IRC log of eval on 2012-06-28

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:52:33 [RRSAgent]

RRSAgent has joined #eval

13:52:33 [RRSAgent]

logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/06/28-eval-irc

13:52:35 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, make logs world

13:52:35 [Zakim]

Zakim has joined #eval

13:52:37 [trackbot]

Zakim, this will be 3825

13:52:37 [Zakim]

ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 8 minutes

13:52:38 [trackbot]

Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference

13:52:38 [trackbot]

Date: 28 June 2012

13:52:56 [shadi]

zakim, call shadi-617

13:52:56 [Zakim]

ok, shadi; the call is being made

13:52:57 [Zakim]

WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started

13:52:57 [Zakim]

+Shadi

13:53:06 [shadi]

chair: Eric

13:53:15 [shadi]

regrets: Tim, Moe

13:54:39 [shadi]

agenda+ New questionnaire

13:54:39 [shadi]

agenda+ Open issues from discussion on the list, previous telco’s and questionnaire. Please join in the discussion on the list. Reference: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/

13:54:39 [shadi]

agenda+ DoC ID 4 – Change language

13:54:39 [shadi]

agenda+ DoC ID 7 – Definition of “website part”

13:54:39 [shadi]

agenda+ DoC ID 18 – Seems to contradict

13:54:41 [shadi]

agenda+ DoC ID 25 – Person or organization

13:54:43 [shadi]

agenda+ DoC ID 41 – Re-used portions of pages

13:54:47 [shadi]

agenda+ DoC ID 44 – Testing all pages

13:55:10 [MartijnHoutepen]

MartijnHoutepen has joined #eval

13:56:50 [vivienne]

vivienne has joined #eval

13:57:33 [Zakim]

+ +1.301.975.aaaa

13:57:34 [Zakim]

- +1.301.975.aaaa

13:57:34 [Zakim]

+ +1.301.975.aaaa

13:57:48 [shadi]

zakim, aaaa is Liz

13:57:48 [Zakim]

+Liz; got it

13:59:00 [Zakim]

+??P5

13:59:07 [vivienne]

zakim, PPP5 is me

13:59:07 [Zakim]

sorry, vivienne, I do not recognize a party named 'PPP5'

13:59:16 [vivienne]

zakim, ??P5 is me

13:59:16 [Zakim]

+vivienne; got it

13:59:20 [Zakim]

+ericvelleman

13:59:21 [vivienne]

zakim, muteme

13:59:21 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'muteme', vivienne

13:59:36 [vivienne]

zakim, mute me

13:59:36 [Zakim]

vivienne should now be muted

13:59:46 [MartijnHoutepen]

zakim, ericvelleman is really me

13:59:46 [Zakim]

+MartijnHoutepen; got it

13:59:49 [Liz]

Liz has joined #eval

13:59:53 [korn]

korn has joined #eval

14:00:04 [MartijnHoutepen]

zakim, mute me

14:00:04 [Zakim]

MartijnHoutepen should now be muted

14:01:14 [Zakim]

+Mike

14:01:22 [Zakim]

+ +31.30.890.aabb

14:01:31 [Sarah_Swierenga]

Sarah_Swierenga has joined #eval

14:01:36 [Zakim]

+ +1.978.760.aacc

14:01:39 [shadi]

zakim, aabb is Eric

14:01:42 [shadi]

agenda+ TPAC 2012 Registration http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Jun/0102.html

14:01:43 [Kathy]

Kathy has joined #eval

14:01:57 [Zakim]

+Eric; got it

14:01:59 [shadi]

zakim, aacc is Kathy

14:02:11 [ericvelleman]

ericvelleman has joined #eval

14:02:16 [Zakim]

+Kathy; got it

14:02:19 [Zakim]

+[Oracle]

14:02:28 [korn]

Zakim, Oracle is Peter_Korn

14:02:43 [Zakim]

+Peter_Korn; got it

14:02:53 [Zakim]

+ +1.517.432.aadd

14:03:52 [shadi]

zakim, aadd is Sarah_Swierenga

14:04:06 [Zakim]

+Sarah_Swierenga; got it

14:04:32 [MartijnHoutepen]

ack me

14:04:41 [shadi]

scribe: Martijn

14:04:41 [MartijnHoutepen]

zakim, mute me

14:04:46 [shadi]

scribenick: MartijnHoutepen

14:04:49 [Zakim]

MartijnHoutepen should now be muted

14:04:56 [shadi]

agenda?

