IRC log of eval on 2014-01-23

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:36:37 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #eval
14:36:37 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:36:39 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, make logs world
14:36:39 [Zakim]
Zakim has joined #eval
14:36:41 [trackbot]
Zakim, this will be 3825
14:36:41 [Zakim]
ok, trackbot; I see WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM scheduled to start in 24 minutes
14:36:42 [trackbot]
Meeting: WCAG 2.0 Evaluation Methodology Task Force Teleconference
14:36:42 [trackbot]
Date: 23 January 2014
14:52:07 [Vivienne]
Vivienne has joined #eval
14:53:15 [Zakim]
WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has now started
14:53:22 [Zakim]
14:53:28 [Vivienne]
zakim, IPcaller is me
14:53:28 [Zakim]
+Vivienne; got it
14:57:49 [Zakim]
14:58:32 [ericvelleman]
ericvelleman has joined #eval
14:59:26 [agarrison]
agarrison has joined #eval
14:59:44 [agarrison]
I'm going to be a couple of minutes late...
15:00:12 [Liz]
Liz has joined #eval
15:00:58 [Zakim]
15:01:12 [Zakim]
15:01:27 [Detlev]
Detlev has joined #eval
15:02:08 [Mike_Elledge]
Mike_Elledge has joined #eval
15:02:34 [Zakim]
15:02:36 [Zakim]
15:02:37 [Zakim]
15:02:46 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
15:02:47 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
15:03:36 [Detlev]
15:04:05 [shadi]
scribe: shadi
15:04:18 [richard]
richard has joined #eval
15:04:23 [shadi]
15:04:35 [shadi]
agenda+ Follow up discussion about latest Editor Draft and DoC
15:04:46 [shadi]
agenda+ Open issues and last discussions for this version
15:04:53 [shadi]
agenda+ Test-run thoughts
15:05:03 [shadi]
agenda+ Face-to-Face Meeting at CSUN
15:05:11 [shadi]
zakim, mute me
15:05:11 [Zakim]
Shadi should now be muted
15:05:14 [MaryJo]
MaryJo has joined #eval
15:05:16 [shadi]
zakim, take up next
15:05:16 [Zakim]
agendum 1. "Follow up discussion about latest Editor Draft and DoC" taken up [from shadi]
15:05:22 [ericvelleman]
15:05:50 [Zakim]
15:05:51 [agarrison]
zakim, ipcaller is Alistair
15:05:51 [Zakim]
+Alistair; got it
15:06:10 [gavinevans]
gavinevans has joined #eval
15:06:17 [shadi]
EV: updated Editor Draft of 21 January
15:06:24 [shadi]
...treid to integrate some comments
15:07:01 [shadi]
15:07:33 [shadi]
ack me
15:08:26 [shadi]
15:08:30 [Zakim]
+ +44.179.281.aaaa
15:08:55 [ericvelleman]
15:09:18 [shadi]
...there are two disposition of comments
15:09:54 [shadi] from 26 February Working Draft
15:09:59 [shadi]
...the second from 29 November Editor Draft
15:10:51 [shadi]
...missing just a few comments to integrate
15:11:05 [shadi]
...particularly on adding a section on "responsive design"
15:11:38 [shadi]
SAZ: action on Kathy, need to check with her if she can get it in time
15:12:03 [Vivienne]
15:12:12 [shadi]
EV: otherwise need to add an editor note for review
15:12:18 [Mike_Elledge]
15:12:46 [shadi]
EV: comment #72 to add arrows from each step to step 5
15:12:46 [Detlev]
I don''t understand the issue - can you explain, Eric?
15:12:57 [shadi]
...graphic was from Kathy?
15:14:34 [shadi]
ME: need a section for responsive design?
