19:45:59 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 19:45:59 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/08/30-wai-wcag-irc 19:46:01 RRSAgent, make logs public 19:46:01 Zakim has joined #wai-wcag 19:46:03 Zakim, this will be WAI_WCAG 19:46:03 ok, trackbot; I see WAI_WCAG()4:00PM scheduled to start in 14 minutes 19:46:04 Meeting: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Teleconference 19:46:04 Date: 30 August 2012 19:46:10 agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2012JulSep/0061.html 19:46:19 chair: Loretta_Guarino_Reid 19:46:45 regrets: Moe_Kraft 19:51:38 shadi has joined #wai-wcag 19:59:29 zakim, who is on the phone? 19:59:29 WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has not yet started, shadi 19:59:30 On IRC I see shadi, Zakim, RRSAgent, MichaelC, trackbot 19:59:45 robin has joined #wai-wcag 20:00:35 WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has now started 20:00:43 +Robin_Tuttle 20:00:55 Loretta has joined #WAI-WCAG 20:01:05 +Bruce_Bailey 20:01:22 +Loretta_Guarino_Reid 20:01:31 zakim, code? 20:01:31 the conference code is 9224 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), shadi 20:01:37 ericvelleman has joined #wai-wcag 20:01:55 +Shadi 20:02:00 +andrew 20:02:25 Kathy has joined #wai-wcag 20:02:34 +Kathy_Wahlbin 20:02:47 adam has joined #wai-wcag 20:03:09 +??P16 20:03:25 zakim, ??P16 is adam_solomon 20:03:25 +adam_solomon; got it 20:03:39 +Eric_Velleman 20:04:07 +Cooper 20:04:51 +Andi_Snow_Weaver 20:05:06 Andi has joined #wai-wcag 20:05:16 +Gregg_Vanderheiden 20:05:48 greggvanderheiden has joined #wai-wcag 20:07:11 scribe: shadi 20:07:27 updated draft: http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120827 20:07:42 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20120830evaltf/results 20:09:09 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c7 20:09:12 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c12 20:09:45 marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag 20:10:04 +Marc_Johlic 20:11:09 q+ 20:12:35 q+ 20:13:15 q- gregg 20:13:30 ack me 20:16:19 q+ 20:18:08 q+ 20:18:13 q+ 20:19:09 ack me 20:19:42 ack e 20:20:11 ack s 20:20:11 ack me 20:23:22 q+ 20:23:32 ack g 20:24:22 q+ 20:25:17 ack me 20:25:26 +[Microsoft] 20:26:37 [[This document specifies an internationally harmonized methodology for evaluating the accessibility conformance of existing websites to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. It defines an approach for conformance evaluation of entire websites as opposed to page-by-page evaluation that is already defined by WCAG 2.0]] ... [[Website owners, procurers, suppliers, developers, and others are frequently tasked with assessing the conformance of exi 20:26:37 sting websites to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0]] 20:28:58 q+ 20:30:42 GV: "an internationally harmonized" -> "a methodology" 20:31:02 GV: remove "to WCAG 2.0" 20:31:07 q+ 20:31:29 q+ 20:32:39 ack e 20:35:14 GV: need random sample to ensure confidence 20:36:13 q+ 20:37:58 EV: want public input to further improve the sampling procedure 20:37:59 q+ 20:38:39 ack l 20:38:42 ack me 20:38:44 TF Work Statment [[The objective of Eval TF is to develop an internationally harmonized methodology for evaluating the conformance of websites to WCAG 2.0]] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/eval-ws 20:38:55 ack me 20:40:14 q+ to say the methodology could set a level of confidence considered reasonable, describe ways to achieve it, and include the confidence level in the conformance claim 20:40:25 q+ 20:41:03 GV: not suggesting change of scope but rather wording 20:41:32 GV: "reasonable confidence" is a good phrase to consider 20:42:47 q+ 20:43:20 ack g 20:43:26 GV: remove "*entire* website" ... not asserting that entire site is conformant 20:43:52 agenda+ random sampling 20:44:30 ...mix sampling between most used, critical, and random 20:45:10 q- 20:45:18 agenda 1 = sampling procedure 20:45:23 ack me 20:45:23 Great input from Gregg 20:45:30 ack me 20:47:01 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c7 20:49:09 q+ 20:49:30 ack me 20:51:26 q+ 20:51:53 GV: using normative language 20:52:20 LGR: less than a quarter directly WCAG 20:52:30 ack me 20:52:35 ...need more review before publishing 20:53:16 MC: don't want to publish with confusing language between normative and informative 20:55:18 SAZ: wonder if the public provides the right answer for this type of questions? 