13:56:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #er
13:56:45 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/05/17-er-irc
13:56:50 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #er
13:57:05 <shadi> zakim, this will be ert
13:57:05 <Zakim> ok, shadi; I see WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:58:49 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has now started
13:58:57 <Zakim> +Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
13:58:57 <shadi> meeting: ERT WG
13:59:03 <shadi> chair: Shadi
13:59:20 <shadi> regrets: Nick, David, Charles
13:59:29 <JohannesK> JohannesK has joined #er
14:00:11 <Zakim> +Shadi
14:00:30 <CarlosI> CarlosI has joined #er
14:02:05 <carlos> carlos has joined #er
14:02:51 <ChrisR> ChrisR has joined #er
14:03:31 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
14:03:50 <shadi> zakim, ipcaller is really Chris
14:03:50 <Zakim> +Chris; got it
14:04:28 <Zakim> +Jim_Ley
14:05:17 <JibberJim> zakim, scribenick JibberJim
14:05:17 <Zakim> I don't understand 'scribenick JibberJim', JibberJim
14:08:20 <shadi> agenda+ blanket statements
14:08:27 <shadi> agenda+ Comments on WCAG 2.0 "conformance" and "baseline"
14:08:46 <CarlosI> CarlosI has joined #er
14:08:46 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 1
14:08:46 <Zakim> agendum 1. "blanket statements" taken up [from shadi]
14:09:35 <shadi> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-ert/2006May/0054
14:10:25 <Zakim> +José
14:12:10 <JibberJim> SAZ: blanket statements proposal, 2 requirements making more compact view of what has been tested for humans, and not to lose information on exactly what has been tested
14:13:14 <JibberJim> SAZ: 2 use cases, make blanked statements to compact, and also blanket statements to claim conformance
14:13:53 <JibberJim> SAZ: The 2nd type are used in P3P and RDF TL which both described content for labelling
14:16:24 <JibberJim> JL:I think the proposal is fine
14:17:21 <JibberJim> CI: I don't see how it works with blanket statements
14:18:00 <CarlosI> that's CV not CI
14:18:05 <Zakim> -Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
14:18:15 <JibberJim> oops sorry carlos
14:18:27 <JibberJim> s/CI/CV/
14:19:12 <JibberJim> CI: It's pretty much the idea I have too
14:19:20 <Zakim> +Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
14:19:27 <JibberJim> SAZ: I want to include more semantics of what is included
14:19:45 <JibberJim> SAZ: I think we can always pick up vocab from elsewhere for the conformance bits
14:20:36 <JibberJim> CV: The issue is if we can use regexps in uri's or similar to allow describing more rather than a web-content-collection
14:21:43 <JibberJim> SAZ: Initially we did want more semantics of what's in a subdomain, for a more comprehensive class, but I think that is beyond the basic what has been tested area, and we should wait until we can see how much we can re-use from other vocabs when they have been reviewed
14:22:50 <JibberJim> SAZ: the webContentCollection is very good for compactness from automated crawled sites.
14:23:22 <JibberJim> SAZ: So you can query the report for what was the first URL, or what was really tested.
14:23:59 <JibberJim> CV: You want the start "url", and what was actually tested.
14:24:20 <JibberJim> CV: I'm concerned the general claim, may not match the list
14:25:08 <JibberJim> SAZ: It's not a problem if one tool only tests some, as long as it's recorded, it doesn't matter if e.g. the css isn't tested
14:26:27 <JibberJim> CV: In our tool we have much more configuration options than just a url, so not everything may be tested, but it gives the wrong impressoin
14:26:37 <JibberJim> s/impressoin/impression/
14:27:08 <JibberJim> SAZ: So you're saying there are missing parameters, e.g. link level to show how many beyond the first page.
14:27:18 <JibberJim> CV: I'm concerned it's ambiguous.
14:28:25 <JibberJim> JL: I don't see a problem with a slight level of ambiguity, there will always be the ovreall list of what was actually tested
14:29:05 <JibberJim> CI: We're just adding another level for more human consumption, you don't have to trust it and can use the complete list
14:29:41 <JibberJim> SAZ: Let's say I use tool A and test everything under example.org/* - and just go 1 level deep
14:29:52 <JibberJim> SAZ: tool B do the same but say go 2 levels deep
14:30:05 <JibberJim> SAZ: tool B will produce a lot more, is that a problem with the results?
14:30:17 <JohannesK> q+
14:30:47 <JibberJim> CI: a regexp suggests there are not other parameters like link level
14:31:26 <JibberJim> CI: if a regexp isn't enough we should add more properties
14:33:24 <JibberJim> CV: another scenario, you have one tool that only managed to find part of the content under example.org/* and another that finds all and you get pass with the first.
