WCAG Team C -- 5 Jun 2006

<scribe> scribe: Michael

Annotated Checklists

Might be difficult to understand when you have to implement all or some technology specific techniques based on baseline, situation...

Looks a lot like a normative doc (though we know it isn't), how is it kept current as techniques added?

Come to think of it, what is process to vet new techniques?

Would like to see the different conformance levels in the doc

Discussed in the past having various queries to see various views of the stuff on the fly

Would be clearer if a table with checkboxes in a column

Would like to be able to check which "situation" is being used in a given situation, and only see the techniques relevant to that

Not sure if this should exist as a static document, only useful if dynamic and able to incorporate updates

Some of the dynamic abilities like technique submission from public really needed

Comments 629-632

Issue 624

state at Level 1 may not be doable or sufficiently important in all technologies

proposals at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-teamc/2006Jun/0010.html

concern that a requirement about setting focus could go awry

resolution: reject issue with following wording

<scribe> ACTION: Becky to modify proposed wording from proposal to add focus and state issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes.html#action01]

<Andi> http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page#Group_Assignment_BY_GUIDELINE

Recommendations should be made to issue directly, using instructions at http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page#Group_Assignment_BY_GUIDELINE

Issues 629-632

proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-teamc/2006Jun/0011.html

resolution: reject issue, but propose advisory techniques to help mitigate

<scribe> ACTION: Becky to propose wording to explain why issue rejected [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes.html#action02]

<scribe> ACTION: everyone to review proposals by end of day Tuesday so Andi can create survey [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes.html#action03]

<Becky> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/06/01-wai-wcag-minutes

Issue 558

hold to next week

<Becky> ACTION: becky to reseach teamb rationale on the 1.3 color SC for next week [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes.html#action04]

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.127  of Date: 2005/08/16 15:12:03  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: Michael
Inferring ScribeNick: Michael
Present: Andi_Snow-Weaver Becky_Gibson Michael_Cooper Cynthia Shelley Sofia Celic
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-teamc/2006Jun/0012.html
Got date from IRC log name: 5 Jun 2006
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes.html
People with action items: becky everyone

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]

- DRAFT -

WCAG Team C

5 Jun 2006

Attendees