13:57:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
13:57:45 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/05/25-wcag2ict-irc
13:57:47 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:57:47 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #wcag2ict
13:57:49 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 2428
13:57:49 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_(WCAG2ICT)10:00AM scheduled to start in 3 minutes
13:57:50 <trackbot> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
13:57:50 <trackbot> Date: 25 May 2012
13:58:11 <Loicmn> Loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
13:58:54 <Mary_Jo> Mary_Jo has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:02 <Judy> Judy has joined #wcag2ict
14:00:03 <greggvanderheiden> greggvanderheiden has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:00 <Zakim> +Shadi
14:01:02 <MichaelC> zakim, aaaa is Al_Hoffman
14:01:02 <Zakim> +Al_Hoffman; got it
14:01:04 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:01:04 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:01:21 <korn> korn has joined #wcag2ict
14:01:23 <MichaelC> zakim, ??P14 is Gregg_Vanderheiden
14:01:23 <Zakim> +Gregg_Vanderheiden; got it
14:01:29 <Zakim> +Andrew_Kirkpatrick
14:02:04 <Zakim> +??P18
14:02:06 <Loicmn> I can accept Loic ;-)
14:02:11 <MichaelC> zakim, ??P0 is Loic_Martinez
14:02:11 <Zakim> +Loic_Martinez; got it
14:02:28 <MichaelC> zakim, ??P18 Mike_Pluke
14:02:28 <Zakim> I don't understand '??P18 Mike_Pluke', MichaelC
14:02:29 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
14:02:41 <MichaelC> zakim, Microsoft is Alex_Li
14:02:41 <Zakim> +Alex_Li; got it
14:03:15 <janina> janina has joined #wcag2ict
14:03:36 <Zakim> +[Oracle]
14:03:40 <Zakim> +??P22
14:03:45 <korn> zakim, +Oracle is Peter_Korn
14:03:45 <Zakim> sorry, korn, I do not recognize a party named '+Oracle'
14:03:52 <korn> zakim, Oracle is Peter_Korn
14:03:52 <Zakim> +Peter_Korn; got it
14:04:13 <MichaelC> zakim, ??P22 is Janina_Sajka
14:04:13 <Zakim> +Janina_Sajka; got it
14:04:51 <Zakim> +Bruce_Bailey
14:05:04 <shadi> scribe: shadi
14:05:07 <MichaelC> zakim, Loic is Loïc_Martínez
14:05:07 <Zakim> +Loïc_Martínez; got it
14:05:14 <shadi> agenda?
14:05:23 <shadi> Topic: Participation Update
14:05:27 <Judy> zakim, who's on the phone
14:05:27 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who's on the phone', Judy
14:05:31 <shadi> JB: participation still in flux
14:05:42 <Andi> agenda+ Document milestones for coming months
14:05:51 <Andi> agenda+ Survey Results and Discussion
14:05:54 <Judy> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:05:55 <Zakim> On the phone I see Al_Hoffman, Andi_Snow_Weaver, David_MacDonald, Loïc_Martínez, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Judy, Cooper, Shadi (muted), Andrew_Kirkpatrick, ??P18,
14:05:55 <Zakim> ... Alex_Li, Peter_Korn, Janina_Sajka, Bruce_Bailey
14:06:00 <Andi> agenda+ Confirm next meeting time; action items; request next scribe;
14:06:32 <shadi> ...still people joining
14:06:38 <MichaelC> -> TF participation http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/#participation
14:06:39 <Andi> Participants List: http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=55145&public=1
14:06:44 <shadi> ...may be good to have a brief role call
14:06:52 <shadi> ...some already declining
14:07:11 <shadi> ...others in the process of signing up
14:07:49 <shadi> ASN: people on the list?
14:08:06 <shadi> JB: meanwhile everyone should be on the list
14:08:11 <Judy> s/some already declining/some declining as a colleague is joining instead/
14:08:17 <shadi> ...some additional still not, will send you these names
14:08:37 <MichaelC> zakim, ??P18 is Mike_Pluke
14:08:37 <Zakim> +Mike_Pluke; got it
14:09:12 <shadi> ...maybe extend the survey for new partiicpants
14:09:21 <shadi> ASN: can split a survey?
