 [Zakim]: sorry, Yvette_Hoitink, I do not recognize a party named 'fyergaeu'
21:04:51 [Becky_Gibson]: Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
21:04:56 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, who's on the phone?
21:04:56 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Avi, Yvette_Hoitink, Alex_Li, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Michael_Cooper, Bengt_farre, MikeBarta, fyergeau, John_Slatin, Becky_Gibson
21:05:24 [Zakim]: +??P11
21:05:33 [ben]: zakim, ??P11 is Gregg_and_Ben
21:05:33 [Zakim]: +Gregg_and_Ben; got it
21:06:20 [ben]: zakim, who is here?
21:06:20 [Zakim]: On the phone I see Avi, Yvette_Hoitink, Alex_Li, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Michael_Cooper, Bengt_farre, MikeBarta, fyergeau, John_Slatin, Becky_Gibson, Gregg_and_Ben
21:06:23 [Zakim]: On IRC I see Becky_Gibson, ben, RRSAgent, ChrisR, Michael, rellero, Zakim, bengt, Yvette_Hoitink
21:06:25 [Zakim]: -Michael_Cooper
21:06:26 [Michael]: I was here,
21:06:32 [Michael]: usability issues on my phone
21:06:33 [Michael]: I'll redial
21:07:14 [Michael]: thought i was unmuting and I hung up
21:07:45 [Zakim]: +??P6
21:07:54 [ben]: zakim, ??P6 is Michael
21:07:54 [Zakim]: +Michael; got it
21:08:01 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, mute me
21:08:01 [Zakim]: Yvette_Hoitink should now be muted
21:08:07 [Michael]: zakim, Michael is Michael_Cooper
21:08:07 [Zakim]: +Michael_Cooper; got it
21:08:17 [Michael]: zakim, I am Michael_Cooper
21:08:17 [Zakim]: ok, Michael, I now associate you with Michael_Cooper
21:08:26 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, unmute me
21:08:26 [Zakim]: Yvette_Hoitink should no longer be muted
21:08:47 [Yvette_Hoitink]: scribe: me
21:09:09 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, fyergeau is Chris_Ridpath
21:09:09 [Zakim]: +Chris_Ridpath; got it
21:09:16 [ben]: zakim, fyergeau is Chris
21:09:16 [Zakim]: sorry, ben, I do not recognize a party named 'fyergeau'
21:09:25 [gregg]: gregg has joined #wai-wcag
21:09:30 [Yvette_Hoitink]: MC: yesterdays tech call
21:09:45 [Yvette_Hoitink]: mc: checklists & test suite
21:10:07 [Yvette_Hoitink]: test suites have been moved into W3C space
21:10:12 [Yvette_Hoitink]: weren't ready to take poll yet
21:10:33 [Yvette_Hoitink]: in the end they decided that test suites only have test that are necessary and sufficient to meet the guidelines
21:10:41 [Yvette_Hoitink]: no optional tests in test suite for now
21:10:54 [Yvette_Hoitink]: the checklists should be driven by the test suits
21:10:57 [Yvette_Hoitink]: s/suits/suites
21:11:22 [Yvette_Hoitink]: the items in the suites would lead to the items on the check lists, the ones you check off
21:11:34 [Yvette_Hoitink]: ready to go forward and start on that work
21:11:57 [Yvette_Hoitink]: we have a test suite for HTML but need suites for other techs too
21:13:46 [Yvette_Hoitink]: discussion about tasks, they used to be checklists items.
21:14:02 [Yvette_Hoitink]: we found that they were not granular/specific enough to become checklists
21:14:18 [Yvette_Hoitink]: so we changed them from checklist items into tasks
21:15:00 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: It will be good to figure out what the role of tasks is
21:15:11 [Yvette_Hoitink]: in current document it isn't clear
21:15:25 [Yvette_Hoitink]: you have guidelines, sc, and now checklist items, techniques
21:15:39 [Yvette_Hoitink]: techniques speak to tasks, not clear how all of that relates
21:15:46 [Yvette_Hoitink]: need a model of how everything fits together
21:16:14 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: we need a direct correlation between tasks and checklists
21:16:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: both guide each other, not only one direction
21:17:02 [Yvette_Hoitink]: don't want to delete items from checklists because we don't yet have a test for it
21:17:44 [Yvette_Hoitink]: you might want to generate the checklists and the test suite from the same source document.
