19:54:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #au
19:54:45 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-irc
19:54:52 <Jan> Zakim, this will be AUWG 
19:54:52 <Zakim> ok, Jan; I see WAI_AUWG()3:00PM scheduled to start 54 minutes ago
19:54:59 <Jan> Meeting: WAI AU 
19:55:21 <Jan> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2008JulSep/0060.html
19:55:49 <Jan> Regrets: Dana Simberkoff
19:56:23 <AndrewRonksley> AndrewRonksley has joined #au
20:00:01 <MikeS> MikeS has joined #au
20:00:09 <Zakim> WAI_AUWG()3:00PM has now started
20:00:16 <Zakim> + +2
20:00:39 <Zakim> +[IBM]
20:00:43 <MikeS> zakim, IBM is MikeS
20:00:43 <Zakim> +MikeS; got it
20:01:56 <AnnM> AnnM has joined #au
20:02:16 <Zakim> +Greg_Pisocky
20:02:42 <Greg> Greg has joined #au
20:03:12 <Zakim> +??P6
20:03:26 <Jan> zakim, ??P6 is really Jan
20:03:26 <Zakim> +Jan; got it
20:03:29 <Zakim> +??P11
20:03:45 <Jan> zakim, ??P11 is really AnnM
20:03:45 <Zakim> +AnnM; got it
20:03:46 <Zakim> + +1.617.584.aabb
20:04:11 <Jan> zakim, +1.617.584.aabb is really jeanne
20:04:11 <Zakim> +jeanne; got it
20:04:25 <Jan> zakim, who's on the phone?
20:04:25 <Zakim> On the phone I see +2, MikeS, Greg_Pisocky, Jan, AnnM, jeanne
20:04:34 <Greg> Hello
20:04:55 <Jan> zakim, +2 is really AndrweRonksley
20:04:55 <Zakim> +AndrweRonksley; got it
20:06:00 <Greg> I hear yo too
20:06:36 <Jan> Chair: Jan
20:06:54 <Jan> Scribe: AndrewRonksley
20:07:48 <Jan> Topic: F2F Action item review
20:08:34 <Jan> http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2008/WD-ATAG20-20080811/WD-ATAG20-20080811.html
20:09:13 <AndrewRonksley> JS: Worked on part B with AR
20:09:32 <AndrewRonksley> JS: There are some parts we need to discuss with the group
20:10:03 <MikeS> scribe: MikeS
20:10:16 <MikeS> zakim, mute me
20:10:16 <Zakim> MikeS should now be muted
20:10:43 <MikeS> JS: applicabiity section has comments needs more work
20:11:08 <MikeS> ...B.1 on rationale needs work
20:11:45 <MikeS> ...need feedback from group on change to rationale
20:12:08 <MikeS> ...B.1.1 
20:12:23 <MikeS> ...took out benchmarks and rephrased to consistent with WCAG level A
20:12:39 <MikeS> JR: what about other standards?
20:13:24 <MikeS> JS: at F2F, agreed to define conformance earlier in document according to WCAG but that other options would be acceptable
20:14:01 <MikeS> JR: should say "conform to WCAG level A or equivalent"
20:16:00 <MikeS> JR: do we simplify down to WCAG 2.0 level A or have a many-to-one relation to WCAG level A?
20:16:36 <MikeS> GP: whatever the current recomendation is from W3C is the reigning guideline
20:16:56 <Zakim> +??P13
20:17:32 <MikeS> ...opening ourselves to other standards means opening ourselves to other standards whether they are adequate or inadequate
20:17:58 <MikeS> ...we shouldn't be doing "backflips" to accommodate everything
20:18:30 <jeanne> zakim, ??P13 is really Jutta
20:18:30 <Zakim> +Jutta; got it
20:20:02 <MikeS> JR: Sense from the group - one-to-many or WCAG 2.0 level A?
20:20:14 <Greg> GP Wcag with a level
20:20:18 <MikeS> +1 for sticking only with WCAG level A
20:21:02 <MikeS> exactly
20:21:24 <MikeS> JS: don't want to tie ourselves to a particular version
20:21:43 <MikeS> JR: Of course, they might not stick to a level A/AA/AAA structure
20:22:08 <MikeS> GP: remain ambiguous on version so as not to get out-dated
20:23:37 <MikeS> Ann: +1 to dropping non-W3C guidelines; overcomplicates things
20:25:37 <MikeS> JS: just refer to WCAG with levels maybe renaming to 'minimum', 'moderate', 'maximum' conformance
20:25:50 <AndrewRonksley> + 1 for aligning to WCAG. Makes sense for the W3C documents to reference each other. I think this would help with peoples' understanding off all the documents as a "whole".