14:09:27 <shadi> JB: don't think so
14:09:35 <shadi> ...need to figure it out
14:10:15 <Judy> s/don't think so/don't think so without losing data/
14:10:18 <shadi> [Loic introduces himself]
14:10:33 <shadi> AK: Kiran Kaja from Adobe will be participating too
14:10:47 <Judy> s/too/in my place
14:11:07 <shadi> zakim, take up next
14:11:07 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Document milestones for coming months" taken up [from Andi]
14:11:32 <shadi> ASN: looking at the calendar, we only have ~11 meetings until the next draft
14:11:44 <shadi> ...need to close proposals rapidly
14:12:18 <shadi> ...looked at the Success Criteria and selected some of the less controversial ones
14:12:28 <shadi> ...to test the process and how the survey works
14:12:46 <shadi> ...suggest people send alternate proposals where they disagree
14:13:03 <shadi> ...to speed up the process
14:13:22 <shadi> MP: need to get fundamental issues agreed upon early on
14:13:25 <Alex> Alex has joined #wcag2ict
14:13:34 <shadi> ...then move through the rest fairly rapidly
14:13:46 <shadi> zakim, take up next
14:13:46 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Survey Results and Discussion" taken up [from Andi]
14:14:29 <Judy> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/MAY252012/results
14:15:01 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/MAY252012/results#xq5
14:15:56 <shadi> LMN: unsure. maybe overly restrictive though may need to be that restrictive
14:16:11 <shadi> ...going to be tricky to separate some issues
14:16:20 <shadi> ...maybe go with what is proposed for now
14:17:19 <shadi> GV: breaking documents off software helps people who just generate documents
14:17:36 <shadi> ...people have been wrestling with this for years
14:17:59 <shadi> ...pages JavaScript may have no real content
14:18:07 <Zakim> -Bruce_Bailey
14:18:16 <shadi> ...how to apply these things to documents that did not have programtic content
14:18:43 <Alex> q+
14:18:43 <shadi> ...maybe need to consider what the intent of the AccessBoard and M376
14:19:02 <shadi> ack a
14:19:03 <korn> q+
14:19:24 <mapluke> q+
14:19:29 <shadi> ack me
14:19:45 <shadi> zakim, mute me
14:19:45 <Zakim> Shadi should now be muted
14:20:01 <Zakim> +Bruce_Bailey
14:20:05 <shadi> AL: don't know how to differentiate simple vs complex documents
14:20:13 <shadi> ...document with macros?
14:20:25 <shadi> ...what are we getting at with this differentiation?
14:20:35 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:20:36 <shadi> ...what is it useful for?
14:21:22 <AWK> AWK has joined #wcag2ict
14:21:22 <shadi> ASN: why the division in 2010 ANPRM?
14:21:34 <shadi> BB: were trying to separate by audience
14:21:42 <shadi> ...may not have been clear enough
14:22:08 <shadi> ...start with a simple document and may end up adding media, buttons, and such
14:22:14 <shadi> ack korn
14:22:32 <shadi> PK: as the survey and ANPRM responses show, it is a very fuzzy line
14:22:47 <shadi> ...draw a line in pencil
14:23:04 <shadi> ...keep it in the back of our minds during development as we go through the SCs
14:23:18 <shadi> ...then come back to see if this separation is helpful
14:23:35 <korn> q-
14:23:42 <shadi> ack mapluke
14:23:54 <shadi> MP: cautious about boundaries
14:24:09 <shadi> ...every line we draw will potentially get people asking
14:24:36 <shadi> ...web content is somewhat also electronic content
14:24:48 <Loicmn> q+
14:25:15 <shadi> ...should be careful about creating new concepts that people will be debating for ever
14:25:20 <shadi> ...and get confused about
14:25:24 <shadi> ack greggvanderheiden
14:25:51 <shadi> GV: sounds like two suggestions on the table right now
14:26:04 <shadi> ...(1) draw a pencil line for now and revisit later
14:26:16 <shadi> ...(2) not draw a line at all and just go from there
14:26:39 <shadi> ...since using WCAG for all three areas, should not be an issue anymore
14:26:51 <Andi> q+ Al_Hoffman
