13:26:45 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #rd
13:26:45 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-rd-irc
13:26:47 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
13:26:49 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be 7394
13:26:49 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_RDWG()9:30AM scheduled to start in 4 minutes
13:26:50 <trackbot> Meeting: Research and Development Working Group Teleconference
13:26:50 <trackbot> Date: 22 April 2015
13:27:03 <klaus> klaus has joined #rd
13:29:57 <sloandr> sloandr has joined #rd
13:30:05 <peter_thiessen> peter_thiessen has joined #rd
13:30:35 <annika> annika has joined #rd
13:33:08 <annika> zakim, code?
13:33:08 <Zakim> the conference code is 7394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), annika
13:33:34 <shadi-out> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:33:34 <Zakim> apparently Team_(rd)13:30Z has ended, shadi-out
13:33:36 <Zakim> On IRC I see annika, peter_thiessen, sloandr, klaus, RRSAgent, mhakkinen, Vivienne, Judy, shadi-out, Zakim, trackbot
13:33:45 <shadi-out> zakim, this is rd
13:33:45 <Zakim> ok, shadi-out; that matches WAI_RDWG()9:30AM
13:33:48 <shadi-out> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:33:48 <Zakim> On the phone I see [IPcaller], ??P31, ??P33, [IPcaller.a], [IPcaller.aa], +1.609.734.aaaa
13:33:55 <peter_thiessen> Have you tried turning it off and on again? :)
13:33:57 <Vivienne> zakimk IPcaller is me
13:34:08 <shadi-out> zakim, ipcaller is Vivienne
13:34:08 <Zakim> +Vivienne; got it
13:34:09 <Vivienne> zakim, IPcaller is me
13:34:09 <Zakim> sorry, Vivienne, I do not recognize a party named 'IPcaller'
13:34:17 <Zakim> -??P33
13:34:24 <shadi-out> zakim, aaaa is mhakkinen
13:34:24 <Zakim> +mhakkinen; got it
13:34:29 <Vivienne> zakim, IPcaller is me
13:34:29 <Zakim> sorry, Vivienne, I do not recognize a party named 'IPcaller'
13:34:33 <Zakim> +??P33
13:34:43 <annika> zakim, ??P33 is me
13:34:43 <Zakim> +annika; got it
13:35:18 <sloandr> zakim, IPcaller.aa is me
13:35:18 <Zakim> +sloandr; got it
13:35:32 <shadi-out> zakim, who is on the phone?
13:35:32 <Zakim> On the phone I see Vivienne, ??P31, [IPcaller.a], sloandr, mhakkinen, annika
13:36:04 <sloandr> q-
13:36:16 <shadi-out> q- ipcaller.aa
13:36:18 <Zakim> -[IPcaller.a]
13:36:32 <shadi-out> queue=
13:36:58 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
13:37:10 <peter_thiessen> zakim, IPcaller is me
13:37:10 <Zakim> +peter_thiessen; got it
13:37:32 <annika> zakim, mute me
13:37:32 <Zakim> annika should now be muted
13:37:38 <klaus> zakim, ??31 is me
13:37:39 <Zakim> sorry, klaus, I do not recognize a party named '??31'
13:38:00 <klaus> zakim, ??P31 is me
13:38:00 <Zakim> +klaus; got it
13:38:30 <mhakkinen> http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/charter4
13:38:44 <mhakkinen> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/47076/chart/results?view=compact
13:39:51 <Vivienne> scribe: vivienne
13:39:55 <Vivienne> regrets: none
13:40:20 <Vivienne> Will look at the table of the responses and walk through them
13:42:09 <Vivienne> Judy's comment is a wording change to last sentence
13:43:17 <Vivienne> Mark: Klaus statement about re-working second sentence.
13:43:20 <sloandr> q+
13:44:23 <Vivienne> DS: secnd sentence talks about 'filling gaps' is overly ambitious - modify to 'identy strategies to filling these gaps' or similar.  We can't always fill the gaps.
13:44:56 <Vivienne> MH: missed the comment about filling gaps, will amend this
13:45:06 <sloandr> zakim, ack me
13:45:06 <Zakim> I see no one on the speaker queue
13:45:43 <Vivienne> DS proposal is "identify strategies to fill gaps"
13:46:03 <sloandr> second sentence suggestion? RDWG works within W3C and externally with the accessibility research community to develop strategies for prioritising work to fill these gaps
13:48:13 <Vivienne> MH: take David's second suggestion and work with that
13:49:27 <mhakkinen> RDWG works within W3C and externally with the accessibility research community to develop strategies for prioritising and undertaking work, when possible, to fill these gaps.
13:50:29 <shadi-out> [[maybe "address" or "help address" instead of "fill"?]]
