IRC log of eval on 2012-09-06

Timestamps are in UTC.

13:45:58 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #eval
13:45:58 [RRSAgent]
logging to
13:46:00 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
13:46:00 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #eval
13:46:02 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 3825
13:46:02 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 14 minutes
13:46:03 [trackbot]
Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
13:46:03 [trackbot]
Date: 06 September 2012
13:51:03 [vivienne]
vivienne has joined #eval
13:55:44 [ericvelleman]
ericvelleman has joined #eval
13:56:19 [Detlev]
Detlev has joined #eval
13:56:53 [MartijnHoutepen]
MartijnHoutepen has joined #eval
13:58:09 [shadi]
zakim, this is eval
13:58:09 [Zakim]
shadi, I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be eval".
13:58:12 [Zakim]
WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
13:58:20 [Zakim]
13:58:25 [vivienne]
zakim, ??P9 is me
13:58:25 [Zakim]
+vivienne; got it
13:59:03 [Liz]
Liz has joined #eval
13:59:26 [Mike]
Mike has joined #eval
13:59:49 [Zakim]
+ +1.301.975.aaaa
13:59:53 [Zakim]
- +1.301.975.aaaa
14:00:06 [Zakim]
+ +31.30.239.aabb
14:00:13 [MartijnHoutepen]
zakim, aabb is me
14:00:16 [Zakim]
+MartijnHoutepen; got it
14:00:16 [Liz]
zakim, aaaa is Liz
14:00:24 [Zakim]
sorry, Liz, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
14:00:48 [Zakim]
+ +49.404.318.aacc
14:00:50 [MartijnHoutepen]
zakim, mute me
14:00:52 [Zakim]
+ +31.30.239.aadd
14:01:04 [Zakim]
MartijnHoutepen should now be muted
14:01:08 [Zakim]
14:01:13 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:01:14 [Detlev]
Zakim aacc is Detlev
14:01:14 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne, MartijnHoutepen (muted), +49.404.318.aacc, +31.30.239.aadd, Shadi
14:01:16 [Zakim]
+ +1.301.975.aaee
14:01:42 [korn]
korn has joined #eval
14:01:56 [Detlev]
Zakim, aacc is Detlev
14:01:56 [Zakim]
+Detlev; got it
14:01:57 [ericvelleman]
14:02:21 [Detlev]
Zakim, who is on the phone?
14:02:21 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne, MartijnHoutepen (muted), Detlev, +31.30.239.aadd, Shadi, +1.301.975.aaee
14:02:32 [ericvelleman]
Zakim, aadd is Eric
14:02:36 [Zakim]
+Eric; got it
14:03:04 [Liz]
zakim, aaee is Liz
14:03:14 [Kathy]
Kathy has joined #eval
14:03:20 [Zakim]
14:03:23 [korn]
Zakim, Oracle has Peter_Korn
14:03:28 [Zakim]
+Liz; got it
14:03:42 [Zakim]
14:03:42 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:03:52 [Zakim]
+Peter_Korn; got it
14:03:55 [kerstin]
kerstin has joined #eval
14:03:58 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:04:04 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:04:21 [vivienne]
no cheap shots about my printer!
