IRC log of wai-wcag on 2012-04-19
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 19:58:59 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:58:59 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/04/19-wai-wcag-irc
- 19:59:00 [korn]
- korn has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:01 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 19:59:01 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #wai-wcag
- 19:59:03 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG
- 19:59:03 [Zakim]
- ok, trackbot, I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM already started
- 19:59:04 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference
- 19:59:04 [trackbot]
- Date: 19 April 2012
- 19:59:28 [Zakim]
- +[Oracle]
- 19:59:39 [Zakim]
- +Cooper
- 19:59:49 [MichaelC]
- zakim, Oracle is Peter_Korn
- 19:59:49 [Zakim]
- +Peter_Korn; got it
- 20:00:15 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 20:00:41 [Zakim]
- +Bruce_Bailey
- 20:01:17 [awk]
- scribe: akirkpat2
- 20:01:29 [Zakim]
- +Maureen_Kraft
- 20:01:42 [MichaelC]
- zakim, Microsoft is Alex_Li
- 20:01:42 [Zakim]
- +Alex_Li; got it
- 20:01:47 [MichaelC]
- scribeNick: awk
- 20:01:50 [Zakim]
- +Gregg_Vanderheiden
- 20:02:08 [MoeKraft]
- MoeKraft has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:02:39 [Zakim]
- +[Microsoft]
- 20:03:02 [MichaelC]
- zakim, Microsoft is Cherie_Ekholm
- 20:03:02 [Zakim]
- +Cherie_Ekholm; got it
- 20:03:06 [greggvanderheiden]
- greggvanderheiden has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:03:11 [Zakim]
- +Andi_Snow-Weaver
- 20:03:18 [Loretta]
- Loretta has joined #WAI-WCAG
- 20:03:39 [Andi]
- Andi has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:03:44 [Zakim]
- +Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 20:04:47 [awk]
- TOPIC: WCAG2ICT Task Force Work Statement
- 20:04:56 [Zakim]
- + +1.253.381.aaaa
- 20:05:14 [Loretta]
- https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120419TF/results
- 20:05:32 [marcjohlic]
- marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:06:02 [Zakim]
- +Marc_Johlic
- 20:06:22 [MichaelC]
- zakim, aaaa is Robin_Tuttle
- 20:06:22 [Zakim]
- +Robin_Tuttle; got it
- 20:07:25 [Andi]
- zakim, who is on the phone?
- 20:07:25 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Andrew_Kirkpatrick, Judy, Peter_Korn, Cooper, Alex_Li, Bruce_Bailey (muted), Maureen_Kraft, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Cherie_Ekholm, Andi_Snow-Weaver,
- 20:07:29 [Zakim]
- ... Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Robin_Tuttle, Marc_Johlic
- 20:07:41 [Zakim]
- -Marc_Johlic
- 20:08:02 [Zakim]
- +Marc_Johlic
- 20:08:57 [Zakim]
- -Bruce_Bailey
- 20:09:04 [Zakim]
- +Bruce_Bailey
- 20:09:06 [robin]
- robin has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:15:20 [korn]
- Do we not queue in WCAG calls?
- 20:15:55 [greggvanderheiden]
- q+
- 20:15:58 [Judy]
- q+
- 20:16:07 [Loretta]
- ack g
- 20:17:14 [Loretta]
- q+ alex
- 20:17:18 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 20:17:22 [Zakim]
- -Maureen_Kraft
- 20:18:24 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 20:19:41 [awk]
- q+
- 20:20:06 [Judy]
- [in scope: how a wcag2 provision would apply to non-web ict; out-of-scope: whether a wcag2 provision ought to apply to non-web ict]
- 20:20:22 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 20:20:39 [korn]
- q+
- 20:21:28 [Loretta]
- ack k
- 20:22:05 [greggvanderheiden]
- IN THE OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this task force is to respond to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content. It is not the purpose of Task force to make any judgements of as to whether WCAG or any particular provisions should be used with non-web content but rather to comment on the meaning of the WCAG guidelines, success criteria and conformance
- 20:22:06 [greggvanderheiden]
- model and how it should be understood if it were to be applied to non-web electronic documents or software. IN THE "OUT OF SCOPE" SECTION: * any judgement as to whether or not WCAG or any provisions SHOULD be applied to non-web content.
