20:51:27 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #indie-ui
20:51:27 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/04/29-indie-ui-irc
20:51:29 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
20:51:29 <Zakim> Zakim has joined #indie-ui
20:51:31 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be INDIE
20:51:31 <Zakim> ok, trackbot; I see WAI_Indie()5:00PM scheduled to start in 9 minutes
20:51:32 <trackbot> Meeting: Independent User Interface Task Force Teleconference
20:51:32 <trackbot> Date: 29 April 2015
20:51:37 <janina_> /exit
20:52:15 <janina> janina has joined #indie-ui
20:57:44 <Judy> Judy has joined #indie-ui
20:57:54 <Judy> zakim, code?
20:57:54 <Zakim> the conference code is 46343 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), Judy
20:59:44 <Zakim> WAI_Indie()5:00PM has now started
20:59:51 <Zakim> +??P0
21:01:04 <Zakim> +Judy
21:01:50 <Zakim> +Joanmarie_Diggs
21:02:44 <jasonjgw> jasonjgw has joined #indie-ui
21:02:47 <Zakim> +??P3
21:03:29 <Zakim> +Jason
21:03:35 <janina> agenda?
21:03:39 <janina> Chair:  Janina_Sajka
21:03:39 <janina> agenda+ preview agenda with items from two minutes
21:03:39 <janina> agenda+ Editors' Reports; Heartbeat Publications Update
21:03:39 <janina> agenda+ Future of IndieUI Work (Continued)
21:03:40 <janina> agenda+  Other Business
21:03:42 <janina> agenda+ Be Done
21:04:12 <janina>  zakim, who's here?
21:04:12 <Zakim> On the phone I see Michael_Cooper, Judy, Joanmarie_Diggs, ??P3, Jason
21:04:14 <Zakim> On IRC I see jasonjgw, Judy, janina, Zakim, RRSAgent, MichaelC, joanie, hober, koji, trackbot
21:04:28 <MichaelC> zakim, ??P3 is janina
21:04:29 <Zakim> +janina; got it
21:06:58 <andy> andy has joined #indie-ui
21:07:59 <Zakim> +??P5
21:08:25 <Zakim> +[Apple]
21:08:42 <MichaelC> zakim, ??P5 is Andy_Heath
21:08:42 <Zakim> +Andy_Heath; got it
21:09:22 <jcraig> jcraig has joined #indie-ui
21:09:59 <jcraig> scribe: jcraig
21:10:09 <jcraig> agenda?
21:10:50 <jasonjgw> Michael confirmed intent to publish tomorrow.
21:11:25 <jcraig> scribe: jason jgw
21:11:34 <jcraig> scribe: jasonjgw
21:11:55 <jasonjgw> Janina notes that there doesn't seem to be sufficient consensus on how to progress with the work and whether to continue under this working group.
21:12:33 <jasonjgw> Janina notes moves toward consolidation of working groups within the WAI domain.
21:12:43 <andy> +q
21:12:57 <Judy> q+
21:12:58 <jasonjgw> Janina notes events work developing in WebApps.
21:14:28 <jasonjgw> Judy notes the option on the survey to seek a charter extension.
21:14:48 <jasonjgw> To do this, there needs to be strong evidence of moves to bring this discussion to a close.
21:15:14 <Zakim> +Katie_Haritos-Shea
21:15:15 <jasonjgw> The results of the previous survey were inconclusive.
21:15:36 <Ryladog> Ryladog has joined #indie-ui
21:15:42 <janina> q?
21:15:48 <janina> ack j
21:16:14 <jasonjgw> Judy notes that the end of the charter is tomorrow, and there doesn't seem to have been enough dialog to seek an extension  at this point.
21:16:33 <janina> Glad you're here, Katie!
21:17:22 <jasonjgw> Judy notes that if Events move to WebApps but User Context were to remain in IndieUI, this would create difficulties with staff resources. Judy urges resolution of the discussion regarding future of the work.
21:17:33 <andy> q-
21:17:42 <jasonjgw> Andy decides to listen for a while in light of Judy's comments.