14:04:24 [Kathy]
zakim, mute me
14:04:34 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:04:39 [vivienne]
I can do it Shadi
14:04:42 [Detlev]
I dont mind scribing
14:04:58 [Detlev]
ack me
14:05:00 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:05:01 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:05:06 [Zakim]
sorry, kerstin, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
14:05:06 [kerstin]
it seems zakimm doesn't know me
14:05:11 [Zakim]
+ +1.978.443.aaff
14:05:23 [Detlev]
zakim, mute me
14:05:23 [Sarah_Swierenga]
Sarah_Swierenga has joined #eval
14:05:26 [Zakim]
sorry, Kathy, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you
14:05:38 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:05:50 [kerstin]
I'm unidentified too
14:06:02 [Kathy]
zakim aaff is me
14:06:07 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), MartijnHoutepen (muted), Detlev, Eric, Shadi, Liz, [Oracle], [IPcaller], +1.978.443.aaff
14:06:13 [kerstin]
14:06:15 [Zakim]
[Oracle] has Peter_Korn
14:06:21 [Sarah_Swierenga]
hello everyone
14:06:27 [shadi]
scribe: shadi
14:06:28 [kerstin]
zakim, ipcaller is me
14:06:32 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:06:35 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:06:47 [ericvelleman]
14:06:51 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), MartijnHoutepen (muted), Detlev (muted), Eric, Shadi, Liz, [Oracle], [IPcaller], +1.978.443.aaff
14:06:58 [Zakim]
[Oracle] has Peter_Korn
14:07:01 [shadi]
14:07:12 [Zakim]
+ +1.517.432.aagg
14:07:15 [kerstin]
zakim, [IPcaller] is me
14:07:28 [Kathy]
zakim, aaff is me
14:07:29 [shadi]
updated Editor Draft:
14:07:33 [Zakim]
+kerstin; got it
14:07:38 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:07:39 [ericvelleman]
14:07:39 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:07:56 [Zakim]
+ +1.517.353.aahh
14:08:00 [shadi]
14:08:05 [Zakim]
sorry, kerstin, I do not recognize a party named '[IPcaller]'
14:08:12 [Zakim]
+Kathy; got it
14:08:16 [Zakim]
kerstin should now be muted
14:08:18 [shadi]
zakim, ipcaller is Kerston
14:08:24 [ericvelleman]
14:08:28 [Zakim]
sorry, shadi, I do not recognize a party named 'ipcaller'
14:08:36 [shadi]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:08:38 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), MartijnHoutepen (muted), Detlev (muted), Eric, Shadi (muted), Liz, [Oracle], kerstin (muted), Kathy, +1.517.432.aagg, +1.517.353.aahh
14:08:42 [Zakim]
[Oracle] has Peter_Korn
14:08:49 [vivienne]
14:08:53 [kerstin]
zakim is a bit slow today
14:08:59 [vivienne]
ack me
14:08:59 [ericvelleman]
14:09:21 [shadi]
VC: sent a couple of grammar and typos
14:09:30 [shadi]
...but otherwise looks fabulous
14:09:39 [shadi]
...still things to discuss later
14:09:48 [shadi]
...but good to put out for comments
14:09:53 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:09:53 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:09:54 [shadi]
...looking really good
14:10:10 [shadi]
EV: have things in the list to discuss
14:10:19 [shadi]
...also some things came in today
14:10:36 [shadi]
...will discuss after publication
14:10:47 [ericvelleman]
14:10:53 [shadi]
Topic: Updated Editor Draft
14:10:58 [shadi]
Topic: Comments
14:11:09 [ericvelleman]
14:11:52 [shadi]
EV: changes title to include "According to this Methodology"
14:12:09 [shadi]
...also added to the "Methodology Requirement 5.b"
14:12:51 [shadi]
...also no mention of comitment to repair now
14:12:58 [Detlev]
14:13:02 [korn]
14:13:23 [ericvelleman]
14:13:26 [Detlev]
ack me
14:13:26 [shadi]
...also added a review note to get more input on this section
14:14:02 [shadi]
DF: maybe good compromise but slighly confusing to talk about accessibility statements and conformance claims
14:14:34 [shadi]
...maybe the only difference is that we don't evaluate all pages
14:14:51 [shadi]
...think OK to go out for now but not very clear right now
14:15:04 [shadi]
EV: have an issue on the sampling section
14:15:10 [shadi]
...may impact this section too
14:15:26 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:15:26 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:15:26 [shadi]
...will be good to see what we get from the public
14:15:34 [Detlev]
ack me
14:15:37 [shadi]
ack me
14:15:38 [MartijnHoutepen]
me too
14:15:45 [korn]
Eric - others can hear me...
14:15:47 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:15:47 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:15:49 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:15:49 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:16:28 [shadi]
PK: may have a suggestion
14:16:30 [korn]
Prefer "Provide an Accessibility Evaluation Conformance Statement"
14:16:48 [shadi]
...but OK to go out for now if needed
14:17:14 [MoeKraft]
MoeKraft has joined #eval
14:17:38 [korn]
Or: "Provide an Accessibility Evaluation Statement"
14:17:43 [shadi]
EV: WCAG WG was rather sceptical to the use of the word conformance
14:17:46 [shadi]
14:17:55 [Detlev]
better that version! without conformance
14:17:55 [shadi]
14:18:11 [shadi]
PK: does not include "conformance"
14:18:15 [Zakim]
+ +1.978.899.aaii
14:18:18 [korn]
14:18:25 [ericvelleman]
14:18:28 [MoeKraft]
Zakim, aaii is MoeKraft
14:18:28 [Zakim]
+MoeKraft; got it
14:18:36 [shadi]
...accessibility *evaluation* statement rather than accessibility statement
14:18:41 [shadi]
ack me
14:18:55 [Detlev]
Shadi; likes it
14:19:48 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:19:50 [Detlev]
Shadi: Since Peter was OK for not changing before the thing goes out as draft, it may stay? (not sure...)