- 20:22:09 [greggvanderheiden]
- q+
- 20:22:51 [korn]
- q-
- 20:22:54 [awk]
- q+
- 20:23:00 [Loretta]
- ack g
- 20:23:03 [korn]
- q+ Alex_Li
- 20:24:26 [Loretta]
- q+
- 20:25:03 [Loretta]
- ack aw
- 20:25:06 [korn]
- q+
- 20:25:34 [Loretta]
- q-
- 20:25:37 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 20:26:39 [Loretta]
- ack k
- 20:27:37 [greggvanderheiden]
- Software would include, Applications, operating systems, and software in ICT that also has hardware aspects
- 20:28:05 [Andi]
- This task force was formed in response to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content.
- 20:28:15 [greggvanderheiden]
- IN THE OBJECTIVE: This task force was formed in response to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content. It is not the purpose of Task force to make any judgements of as to whether WCAG or any particular provisions should be used with non-web content but rather to comment on the meaning of the WCAG guidelines, success criteria and conformance model and
- 20:28:16 [greggvanderheiden]
- how it should be understood if it were to be applied to non-web electronic documents or software. IN THE "OUT OF SCOPE" SECTION: * any judgement as to whether or not WCAG or any provisions SHOULD be applied to non-web content.
- 20:29:28 [greggvanderheiden]
- great minds…. it looks identical -- yes?
- 20:29:49 [Andi]
- in the second sentence, I suggest "it is not the INTENT" rather than "it is not the PURPOSE"
- 20:29:59 [greggvanderheiden]
- OK one sec
- 20:30:20 [korn]
- q+
- 20:30:24 [greggvanderheiden]
- IN THE OBJECTIVE: This task force was formed in response to suggestions that WCAG would be a good set of guidelines to apply to electronic documents and software that are not web content. It is not the intent
- 20:30:24 [greggvanderheiden]
- of Task force to make any judgements of as to whether WCAG or any particular provisions should be used with non-web content but rather to comment on the meaning of the WCAG guidelines, success criteria and conformance model and how it should be understood if it were to be applied to non-web electronic documents or software. IN THE "OUT OF SCOPE" SECTION: * any judgement as to whether or not WCAG or any provisions
- 20:30:25 [greggvanderheiden]
- SHOULD be applied to non-web content.
- 20:31:09 [Andi]
- q+
- 20:31:35 [Loretta]
- ack k
- 20:32:47 [Judy]
- q+
- 20:32:47 [Loretta]
- q+
- 20:33:22 [greggvanderheiden]
- q+
- 20:33:26 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 20:33:28 [korn]
- q+ Alex_Li
- 20:33:58 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 20:34:59 [Zakim]
- +Maureen_Kraft
- 20:35:28 [Judy]
- q?
- 20:35:58 [Judy]
- q+
- 20:36:06 [Alex]
- Alex has joined #wai-wcag
- 20:36:33 [korn]
- q+
- 20:36:47 [Loretta]
- ack l
- 20:37:27 [Loretta]
- ack g
- 20:39:17 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 20:39:55 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 20:40:11 [greggvanderheiden]
- Additionfor OUT OF SCOPE section: Other than a statement that
- 20:42:09 [Zakim]
- -Bruce_Bailey
- 20:42:15 [greggvanderheiden]
- Addition for OUT OF SCOPE section: Other than a statement that “The taskforce does not assert that the WCAG is a comprehensive or complete set of guidelines for ICT (including Web content).” the task force would make no comment on specific gaps or how to fill them.
- 20:42:22 [Loretta]
- ack k
- 20:42:26 [Loretta]
- q+
- 20:42:59 [greggvanderheiden]
- q+
- 20:43:41 [Zakim]
- +Bruce_Bailey
- 20:44:06 [Judy]
- q+ to comment on the concern that she is hearing about "implied comprehensive coverage," and to explore whether we can come up with wording that would very narrowly address that.