21:18:22 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: could generate other stuff from same source as well
21:18:46 [Yvette_Hoitink]: If empty tests are generated, we know where we need to work on
21:18:57 [Yvette_Hoitink]: compliment the group on the format, setting up procedures
21:19:07 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: questions?
21:19:17 [Yvette_Hoitink]: all: (silence)
21:19:51 [Zakim]: +??P12
21:20:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: next: test suites & checklist discussion
21:21:18 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: technologies used would be used to generate the checklists
21:21:32 [Yvette_Hoitink]: even simple HTML page often has multiple technologies
21:21:41 [Becky_Gibson]: zakim, ??P12 is Kerstin
21:21:41 [Zakim]: +Kerstin; got it
21:21:53 [Yvette_Hoitink]: lots of 'orphan' items that do not relate to a success criteria
21:22:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]: talked about moving them to a seperate place
21:23:05 [Yvette_Hoitink]: for example: alt.text.length >= X, that's not in our guidelines or sc so we need to decide what to do with them
21:23:21 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: I understand that we moved them for now, correct?
21:23:23 [Zakim]: +??P13
21:23:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: mc: yes
21:24:01 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: it's strange to have W3 tests for things that W3 doesn't require. Needs thought
21:24:12 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: "test procedures" or "test suite"?
21:24:37 [Yvette_Hoitink]: suite = stimuli that you run to see if it meets. Currently, we have procedures with some sample code
21:25:00 [Yvette_Hoitink]: You could use suite to test _tools_
21:25:29 [Yvette_Hoitink]: should we have two types of tests suites?
21:25:36 [Becky_Gibson]: zakim, ??P13 is David_MacDonald
21:25:36 [Zakim]: +David_MacDonald; got it
21:25:43 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, who's making noise?
21:25:54 [Zakim]: Yvette_Hoitink, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Chris_Ridpath (39%), Yvette_Hoitink (50%), Alex_Li (9%), Gregg_and_Ben (34%)
21:26:33 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: other issues with tests suites/checklists?
21:27:03 [Yvette_Hoitink]: all: (silence)
21:27:32 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: Q for Chris: do you prefer "test suite" or "test procedures"/"test methods"?
21:27:42 [Yvette_Hoitink]: delete last line
21:28:04 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: test procedures for what is currently test suite, and 'test suite' to test tools
21:28:15 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: I think test suite is good term for what it is
21:28:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: purpose is to test content
21:28:43 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: test suite can be used to check document, similar to checklists
21:28:57 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: checklists tells you the true/false questions
21:29:04 [Yvette_Hoitink]: test suites tells you how to determine that
21:29:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: If your content passes all tests in test suite, your content passes the guidelines
21:29:39 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: test procedure/test methods might be easier to translate
21:29:49 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: we can leave this as an open issue
21:29:56 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: no problem with name change
21:30:13 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: it's still not clear to people that this is the way to test conformance
21:30:36 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: more interested in function of the suite than title
21:31:07 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: If 'test suite' is the correct term for this thing, is it the correct term for the other pages that Gregg mentioned and if not what should we call them?
21:32:21 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: Chose term because W3 uses the term 'suite' a lot
21:32:26 [ChrisR]: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/
21:32:33 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: we'll discuss this with Shawn and EO
21:33:34 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: it seems we're clear of what the test suites and checklists are
21:33:45 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: superb idea to derive both of them from the same source
21:34:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: techniques also have direct correlation with checklists and test suite
21:34:29 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: people are interested in "how do I meet the checklists" so suite is important
21:35:19 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: BTW: if we talk about measuring things in words, have to take Japanese-like languages into account which don't have words as such
21:35:25 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: other comments?