20:55:29 EV: would like to get input from the public 20:55:59 ...still does not resolve the issue of confusion, regardless if NOTE or REC 20:56:05 q+ 20:56:20 ...may reinforce that this is THE rather than A methodology 20:57:28 EV: "Methodology Requirement" rather than "Requirement" in addition to the changes in the Abstract and Introduction sections 20:57:48 ack me 20:57:49 LGR: like the idea of using "Methodology Requirement" 21:00:55 MC: add note that the term "Methodology Requirement" is temporary and as for public input 21:01:24 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120730-WCAG#c12 21:03:14 Typo: Requirement 4 twice in section 5. 21:03:24 q+ 21:03:52 ack me 21:04:31 GV: defines *this* methodology, so quite normative 21:05:08 LGR: ambiguity with "WCAG conformance" 21:05:27 q+ 21:06:36 ...another example of normativity labnguage 21:06:37 ack s 21:06:38 ack me 21:08:42 q+ 21:09:19 [[However, it is required that the following requirements defined by this methodology are met]] 21:10:34 EV: [[However, it is required by this methodology that the following requirements are met]] 21:11:03 GV: if you have any requirements at all then it is a standard 21:11:21 ...can't even have "must", "shall", "require" 21:11:33 q+ 21:12:18 ack me 21:12:21 ack me 21:12:41 -adam_solomon 21:13:00 q+ 21:14:03 ack e 21:14:56 GV: if want a standard then has to be normative 21:15:11 ...otherwise cannot use normative language 21:15:36 q+ 21:15:50 ...could provide several methods 21:15:56 q+ 21:16:39 ...people could select between these methods 21:16:58 ...or could just describe the method 21:17:36 ...not sure what the benefit of the "must"s is 21:18:04 ack e 21:18:06 ...possibly can achieve the same goal without using normative language 21:18:47 EV: when people select one of several methods, they still need to follow particular steps 21:19:31 ...would replace "Requirement" with "step" help? 21:19:46 GV: yes, just describe the process 21:20:30 ack me 21:21:11 q+ 21:21:53 q+ 21:22:25 ack me 21:22:52 LGR: would be OK with making language as clear as possible and adding editor notes for public feedback 21:23:02 David has joined #wai-wcag 21:23:23 ack g 21:24:02 GV: taking the normative language out may get readers more focused on the actual content 21:24:15 +David_MacDonald 21:26:03 ...not sure of benefits of making REC other than referencability, such as by policies 21:27:29 If we want to go toward a normative methodology, it would help to separate the WCAG-specific info from the general website evaluation parts. 21:28:36 q+ 21:29:59 marcjohlic_ has joined #wai-wcag 21:30:11 -Andi_Snow_Weaver 21:31:25 I'm not sure how many of us will be at TPAC. 21:31:45 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/eval-tf#meetings 21:32:28 ack me 21:32:29 http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2011/eval/track/ 21:32:58 -Robin_Tuttle 21:33:10 -Marc_Johlic 21:35:09 -andrew 21:35:11 -Bruce_Bailey 21:35:14 -[Microsoft] 21:35:15 -Kathy_Wahlbin 21:35:24 -David_MacDonald 21:35:25 -Cooper 21:35:25 -Eric_Velleman 21:35:27 -Loretta_Guarino_Reid 21:35:29 -Shadi 21:36:02 zakim, drop Gregg 21:36:02 Gregg_Vanderheiden is being disconnected 21:36:03 WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended 21:36:03 Attendees were Robin_Tuttle, Bruce_Bailey, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, Shadi, andrew, Kathy_Wahlbin, adam_solomon, Eric_Velleman, Cooper, Andi_Snow_Weaver, Gregg_Vanderheiden, 21:36:03 ... Marc_Johlic, [Microsoft], David_MacDonald 21:36:13 rrsagent, make minutes 21:36:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/30-wai-wcag-minutes.html MichaelC 21:37:59 ericvelleman has left #wai-wcag 21:54:12 rrsagent, make minutes 21:54:12 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/08/30-wai-wcag-minutes.html MichaelC 21:55:55 rrsagent, bye 21:55:55 I see no action items