<trackbot> Date: 22 February 2013

<andisnow> scribe: Mary_Jo_Mueller

<andisnow> scribenick: MaryJo

<Mike_P> Mike - My Mike doesn't work

Responses to comments on 1st public draft.

There is a survey out for the comments from the WCAG working group that we could cover at the end of this meeting.

Will take about 30 minutes to cover these.

M376 will be stopped at 10 so we can complete working on these edits.

We will meet for 1 hour on Friday 1 March.

M376 Comparison Survey

https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/cross-cutting-issues-and-notes/comparison-to-m376

<Mike_P> +q

The items where we think our language is better are highlighted in blue so they are easy to find.

This is in the right-hand column of the table.

There's only 1 we had come to agreement so far: 1.4.4.

<greggvanderheiden> yes very nice

Suggestion to make sure there is an explanation of why the WCAG2ICT text is preferable.

As we have been going through this, we've been settling on the language we prefer first rather than documenting an explanation.

<Mike_P> +1

<alex_> +1 for andi

<Mike_P> +q

<greggvanderheiden> Suggest that we just accept all the NO CHANGE items where Peter's analysis has already showed that they were not different ( shown as "there was no significant difference" in second last column and "no change" in last column.

<greggvanderheiden> ack

<Mike_P> +1

<Loic> +1 to what Peter has said

We can address the exact wording in the right column can be worked on as we go and we can replicate it.

<Mike_P> +q

<Mike_P> +1

For 1.4.4 we should say the difference is editorial, but explain that the WCAG2ICT language is easier to understand.

<korn> Differences only editorial.

<korn> No change. 

<korn> Rationale: WCAG2ICT language easier to understand.

<korn> -22Feb13

We are summarizing what WCAG2ICT is doing to our document and the rationale for that answer.

<korn> final 2.1.2 comment: "WCAG2ICT has note not in M376.

<korn> No change. 

<korn> Rationale: WCAG2ICT note helpful to developers.

<korn> -22Feb13."

We'll address 2.2.1 a little later because it will take some thought.

For SC 2.2.2, we have a Note 1 and a Note 2 where M376 combined in a single note. In WCAG2ICT there is a 'must' in one of the notes (because it was from WCAG) which was changed.

<greggvanderheiden> add ["replacing "page" with "non-web documents and software" ] to the end of the WCAG2ICT guidance.

<greggvanderheiden> so that it reads "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) replacing "page" with "non-web documents and software + NOTE

<greggvanderheiden> Change fist paragraph of our guidance to say "This applies directly as written, and as described in INTENT from Understanding WCAG 2.0 (above) replacing "page" with "non-web documents and software in Note 2"

<andisnow> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/W2IRESPONSES/

<andisnow> scribe: Andi_Snow-Weaver

<andisnow> scribenick: andisnow

WCAG WG edits to comment responses

RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2655

RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2653
RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2662
RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits with Loic's modification to LC-2669

<greggvanderheiden> We agree, and this is covered in the introduction of the current public force working draft dated Dec13, in the extended discussion on interpreting terms. http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-wcag2ict-20121213/

<greggvanderheiden> We agree, and this is covered in the Key Terms section (right after the introduction) of the current public task force working draft dated Dec13. http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-wcag2ict-20121213/

RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2660 changing referencing Key Terms in the public working draft rather than Introduction on the Google site.
RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2700 with additional phrase that it will appear in the next public working draft.
RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits with Loic's modification to LC-2679
RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2681 with extra spaces removed per Loic's suggestion.
RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2688
RESOLUTION: Accept WCAG WG edits to LC-2695

<BBailey> byw

This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.137  of Date: 2012/09/20 20:19:01  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/explanatio/explanation/
Succeeded: s/RESOLUTION: no change to WCAG2ICT text.//
Succeeded: s/-22Feb13//
Succeeded: s/RESOUTION/RESOLUTION/
Found Scribe: Mary_Jo_Mueller
Found ScribeNick: MaryJo
Found Scribe: Andi_Snow-Weaver
Found ScribeNick: andisnow
Scribes: Mary_Jo_Mueller, Andi_Snow-Weaver
ScribeNicks: MaryJo, andisnow

WARNING: No "Present: ... " found!
Possibly Present: Alex_Li Andi_Snow_Weaver BBailey Bruce_Bailey Gregg_Vanderheiden Janina_Sajka Judy Loic MaryJo Mary_Jo_Mueller MichaelC Michael_Cooper Microsoft Mike_P Mike_Pluke Oracle P11 P18 P22 P9 Peter Peter_Korn Rationale aaaa aabb alex_ andisnow greggvanderheiden https janina joined korn scribenick trackbot wcag2ict
You can indicate people for the Present list like this:
        <dbooth> Present: dbooth jonathan mary
        <dbooth> Present+ amy

Regrets: David_MacDonald Kiran_Kaja Shadi_Abou-Zahra
Found Date: 22 Feb 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/02/22-wcag2ict-minutes.html
People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.