14:19:51 [Kathy]
14:19:54 [vivienne]
14:19:57 [Liz]
14:19:58 [Detlev]
14:20:04 [Sarah_Swierenga]
14:20:06 [Mike]
14:20:06 [shadi]
[[Provide Accessibility Evaluation Statement]]
14:20:18 [shadi]
[[Provide an Accessibility Evaluation Statement (Optional)]]
14:20:23 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:20:23 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:20:25 [ericvelleman]
14:20:43 [Detlev]
14:21:08 [shadi]
RESOLVED: Provide an Accessibility Evaluation Statement (Optional)
14:21:52 [shadi]
PK: also need to change throughout the document accordingly
14:22:54 [Detlev]
looks ok
14:23:01 [shadi]
Topic: Section 5
14:23:04 [Kathy]
14:23:06 [shadi]
14:23:13 [Sarah_Swierenga]
14:23:16 [ericvelleman]
14:23:16 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:23:17 [MoeKraft]
14:23:18 [vivienne]
14:23:23 [Mike]
14:23:24 [Liz]
14:23:31 [shadi]
EV: changed title of section 5 to remove "conformance" to avoid ambuity with WCAG conformance
14:23:40 [korn]
14:24:00 [Detlev]
zakim, who is on the phone?
14:24:00 [Zakim]
On the phone I see vivienne (muted), MartijnHoutepen (muted), Detlev (muted), Eric, Shadi (muted), Liz, [Oracle], kerstin (muted), Kathy, +1.517.432.aagg, +1.517.353.aahh, MoeKraft
14:24:03 [Zakim]
[Oracle] has Peter_Korn
14:24:17 [korn]
"The evaluation carried out conforms with this methodology as per 5. Conformance with this Methodology;" should then become: "The evaluation carried out IS BASED ON this methodology as per 5. APPLICATION OF this Methodology;"
14:24:24 [ericvelleman]
14:24:33 [korn]
This is the first bullet under 3.5.2 Step 5.b
14:25:02 [shadi]
ack me
14:25:20 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:25:20 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:25:35 [Tim]
Tim has joined #eval
14:26:03 [shadi]
14:26:24 [korn]
14:26:24 [shadi]
PK: need to remove "conform" from the first bullet in section 3.5.2
14:26:24 [Detlev]
yes, makes sense
14:26:26 [shadi]
ack me
14:27:06 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:27:06 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:27:16 [ericvelleman]
14:27:33 [ericvelleman]
14:27:35 [shadi]
SAZ: editor discretion on term for "conforms" - maybe not "based on"
14:27:48 [shadi]
PK: fine, just need to remove "conforms"
14:27:57 [shadi]
Topic: WCAG WG comments
14:28:34 [shadi]
EV: changed "Requirements" to "Methodology Requirements"
14:28:54 [shadi]
...framing it to this methodology
14:29:07 [shadi]
...changes to Abstract and Introduction
14:29:17 [Zakim]
14:29:27 [shadi]
...tried to clarify what the methodology is and isn't more precisely
14:30:01 [shadi]
...added links to the issues and disposition of comments from review notes
14:30:14 [shadi]
...tried to get the framing more in shape
14:30:27 [ericvelleman]
14:30:29 [Detlev]
14:30:36 [Kathy]
14:30:38 [vivienne]
14:30:41 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:30:45 [Tim]
14:30:48 [Liz]
14:31:38 [Sarah_Swierenga]
14:31:47 [shadi]
EV: need to discuss comments #6 and #9 with commenter
14:32:14 [shadi]
...#6 is about requirements that refer to other sub-requirements
14:32:32 [shadi]
...would like to explore this in more detail later on
14:32:53 [Detlev]
14:32:59 [Detlev]
ack me
14:33:26 [shadi]
DF: the second diagram doesn't seem to add much
14:33:41 [shadi]
...doesn't harm either but not as helpful as the first
14:33:49 [vivienne]
14:33:51 [shadi]
14:33:58 [vivienne]
ack me
14:34:05 [shadi]
EV: difficult to describe because of that!
