<shadi> Scribe: Wendy Chisholm
<shadi> ScribeNick: wendy
<ericP> wow, er activity
<shadi> hey eric
<shadi> 1st meeting under the new charter...
<ericP> yo y'all, i'm mucking with annotea. i just wrapped bookmark queries into it and coudl do stuff for earl at the same time.
<ericP> let me know what you need
<scribe> Scribe: wendy
<scribe> Chair: Shadi
so i see
topic, date, etc, too?
<shadi> yup
4 am! ouch!
awk: WGBH/NCAM, working on STEP - looks at results from various tools and prioritizes
ci: former staff of W3C Spanish Office. Now work with tech center (host of spanish office). work on accessibility. have tau (or taw?)
<shadi> TAW
ci: working on new version of TAW that works with EARL
cmn: SIDAR, couple versions of tool, generates
earl. guides user through manual evaluation process. have worked on a variety
of tools that incorporated earl.
... have worked w/euroaccessibility who had been testing eval tools and
comparing results.
... to help determine if tools were reliable for a set of tests. work
currently on hold.
cr: ATRC at university of toronto. work on a-prompt. have online checker checks for wcag 2.0. working on wcag 2.0 test suite.
ca: from [research center in greece - didn't
get full name] research on HCI
... accessibility and personalization of web-based tools.
... automatic transforms of web sites. latest version is customizable.
jl: indie developer. lots of work on earl in
previous wg.
... primarily ineterested in making svg and javascript accessible.
sp: deque. we have a couple tools: ramp (web
access. eval tool), ramp [other edition] only does eval, ramp ascend does
eval and repair.
... soon launching server version
... i oversee accessibility practices. do testing. help make sure java app is
accessible.
sf: NILS in australia. web accessibility
consultant. have developed variety of tools. one is a tool bar for IE.
... working w/group of folks on firefox version.
... working w/folks from bartimeus for custmoized version.
... recently released color contrast analyzer
... an update of chris ridpath's tool from earlier.
kd: w3c, qa team. conformance manager of
w3c.
... interested to participate b/c in qa need these tools.
... specifically, earl to make reports and results of test suites.
... have issues w/how language currently designed.
... could help include quality of spec itself.
<chaals> kd == Karl Dubost
<shadi> wac: co-team contact, was previously chair of ERT WG
<shadi> wac: team contact for WCAG
<shadi> wac: ERT WG will help crucial work
<chaals> wac == Wendy Chisholm
saz: happy that group is starting again. have
received a good response. have about 13 people registered for the group.
... we all probably have diff views on earl and what tools should do. hope we
can work together to finish earl and bring new quality to evaluating web
accessibility.
saz: any questions about sign up process or
work of the group?
... point out the w3c process document
http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/
saz: it includes duties, responsibilities of
participating in a W3C WG.
... our primary form of communication is the weekly teleconference and
mailing list.
... we have a variety of participants spread around the world. we will be
operating in english, but that is not many people's primary language.
... please speakly slowly and clearly.
... scribing - we have 2 irc bots. type minutes in irc. RRSAgent will make an
html page of the log.
... we will have a scribe list. each participant will be on the list.
... we will rotate through the list.
... if you are unable to scribe for any reason, let shadi know and he will
remove you from the list.
... or, if temporarily unable to scribe, you may pass and scribe the
following week.
saz: these are the items we are chartered to do
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/charter3
section 4: deliverables - http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/charter3#deliverables
saz: there are 8 deliverables
1. Issues lists for all deliverables under development
saz: we need to track issues/bugs of EARL as
well as other work.
... in wcag wg using bugzilla. other w3c wgs use other tools.
2. Requirements for Evaluation and Report Language (EARL), to be published as a W3C Working Group Note
saz: currently the earl spec has scenarios to
help introduce earl, but it places some requirements for what earl should
address.
... we should reexamine and expand on. ensure all requirements in there.
3. EARL 1.0 Working Drafts, and W3C Working Group Note or W3C Recommendation
saz: this is our primary deliverable
... diff between Note and Rec is the maturity of the doc. will decide/discuss
as we set the requirements for earl.
... describes basic differences between note and rec.
4. Input into Evaluation Resource Suite
saz: everyone should become aquainted with the Evaluation Resource Suite - maintained by EOWG
saz: EOWG is revising. we will provide technical input.
5. Input into tools for aggregating accessibility metadata among multiple sources
saz: refers to the exchange of metadata between
tools and sources (eval tools and auth tools or eval tools and browsers or
amongst eval tools)
... so that human reviewers input data and could be aggregated into authoring
tool
... could speak of syndication (different consumers)
6. Input into development of test files and test suites for WCAG 2.0, UAAG 2.0, and ATAG 2.0
saz: currently, primarily wcag . there is a
techniques task force which is working on developing test suites for wcag
2.0. we should keep an eye on it.