21:35:59 [David]: David has joined #wai-wcag
21:36:15 [Becky]: Becky has joined #wai-wcag
21:36:28 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: some of the tests are language-specific for example the alt-text word limit
21:36:44 [David]: Gage Dictionary meaning #3) Suite: any set or series of like things
21:37:32 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: Some tests are optional, you could have tests like the alt-length where human testing can be prompted if too long
21:38:15 [BeckyG]: BeckyG has joined #wai-wcag
21:38:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: we have no SC that alt-text has to be short. have to be careful that we don't contrain them just because it's easy to test
21:38:46 [Yvette_Hoitink]: CR: That's the whole point of bottom-up working, we have to hope to meet in the middle
21:38:57 [Becky_Gibson]: Becky_Gibson has joined #wai-wcag
21:38:59 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: top-down is normative, bottom-up is not
21:39:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: next topic: John's 18 November proposed change to guideline 1.1
21:39:37 [Yvette_Hoitink]: http://tinyurl.com/4pf37
21:40:07 [Becky_Gibson]: q+
21:40:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: changes from 'identifying' to 'providing' the function
21:40:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]: ack John
21:41:15 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: if you have an unchecked box, you want "unchecked box" as alt, not "this box tells you whether the statement is true or not"
21:41:58 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: quick update: Mike Barta responded that he had problem with "provides the same function"
21:42:12 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: new proposal: "serves the same function" instead
21:42:22 [Yvette_Hoitink]: "serves the same purpose as"
21:42:50 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: That helps clarify for me, "function" sounded to active for me. "serves the same purpose" is better
21:43:04 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: I had issues too, that are addressed by this new proposal
21:43:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Unanimous consent to change the phrasing to "serves the same purpose as"
21:43:33 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Next topic: Misc issues
21:43:51 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Issue 292 <http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=292>
21:44:05 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: active/passive voice, addressed by John's rewrite
21:44:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: I will continue to address this as I go along
21:44:55 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: no objections to closing this item -> item closed
21:45:11 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Next issue: 376 <http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=376>
21:46:48 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: If you mark up the text, determining how to show it to the user is user-agent issue
21:47:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: closed because covered by UAAG
21:47:40 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Next issue: 392 - <http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=392>
21:47:58 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: complaint was that we should define target audience
21:48:20 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: What are target audiences?
21:48:25 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: Web developers!
21:48:47 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: This ties in with Tom's work on personas
21:48:55 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: we need a list for our requirements docs
21:49:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: Policy makers
21:49:30 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: Website owners/managers
21:49:39 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: User agent developers
21:49:42 [Yvette_Hoitink]: users
21:49:45 [Yvette_Hoitink]: tool makers
21:50:01 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: people who write contracts
21:50:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]: purchasing agents
21:50:19 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: how would a user use the guidelines?
21:50:50 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: because they want to address inaccessible website and want to know what can be done
21:50:57 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: consumers / advocates
21:51:21 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: authoring tool developers, testing tool developers
21:51:26 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: lawyers
21:51:40 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: content managers
21:52:17 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: so we have website owners/managers and web content managers
21:52:26 [Yvette_Hoitink]: UI designers
21:54:51 [Yvette_Hoitink]: individuals and organizations
21:54:55 [Yvette_Hoitink]: teachers
21:55:01 [Yvette_Hoitink]: trainers
21:55:11 [Yvette_Hoitink]: consultants
21:55:37 [Yvette_Hoitink]: rehabilitation specialists
21:56:17 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: anything else, you can send it on
21:56:31 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: next issue: 317 - <http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=317>
21:57:01 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: presenting information with color
21:57:53 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: we wrote "in color" but we meant only if the color IS presenting the information
21:58:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gv: our current wording can be read wrong.
