See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 22 April 2015
<janina> agenda: this
<scribe> scribe: fesch
js: organizational discussions - 2 minutes
gz: I am not getting all messages
from the mailing lists
... anyone else missing emails?
jf: I have difficulty logging in sometimes
jn: I get the emails, I get... don't know what is missing
js: are spam filters grabbing emails? I had to white list everything from W3C
gz: maybe my spam filter
js: waiting on minutes from two weeks ago, Gregg still needs a chance to filter
RESOLUTION: publish minutes from last week
action 1597
<MichaelC> action-1597 due 2 weeks
<trackbot> Set action-1597 Review web midi api http://www.w3.org/tr/webmidi/ due date to 2015-05-06.
action-1572
<trackbot> action-1572 -- Cynthia Shelly to Look at the possibility of using browser code for alpha transparency checking due 2014-02-11 -- due 2015-04-15 -- OPEN
<trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1572
mc: should close
<MichaelC> close action-1572
<trackbot> Closed action-1572.
<MichaelC> CSS Cascading and Inheritance Level 3
js: thoughts anyone?
jf: I agree with Michael
js: this is well established is it not?
jn: some user agents are not allowing user style sheets, which breaks user overrides
fe: can do it through the GUI
jn: chrome has removed style
sheets completely
... breaks balance of power between user and author
stylesheets
mc: not sure what will happen with CR?
jn: will keep as some browsers still implement user's stylesheet
<MichaelC> CSS Cascading and Inheritance Level 4
adds import and supports condition
js: sit on it for now, will get back into it later
none
<JF> do we have a specific date for TPAC 2015?
js: in Sapparo Japan, expect
heightened participation from folks in Asia
... do we need to participate?
... do we expect to spend face-to-face time at TPAC?
... we benefit from face-to-face time...
... End of October, who can get there?
<Gottfried> http://www.w3.org/2015/11/TPAC/
<MichaelC> 26-30 October 2015
<JF> I'm guessing a 25% for me at this time
rs: I don't know if I can go
jd: in the same boat as Rich
rs: who would we meet with?
js: HTML, webApps...
rs: aria needs an interlock with
webApps sometime
... webApps wants things added to aria so they could use
them
... different from what they wanted in the past
... I think this is why they want aria in its own WG
js: I am in favor of all those options... trying to figure out a way to do a joint task force with webApps, not always easy to do
jf: we have a week to inform, can say we have a small contingent and then we could back down, if needed
mc: that would make it hard for the meeting planners
jf: thinking that there were a couple of other things from last week, that we may need to talk in the fall
js: not short of agenda, question
is - who shows up?
... who is there, will dictate the agenda in a face-to-face
mc: 27 groups have registered to go including.... HTML, webApps, CSS
cs: I plan to be there (as part of HTML if nothing else)
mc: SVG is meeting there
js: think about whether you can
get there, let me know next week, if we have
... an estimate
mc: big discussion going on
<MichaelC> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/member-charters-review/
mc: lots of discussion on PF, one
proposal to split PF into ARIA and reveiw group
... passion on both sides... one reason to not split, brings
technical people for review
... I was asked to ask on this groups opinion on -
... whether there should be group on review and strategy and
relies on people in other groups?
rs: that doesn't address - some
people want to be free hired guns for consulting...
... ARIA is mature enough, but the other things we have ignored
what PF is doing is research like CATF and SvgA11y...
... for example SVG a11y, will be asking for extensions for
roles, where does that belong?
... what if WAI 2020 makes an extension for Cognitive?
... we have kept some research in APA, and spin off ARIA
mc: so you can see APA which does review and research?
rs: yes
cs: research group seems to be pretty academic - don't want pure academic
rs: are we going to get that type of participation? We seem to end up with academics
cs: maybe call it strategy
mc: some folks have seen research as too academic, so we would that into consideration in the future
rs: I am concerned about reaching out - we already try to do that.
js: when we looked at the matrix,
we have tried to address this, we inserted an IBMer in
CSS...
... I would like to see when people vote on splitting PF, I
would like to see who will volunteer for spec review
cs: would it be really that different if we split?
rs: no
js: who the chairs are, and whether MC is for both...
cs: not sure a split is that big a deal
<joanie> +1 To what Cynthia just said.
mc: expected I would be contact
for both groups - if indyUI does not recharter... if it does,
less clear
... I guess the Wednesday meeting would change a bit, other
calls not much
rs: I don't think a split would affect much
mc: ARIA group would be chartered in public
js: we haven't been policing that
jn: tracker stuff goes to member space
mc: when have new home page, will fix that
cs: look at Steve F list of changes...
mc: some changes are in progress, some will happen after recharter, want to discuss some
gz: would like splitting and go to the review group
cs: will apple participate?
js: apple has been doing ARIA, not spec review
cs: need more help from apple on API mapping
js: I would like to see people
speak up to what they will do
... informally we may do the same stuff
... do you want to look at what Steve F changes?
... want to make sure we don't give people conflicting
advice
... so what we are hearing, most folks don't think it will
change much
cs: but not picking up interaction
js: WAI isn't getting much funding from members
rs: IBM is in W3C primarily in WAI
cs: I am concerned that WAI isn't well funded from members
mc: my time is funded by US gov work
cs: this is a discussion we need to have, accessibility shouldn't be off in a corner
mc: used to provide flexibility
rs: does the 10% of funding that goes to WAI?
mc: there is also US gov, European....
rs: IBM contributes directly to WAI
js: good to see SAP back in W3C :)
<JF> suggest that at some level this should be an AC discussion.
js: do members have a preference?
<JF> +1 to Cyns - and I note we are now 5 minutes past end of meeting time
cs: whatever gets this done faster...
rs: would like to Judy to get others funding WAI, the funding issue bothers me
cs: strategic part is ok, spec review boring...
rrsagent draft minutes