14:27:05 <shadi> ...underlying requirements still WCAG
14:27:38 <janina> +1 to a division that distinguishes "simple" docs from docs with "programatic" content
14:28:14 <shadi> [scribe missed some of the comments]
14:28:24 <janina> "simple" could be published ina traditional p-book
14:28:29 <shadi> ack loicmn
14:28:53 <shadi> LMN: in our M376 work, electronic documents were quite clear
14:29:11 <shadi> ...but with software things started becoming more complicated
14:29:27 <shadi> ...wondered about when Success Criteria do not apply
14:29:50 <shadi> ...like the concept of "documents with programtic content"
14:30:06 <korn> q+
14:30:28 <shadi> ...tricky issue, maybe keep separation for now and assess later if we need to differentiate
14:30:51 <mapluke> q+
14:30:56 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:31:00 <shadi> ...my concern is that document authors may be scared off and think it does not apply to them if it is too focused on software
14:31:16 <shadi> ack Al_hoffman
14:31:26 <shadi> AH: think saying very similar things
14:31:45 <korn> q-
14:31:49 <shadi> ...generally if you have more than text in your documents then there is more you will need to consider
14:32:01 <shadi> ack mapluke
14:32:19 <David> q+
14:32:22 <shadi> MP: do need a boundary, not sure if electronic document or something esle
14:32:37 <shadi> ...probably more subtle issue
14:32:50 <shadi> ...may not need separation for software
14:32:54 <shadi> ack greggvanderheiden 
14:33:07 <shadi> GV: think we are closing on something
14:33:15 <shadi> ...document may be too narrow of a word
14:33:24 <shadi> ...maybe not try to define it upfront
14:33:37 <shadi> ...but provide guidance for people doing simpler things
14:34:02 <shadi> ...some phrasing "if you are doing this kind of stuff"
14:34:11 <shadi> ...may be more clear at the end
14:34:23 <shadi> ...may not be a clear definition though
14:34:33 <shadi> ...maybe too early
14:34:39 <shadi> ack david
14:35:01 <shadi> DmD: HTML5 people discussing similar stuff
14:35:20 <shadi> ...need to distinguish from "content"
14:35:31 <Zakim> -Cooper
14:36:14 <shadi> ASN: think summary is that keep rough boundaries for now but come back later to revisit
14:36:20 <shadi> zakim, take up next
14:36:20 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Confirm next meeting time; action items; request next scribe;" taken up [from Andi]
14:37:35 <shadi> s/ASN: think summary is that keep rough boundaries for now but come back later to revisit/ASN: think summary is that treat things that do not have programtic content, everything esle is software
14:37:55 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/MAY252012/results#xq7
14:38:47 <Loicmn> +q
14:38:57 <shadi> ASN: think is pretty confusing
14:39:07 <shadi> ...definition of user agent
14:39:13 <shadi> ack loicmn
14:39:40 <shadi> LMN: in M376 we tried to generalize the terms used in WCAG
14:40:02 <shadi> ...difficult because may have windows, boxes, pre-defined actions, etc
14:40:37 <shadi> ...took the term "interaction context" from usability
14:40:53 <shadi> ...were not able t come up with better wording
14:41:17 <shadi> ...issue of circular definition in WCAG
14:41:41 <shadi> ...content is rendered by user agent and user agent renders content
14:42:22 <shadi> ...also the role of user agent in the web context is typically taken by the platform services in non-web context
14:42:31 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:42:57 <shadi> ASN: example of platform services?
14:43:19 <shadi> LMN: browser is the platform for web context
14:43:46 <shadi> ...query it to fetch alternate text for image
14:43:52 <korn> q+
14:43:58 <shadi> ...similar concept for software
14:44:06 <shadi> ack greggvanderheiden 
14:44:16 <shadi> GV: useful to think of it that way
14:44:28 <shadi> ...web content is typically played in some way
14:45:08 <shadi> ...layers of platforms: operating system, browser, library, ...