21:58:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: Joe Clark thought we were against color, because he misunderstood
22:00:48 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: I think this is a very good point, but have two problems with proposed formulation by BG
22:02:36 [bengt_]: bengt_ has joined #wai-wcag
22:02:57 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: "information differentiated by hue"?
22:03:42 [Yvette_Hoitink]: have to make clear that you can present information using color, but the color shouldn't be informative in tiself
22:03:49 [Yvette_Hoitink]: s/tiself/itself
22:04:20 [bengt_]: zakim, kick bengt_farre
22:04:20 [Zakim]: I don't understand 'kick bengt_farre', bengt_
22:04:44 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: Perhaps we can swap: "If color is used to convey information..."
22:04:45 [Zakim]: -Bengt_farre
22:05:18 [Zakim]: +??P2
22:05:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: If I make a label red, that's acceptable at level 1?
22:05:29 [bengt_]: zakim, ??P2 is Bengt_Farre
22:05:29 [Zakim]: +Bengt_Farre; got it
22:05:32 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Yes, because it is available in markup
22:06:03 [Zakim]: -Kerstin
22:06:10 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BG: So a screenreader user would have to instruct the reader to read aloud the attributes to know it's red?
22:06:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]: gV: At level 1, that is correct
22:06:20 [Yvette_Hoitink]: q+
22:06:41 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: I can tell Jaws to give me color information
22:06:54 [Zakim]: +??P12
22:07:00 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: Adds significantly to the time it takes
22:07:29 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, ??P12 is Kerstin
22:07:29 [Zakim]: +Kerstin; got it
22:07:31 [Becky_Gibson]: zakim, ??P12 is Kerstin
22:07:31 [Zakim]: I already had ??P12 as Kerstin, Becky_Gibson
22:07:34 [Yvette_Hoitink]: :-)
22:08:20 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: is a result because we choose at level 1 we wouldn't require visual changes, so that's why the use of color is at level 2
22:08:25 [Yvette_Hoitink]: without markup, that is
22:09:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Old wording used different words for level 1 and 2, one said "through color", other said "using color"
22:10:18 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: L1 "any information conveyed through color can also be programmatically determined"
22:13:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: Many web developers use hex to denote color: #FFAABB, etc
22:13:41 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: User agent should determine which color that is. But oops, UAAG doesn't require that so we can't either
22:14:10 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: We need to make sure information like "this field is required" should be available
22:15:16 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: A technique could be to use a <span title="required">
22:15:55 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BC: At the moment, title is many times optional and read on request
22:16:25 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: I think the wording does work with our intent
22:16:54 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: L2: "Any information that is conveyed through color is also available without having to interpret color or markup"
22:17:15 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: That might be problematic because all content requires interpreting markup
22:17:31 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: We don't want PEOPLE to look at markup
22:17:45 [Yvette_Hoitink]: s/People/require people
22:18:17 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BC: "without color"
22:18:27 [Zakim]: -Chris_Ridpath
22:18:35 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: No, that would require black and white which is not how we want people to read
22:19:55 [Yvette_Hoitink]: "in a manner that does not rely on color alone"
22:22:26 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: "Any information that is conveyed through color is presented in a manner that does not rely on color or markup"
22:23:01 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: problem with that, relying on markup might be a good alternative to color, for example <em> + red
22:24:52 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: We don't want <span title="require"> to pass at level 2, because that still requires special AT
22:25:29 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: Is title covered in UAAG?
22:25:47 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: It is, but at lvl 2 we don't want people to hover over every form element to see what's required
22:31:09 [Yvette_Hoitink]: Is color just a special case of 'visual modality'? For example, do we also want to address people who can't perceive a 2 pt font difference?