14:34:21 [shadi]
VC: not sure need any arrows
14:34:30 [shadi]
...could just show the sequence
14:34:51 [shadi]
EV: the idea was to show that it isn't necessarily a sequence but some level of iteratively
14:35:12 [shadi]
VC: how about life-cycle diagram
14:35:31 [shadi]
DF: mostly linear with some exceptions
14:35:45 [shadi]
...but would you go back between steps 4 and 5?
14:36:04 [shadi]
...think either need to identify what the arrows mean or get rid of them
14:36:16 [shadi]
VC: how about a flowchart?
14:36:28 [shadi]
EV: like the idea
14:36:37 [shadi]
14:36:54 [vivienne]
zakim, mute me
14:36:54 [Zakim]
vivienne should now be muted
14:36:59 [shadi]
...only initial diagram
14:37:06 [shadi]
...could improve it later
14:37:13 [shadi]
ack me
14:38:04 [Detlev]
Shadi: Commenting on diagram - diagram meets its purpos of triggering discussion, is just a first draft to be improved upon
14:38:31 [Detlev]
Shadi: finds comments useful - WCAG WG also suggested a workflow diagram
14:38:57 [Detlev]
Shadi: if anyone wants to imprtove of it visually, feel invited to contribute
14:39:03 [Kathy]
I can work on that
14:39:05 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:39:05 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:39:11 [Detlev]
Shadi: the aim is just to give an overview
14:39:21 [Sarah_Swierenga]
fine with draft diagram for now +1 - I think it's important to have a visual here to draw attention to the process.
14:39:23 [shadi]
KW: I can take a first stab at that
14:39:43 [shadi]
ACTION: Kathy to work on workflow diagram for Section 3
14:39:43 [trackbot]
Sorry, couldn't find user - Kathy
14:40:10 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:40:10 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:40:16 [Kathy]
kwahlbin i think
14:40:28 [shadi]
ACTION: kwahlbin to work on workflow diagram for Section 3
14:40:29 [trackbot]
Created ACTION-5 - Work on workflow diagram for Section 3 [on Kathleen Wahlbin - due 2012-09-13].
14:40:43 [Detlev]
14:40:59 [shadi]
EV: other comments on this September 4 version?
14:41:03 [Sarah_Swierenga]
This latest draft reads well!
14:41:15 [ericvelleman]
14:41:18 [Detlev]
ack me
14:41:39 [kerstin]
14:41:40 [shadi]
DF: want to take up the numbering issue
14:41:55 [shadi]
...simulataneous numbers and letters
14:42:16 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
14:42:16 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
14:42:16 [kerstin]
zakim, unmute me
14:42:17 [Zakim]
kerstin should no longer be muted
14:42:49 [kerstin]
it's me
14:42:50 [shadi]
14:43:00 [shadi]
ack me
14:43:00 [kerstin]
I have some issues, I'll send via mail
14:43:10 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:43:10 [Zakim]
kerstin should now be muted
14:43:19 [kerstin]
ok, i type
14:43:30 [shadi]
14:43:51 [Detlev]
Shadi: Open new issue: numbering
14:44:02 [kerstin]
I don't agree with calling it "standardized approach", think approach is ok
14:44:37 [Detlev]
Shadi: standardized approach was removed
14:44:41 [kerstin]
I'm also still unsatisfied with not adressing quality criteria
14:45:06 [kerstin]
14:45:16 [kerstin]
14:45:43 [vivienne]
14:45:45 [Detlev]
Shadi:can be changed to common approach
14:45:47 [Detlev]
14:45:47 [Liz]
14:45:49 [Sarah_Swierenga]
14:45:50 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:45:52 [Kathy]
14:45:55 [kerstin]
common is not ok. it could be "common" if someone uses it
14:46:09 [shadi]
[[section 1.2: change "standardized approach" to "common approach"]]
14:46:22 [shadi]
SS: common to whom?
14:46:27 [korn]
+1 to "Systematic"
14:46:27 [shadi]
14:46:38 [Detlev]
systematic sounds OK
14:46:40 [Tim]
I like systematic
14:46:47 [shadi]
...consistency angle of "standardized" is nice
14:46:59 [kerstin]
I would agree with systematic
14:47:00 [Liz]
Unified approach
14:47:46 [shadi]
PK: slight plurality for "systematic"?