14:45:28 <shadi> ...trying to sort out how that helps us here
14:45:40 <mapluke> q+
14:45:40 <shadi> ...next underlying platform
14:45:46 <shadi> ack korn
14:46:06 <shadi> PK: issue with "interaction context" is that it breaks down in some situations
14:46:15 <greggvanderheiden> q+
14:46:49 <shadi> ...issue of the utility of this term
14:46:50 <korn> q-
14:46:57 <shadi> ack mapluke
14:47:07 <shadi> MP: can see some of the issues
14:47:24 <shadi> ...circularity of definition of user agent
14:47:31 <shadi> ...need to avoid doing that
14:47:48 <Alex> q+
14:47:52 <shadi> ...need to understand boundary of user agent
14:48:06 <shadi> ...would be good to break that down somehow
14:48:10 <korn> q+
14:48:14 <shadi> ack greggvanderheiden 
14:48:42 <shadi> GV: something is circular when you cannot ever resolve it and keep going round in circles
14:48:56 <shadi> ...user agent is a critical part of the definition
14:49:10 <shadi> ...cannot change the definition but can explain it in this context
14:49:56 <shadi> ...perhaps way forward is to think about "interaction context" as a concept
14:50:08 <shadi> ...and see if we can explain it for each Success Criterion
14:50:19 <shadi> ...to see where it breaks down
14:50:54 <mapluke> q+
14:51:35 <shadi> ...to avoid defining a term for each Success Criterion
14:51:40 <shadi> ack alex
14:51:54 <shadi> AL: circular definition is a huge problem
14:52:03 <greggvanderheiden> q+  
14:52:10 <shadi> ...had this discussion before
14:52:46 <shadi> ...should look at each Success Criterion and see how it applies in each case
14:52:56 <shadi> ... so that we may not need to define a new term
14:53:17 <shadi> ...basically have either piece of document or piece of software
14:53:20 <shadi> ack korn
14:53:38 <shadi> PK: in web usually it is content plus user agent
14:54:08 <shadi> ...maybe not useful to define processor as user agent that plays software
14:54:26 <korn> q-
14:54:42 <shadi> ...agree to following the Success Criteria and see what holds up and what falls appart
14:54:52 <shadi> ...think interaction context will fall apart
14:54:57 <shadi> ack mapluke
14:55:11 <shadi> MP: agree with the circular definition issue
14:55:30 <shadi> ...in M376 adopted the term to keep simple
14:55:39 <shadi> ...otherwise created holes
14:55:44 <shadi> ack greggvanderheiden 
14:56:02 <shadi> GV: have advantage that WCAG didn't have
14:56:15 <shadi> ...could not talk about the broader ICT
14:56:26 <shadi> ...here we can talk about software and documents
14:56:38 <shadi> ...really no line between them
14:57:05 <shadi> ...documents so loaded up with programtic content
14:57:12 <shadi> ...except plain text documents
14:57:42 <shadi> ...let's walk through the Success Criteria
14:57:54 <shadi> ...not sure if we will come up with a simple solution
14:58:31 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/MAY252012/results#xq6
14:58:48 <shadi> ASN: next item was to check on people's interest in contributing
14:59:03 <shadi> ...Loic provided a nice list, Peter can work on anything
14:59:11 <shadi> ...David provided some suggestions
14:59:26 <shadi> ...have survey on all the 1.2 Success Criteria
14:59:26 <korn> q+
14:59:34 <shadi> ...could be our survey for Tuesday
14:59:37 <shadi> ack korn
14:59:51 <shadi> PK: in favor of surveys that are ahead of what we get to
14:59:56 <greggvanderheiden> q+
15:00:03 <shadi> ASN: 1.2 Success Criteria ok?