13:51:17 <mhakkinen> RDWG works within W3C and externally with the accessibility research community to develop strategies to address these gaps.
13:51:50 <Vivienne> please put a +1 for adopting above
13:51:51 <Vivienne> +1
13:51:52 <annika> +1
13:51:53 <peter_thiessen> +1
13:51:54 <klaus> +1
13:51:55 <sloandr> +1
13:52:02 <mhakkinen> +1
13:52:04 <shadi-out> +1
13:52:52 <Vivienne> MH: Klaus is more needed?
13:53:01 <Vivienne> Klaus: well-covered now
13:53:20 <Vivienne> Klaus: sentence is agreed now
13:54:09 <sloandr> q+
13:55:42 <Vivienne> Scope: MH reviewed comments in survey
13:58:18 <annika> q+
13:58:53 <Vivienne> DS: clarification on comment about clearing huse - also refers to Annika's comment.  We would be creating a clearing house as there isn't one already. Agree with Annika as there is an opportunity to list those people who are tackling different research areas. Helps with the gap-filling challenge.  RDWG can be a connection between current research questins and the people who are working on them
13:59:33 <sloandr> zakim, ack me
13:59:33 <Zakim> I see annika on the speaker queue
13:59:34 <Vivienne> DS: perhaps add a comment about what the clearing house concept would look like - perhaps change the word
14:00:11 <Vivienne> MH: it is in the scope on researchers/research opportunities - could put notes in the deliverables section about this
14:00:20 <annika> ack me
14:01:08 <Vivienne> AN: to clarify comment on researchers' names.  We are not doing this at the moment, and need to decide if we want to take this on.  If we aren't taking this on, shouldn't refer to it.
14:01:43 <Vivienne> MH: could be in the re-chartering in the future.  In work we should be listing researchers who can be contacted for further information.
14:01:46 <annika> zakim, mute me
14:01:47 <Zakim> annika should now be muted
14:02:34 <Vivienne> MH: Judy's comments are editorial/wordsmithing.  Are there other scope comments to be made here?  Should we make the scope sound less ambitious.
14:02:54 <Judy> zakim, code?
14:02:54 <Zakim> the conference code is 7394 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), Judy
14:03:02 <Vivienne> We shouldn't put in thngs we can't do within the 18 mnths
14:03:05 <Zakim> +Judy
14:03:21 <Judy> zakim, who's on the phone?
14:03:21 <Zakim> On the phone I see Vivienne, klaus, sloandr, mhakkinen, annika (muted), peter_thiessen, Judy
14:04:11 <Vivienne> MH: changes to Charter will get posted in next day
14:04:42 <Vivienne> Judy: will be sending out updated snapshots to AC commenters - hope to include a link to the updated charter
14:05:37 <Vivienne> MH: concern expressed is potential putting something down in scope that is overly ambitious.  Judy's suggestion of 'brief' in frnt of note
14:05:46 <Judy> s/AC commenters/AC commenters later today/
14:06:06 <Vivienne> MH: notes will be WG notes and not W3C notes
14:06:41 <Vivienne> Judy: notes may be something that would be too difficult
14:06:58 <Judy> q+
14:07:08 <Vivienne> MH: Klaus pointed out that there are more scope bullet points than deliverables - don't necessarily line up - do they need to?
14:07:20 <Vivienne> zakim, mute me
14:07:20 <Zakim> Vivienne should now be muted
14:09:20 <Vivienne> Judy: helpful to align. Need to have clear Charter so that the work can continue.
14:10:20 <Vivienne> Judy: discussion about whether this should be combined with APA Working Group.  This group complements that other work.
14:11:14 <Vivienne> MH: David's comment about symposia.
14:11:45 <Judy> s/Need to have clear Charter/Need to have clear Charter with credible scope of work,/
14:12:28 <Vivienne> DS: comment was about selection of topics for upcoming symposia.  Topics are chosen strategically to complement and support other W3C activity.  Up until now topics have to a large extent been chosen withn RDWG rather than encouraged by other groups.  Can we make that link more explicit - that we will have sympsia on areas that are more critical to other groups - group output would be more helpful
14:12:28 <Vivienne> to other groups
14:12:43 <Judy> +1 to David's observation and suggestion
14:12:46 <Vivienne> DS: to some extent it has been driven by researcher's interests rather than need
14:13:05 <Vivienne> DS: subjects should be chosen strategically and this link could be clearer
14:13:17 <Vivienne> +1 from me also
14:13:33 <mhakkinen> +1
14:13:39 <Vivienne> zakim, who is on speaker queue
14:13:39 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on speaker queue', Vivienne
14:13:47 <peter_thiessen> +1
14:13:48 <klaus> +1
14:13:49 <annika> +1
14:14:49 <Judy> s/so that work can continue/if this group is going to be able to continue. There are some reviewers who felt it should be closed, or merged into WAI IG or APA WG; but also counter-concerns./
14:14:49 <Vivienne> Jonathan: output from symposia - synopsis
14:15:02 <Vivienne> MH: driving to keep actual summary work as brief and concise as possible
14:15:18 <Vivienne> Jonathan: don't want to be reading some one else's commentary on the document
14:15:24 <Judy> s/that other work/that other work, but may be difficult to combine./
14:15:40 <mhakkinen> Jason (not Jonathan) made the comments
14:16:39 <Vivienne> MH: confusion about clearing house and catalogue - others also commented on this.  Any thoughts on clearing house?