21:17:56 <jcraig> q+
21:18:14 <jasonjgw> Janina raises the question whether anyone would object to a move of the Events work to WebApps.
21:18:33 <andy> q+
21:18:38 <Judy> s/enough dialog/enough evidence of efforts to resolve IndieUI path/
21:18:41 <jcraig> ack me
21:19:29 <jasonjgw> James thinks this should have been considered when Web Events dissolved - Events should have been taken to WebApps.
21:19:41 <jasonjgw> Janina notes that there appears to be growing interest in continuing the work.
21:20:20 <jcraig> ack and
21:20:24 <janina> q?
21:20:28 <jasonjgw> Janina notes the interest from the editing task force in taking up some of the work, and acknowledges that this is encouraging.
21:20:34 <Judy> s/this would create difficulties with staff resourcs/the remaining IndieUI User Context work would not likely be sufficient to justify maintaining this group -- besides which we need the staff resources for another group for which there is pressure to split./
21:20:57 <Judy> s/this would create difficulties with staff resources/the remaining IndieUI User Context work would not likely be sufficient to justify maintaining this group -- besides which we need the staff resources for another group for which there is pressure to split./
21:21:26 <jasonjgw> Andy is concerned about the future of User Context, given that the Events work can reasonably be taken up elsewhere. This group is uniquely placed to do the User Context work. Related efforts are underway, but there is no broad consensus between such groups.
21:21:45 <jasonjgw> Andy notes the related efforts engaged in user needs work.
21:22:09 <Ryladog> +1 to Andy's comment
21:22:24 <jasonjgw> He emphasizes the importance of focusing the User Context work in one place, and that this group is a good place for it.
21:23:33 <jasonjgw> Janina notes the broad agreement that User Context shouldn't be dropped; some people would proceed more quickly with a more extensive specification; others want to proceed more carefully; but how and where the work should be carried forward is the remaining question.
21:24:13 <andy> GVH’s GPII, ISO SC36 Individualisation (driven bt Jutta), IMS (I forgot to mention), ISO SC35 which is revising and extending the SWG-A User Needs Summary
21:24:34 <Ryladog> q+
21:25:49 <MichaelC> q+
21:25:51 <jasonjgw> Some PF participants who had previously raised patent concerns are now less concerned; this work could be taken up in PF and the existing membership of that group wouldn't have to add this to their workload. Janina notes the strong relationship with CSS and there's a question whether there's enough left over (from what CSS might take up) related to accessibility to motivate an accessibility-related effo
21:25:54 <janina> q?
21:25:57 <jasonjgw> rt.
21:26:03 <janina> ack r
21:26:06 <jasonjgw> Janina indicates another option is to establish a community group to carry the work forward.
21:26:26 <MichaelC> q+ to say CG would need driving; CSS wouldn´t be a fit for all of User Context
21:26:53 <andy> +1 for michael’s comment
21:27:19 <jasonjgw> James summarizes dialogue in IRC.
21:28:31 <MichaelC> q+ to say a technology wouldn´t fit into a guidelines group, even an expanded one
21:29:13 <jcraig> scribe: jcraig
21:29:25 <Ryladog> q+
21:29:41 <jcraig> * sidetracked related to separate WAI charter discussion
21:30:31 <janina> q?
21:30:37 <MichaelC> ack me
21:30:37 <Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say CG would need driving; CSS wouldn´t be a fit for all of User Context and to say a technology wouldn´t fit into a guidelines group, even an
21:30:40 <Zakim> ... expanded one
21:30:40 <jcraig> jw: suggests User Context could be joint effort between CSS and a WAI group
21:30:46 <Zakim> -Jason
21:31:06 <jcraig> mc: concerned about moving work to a CG, would be no guarantee to drive the work forward
21:31:44 <jcraig> mc: re: CSS, I think we expect the totality of User Context will not fit into CSS (at least not completely)
21:32:00 <jcraig> but good to work with CSS WG for the items that make sense there
21:32:24 <andy> q+
21:32:32 <jcraig> even a possible expanded WAI Guidelines group may not be the right place for it
21:32:46 <janina> ack r
21:33:09 <jcraig> seems that it's somewhat related to "applications" so tangientially related to ARIA work
21:33:14 <janina> ack a
21:34:12 <jcraig> ks: i think the UC work should be under a WG, perhaps joint TF under two WGs
21:34:36 <jcraig> ah: +1 to KS about WG under PF
21:35:10 <jcraig> but I don't agree that ARIA? and User Context are on the same level?