- 20:44:12 [greggvanderheiden]
- Addition for OUT OF SCOPE section: * Any comment on the application of WCAG to non-ICT”
- 20:44:37 [Judy]
- q+ to comment on the concern that she is hearing about "implied comprehensive coverage," and to explore whether we can come up with wording that would very narrowly address that... particularly at the level of an _individual_ provision.
- 20:45:15 [Loretta]
- ack l
- 20:45:54 [Loretta]
- ack g
- 20:47:32 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 20:47:32 [Zakim]
- Judy, you wanted to comment on the concern that she is hearing about "implied comprehensive coverage," and to explore whether we can come up with wording that would very narrowly
- 20:47:35 [Zakim]
- ... address that. and to comment on the concern that she is hearing about "implied comprehensive coverage," and to explore whether we can come up with wording that would very
- 20:47:35 [Zakim]
- ... narrowly address that... particularly at the level of an _individual_ provision.
- 20:48:14 [greggvanderheiden]
- q+
- 20:49:22 [Loretta]
- q+
- 20:49:44 [Loretta]
- ack g
- 20:52:28 [Judy]
- q+
- 20:52:49 [Loretta]
- ack l
- 20:52:54 [Judy]
- [judy hearing a suggestion that the doc that the group produces should itself include a clear statement of what the doc does _not_ cover]
- 20:54:06 [greggvanderheiden]
- SUGGESTION: Include the limitations of the task force in the report so that it is clear why it did not comment on some aspects
- 20:54:10 [greggvanderheiden]
- q+
- 20:54:38 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 20:56:08 [Loretta]
- Judy, I'm not getting the echo.
- 20:56:55 [korn]
- q+
- 20:57:26 [Loretta]
- q+
- 20:57:48 [Zakim]
- -Bruce_Bailey
- 20:58:13 [Zakim]
- +Bruce_Bailey
- 20:59:27 [Loretta]
- ack g
- 20:59:38 [Loretta]
- q-
- 21:01:33 [MichaelC]
- q+ to say last week I heard objection to being too broad about reivew of the conformance section; now I'm hearing objection about being too narrow
- 21:01:41 [Loretta]
- ack k
- 21:02:33 [Loretta]
- q+
- 21:02:43 [Loretta]
- q-
- 21:02:52 [Loretta]
- ack m
- 21:02:52 [Zakim]
- MichaelC, you wanted to say last week I heard objection to being too broad about reivew of the conformance section; now I'm hearing objection about being too narrow
- 21:04:37 [greggvanderheiden]
- Every place that is says "principles, guidelines, and success criteria" add "conformance requirements" ,
- 21:04:54 [korn]
- I heard "Conformance Criteria"
- 21:06:07 [greggvanderheiden]
- so that it reads "principles, guidelines, success criteria and conformance requirements" , but leave the 2nd bullet under what is included as it is to refer to conformance in general
- 21:09:37 [korn]
- No objection Judy
- 21:11:05 [Andi]
- q+
- 21:11:55 [Loretta]
- q+
- 21:12:17 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 21:12:48 [Alex]
- q+
- 21:13:04 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 21:14:20 [Judy]
- q+
- 21:14:33 [Loretta]
- ack l
- 21:16:24 [korn]
- I have heard it briefly much earlier; I am muted (and have been)
- 21:16:30 [Zakim]
- -Maureen_Kraft
- 21:16:59 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 21:17:23 [greggvanderheiden]
- q+
- 21:17:42 [Loretta]
- ack g
- 21:18:28 [Judy]
- q+
- 21:18:38 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 21:22:30 [Andi]
- note to Judy - typo in the text under "Dependencies" heading: "dependencises" should be "dependencies"
- 21:22:43 [Judy]
- q+
- 21:22:45 [Alex]
- q+
- 21:22:53 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 21:22:59 [Judy]
- q+ later
- 21:23:00 [Loretta]
- ck a
- 21:23:02 [Loretta]
- ack a
- 21:23:40 [Judy]
- zakim, who's here?