14:05:08 [richard]

richard has joined #eval

14:05:24 [shadi]

zakim, take up agendum 9

14:05:25 [Zakim]

agendum 9. "TPAC 2012 Registration http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Jun/0102.html" taken up [from shadi]

14:06:18 [MartijnHoutepen]

wcag-em due to meet 29-30 oct at TPAC

14:07:24 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: if interested: start booking!

14:07:55 [Zakim]

+??P32

14:08:39 [richard]

zakim ??p32 is richard

14:08:40 [shadi]

zakim, ??p32 is Richard

14:08:40 [Zakim]

+Richard; got it

14:08:45 [shadi]

zakim, mute me

14:08:45 [Zakim]

Shadi should now be muted

14:08:55 [ericvelleman]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq3/

14:09:06 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:09:06 [Zakim]

agendum 1. "New questionnaire" taken up [from shadi]

14:09:21 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: new questionnaire online, open till sunday

14:10:15 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: if you haven't filled it in yet, do so

14:10:36 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:10:36 [Zakim]

agendum 2. "Open issues from discussion on the list, previous telco’s and questionnaire. Please join in the discussion on the list. Reference:

14:10:39 [Zakim]

... https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/" taken up [from shadi]

14:10:47 [ericvelleman]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/

14:10:59 [shadi]

zakim, close agendum 2

14:10:59 [Zakim]

agendum 2, Open issues from discussion on the list, previous telco’s and questionnaire. Please join in the discussion on the list. Reference:

14:11:01 [Zakim]

... https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/, closed

14:11:01 [Zakim]

I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

14:11:01 [Zakim]

3. DoC ID 4 – Change language [from shadi]

14:11:04 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:11:04 [Zakim]

agendum 3. "DoC ID 4 – Change language" taken up [from shadi]

14:11:14 [shadi]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/results#x2631

14:11:42 [shadi]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Jun/0124.html

14:11:57 [richard]

+1

14:12:04 [ericvelleman]

Resolution: Leave this comment for the moment and make no change. When the comments was made, the document looked like this: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#step5. We will work on that section in more detail in the next editor drafts and will have ample opportunity to discuss this as a group then.

14:12:12 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: new resolution of DoC 4

14:12:16 [shadi]

+1

14:12:17 [korn]

+1

14:12:17 [MartijnHoutepen]

+1

14:12:26 [vivienne]

+1

14:12:26 [Liz]

+1

14:12:32 [shadi]

ack me

14:12:32 [ericvelleman]

+1

14:12:33 [Sarah_Swierenga]

+1

14:13:02 [MartijnHoutepen]

Resolution for DoC 4: eave this comment for the moment and make no change. When the comments was made, the document looked like this: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#step5. We will work on that section in more detail in the next editor drafts and will have ample opportunity to discuss this as a group then.

14:13:06 [ericvelleman]

# DoC ID 4 – Change language Resolution:

14:13:15 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:13:15 [Zakim]

agendum 4. "DoC ID 7 – Definition of “website part”" taken up [from shadi]

14:13:27 [MartijnHoutepen]

RESOLUTION

14:13:33 [shadi]

zakim, take up agendum 3

14:13:33 [Zakim]

agendum 3. "DoC ID 4 – Change language" taken up [from shadi]

14:13:51 [MartijnHoutepen]

RESOLUTION: Leave this comment for the moment and make no change. When the comments was made, the document looked like this: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#step5. We will work on that section in more detail in the next editor drafts and will have ample opportunity to discuss this as a group then.

14:14:27 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:14:27 [Zakim]

agendum 3 was just opened, shadi

14:14:35 [shadi]

zakim, close agendum 3

14:14:35 [Zakim]

agendum 3, DoC ID 4 – Change language, closed

14:14:36 [Zakim]

I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

14:14:36 [Zakim]

4. DoC ID 7 – Definition of “website part” [from shadi]

14:14:38 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:14:38 [Zakim]

agendum 4. "DoC ID 7 – Definition of “website part”" taken up [from shadi]

14:14:53 [shadi]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/results#x2621

14:15:17 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: shadi will suggest new text for resolution DoC ID 7

14:15:19 [ericvelleman]

DoC ID 18 – Seems to contradict

14:15:21 [shadi]

action: shadi to draft a proposal for new definition of "website part"

14:15:22 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-1 - Draft a proposal for new definition of "website part" [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2012-07-05].