... we could help wcag a lot (primarily working on html). have techniques for
scripting and css.
... we could start development of other test suites (svg or smil). will see
how we will coordinate with wcag and others on development of test suites.
7. Meeting minutes
8. If EARL 1.0 enters the W3C Recommendation track, documentation of open issues, resolutions, responses to comments, and implementation reports and other artifacts of the W3C Process as described in section 7.2 General Requirements for Advancement of the W3C Process document.
<Zakim> karl, you wanted to say that Rec is better for Implementation fostering
kd: Rec v. Note - even if harder to get to Rec,
a benefit is better quality checking.
... incentive to get implementations and in the end is beneficial. pushes
development of tools.
saz: in irc you can type "q+" and zakim will add you to the speaker queue. or on the phone type 41#
sp: is it important for us to have accessibilty eval and repair techniques? there is a document for WCAG 1.0. Should we build for WCAG 2.0? should that be on our list of deliverables.
saz: partially, some of that work is going into
WCAG 2.0 Techniques some went to ATAG Techniques.
... WCAG 2.0 is taking a different approach. Each Success Criteria needs to
be testable.
... the testing is more of a black box. if described well enough, then if the
tool can execute...some tests will only be executable by humans.
... rather than develop an additional document, which would repeat much of
the wcag 2.0 test suite work, we need to work with the wcag wg on test suite
development.
<shadi> wac: WCAG 2.0 is taking a different approach than WCAG 1.0
<shadi> wac: feedback from WCAG 1.0 shows that Criteria need to be testable statements
<shadi> wac: non-technology specific and technology specific techniques
<shadi> wac: test suites partly reflect AERT work
<shadi> wac: so far we primarily worked on HTML
<shadi> wac: we understand that the main focus of ERT is to get EARL ut
<shadi> wac: but we hope ERT WG can help with test suites
WCAG 2.0 tests: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/
HTML Techniques for WCAG 2.0: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-HTML-TECHS/
Introduction to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Working Draft Documents: http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag20
saz: one requirement in the charter is to give input to the transition support materials from WCAG 1.0 to WCAG 2.0.
saz: everyone should be acquainted w/the
current EARL spec. if not, please do so soon.
... would like to first look at scenarios that are at the beginning of the
current doc.
http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10/#user-scenarios
saz: user scenarios will help ppl understand
what they can use earl for.
... will help us gather the requirements of earl.
... help us determine the target audience of the earl spec and how to reach
them.
... in current spec, discussion of current roles.
... are there more audiences that could benefit? an end user browsing the
web.
<chaals> [Yep, seems like a reasonable thing to do]
kd: good idea to discuss on mailn glist.
<scribe> ACTION: everyone read scenarios and send comments to the mailing list.
saz: mtg was scheduled/announced on short
notice. it would be a shame to miss this opportunity to meet at the TP. many
w3c groups will be meeting there. good exchange of ideas.
... good opportunity to check base with other groups. especially since we are
just starting would be good to contact other groups - let them know we exist
and what we are working on.
... e.g., eo wg, qa wg, wcag wg techniques task force.
... since we have a low registration propose that those who will attend we
will not make any decisions during f2f since won't have quorum.
... we will try to scout and gather information about requirements for
earl.
... will also work on requirements document - seems to be a good setting. not
a requirement to particpate at the f2f.
... any questions?
cmn: if you can't make a telecon and a decision
is to be made, how can you be heard?
... what is the process to comment on a decision? if i'm not at a mtg, is
there a way to say, "can we revisit that decision?"
saz: in general, don't expect decisions to be
surprises. expect there will be sufficient notification. let's look at on a
case-by-case basis.
... should be sufficient notice on agenda/mailing list if decision to be
made.
... want to check w/everyone who will be at TP
yes: ak, cmn, steve, wac, saz
not likely: ci, sp (by phone?)
no: cr (phone in?), chrisoula (could by phone), jl, kd (happy by phone)
saz: registration deadline is this friday
... try to organize teleconference bridge
... try for morning time mtg time so that convenient for europe
... probably meet with eowg on thurs afternoon and qa on friday afternoon
... agenda should be posted in next couple of days
<Zakim> karl, you wanted to say something about decision process
kd will post to mailing list
saz: please complete the questionnaire about meeting time
<shadi> http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/32094/ERT_TeleconMeetingTime/
I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2005/02/15-er-minutes wendy