15:14:51 [shadi]
SAZ: actually a paragraph in the list under "Particular Evaluation Contexts"
15:17:20 [shadi]
ME: could then shorten the note in section "website in multiple versions" if we have a specific section on responsive design
15:17:33 [Vivienne]
zakim, mute me
15:17:33 [Zakim]
Vivienne should now be muted
15:17:39 [shadi]
EV: need text from Kathy first
15:17:54 [shadi]
15:18:02 [MoeKraft]
MoeKraft has joined #eval
15:18:03 [Zakim]
+ +1.978.899.aabb
15:18:13 [shadi]
ack mike
15:18:21 [shadi]
ack viv
15:18:22 [Vivienne]
zakim, ack me
15:18:22 [Zakim]
I see no one on the speaker queue
15:18:28 [MoeKraft]
Zakim , aabb is MoeKraft
15:18:38 [Vivienne]
zakim, mute me
15:18:38 [Zakim]
Vivienne should now be muted
15:18:57 [Detlev]
15:19:36 [Detlev]
ack me
15:19:53 [shadi]
EV: back to comment #72, everyone OK with an arrow from each step to step 5?
15:20:05 [shadi]
DF: diagram already quite complex
15:20:18 [shadi]
...will that really make it better?
15:20:46 [shadi]
EV: agree but more precise
15:20:53 [shadi]
DF: quite self-explanatory
15:21:02 [shadi]
...but the important message is the feedback loop
15:21:14 [shadi]
...not the fact that you need reporting all the time
15:21:25 [Vivienne]
I'm not too worried about it
15:21:31 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
15:21:31 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
15:21:57 [Detlev]
leave as is
15:22:02 [ericvelleman]
15:22:07 [agarrison]
15:22:12 [Mike_Elledge]
-1 (keep the same)
15:22:14 [MaryJo]
15:22:19 [Liz]
Leave as is
15:22:51 [shadi]
[poll on making the change of adding arrows above]
15:23:09 [shadi]
RESOLUTION: keep it as-is in the upcoming draft for more discussion
15:25:10 [Mike_Elledge]
15:25:43 [Zakim]
15:26:24 [MaryJo]
keep as is, lists of one are not optimal.
15:26:27 [Zakim]
15:27:15 [ericvelleman]
15:28:06 [Detlev]
Should be "Aggregated Score" not "Aggregation Score"
15:28:21 [shadi]
EV: had agreed to drop "Per Instance" score approach
15:28:36 [shadi]
...also dropped "Web Web Page" scoring
15:28:53 [shadi]
...and renamed to "Aggregated Score" to make clearer
15:28:54 [shadi]
15:28:55 [Detlev]
15:29:00 [shadi]
q- later
15:29:05 [shadi]
q- mike
15:29:07 [Detlev]
ack me
15:29:33 [Zakim]
15:29:46 [ericvelleman]
15:30:31 [shadi]
DF: do we remove "Per Web Page" score as well?
15:30:52 [shadi]
...if one SC is missed on one page gets reflected highly
15:31:09 [shadi]
ack me
15:31:54 [Detlev]
Zakim, mute me
15:31:54 [Zakim]
Detlev should now be muted
15:32:13 [MaryJo]
15:32:42 [Detlev]
per page would work fine for me
15:33:03 [shadi]
SAZ: agreed on "Per Web Page" than "Per Website"
15:33:36 [shadi]
...also need to discuss opening up to other scoring approaches
15:34:20 [shadi]
MJ: think "Per Website" makes more sense
15:36:32 [Detlev]
15:36:44 [Detlev]
ack me
15:37:05 [shadi]
[SAZ explains "Per Web Page" vs "Per Website"]
15:37:34 [shadi]
DF: approach of calculating over all pages is what we do
15:37:37 [gavinevans]
15:37:54 [shadi]
...but some may argue that this could raise discussion
15:38:02 [shadi]
ack mary
15:39:18 [shadi]
..."Per Website" loses quantitative aspects
15:40:01 [shadi]
EV: in The Netherlands it is done the other way around
15:40:27 [shadi]
DF: "Per Web Page" can mask issues, like CAPTCHA that is critical
15:41:12 [shadi]