14:15:29 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:15:29 [Zakim]

agendum 4 was just opened, shadi

14:15:35 [shadi]

zakim, close agendum 4

14:15:35 [Zakim]

agendum 4, DoC ID 7 – Definition of “website part”, closed

14:15:36 [Zakim]

I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is

14:15:36 [Zakim]

5. DoC ID 18 – Seems to contradict [from shadi]

14:15:37 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:15:38 [Zakim]

agendum 5. "DoC ID 18 – Seems to contradict" taken up [from shadi]

14:15:52 [shadi]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/results#x2630

14:16:05 [shadi]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Jun/0127.html

14:16:10 [ericvelleman]

Resolution: Discard this comment. When the comments was made, section 5 was more or less empty except for some editor notes. We will work on that section in more detail in the next editor drafts and will have ample opportunity to discuss this as a group then.

14:16:16 [MartijnHoutepen]

+1

14:16:20 [korn]

+1

14:16:21 [shadi]

+1

14:16:21 [Liz]

+1

14:16:24 [vivienne]

+1

14:16:29 [richard]

+1

14:16:41 [ericvelleman]

+1

14:16:41 [Sarah_Swierenga]

+1

14:16:46 [MartijnHoutepen]

RESOLUTION: Discard this comment. When the comments was made, section 5 was more or less empty except for some editor notes. We will work on that section in more detail in the next editor drafts and will have ample opportunity to discuss this as a group then.

14:16:56 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:16:56 [Zakim]

agendum 6. "DoC ID 25 – Person or organization" taken up [from shadi]

14:17:21 [shadi]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/results#x2613

14:17:29 [shadi]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Jun/0122.html

14:17:42 [MartijnHoutepen]

RESOLUTION: Discard this comment. When the comments was made, section 5 was more or less empty except for some editor notes. We will work on that section in more detail in the next editor drafts and will have ample opportunity to discuss this as a group then.

14:17:50 [ericvelleman]

The Resolution would then be: replace "Person who did the evaluation" by "Evaluator".

14:17:54 [Sarah_Swierenga]

+1

14:18:02 [vivienne]

+1

14:18:03 [Liz]

+1

14:18:14 [richard]

+1

14:18:16 [MartijnHoutepen]

+1

14:18:50 [shadi]

+1 provided the word "Evaluator" is linked to its definition

14:18:51 [Sarah_Swierenga]

+1 linking to definition

14:19:16 [MartijnHoutepen]

ack me

14:19:21 [Liz]

+1 to link to definition

14:19:58 [shadi]

scribe: shadi

14:19:58 [MartijnHoutepen]

MartijnHoutepen has left #eval

14:20:01 [richard]

+1 lonk to definition

14:20:24 [shadi]

RESOLUTION: replace "Person who did the evaluation" by "Evaluator" and link it to its definition

14:20:26 [MartijnHoutepen]

MartijnHoutepen has joined #eval

14:20:41 [MartijnHoutepen]

zakim, mute me

14:20:41 [Zakim]

MartijnHoutepen should now be muted

14:20:45 [ericvelleman]

DoC ID 25 – Person or organization

14:20:50 [shadi]

scribe: Martijn

14:20:57 [shadi]

scribenick: MartijnHoutepen

14:21:02 [shadi]

zakim, taker up next

14:21:02 [Zakim]

I don't understand 'taker up next', shadi

14:21:03 [ericvelleman]

DoC ID 41 – Re-used portions of pages

14:21:08 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:21:08 [Zakim]

agendum 7. "DoC ID 41 – Re-used portions of pages" taken up [from shadi]

14:21:19 [shadi]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/results#x2616

14:22:47 [richard]

q+

14:22:58 [ericvelleman]

Step 3 introduction text has a Note that says: “Note: This step identifies a comprehensive sample of web pages that need to be evaluated. However, many web pages will have repetitive content, such as the header, navigation, and other common components that may not need to be re-evaluated on each occurrence. Guidance on evaluating the sample identified in this step is provided in Step 4: Audit the Selected Sample”.

14:23:33 [ericvelleman]

Step 4 introduction has an Editor Note that says: “…The introduction will include advice on how to avoid evaluation of repetitive content that would not yield new findings;”

14:23:59 [ericvelleman]

New Proposed Resolution: Add in editor note in step 4: “Include this comment for consideration for when we start working on this section ” and no change in step 3 introduction text as it already covers this.

14:24:31 [ericvelleman]

q?