22:32:56 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: You could use light and dark and be ok
22:35:05 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: I thought the color issue was for two audiences: blind + colorblind, not just colorblind
22:35:11 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: blind are covered at level 1
22:35:28 [Yvette_Hoitink]: YH: disagree, at level 2 blind people shouldn't have to interpret markup
22:36:33 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: "any information that is conveyed through color must also be conveyed through text"
22:36:47 [Yvette_Hoitink]: JS: Cannot do that because some things don't have text, like graphics
22:37:29 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: we could have two items: 'without having to interpret color' and 'by using characters or text'
22:38:11 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: if you have a subway map with two colors, wouldn't it be great if one was dotted? that was covered in our original proposal
22:39:26 [Yvette_Hoitink]: MB: Could you make the requirement to use character/text at level 3?
22:39:40 [Zakim]: -Michael_Cooper
22:40:28 [David]: David has joined #wai-wcag
22:40:47 [David]: test
22:40:59 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: unless we require at level 1 something that AT should handle, we need to patch it at level 2
22:41:34 [David]: Am I in?
22:41:55 [David]: Thx I'm in the Matrix
22:43:10 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: we could say "it must be evident without having to interpret color, e.g. through context or characters that accompany the color coding or through patterns"
22:43:49 [gregg]: Level 1 Any information conveyed through color can also be programmatically determined
22:44:11 [Zakim]: -MikeBarta
22:44:34 [gregg]: Level 2 Any informtiaont that is conveyed through color must also be visually evident without havingt to interpret color.
22:44:57 [gregg]: (for example through context or or characters
22:44:57 [gregg]: or symbols that accompany the color coding
22:45:37 [gregg]: or through pattern difference such as dotted red and solid green line in a graph.
22:47:33 [Zakim]: -Avi
22:47:50 [Yvette_Hoitink]: Level 1 also has similar examples
22:48:43 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: For level 1, example: "For example through markup or unique characters or symbols that accompany the coding"
22:49:09 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: we will specify in techniques what markup we want
22:49:23 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: Should we use this language and post it to the list?
22:49:56 [Zakim]: -Alex_Li
22:49:57 [Zakim]: -Becky_Gibson
22:49:57 [Zakim]: -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
22:49:58 [Zakim]: -Yvette_Hoitink
22:49:59 [Zakim]: -David_MacDonald
22:50:00 [Zakim]: -John_Slatin
22:50:00 [Zakim]: -Kerstin
22:50:01 [Zakim]: -Bengt_Farre
22:50:03 [Zakim]: WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
22:50:05 [Zakim]: Attendees were Avi, Yvette_Hoitink, Alex_Li, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Michael_Cooper, Bengt_farre, John_Slatin, MikeBarta, Becky_Gibson, Gregg_and_Ben, Chris_Ridpath, Kerstin,
22:50:07 [Yvette_Hoitink]: GV: no objections to not talking about this anymore today
22:50:08 [Zakim]: ... David_MacDonald
22:50:14 [Yvette_Hoitink]: :-)
22:50:15 [bengt_]: bengt_ has left #wai-wcag
22:50:24 [Yvette_Hoitink]: Ben, can you do the log-thingy?
22:50:37 [Yvette_Hoitink]: I think the RRSagent needs some commands now
22:50:56 [Yvette_Hoitink]: RRSagent, make log world
22:51:02 [Yvette_Hoitink]: something like that, IIRC
22:51:10 [Yvette_Hoitink]: RRSagent, help
22:52:17 [Yvette_Hoitink]: BEN?
22:52:29 [Yvette_Hoitink]: anyone?
22:52:38 [Yvette_Hoitink]: zakim, who's on the phone?
22:52:38 [Zakim]: sorry, Yvette_Hoitink, I don't know what conference this is; apparently WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
22:52:40 [Zakim]: On IRC I see David, ben, RRSAgent, ChrisR, rellero, Zakim, Yvette_Hoitink
22:53:06 [Yvette_Hoitink]: DOES ANYONE KNOW if I need to give the RRSagent any more commands?
22:53:22 [Yvette_Hoitink]: -------------------------------------------------------------
22:53:33 [Yvette_Hoitink]: earth to Ben
22:54:13 [ben]: RRSAgent, make log world
22:54:19 [ben]: RRSAgent, bye
22:54:19 [RRSAgent]: I see no action items