15:00:04 <korn> q-
15:00:19 <shadi> PK: yes. not sure how contentious would be but would get us ahead
15:00:30 <shadi> DmD: looking at the low hanging fruit
15:00:47 <shadi> PK: good to see what the challenges are without consuming too much time
15:00:53 <shadi> ack greggvanderheiden 
15:01:41 <shadi> GV: made experience in WCAG WG when people provide proposals ahead of time
15:02:16 <shadi> ...then discuss these in the meetings
15:02:26 <shadi> ...people could add additional suggestions
15:02:46 <shadi> ...would be either resolved or sent back for refinement
15:03:03 <shadi> ...also allowed people who missed calls to contribute
15:03:08 <Mary_Jo> q+
15:03:10 <shadi> ...however, in this case please be very clear
15:03:30 <shadi> ...as we otherwise spend a lot of time trying to work out what the person's comments meant
15:04:11 <shadi> ...choices were always "accept as-is", "accept with the following suggestions", or "do not accpet for these reasons"
15:04:24 <shadi> ...could be useful to adopt this format here
15:04:30 <mapluke> q+
15:04:47 <shadi> ASN: next survey will have these kinds of choices on them
15:05:00 <shadi> ...links will open into separate windows too
15:05:10 <shadi> ack Mary_Jo 
15:05:18 <korn> q+
15:05:23 <korn> q-
15:05:33 <shadi> MJ: try not to hold back contentious items for too long
15:05:38 <shadi> ack mapluke
15:05:49 <shadi> MP: agree with pre-prepared proposals
15:05:49 <greggvanderheiden> q+
15:06:06 <shadi> ...Loic has some of the points that M376 looked at
15:06:35 <shadi> ASN: Loic, can you start working on some of the SCs you noted interest for?
15:06:47 <shadi> LMN: draft applicability notes?
15:07:05 <shadi> ...if so, send them to the Google Site or to the editors?
15:07:11 <shadi> ack greggvanderheiden 
15:07:36 <shadi> GV: survey should not be the first place we provide information
15:07:48 <shadi> ...people should add their comments to the Google Docs
15:07:57 <shadi> ...also feel free to add proposals
15:08:09 <Alex> q+
15:08:10 <shadi> ...can agree to them or add alternate proposals
15:08:24 <shadi> ...better to put a proposal than only a critique
15:08:40 <shadi> ...everyone on this group should be able to edit the page
15:08:59 <shadi> ...but only editors edit above the marked line
15:09:13 <shadi> ...as this will have the consensed text from the group
15:09:23 <shadi> ...also don't edit people's text
15:09:44 <shadi> ASN: was not able to edit
15:10:00 <shadi> ...a gadget appears and the text disappears
15:10:22 <shadi> GV: click on the controls then you can go in and edit it
15:10:46 <shadi> ...maybe will put that text into the editable area
15:10:46 <Andi> q+
15:11:36 <shadi> GV: some people wanted to associate their Google accounts with these documents rather than other addresses
15:11:40 <Zakim> -Mary_Jo_Mueller
15:11:48 <shadi> ...let me know these addresses and I will do that for you
15:12:38 <shadi> ...everyone should be able to edit the full page
15:12:40 <Zakim> +Mary_Jo_Mueller
15:12:59 <Loicmn> q+
15:13:13 <shadi> ...can also subscribe to the site, which will notify you everytime something changes
15:13:22 <shadi> ...be sure to set a filter first, lots of emails
15:13:28 <shadi> ack alex
15:13:48 <shadi> AL: have very different experience depending on the computer i use
15:13:59 <shadi> ...browser and security settings issue
15:14:13 <Andi> q-
15:14:16 <shadi> ...please move off Google Sites ASAP
15:14:28 <shadi> GV: tested with many browsers
15:14:36 <shadi> ....please let me know the exact issues
15:15:07 <shadi> ...will have an issue regardless what tool we ise
15:15:12 <shadi> s/ise/use
15:15:21 <shadi> AL: not sure what the issue is
15:15:37 <shadi> ...maybe because did not want to disclose some information to Google
15:15:59 <shadi> ack loicmn
15:16:16 <shadi> LMN: thanks for the explanations, some things some to be working better already
15:16:41 <shadi> ...accept the action to produce some proposals but what is the procedure and timelines?
15:17:04 <shadi> ...send notification to the facilitators, Andi and Mike?
15:17:18 <shadi> ASN: to the public mailing list for everyone to see
15:17:37 <shadi> LMN: will have some stuff ready by Tuesday afternoon
15:17:47 <shadi> JB: Monday afternoon?