21:35:18 <MichaelC> q+ to say that´s why a TF of an existing group works best
21:35:24 <jcraig> it's more experimental
21:35:53 <janina> q?
21:35:55 <jcraig> so we should not expect it to develop as a solid set of conformant User Agent specification as other specs do
21:36:02 <MichaelC> ack me
21:36:02 <Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say that´s why a TF of an existing group works best
21:36:03 <janina> ack m
21:36:08 <jcraig> s/specification/specifications/
21:36:47 <janina> q?
21:36:56 <Judy> q+
21:37:01 <janina> ack j
21:37:03 <jcraig> mc: that reinforces my opinion that it should be put into PF. it's been awkward that IndieUI WG didn't meet it's deadlines. so difficult to meet new WG reqs for W3C groups
21:37:29 <jcraig> jb: I'm hearing ideas of where it could go. no objections.
21:37:31 <jcraig> q+
21:37:51 <jcraig> jb: trying to determine whether we have a resolution.
21:38:03 <janina> ack j
21:38:38 <MichaelC> jc: a reason to request extension is that we made a very recent decision to pull back scope
21:39:14 <MichaelC> leaving just the stuff that is more solidified
21:39:21 <MichaelC> which can be a working proof of concept
21:39:51 <MichaelC> this includes an event to dismiss a modal dialog
21:39:59 <MichaelC> and media play / pause
21:40:27 <MichaelC> q+ to say that´s Events, can we push that in WebApps?
21:40:41 <MichaelC> these are things that are of clear use to more than a11y users
21:40:55 <MichaelC> would like to mature to demo-able stage, say by TPAC
21:41:06 <MichaelC> then see where it goes
21:41:21 <janina> q?
21:41:23 <MichaelC> if this group closes, does that end likelihood of getting a couple real implementations?
21:41:26 <MichaelC> ack me
21:41:26 <Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to say that´s Events, can we push that in WebApps?
21:41:29 <janina> ack m
21:43:23 <jcraig> mc: jc described ideas for Events... WebApps has not formally commited to taking up the dismiss or media events, but they have generally agreed these events are in there... purview?
21:43:30 <jcraig> s/there/their
21:43:40 <jcraig> s/there/their/
21:44:10 <jcraig> mc: more likely to go to WebApps and convince them to take this on
21:44:19 <janina> q?
21:44:21 <Judy> [JB has not heard at any point of a WG only for proof of concept work and expects that would be very heavily pushed back on]
21:44:35 <jcraig> that seem like a more likely outcome that extending a charter for this group
21:46:33 <Ryladog> q+
21:47:36 <jcraig> jc: agrees to drop the short extension as an option()
21:47:46 <jcraig> s/option()/option/
21:48:03 <andy> q+
21:48:09 <jcraig> ks: concerned I would not be able to join PF
21:48:11 <MichaelC> ack r
21:48:24 <Judy> q+
21:48:24 <jcraig> if this group dissolveds
21:48:45 <jcraig> mc: I hope we can resolve that issue
21:48:59 <MichaelC> ack j
21:49:26 <jcraig> jb: I hope we can too. but not something we can use to hold up a group charter decision
21:50:15 <jcraig> ah: same concern for my own involvement
21:52:01 <janina> q?
21:52:04 <jcraig> general discussion of Invited Expert status
21:52:05 <andy> q-
21:52:06 <janina> ack an
21:54:00 <Judy> JB had also commented above that exploration or development of proof-of-concept work would not IMO be viewed as sufficient justification for a charter extension]
21:54:48 <jcraig> js: proposed resolution: do we all agree that User Context module going to PF? Except to the CSS parts?
