<Jan> zaki, code?

<Jan> Scribe: jeanne

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0008.html

1. Planning for additional calls to handle the high volume of proposals

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0007.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0007.html

1. Planning for additional calls to handle the high volume of proposals.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0102.html

JR: because we have so many comments that we can't get through in 1 hour calls, we propose scheduling some half day meetings

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0104.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0001.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0002.html

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0004.html

JS: Can make most days work except Thursday, and I can move a single Thursday.

[discussion of Jutta's limited availability]

<Jan> Oct 29...works for Jutta, Jan, Jeanne

<Jan> Jeanne has something 130-300p

<Jan> Ok for Andrwe

<Jan> 900-1200 ET

<Jan> Resolution: A supplemental meeting 9-12ET on Oct 29

2. "Claimants" issue - IBM58, IBM59, and IBM60

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0102.html

<Jan> In order to address the comments IBM58, IBM59, and IBM60, we propose to

<Jan> follow the example set by WCAG which does not specify who a claimant can be.

<Jan> We propose the following changes to ATAG:

<Jan> 1. Remove #4 Claimants may be anyone (e.g., authoring tool developers,

<Jan> journalists, other third parties).

<Jan> 2. Remove #5 parenthetical clause "(including claims that include

<Jan> products for which they are not responsible)"

<Jan> Resolution: All accept action at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0102.html

3. ATAG 2.0 Conformance Proposal

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0104.html

<scribe> ACTION: jeanne to update the ATAG 2.0 document with the proposal of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0102.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/18-au-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-302 - Update the ATAG 2.0 document with the proposal of http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0102.html [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-10-25].

"Claimants" issue - IBM58, IBM59, and IBM60

ATAG 2.0 Conformance Proposal

JR: I worked on it with Tim Boland, who did not completely agree on this proposal.

It goes through the full and partial conformance levels to Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.

scribe: for example, a checker would claim conformance to parts 1 & 3. A simple tool would claim conformance to 1 & 2, and a full featured too would claim conformance to 1, 2, & 3.

GP: So a claimant could claim 1 & 2, optionally 3.

JR: No, for example, Achecker would claim 1 & 3.
... Tim's concerns were general - Does this meet the QA standards of clearly checkable standards?
... the checking and repair is the hardest piece, so we are pulling back from that by separating it into its own part.

<Jan> JS: I like it...

<Jan> JS: I also like the change to 1,2,3

JR: Does anyone have a concern about it?

AR: no concerns at this minute

<Jan> AR: No concern

<Jan> GP: Support it

GP: I support it, I like it

JT: It achieves what we want and retains the A & B framing.

<Jan> Resolution: All accept proposal at: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0104.html

Resolution: Accept the rewording of Topic: 3. ATAG 2.0 Conformance Proposal

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JulSep/0104.html

4. ATAG2 proposal on use of structure

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0001.html

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne to update document with the text from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0001.html [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2010/10/18-au-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-303 - Update document with the text from http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0001.html [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2010-10-25].

ATAG2 proposal on use of structure

JR: The most difficult comment to deal with is that "we want to hide complexity and structure from the user". There are times when simplicity will help accessibility.
... I moved it to AA. I tried up a number of alternatives, but finding the code behind the method calls, may be useful.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0001.html

scribe: obviously, this is useful for a big, big web document. What's the definition of a big, big web document?
... where do we draw the line and how do we draw the line?

JT: There are a lot of assumptions that aren't stated, but if we state them, it becomes too complex

JS: I think that with good examples, we can make it more clear.

<Jan> JR: Another possibility is to keep what we have at AA or AAA...since I don't think it is essential

We have a meeting on the 25th when Jutta is away, but we can set up a survey so that those with regrets can participate.

GP: I have regrets for 25th as well, but will participate with the survey.

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.135  of Date: 2009/03/02 03:52:20  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Found Scribe: jeanne
Inferring ScribeNick: jeanne

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: AR ARonksley GP GregP IPcaller JR JS JT Jan Jeanne Jutta P1 P2 P4 aaaa gpisocky inserted trackbot
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Regrets: Sueann N.
Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010OctDec/0008.html
Got date from IRC log name: 18 Oct 2010
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/10/18-au-minutes.html
People with action items: jeanne