14:24:46 [shadi]

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-EM/#step3

14:25:03 [shadi]

ack richard

14:25:07 [shadi]

q+

14:25:11 [shadi]

ack me

14:25:17 [MartijnHoutepen]

richard: links to the existing discussion about templates

14:26:12 [Zakim]

-Mike

14:26:20 [ericvelleman]

q?

14:26:55 [Zakim]

+Mike

14:27:05 [ericvelleman]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120523.html

14:28:25 [ericvelleman]

q?

14:28:36 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: newer version of methodology already adresses this

14:29:25 [ericvelleman]

q?

14:29:37 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: template issue is a different discussion; maybe close this comment

14:29:46 [ericvelleman]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-em-comments/2012Apr/0003.html

14:31:00 [korn]

q+

14:32:15 [vivienne]

q+

14:32:22 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: we have to be careful; we are evaluating the whole page. This comment adresses evalution efficiency. We musnt open doors to excluding parts

14:32:40 [richard]

+1

14:32:49 [shadi]

zakim, mute me

14:32:49 [Zakim]

Shadi should now be muted

14:33:36 [richard]

NO repeated blocks is not similar areas

14:33:56 [MartijnHoutepen]

peter: add advisory if evaluator notices repeated blocks, make a note

14:34:00 [vivienne]

ack me

14:34:38 [shadi]

ack korn

14:35:09 [MartijnHoutepen]

vivienne: We recommend taking a screenshot to identify 'shared areas', chech everything on every page, but not make a remark every time, refer to earlier comment

14:35:21 [ericvelleman]

q?

14:35:37 [vivienne]

zakim, mute me

14:35:37 [Zakim]

vivienne should now be muted

14:36:24 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: this is a valuable discussion, but the comment does not adress this issue. We will have this discussion later

14:37:07 [Sarah_Swierenga]

+1 to respond to the public comment - saying that we are working on it for a future draft.

14:37:15 [shadi]

q+

14:37:19 [shadi]

ack me

14:37:23 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: we can close this issue first, keeping in mind we will have the discussion when we arrive to discussing this specific step

14:38:25 [shadi]

http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120523.html#step4

14:38:45 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: maybe create a specific editor note asking for input on how to deal with re-used content

14:40:15 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: We adressed this comment.

14:40:36 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: If we want more input on this, we can create a specific editor note for this

14:40:39 [ericvelleman]

Proposed resolution: we addressed the comment in the editor note and close it now

14:41:01 [richard]

q+

14:41:49 [shadi]

(1) we have a note in section 3 step 3 relating to that point; (2) we have a related editor note in step 4; (3) we are updating step 4 to refelect this in the upcoming draft

14:41:55 [Sarah_Swierenga]

+1 to close and add editor note

14:42:20 [Mike_Elledge]

Mike_Elledge has joined #eval

14:42:30 [shadi]

ack richard

14:42:31 [MartijnHoutepen]

richard: agree with shadi

14:42:51 [richard]

+1

14:43:23 [korn]

+1

14:43:31 [vivienne]

+1

14:43:39 [MartijnHoutepen]

RESOLUT+1

14:43:42 [MartijnHoutepen]

+1

14:43:49 [MartijnHoutepen]

RESOLUTION: No Change

14:43:57 [MartijnHoutepen]

Rationale: (1) we have a note in section 3 step 3 relating to that point; (2) we have a related editor note in step 4; (3) we are updating step 4 to refelect this in the upcoming draft

14:44:17 [shadi]

zakim, take up next

14:44:17 [Zakim]

agendum 8. "DoC ID 44 – Testing all pages" taken up [from shadi]

14:44:22 [ericvelleman]

q?

14:44:25 [shadi]

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq2/results#x2614

14:44:54 [shadi]

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-evaltf/2012Jun/0098.html

14:45:01 [korn]

q+

14:45:52 [shadi]

ack k

14:46:04 [richard]

q+

14:46:38 [MartijnHoutepen]

peter: one of the goals of this methodology is sampling, but is not mandatory

14:47:31 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: rewording: if evaluating all pages is not feasible, take a sample

14:47:46 [shadi]

ack r

14:48:42 [Mike_Elledge]

q+

14:49:08 [MartijnHoutepen]

richard: the majority of websites is quite small, we want to encourage them to evaluate a11y themselves. As a starting position: evaluate the whole site

14:49:31 [vivienne]

q+

14:50:00 [shadi]

ack mike

14:50:28 [MartijnHoutepen]

mike: agree with Richard, in ideal circumstances every page will be tested, but that isnt feasible

14:50:42 [vivienne]

ack me

14:51:13 [ericvelleman]

q?