14:17:20 <Vivienne> Judy: clearing house implies something more active than catalogue which sounds static
14:17:31 <Vivienne> MH: Judy, any comments from others about clearinghouse?
14:19:01 <Vivienne> Judy: is a lot of difficulty in AC in understanding what the purpose of the group has been, and what it does.  Hope is that Charter updates will help that - but on this deliverable there is a hgh risk that people won't understand the intent partly because it is very different from other W3C work and because of some of the inconsistencies in explanation
14:19:11 <sloandr> q+
14:19:46 <mhakkinen> ack judy
14:20:53 <Vivienne> DS: RDWG's unique function within W3C.  It may be that research relates to different disciplines - bringing those disparate subject or domains together to contribute more to W3C standards activity needs a more concerted effort which is what RDWG can do - connecting the research communty.  That is different to other connections between academic research and W3C which is often more computer
14:20:53 <Vivienne> science/mathematics focussed.
14:21:20 <Judy> q+
14:21:21 <Vivienne> DS: this is one major sellng point for those who aren't convnced about the need for RDWG
14:21:50 <Vivienne> DS: this could be somewhere in the Charter - who we see as the research community that we want to harness and take part and get involved
14:22:22 <Vivienne> MH: tried to bring in more reference to industry and industry research - the different types of contributors in the research community would be useful
14:22:26 <sloandr> ack me
14:23:25 <Vivienne> Judy: this could be useful to add - bringing those entities together.  Other groups were academically focussed and the current charter mentions the different communities - need to state that we could bring the groups together and look at those that are standard-related and the industry-related
14:23:48 <Judy> s/bringing those/emphasizing bring those/
14:24:10 <Vivienne> DS: research communities may be defined by topic and discipline, or interest.  There is an opportunity to bring it all togehter.
14:24:17 <mhakkinen> +1
14:24:22 <Vivienne> +1
14:24:43 <Judy> q+
14:24:43 <peter_thiessen> +1
14:24:54 <Judy> q-
14:25:11 <Judy> q+
14:25:24 <Vivienne> MH: will take it as an action to affect the changes discussed today and incorporate David and Judy's comments.  May request clarification.
14:27:05 <Vivienne> Judy: the end section of the Charter which denotes changes - show changes since the first draft and this last one.  Right now it doesn't convey the primary changes well.  Need to show how they address the concerns raised.  Include a shorter charter period, diff can be made available, printing the updated URL
14:27:43 <Vivienne> MH: key points - chartering duration and other points - will try to get those in
14:28:23 <Vivienne> Judy: what is the group's intention for voting for updating the proposed changes.  Would like to get it in for review hopefully by the end of this week.
14:29:01 <sloandr> +1 happy to review an updated draft tomorrow
14:29:04 <Vivienne> MH: who can give feedback on changes by Friday morning
14:29:08 <Vivienne> +1
14:29:10 <peter_thiessen> +1
14:29:12 <annika> +1
14:29:13 <Judy> +1 happy to comment on an updated draft
14:29:19 <shadi-out> +1
14:29:23 <Vivienne> Jason +1 also
14:29:23 <Judy> s/comment on/review/
14:29:28 <klaus> +1
14:29:39 <Vivienne> zakim, unmute me
14:29:39 <Zakim> Vivienne should no longer be muted
14:30:31 <Zakim> -mhakkinen
14:30:33 <Zakim> -Judy
14:30:34 <Zakim> -sloandr
14:30:36 <klaus> thanks bye
14:30:36 <Zakim> -annika
14:30:45 <Zakim> -klaus
14:30:48 <Zakim> -peter_thiessen
14:30:52 <Zakim> -Vivienne
14:30:54 <Zakim> WAI_RDWG()9:30AM has ended
14:30:54 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.609.734.aaaa, Vivienne, mhakkinen, annika, sloandr, peter_thiessen, klaus, Judy
14:31:06 <shadi-out> trackbot, end meeting
14:31:06 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
14:31:07 <Zakim> sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is
14:31:14 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
14:31:14 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/22-rd-minutes.html trackbot
14:31:15 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
14:31:15 <RRSAgent> I see no action items