- 21:23:40 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Andrew_Kirkpatrick, Judy, Peter_Korn, Cooper, Alex_Li, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Cherie_Ekholm, Andi_Snow-Weaver, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Robin_Tuttle, Marc_Johlic,
- 21:23:40 [korn]
- q+
- 21:23:43 [Zakim]
- ... Bruce_Bailey (muted)
- 21:23:43 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see Alex, marcjohlic, Andi, Loretta, greggvanderheiden, Zakim, korn, RRSAgent, awk, Judy, MichaelC, trackbot
- 21:24:09 [Loretta]
- ack j
- 21:25:25 [MichaelC]
- q+ to say I was involved in a task force to analyze why W3C specs come in late a lot of the time. One of the factors is that timelines were known to be unrealistic, but there was pressure to make them that way. Experience so that wishing an aggressive timeline were achievable doesn't make it so, and documenting it as such just sets us up for missed expectations.
- 21:25:48 [Loretta]
- ack k
- 21:27:25 [Loretta]
- Can WG approve acceptance of LC-2604, from last week's survey, which has unanimous consent?
- 21:27:31 [MichaelC]
- s/Experience so/Experience shows/g
- 21:27:42 [Loretta]
- ack m
- 21:27:42 [Zakim]
- MichaelC, you wanted to say I was involved in a task force to analyze why W3C specs come in late a lot of the time. One of the factors is that timelines were known to be
- 21:27:46 [Zakim]
- ... unrealistic, but there was pressure to make them that way. Experience so that wishing an aggressive timeline were achievable doesn't make it so, and documenting it as such just
- 21:27:46 [Zakim]
- ... sets us up for missed expectations.
- 21:28:51 [MichaelC]
- s/Experience so/Experience shows/g
- 21:29:02 [Judy]
- [judy: heard from peter an interest in ensuring that we haven't put our pencils away too early for addressing input from other efforts"
- 21:30:13 [Judy]
- [judy: hearing from gregg: good to avoid sunsetting, and good to avoid slack]
- 21:30:16 [Zakim]
- -Andi_Snow-Weaver
- 21:30:43 [awk]
- RESOLUTION: Judy will produce another draft for next week
- 21:31:09 [awk]
- TOPIC: LC-2604
- 21:31:21 [Zakim]
- -Peter_Korn
- 21:31:23 [Zakim]
- -Alex_Li
- 21:31:23 [Zakim]
- -Bruce_Bailey
- 21:31:24 [awk]
- RESOLUTION: Accepted by unanimous consent
- 21:31:24 [Zakim]
- -Cooper
- 21:31:25 [Zakim]
- -Marc_Johlic
- 21:31:26 [Zakim]
- -Judy
- 21:31:26 [Zakim]
- -Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:31:28 [Zakim]
- -Gregg_Vanderheiden
- 21:31:29 [korn]
- korn has left #wai-wcag
- 21:31:37 [Zakim]
- -Cherie_Ekholm
- 21:31:40 [Zakim]
- -Robin_Tuttle
- 21:31:41 [MichaelC]
- chair: Loretta_Guarino_Reid
- 21:31:47 [Zakim]
- -Andrew_Kirkpatrick
- 21:31:48 [Zakim]
- WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
- 21:31:48 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Andrew_Kirkpatrick, Judy, Cooper, Peter_Korn, Bruce_Bailey, Maureen_Kraft, Alex_Li, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Cherie_Ekholm, Andi_Snow-Weaver, Loretta_Guarino_Reid,
- 21:31:48 [Zakim]
- ... +1.253.381.aaaa, Marc_Johlic, Robin_Tuttle
- 21:31:54 [awk]
- awk has left #wai-wcag
- 21:32:14 [MichaelC]
- regrets+ Kathleen_Wahlbin
- 21:32:18 [MichaelC]
- agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2012AprJun/0023.html
- 21:32:21 [MichaelC]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 21:32:21 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html MichaelC
- 21:35:47 [MichaelC]
- rrsagent, bye
- 21:35:47 [RRSAgent]
- I see no action items