14:51:23 [richard]

q+

14:51:48 [vivienne]

zakim, mute me

14:51:48 [Zakim]

vivienne should now be muted

14:52:10 [MartijnHoutepen]

vivienne: most of the people who will want their website evaluated, will be large websites. The majority of websites that are evaluated, are larger. No problem with suggestion to put the whole website first

14:52:50 [shadi]

[[1. Introduction - Because it is generally not feasible nor desired to evaluate every single web page in such a context, it is essential to employ a reliable method for determining the overall conformance of a website -> In many situations it is not possible to evaluate every single web page, so that it is essential to...]]

14:52:58 [shadi]

q+

14:52:58 [MartijnHoutepen]

richard: difference between commercial business and target user of our methodology. The more people that use this methodology the better

14:53:01 [shadi]

ack r

14:53:05 [shadi]

ack me

14:54:24 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: we need to make sure our methodology scales up and down.

14:55:03 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: in the introduction we already mention this issue

14:55:53 [vivienne]

+1 to Shadi's idea of new wording

14:55:57 [korn]

+1

14:56:00 [Mike_Elledge]

+1

14:56:04 [Sarah_Swierenga]

+1

14:56:05 [ericvelleman]

+1

14:56:06 [richard]

+1

14:56:12 [Mike_Elledge]

!

14:56:14 [MartijnHoutepen]

shadi: suggestion to add a note; if you have the resources to evaluate every page, consider it your sample

14:56:16 [MartijnHoutepen]

+1

14:56:30 [Liz]

+1

14:56:50 [shadi]

action: shadi to go through methodology and propose wording changes to better address the possibility to evaluate all pages, if the evaluator is willing to do so

14:56:50 [trackbot]

Created ACTION-2 - Go through methodology and propose wording changes to better address the possibility to evaluate all pages, if the evaluator is willing to do so [on Shadi Abou-Zahra - due 2012-07-05].

14:57:11 [shadi]

zakim, mute me

14:57:11 [Zakim]

Shadi should now be muted

14:57:33 [MartijnHoutepen]

eric: two proposals by shadi to look forward to

14:57:48 [Mike_Elledge]

bye!

14:57:49 [MartijnHoutepen]

ack me

14:57:49 [vivienne]

well done all - good night

14:57:50 [Sarah_Swierenga]

bye - have a good week!

14:57:53 [vivienne]

vivienne has left #eval

14:57:53 [Zakim]

-Peter_Korn

14:57:55 [Zakim]

-Sarah_Swierenga

14:57:56 [Zakim]

-Kathy

14:57:56 [Zakim]

-Shadi

14:57:58 [Zakim]

-MartijnHoutepen

14:57:58 [Zakim]

-Mike

14:57:59 [Zakim]

-Eric

14:58:02 [Zakim]

-Richard

14:58:08 [Zakim]

-vivienne

14:58:10 [Zakim]

-Liz

14:58:12 [Zakim]

WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended

14:58:14 [Zakim]

Attendees were Shadi, +1.301.975.aaaa, Liz, vivienne, MartijnHoutepen, Mike, +31.30.890.aabb, +1.978.760.aacc, Eric, Kathy, Peter_Korn, +1.517.432.aadd, Sarah_Swierenga, Richard

14:58:40 [ericvelleman]

ericvelleman has left #eval

14:58:46 [MartijnHoutepen]

MartijnHoutepen has left #eval

15:02:31 [korn]

korn has left #eval

15:19:20 [shadi]

trackbot, end meeting

15:19:20 [trackbot]

Zakim, list attendees

15:19:20 [Zakim]

sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is

15:19:28 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, please draft minutes

15:19:28 [RRSAgent]

I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/06/28-eval-minutes.html trackbot

15:19:29 [trackbot]

RRSAgent, bye

15:19:29 [RRSAgent]

I see 2 open action items saved in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/28-eval-actions.rdf :

15:19:29 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: shadi to draft a proposal for new definition of "website part" [1]

15:19:29 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/28-eval-irc#T14-15-21

15:19:29 [RRSAgent]

ACTION: shadi to go through methodology and propose wording changes to better address the possibility to evaluate all pages, if the evaluator is willing to do so [2]

15:19:29 [RRSAgent]

recorded in http://www.w3.org/2012/06/28-eval-irc#T14-56-50