..."Per Website" is more sensitive and forces people to look at the issues more closely
15:41:31 [shadi]
...people can also add their own scores approach on top
15:41:54 [shadi]
15:41:54 [shadi]
15:42:39 [Detlev]
hello, can of worms,,
15:42:51 [shadi]
GE: maybe could come up with an approach to measure the aggregate score
15:42:55 [Vivienne]
15:43:12 [shadi] multiply certain types of issues with a factor
15:43:17 [shadi]
ack gavin
15:43:20 [shadi]
q- later
15:44:23 [shadi]
...often get asked to provide a score for organizations
15:45:32 [Vivienne]
zakim, ack me
15:45:32 [Zakim]
unmuting Vivienne
15:45:33 [Zakim]
I see shadi on the speaker queue
15:46:06 [shadi]
VC: difference between WCAG 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 in the level assignment
15:46:23 [shadi]
...that has impact on scoring
15:46:52 [shadi]
...gets into controversy
15:47:37 [shadi]
GE: more for research on analyzing different websites that an individual website
15:48:52 [MoeKraft]
15:50:07 [shadi]
ack me
15:50:29 [shadi]
SAZ: sophisticated scoring gets very complex and controversial
15:51:16 [shadi]
...but intent is to communicate improvement over time
15:51:50 [shadi]
..."Per Website" better communicates progress but can also cascade serious issues
15:51:55 [Detlev]
15:52:18 [shadi]
MK: should add disclaimer that there is no widely recognized scoring mechanism
15:52:23 [shadi]
ack moe
15:52:36 [Detlev]
ack me
15:52:39 [shadi]
EV: have very tentative text
15:53:41 [shadi]
DF: often have incidental issues that could have significant effect
15:54:38 [shadi]
...could be a systemic pattern but still has little impact on website after all
15:55:49 [Vivienne]
I'd vote to add the other back in and have 2 choices
15:55:54 [Detlev]
15:56:10 [Detlev]
agree with Vivienne to have both in
15:56:20 [Liz]
both in
15:57:00 [gavinevans]
both in
15:57:03 [MoeKraft]
keep both
15:57:06 [Detlev]
Rationale: having both in will gneerate more helpful comments
15:57:12 [shadi]
SAZ: add "Per Website" back in and move discussion to next publication
15:57:37 [shadi]
RESOLUTION: add "Per Website" back in and move discussion to next publication
15:57:54 [shadi]
15:58:07 [shadi]
zakim, take up agendum 4
15:58:07 [Zakim]
agendum 4. "Face-to-Face Meeting at CSUN" taken up [from shadi]
16:00:56 [Detlev]
16:01:00 [Detlev]
I mena yes
16:01:13 [Detlev]
16:01:15 [Vivienne]
goodnight all.
16:01:20 [Liz]
16:01:20 [agarrison]
16:01:24 [Zakim]
16:01:25 [Zakim]
16:01:26 [Zakim]
16:01:27 [ericvelleman]
ericvelleman has left #eval
16:01:29 [Zakim]
16:01:30 [Zakim]
- +44.179.281.aaaa
16:01:30 [gavinevans]
16:01:33 [Zakim]
16:01:34 [Zakim]
16:01:36 [gavinevans]
gavinevans has left #eval
16:01:45 [Zakim]
16:02:03 [Zakim]
- +1.978.899.aabb
16:02:04 [Zakim]
WAI_ERTWG(Eval TF)10:00AM has ended
16:02:04 [Zakim]
Attendees were Vivienne, Shadi, Mary_Jo_Mueller, Liz, Detlev, EricVelleman, Mike_Elledge, Alistair, +44.179.281.aaaa, +1.978.899.aabb
16:07:21 [shadi]
trackbot, end meeting
16:07:21 [trackbot]
Zakim, list attendees
16:07:21 [Zakim]
sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
16:07:29 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, please draft minutes
16:07:29 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate trackbot
16:07:30 [trackbot]
RRSAgent, bye
16:07:30 [RRSAgent]
I see no action items