14:34:14 <JibberJim> CV: I don't think there should be something that can be interpreted ambiguously
14:35:20 <JibberJim> SAZ: I propose we wait until the RDF-CL and P3P comes back and Chaals's webformats access-control PI's
14:38:05 <shadi> zakim, close agendum 1
14:38:05 <Zakim> agendum 1, blanket statements, closed
14:38:07 <Zakim> I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
14:38:08 <Zakim> 2. Comments on WCAG 2.0 "conformance" and "baseline" [from shadi]
14:38:18 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 2
14:38:18 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Comments on WCAG 2.0 "conformance" and "baseline"" taken up [from shadi]
14:40:57 <JibberJim> q+
14:41:28 <shadi> ack JohannesK
14:41:59 <shadi> ack JibberJim
14:43:32 <JibberJim> JL: I'm concerned that the baseline is against tech's that have no conformance criteria of their own.
14:44:01 <CarlosI> I strongly share the same concerns
14:44:06 <JibberJim> JL: If they don't say what a conformant User Agent to e.g. javascript is then it's essentially meaningless
14:45:25 <JibberJim> JK: The same issues with HTML aswell, e.g. with LINK/ABBR too that are not actually widely supported
14:45:58 <JohannesK> Jim: they are, but not in IE :-)
14:46:09 <JibberJim> SAZ: How do you (an author) identify that there are actually UA's with adequate support for a baseline
14:46:32 <CarlosI> Basic use case: CSS in baseline. Could I use display:none knowing it doesn't work properly
14:47:21 <JibberJim> SAZ: How does saying HTML/javascript exactly help with a baseline, for example if you are using document.write then you need to ensure it meets the appropriate guideline
14:47:41 <JibberJim> SAZ: So if you focus on a feature, you can usually find guidelines that reflect on that.
14:50:14 <JibberJim> JL: I don't think there are guidelies that cover everything within scripting
14:50:41 <JibberJim> JL: It matters more for javascript because there are no conformance requirements on what a conformant javascript User Agent is
14:51:24 <JibberJim> SAZ:  So I think it is related to the previous point about finding a conformant UA for a particular baseline
14:52:31 <JibberJim> CI: if we have CSS in the baseline, CSS has very different range of support in UA's does that mean you cover the different implementations or is it only in a perfect ua
14:53:22 <JibberJim> SAZ: Could they be relying on conformant UA's in their baselines
14:53:34 <JibberJim> CI: Are there any CSS 2.0 conformance UA's
14:54:00 <JibberJim> CI: I think we shouldn't rely on a baseline that doesn't exist!
14:54:42 <JibberJim> SAZ: So 3rd point is you're relying on a conformant browser, even though there are in reality almost certainly not conformant ua's  - even html 4.01 has bugs and issues
14:55:50 <JibberJim> CI: The conformance runs into too few uas and people using them that actually are conformant. we should keep that in consideration
14:56:10 <JibberJim> CI: even if 90% of ua's conformant doesn't mean most people do
14:57:08 <JibberJim> CI: What is javascript?
14:58:20 <JibberJim> SAZ:How easy was it to understand the baseline model?
14:58:32 <JibberJim> CI: Easy to understand, but can't put in practice
14:58:42 <JibberJim> CV: Concept is flawed and tough to put in practice
14:59:27 <JibberJim> CR: I think they had no choice, but to have a baseline
15:00:06 <JibberJim> SAZ: Baselines might work well in the intranet environment, but not on the public web
15:00:26 <JibberJim> SAZ: In an intranet you know every sort of browser
15:00:57 <JibberJim> JK: I don't think the baseline concept is as flawed, it's just a matter of defining what I assume to be in the baseline
15:01:46 <CarlosI> Actually, I think people is already applying the "baseline concep" in intranet evironments
15:02:13 <JibberJim> JK: If I have a controlled environment then I could use HTML, but without the controlled environment I can only use html
15:03:00 <JibberJim> SAZ: Do you think there's enough guidence on how to choose a guideline for public websites.
15:03:22 <JibberJim> JK: I don't think it's clear, but a public sector website should be very low.
15:04:39 <JibberJim> SAZ: I'll summarise to the list and then people will add comments!
15:04:57 <Zakim> -Chris
15:04:58 <Zakim> -Jim_Ley
15:05:00 <ChrisR> ChrisR has left #er
15:05:00 <Zakim> -José
15:05:01 <Zakim> -Shadi
15:05:03 <Zakim> -Klaus/Johannes/Thomas
15:05:04 <Zakim> WAI_ERTWG()10:00AM has ended
15:05:05 <Zakim> Attendees were Klaus/Johannes/Thomas, Shadi, Chris, Jim_Ley, José
15:05:10 <shadi> zakim, bye
15:05:10 <Zakim> Zakim has left #er
15:05:12 <JibberJim> shadi, can I just have a quick minute on some process stuff?
15:05:22 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
15:05:27 <shadi> jim, sure!
15:05:32 <shadi> want me to call you?
15:05:38 <shadi> rrsagent, make minutes
15:05:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2006/05/17-er-minutes.html shadi
15:05:44 <shadi> rrsagent, make logs world
15:05:51 <shadi> rrsagent, bye
15:05:51 <RRSAgent> I see no action items