15:17:50 <shadi> LMN: okay
15:18:22 <shadi> ASN: good to have by Tuesday afternoon to send for following week
15:18:32 <Zakim> -Al_Hoffman
15:18:36 <Judy> s/for following week/for following meeting/
15:19:02 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/MAY252012/results#xq9
15:19:35 <shadi> ASN: seems that text was perceived to imply that SC applies to hardware, which is not the case
15:19:48 <shadi> GV: issue with my own text
15:19:57 <korn> q+
15:20:14 <shadi> ...meant documents that decribe hardware
15:20:25 <shadi> ...not the hardware controls themsevles
15:21:03 <shadi> [Gregg reads out the proposed text]
15:21:48 <Andi> q+
15:22:41 <shadi> ack korn
15:22:57 <shadi> PK: given the clarifications that Gregg provided
15:23:06 <korn> q-
15:23:15 <shadi> ...maybe need to bring back to the group for rediscussion later on
15:23:19 <shadi> ack andi
15:23:36 <shadi> ASN: possibly the wording as-is now seems misleading
15:24:03 <shadi> ...what is the rationale about the category "ICT in general"?
15:24:11 <shadi> GV: comes up in several areas
15:24:53 <shadi> ...was relying on the text further up in the document that sets the scope
15:25:15 <shadi> ...will go back and look at this, then bring it back to the group
15:25:55 <shadi> ASN: will need to re-survey amendments to things that we already surveyed
15:26:09 <shadi> GV: will clearly mark pages to which we have consensus
15:27:01 <shadi> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/MAY252012/results#xq10
15:27:21 <shadi> ASN: can we get unanimous consensus on this?
15:27:28 <shadi> ...any objections?
15:27:48 <shadi> RESOLUTION: proposal for 1.4.1 accepted
15:27:50 <korn> q+
15:28:13 <AWK> 10am Tuesdays works for Adobe
15:28:14 <korn> q-
15:28:21 <shadi> agenda?
15:28:33 <shadi> zakim, take up agendum 3
15:28:33 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Confirm next meeting time; action items; request next scribe;" taken up [from Andi]
15:28:49 <shadi> ASN: Judy, any news on Tuesday conflicts?
15:29:01 <shadi> JB: nothing new yet, but some conflicts
15:29:12 <shadi> ASN: will send out new survey
15:29:20 <shadi> ...not sure this morning though
15:29:23 <janina> Can we extend time on today's survey?
15:29:36 <shadi> JB: next meetigns are Tuesday and Friday
15:29:36 <janina> Thanks!
15:29:49 <Zakim> -Andrew_Kirkpatrick
15:29:50 <Judy> s/but some conflicts/though a few conflicts/
15:30:25 <janina> Absolutely!
15:30:38 <janina> I'm on linphonec
15:31:12 <Zakim> -Peter_Korn
15:31:14 <Zakim> -Mary_Jo_Mueller
15:31:14 <Zakim> -Bruce_Bailey
15:31:15 <Zakim> -Andi_Snow_Weaver
15:31:15 <Zakim> -Judy
15:31:16 <Zakim> -Shadi
15:31:19 <Zakim> -David_MacDonald
15:31:21 <Zakim> -Loïc_Martínez
15:31:22 <Zakim> -Janina_Sajka
15:31:26 <janina> janina has left #wcag2ict
15:31:26 <Zakim> -Gregg_Vanderheiden
15:32:14 <Zakim> -Mike_Pluke
15:32:19 <shadi> zakim, who is on the phone?
15:32:19 <Zakim> On the phone I see Alex_Li
15:32:27 <shadi> zakim, drop a
15:32:29 <Zakim> Alex_Li is being disconnected
15:32:30 <Zakim> WAI_(WCAG2ICT)10:00AM has ended
15:32:30 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.540.373.aaaa, Andi_Snow_Weaver, David_MacDonald, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Judy, Cooper, Shadi, Al_Hoffman, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Andrew_Kirkpatrick, Loic_Martinez, Alex_Li,
15:32:30 <Zakim> ... Peter_Korn, Janina_Sajka, Bruce_Bailey, Loïc_Martínez, Mike_Pluke
15:32:35 <shadi> trackbot, end meeting
15:32:35 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:32:35 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
15:32:43 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:32:43 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/05/25-wcag2ict-minutes.html trackbot
15:32:44 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:32:44 <RRSAgent> I see no action items