21:55:01 <Judy> JB had also clarified above that the Invited Expert route can be an option for APA WG as it is for any W3C WG
21:55:04 <Judy> q+
21:57:59 <Judy> q-
21:58:46 <jcraig> jc: proposed resolution: do we all agree that the portions of User Context module that dfo not fit into CSS will go to another WAI group, potemntially APA or a spin-off from that APA/PD effort
22:00:08 <andy> q+
22:00:12 <MichaelC> q+
22:00:26 <MichaelC> q+ to say PF can shake all that out, and already has schema.org on its radar
22:01:19 <jcraig> proposed resolution: do we all agree that the portions of User Context module that do not fit into CSS will go to another WAI group, either APA or a split-off from that APA/PF effort
22:01:43 <janina> q?
22:02:14 <MichaelC> q-
22:02:53 <MichaelC> ack a
22:03:39 <jcraig> ah: UC should not split it's content
22:04:15 <jcraig> s/it's/its/
22:08:50 <jcraig> mc: this is most similar to #3 but with notes
22:09:43 <jcraig> jc: #3 did not clearly convey some work is sent to CSS, and that would would be referenced in the UC document APA would maintain
22:10:52 <jcraig> proposed resolution: Do we all agree that the portions of User Context module that are not adopted into CSS will go to another WAI group, either APA or a split-off from that APA/PF effort.
22:11:12 <jcraig> +1
22:11:15 <MichaelC> +1
22:11:16 <joanie> +1
22:11:17 <andy> +1
22:11:23 <Ryladog> +1
22:11:28 <janina> +1
22:11:49 <jcraig> RESOLUTION: The portions of User Context module that are not adopted into CSS will go to another WAI group, either APA or a split-off from that APA/PF effort.
22:14:11 <MichaelC> proposed resolution: Request the WebApps WG take up Events and encourage participants to work to advance that.
22:15:14 <MichaelC> proposed resolution: Request the WebApps WG take up Events and encourage participants from IndieUI and APA to work to advance that.
22:15:17 <Zakim> -janina
22:15:26 <MichaelC> +1
22:15:28 <andy> +1
22:15:29 <joanie> +1
22:15:30 <Ryladog> +1
22:15:50 <MichaelC> (janina +1 by proxy)
22:15:54 <jcraig> RESOLUTION: Request the WebApps WG take up Events and encourage participants from IndieUI and APA to work to advance that.
22:16:05 <jcraig> (+1)
22:16:14 <MichaelC> proposed resolution: Close the IndieUI WG
22:16:18 <jcraig> +1
22:16:19 <MichaelC> +1
22:16:20 <joanie> +1
22:16:23 <Ryladog> +1
22:16:33 <MichaelC> (janina +1 by proxy)
22:16:47 <jcraig> RESOLUTION: Close the IndieUI WG.
22:17:08 <jcraig> rrsagent, make mainutes
22:17:08 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'make mainutes', jcraig.  Try /msg RRSAgent help
22:17:17 <jcraig> rrsagent, make minutes
22:17:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/29-indie-ui-minutes.html jcraig
22:17:29 <Judy> Judy gives a massive thanks to the group for their work, and congratulations on tomorrow's publications.
22:17:59 <Zakim> -Katie_Haritos-Shea
22:19:03 <Zakim> -Joanmarie_Diggs
22:19:05 <Zakim> -Judy
22:19:07 <Zakim> -Andy_Heath
22:19:12 <MichaelC> zakim, list attendees
22:19:12 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Michael_Cooper, Judy, Joanmarie_Diggs, Jason, janina, [Apple], Andy_Heath, Katie_Haritos-Shea
22:19:23 <MichaelC> present+ James_Craig
22:19:33 <MichaelC> rrsagent, make minutes
22:19:33 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/04/29-indie-ui-minutes.html MichaelC
22:20:24 <jcraig> rrsagent, please part
22:20:24 <RRSAgent> I see no action items