W3C

- DRAFT -

WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference

07 Jun 2013

See also: IRC log

Attendees

Present
David_MacDonald, [Microsoft], Peter_Korn, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Judy, Janina_Sajka, Loic, Mike_Pluke
Regrets
Chair
SV_MEETING_CHAIR
Scribe
janina

Contents


<trackbot> Date: 07 June 2013

<korn> See https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/edits-for-michael-post-2nd-public-draft for status

<korn> Please all also take a look at https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/to-do-before-3rd-final-public-draft

<korn> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/final_issues_7Jun/results

<scribe> scribe: janina

mp: Process note has general agreement
... Any objection to unanimous consent?

[crickets]

mp: Accepted
... Next is changes of context ....
... We have only a minor editorial correction ...

pk: Our notes are always outside the white-box. So is OK

mp: We have been consistent.
... White-box is reserved for WCAG content.
... Any objection to the convention re white-box content?

[crickets]

<korn> Loic - see 2.1.2 for example

<korn> Also 2.2.2

Loic: A nit perhaps, if we say "with our edit the text would read ..."

pk: Suggest this be taken up on Editor's List

mp: So deferred to the Editors.
... Any objection on "change of content?"

[crickets]

mp: Agreed
... For 3.2.1 on focus ...
... Agreement on survey, any additional considerations?
... Any objection?

[crickets]

mp: Agreed
... Next is changes to the Introduction
... We all seem happy with Andi's edits
... Peter proposed a para to be deleted,
... Any objection to intro as written by Andi, with the para beginning "Later drafts of this document ..." removed

[crickets]

mp: Agreed

pk: Wait, ... ... ...
... Para I suggested, hmmm, where is it?
... Just want to mark it as strike-through and highlight in red ....
... OK

mp: Agreed
... Final is changes to the title
... Survey had no objection
... Any objection now?

[crickets]

mp: Agreed

DRAFT RESOLUTION: alex_ All resolutions in this survey are approvedwith editorial changes as noted in the minutes above.

RESOLUTION: All resolutions in this survey are approved with the editorial changes as noted in the minutes above.

Discuss the New glossary term "accessibility services of software and assistive technology" survey

<korn> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/accessibility_services/results

<Mike_P> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/accessibility_services/results

mp: Two questions remaining
... Great unanimity on the first, but a diagression on services

gv: Agree what we discuss is best understood as a feature, not a service

<Mike_P> +q

GV: OS have different roles, i.e. we should be clear to whom what is exposed
... So OS services expose to AT features

<korn> http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#atdef

pk: Note 3 may already cover this
... On second thought, too tied to user agents

<korn> services provided by an operating system, user agent, or other platform software that enable non-Web documents or software to expose information about the user interface and events to assistive technologies or accessibility features of software

gv: Good for me

mp: I'm also OK
... Any counterview?
... Any objections?

[crickets]

mp: Agreed

DRAFT RESOLUTION: Group agrees to accept the revised 3a on the Wiki page

RESOLUTION: Group agrees to accept the revised 3a on the Wiki page

mp: One more, edits to remaining terms -- other terms

gv: So 3b is moot

pk: Believe we've also resolved GV's other comments common to both

mp: Noting Loic points out two notes re "programatically determined" -- not the same

pk: Did I edit one and not the other? Hmmm

mp: Suggest we concentrate on the note in red

pk: Do we need the parenthetical note above?
... Suggest dropping the parenthetical remark.

<korn> Note: Software typically enables content to be programmatically determined through the use of <key term link>accessibility services of platform software</key term link>. Non-Web documents typically enable content to be programmatically determined through the use of accessibility services of the user agent (which is a kind of platform software).

mp: OK, agreement to remove

<greggvanderheiden> +1

<korn> Note: Software typically enables content to be programmatically determined through the use of <key term link>accessibility services of platform software</key term link>. Non-Web documents typically enable content to be programmatically determined through the use of accessibility services of the user agent.

mp: Any objection to unanimous consent to accept common terms edits as now amended in the Wiki?

pk: Includes Principal 4 and Guidelines 4.1

[crickets]

mp: Agreed

DRAFT RESOLUTION: We accept the common terms as now entered in the Wiki

RESOLUTION: We accept the common terms as now entered in the Wiki

<Loic> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/track/actions/open

Action Item Review

<Mike_P> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/track/actions/open

mp: First item, Andi believes is dealt with completely in the intro
... Believe largely an editorial matter now
... Any discussion?
... Now Action-96

action-96?

<trackbot> ACTION-96 -- Peter Korn to develop a WCAG2ICT Note to "change of context" glossary term (and/or to SC 3.2.1: On Focus) -- due 2013-05-10 -- OPEN

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/track/actions/96

pk: It's done

action-96 close

mp: Next ...

action-97?

<trackbot> ACTION-97 -- Gregg Vanderheiden to propose modification to WCAG 2.0 ERRATA for SC 1.3.1 to clarify structure wrt collections of web pages -- due 2013-05-10 -- CLOSED

<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG2ICT-TF/track/actions/97

gv: done

Decisions about Document Draft

<korn> https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/to-do-before-3rd-final-public-draft

pk: Believe we've now closed all glossary terms
... Hmmm, looking at the wrong doc!
... Judy may have some updates ...
... In the intro
... We've cleared all actions

[checking the checklist ...]

mp: I've been shadowing your iteration, Peter. Looks good.
... If Judy does edit the intro, we'll need to review that.
... Remaining changes simply need to be made, then we likely need a final approval round.
... Is there more to do in telecons?

pk: I think not.

mp: If a new intro from Judy, we may want to survey.
... If minor, perhaps not.
... If substantive, we may need a telecon to discuss.
... Then, we need a final approval.
... I'm unable next Friday

pk: I can, if need be.
... We'll need WCAG-WG approval as well

mp: Tentative telecon for Friday 14 June next
... Believe we can adjourn!

Summary of Action Items

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.138 (CVS log)
$Date: 2013-06-07 15:05:36 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.138  of Date: 2013-04-25 13:59:11  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/13/14/
Found Scribe: janina
Inferring ScribeNick: janina
Default Present: David_MacDonald, [Microsoft], Peter_Korn, Gregg_Vanderheiden, Judy, Janina_Sajka, Loic, Mike_Pluke
Present: David_MacDonald [Microsoft] Peter_Korn Gregg_Vanderheiden Judy Janina_Sajka Loic Mike_Pluke

WARNING: No meeting chair found!
You should specify the meeting chair like this:
<dbooth> Chair: dbooth

Found Date: 07 Jun 2013
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2013/06/07-wcag2ict-minutes.html
People with action items: 

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


[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]