20:27:05 <MikeS> JT: reason we wwent down the one-to-many path was to allow people to set up authoring tool and declare compliance with whatever standard was relevant
20:27:14 <MikeS> ...removing compllexity is a good thing, however
20:28:43 <MikeS> ...a note might be appropriate to explain that more stringent standards exist and that conformance to those standards is also appropriate
20:30:53 <Greg> I will take a stab at it
20:31:56 <Jan> Action: GP to draft some text that explains that WCAG is what is required but that more stringent standards are of course fine 
20:31:56 <trackbot> Created ACTION-12 - Draft some text that explains that WCAG is what is required but that more stringent standards are of course fine  [on Greg Pisocky - due 2008-08-18].
20:34:24 <MikeS> AR: B1.2 aggregated feeds; what was the issue?
20:35:02 <MikeS> JR: situations where content cmes in and is converted or transformed
20:35:22 <MikeS> ...issue for Reed
20:35:59 <MikeS> JS: B2.2 success criteria
20:36:10 <MikeS> ...associated each check with a WCAG success criterion
20:38:49 <MikeS> JR: two ways to check: generalize across problems
20:38:59 <MikeS> ...or check for type of problem taht can occur many tmes
20:39:23 <MikeS> JS: covered in success criteria further down
20:40:47 <MikeS> ACTION: JS to send email to gruop on other issues regarding rewrite of Part B requiring feedback from group
20:40:47 <trackbot> Created ACTION-13 - Send email to gruop on other issues regarding rewrite of Part B requiring feedback from group [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-08-18].
20:41:37 <MikeS> TOPIC: definition of an authoring tool
20:42:34 <jeanne> s/gruop/group
20:42:48 <MikeS> GP: sent mail to group describing components where author has editorial control v. where they do not
20:42:51 <Zakim> -Jutta
20:42:55 <MikeS> JR: doesn't definition already say this?
20:43:03 <MikeS> GP: what is meant by 'editorial control'?
20:43:36 <MikeS> ACTION: JS to come up with definition of 'editorial control' and descriptive names for ntoes 1 and 2
20:43:36 <trackbot> Created ACTION-14 - Come up with definition of 'editorial control' and descriptive names for ntoes 1 and 2 [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2008-08-18].
20:43:49 <Zakim> +??P13
20:44:11 <jeanne> zakim, ??P13 is really Jutta
20:44:11 <Zakim> +Jutta; got it
20:44:29 <Zakim> -AnnM
20:44:45 <jeanne> s/ntoes/notes
20:46:18 <MikeS> AR: no response from Sally on her satisfaction with responses
20:46:36 <MikeS> yes
20:46:47 <AnnM_> AnnM_ has joined #au
20:47:04 <Zakim> +??P11
20:47:23 <jeanne> zakim, ??P11 is really AnnM
20:47:23 <Zakim> +AnnM; got it
20:48:14 <MikeS> zakim, next agendum
20:48:14 <Zakim> I see nothing on the agenda
20:48:26 <MikeS> TOPIC: heartbeat publication
20:49:16 <MikeS> JR: throwing alot of issues to the list to prepare for a necessary heartbeat publication
20:49:25 <MikeS> JS: can we meet weekly until this goes out?
20:49:55 <MikeS> sure
20:50:11 <MikeS> JR: Meeting nex tweek, Aug 18
20:50:31 <MikeS> zakim, unmute me
20:50:31 <Zakim> MikeS should no longer be muted
20:50:43 <Zakim> -Jutta
20:50:45 <Zakim> -AnnM
20:50:46 <Zakim> -Greg_Pisocky
20:50:47 <Zakim> -MikeS
20:50:47 <Zakim> -Jan
20:52:06 <jeanne> rrsagent, make logs public
20:52:37 <AndrewRonksley> rrsagent, make minutes
20:52:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-minutes.html AndrewRonksley
20:54:00 <AndrewRonksley> rrsagent, create minutes
20:54:00 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-minutes.html AndrewRonksley
20:55:19 <jeanne> zakim, bye
20:55:19 <Zakim> leaving.  As of this point the attendees were MikeS, Greg_Pisocky, Jan, AnnM, jeanne, AndrweRonksley, Jutta
20:55:19 <Zakim> Zakim has left #au
20:55:35 <AndrewRonksley> rrsagent, create minutes
20:55:35 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-minutes.html AndrewRonksley
20:59:27 <jeanne> rrsagent,bye
20:59:27 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-actions.rdf :
20:59:27 <RRSAgent> ACTION: GP to draft some text that explains that WCAG is what is required but that more stringent standards are of course fine  [1]
20:59:27 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-irc#T20-31-56
20:59:27 <RRSAgent> ACTION: JS to send email to gruop on other issues regarding rewrite of Part B requiring feedback from group [2]
20:59:27 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-irc#T20-40-47
20:59:27 <RRSAgent> ACTION: JS to come up with definition of 'editorial control' and descriptive names for ntoes 1 and 2 [3]
20:59:27 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/08/11-au-irc#T20-43-36