14:48:01 [Sarah_Swierenga]
+1 systematic
14:48:06 [shadi]
SS: sounds ok
14:48:08 [Detlev]
fine for me
14:48:10 [Liz]
14:48:10 [kerstin]
+1 systematic
14:48:11 [Kathy]
14:48:11 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:48:12 [MoeKraft]
14:48:12 [ericvelleman]
14:48:12 [vivienne]
14:48:32 [Tim]
14:48:36 [shadi]
RESOLVED: change "standardized approach" to "systematic approach"
14:48:47 [shadi]
ack me
14:49:07 [Detlev]
Shadi: Theere was the issue of goodnesds criteria that Kerstin raised
14:49:11 [Sarah_Swierenga]
14:49:22 [shadi]
14:49:57 [Detlev]
Shadi: we have opened an issue on goodness criteria and objectivity
14:50:22 [shadi]
EV: several open things
14:50:38 [shadi]
...goodness criteria, sampling approach, ...
14:51:00 [kerstin]
zakim, mute me
14:51:00 [Zakim]
kerstin was already muted, kerstin
14:51:19 [shadi] come back to after publication
14:51:23 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:51:23 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:51:35 [shadi]
...will be discussing some during the review period too
14:51:44 [shadi]
ack me
14:51:52 [kerstin]
14:52:11 [Detlev]
Shadi: yes, ask, should bwe explicit in the minutes
14:52:12 [shadi]
Topic: Agreement for Publication as a Working Draft
14:52:19 [vivienne]
14:52:20 [Liz]
14:52:20 [Sarah_Swierenga]
+1 for publication
14:52:22 [Detlev]
yes, go ahead
14:52:23 [ericvelleman]
14:52:24 [MartijnHoutepen]
14:52:25 [Tim]
14:52:27 [Kathy]
yes, fine
14:52:30 [MoeKraft]
14:52:47 [Detlev]
Eric, may be ask for objections?
14:52:51 [shadi]
14:52:56 [korn]
+1 for publication
14:53:03 [kerstin]
want to think about it till tomorrow
14:53:10 [Mike]
+1 for publication
14:53:29 [shadi]
RESOLVED: Eval TF agrees with publishing the dociment as an updated WD
14:53:44 [shadi]
RESOLVED: Eval TF agrees with publishing the dociment as an updated WD (pending the discussed changes)
14:53:56 [shadi]
14:54:07 [shadi]
ack me
14:54:36 [Detlev]
Shadi: TF is not a decision-making body, the WCAG WG has to approve it
14:54:49 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
14:54:49 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
14:55:03 [shadi]
EV: need approval from WCAG WG
14:55:05 [ericvelleman]
14:55:12 [shadi]
...then all the discussions will start
14:55:28 [shadi]
EV: thank you all for attending
14:55:33 [Detlev]
good luck in the call!
14:55:35 [MartijnHoutepen]
zakim, unmute me
14:55:35 [Zakim]
MartijnHoutepen should no longer be muted
14:55:35 [Kathy]
14:55:37 [Zakim]
14:55:38 [kerstin]
ok, by, and sorry for inconvenience
14:55:38 [Detlev]
14:55:38 [Zakim]
14:55:39 [vivienne]
bye now
14:55:40 [Zakim]
14:55:40 [Zakim]
14:55:43 [Zakim]
14:55:45 [Zakim]
14:55:46 [korn]
korn has left #eval
14:55:46 [Zakim]
14:55:46 [Zakim]
14:55:48 [Zakim]
14:55:49 [Zakim]
14:55:51 [Zakim]
14:55:53 [MartijnHoutepen]
MartijnHoutepen has left #eval
14:56:07 [Liz]
14:56:22 [ericvelleman]
ericvelleman has left #eval
14:57:20 [shadi]
trackbot, end meeting
14:57:20 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
14:57:20 [Zakim]
As of this point the attendees have been vivienne, +1.301.975.aaaa, +31.30.239.aabb, MartijnHoutepen, +49.404.318.aacc, +31.30.239.aadd, Shadi, +1.301.975.aaee, Detlev, Eric, Liz,
14:57:24 [Zakim]
... Peter_Korn, +1.978.443.aaff, +1.517.432.aagg, kerstin, +1.517.353.aahh, Kathy, +1.978.899.aaii, MoeKraft, Tim_Boland
14:57:28 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:57:28 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
14:57:29 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
14:57:29 [RRSAgent]
I see 2 open action items saved in :
14:57:29 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: Kathy to work on workflow diagram for Section 3 [1]
14:57:29 [RRSAgent]
recorded in
14:57:29 [RRSAgent]
ACTION: kwahlbin to work on workflow diagram for Section 3 [2]
14:57:29 [RRSAgent]
recorded in