IRC log of pf on 2015-08-05
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:51:38 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #pf
- 15:51:38 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/08/05-pf-irc
- 15:51:40 [trackbot]
- RRSAgent, make logs public
- 15:51:42 [trackbot]
- Zakim, this will be WAI_PF
- 15:51:42 [Zakim]
- I do not see a conference matching that name scheduled within the next hour, trackbot
- 15:51:43 [trackbot]
- Meeting: Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference
- 15:51:43 [trackbot]
- Date: 05 August 2015
- 15:52:43 [janina]
- agenda?
- 15:52:49 [janina]
- zakim, clear agenda
- 15:52:49 [Zakim]
- agenda cleared
- 15:52:54 [janina]
- agenda+ preview agenda with items from two minutes
- 15:52:54 [janina]
- agenda+ Actions Review (Specs) http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/open
- 15:52:54 [janina]
- agenda+ new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
- 15:52:54 [janina]
- agenda+ Community Groups http://www.w3.org/community/groups/
- 15:52:56 [janina]
- agenda+ Rechartering Progress [See Below]
- 15:52:58 [janina]
- agenda+ TPAC 2013 Update [See Below]
- 15:53:01 [janina]
- agenda+ ARIA.Next Items
- 15:53:03 [janina]
- agenda+ Other Task Force Updates; COGA; SVG; HTML-A11Y--HTML Reorganization
- 15:53:06 [janina]
- agenda+ MAUR Finalization (Redux)
- 15:53:08 [janina]
- agenda+ Captcha, Multi-Factor Authentication Note Discussion
- 15:53:11 [janina]
- agenda+ Driverless Accessibility User Requirements -- Continued Discussion
- 15:53:13 [janina]
- agenda+ Other Business
- 15:53:16 [janina]
- agenda+ next and future meetings http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#s_273
- 15:53:19 [janina]
- agenda+ be done
- 15:54:49 [janina]
- zakim, next item
- 15:54:49 [Zakim]
- agendum 1. "preview agenda with items from two minutes" taken up [from janina]
- 15:55:07 [janina]
- present+ janina
- 15:55:10 [janina]
- chair: janina
- 16:00:03 [tzviya]
- tzviya has joined #pf
- 16:00:13 [tzviya]
- present+ Tzviya_Siegman
- 16:01:47 [joanie]
- present+ Joanmarie_Diggs
- 16:01:51 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM has joined #pf
- 16:03:26 [Ryladog]
- Ryladog has joined #pf
- 16:04:05 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- present+ Rich_Schwerdtfeger
- 16:04:58 [Ryladog]
- Present+ Katie Haritos-Shea
- 16:08:38 [MichaelC]
- present+ MichaelC, Cyns, Rich
- 16:11:33 [janina]
- scribe: janina
- 16:12:14 [janina]
- cs: Noting a Google and Mozilla effort re creating a Web API. Will follow up and try to get them involved with WAPA and IndieUI
- 16:12:25 [janina]
- rs: SVG Mapping Guide, hopefully by end of month.
- 16:14:13 [janina]
- zakim, take up item 7
- 16:14:13 [Zakim]
- agendum 7. "ARIA.Next Items" taken up [from janina]
- 16:16:42 [ShaneM]
- present+ ShaneM
- 16:20:13 [ShaneM]
- scribenick: ShaneM
- 16:20:32 [ShaneM]
- Discussion of DPub and concerns about A11Y
- 16:20:50 [ShaneM]
- tzviya: lots of groups working on A11Y. A chief concern now.
- 16:21:15 [ShaneM]
- ... while things have not been used much in the past, they are being used extensively now.
- 16:21:19 [ShaneM]
- ... covered in our note
- 16:21:52 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: there is a bunch of concern about litigation and learning system publishers are very aware
- 16:22:19 [ShaneM]
- janina: There isn't specific requirements for things like describedat or whatever. The requirement is to be able to make the materials available.
- 16:22:51 [ShaneM]
- ... longdesc or describedat are really easy for browsers to implement. I dont see publishers asking for specific technology, they just need a solution.
- 16:23:13 [ShaneM]
- ... longdesc is out there now. alternatives that are proposed are not necessarily adequate.
- 16:23:37 [ShaneM]
- ... so why not just stick with longdesc as it is. describedat offers one thing that longdesc doesn't - you can annotate on any element
- 16:23:49 [ShaneM]
- ... we have not developed extensive use cases for why that is a good feature
- 16:24:08 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: the initial impetus for describedat came from SVG.
- 16:24:19 [ShaneM]
- ... Gerardo Capriel (sp?)
- 16:24:25 [ShaneM]
- ... it is in the SVG2 spec at the moment.
- 16:24:42 [ShaneM]
- cyns: My goal with describedat was to end the political fight about longdesc.
- 16:24:54 [ShaneM]
- janina: and that didn't work unfortunately.
- 16:25:14 [tzviya]
- q+
- 16:25:49 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- q+
- 16:25:53 [janina]
- ack t
- 16:26:11 [ShaneM]
- tzviya: The note that the DPUB IG sent to PF - does it spell out the use cases where longdesc is not sufficient?
- 16:26:21 [ShaneM]
- janina: I don't think it does. It is pretty much about images.
- 16:26:41 [ShaneM]
- tzviya: we tried to give some examples where longdesc might not be sufficient - where richer markup is needed.
- 16:26:45 [ShaneM]
- janina: I will re-read.
- 16:27:00 [tzviya]
- http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/aria-1.1/states_and_properties#aria-describedat
- 16:27:06 [janina]
- q?
- 16:27:13 [ShaneM]
- tzviya: I will work with the group who wrote the note to get some better examples.
- 16:27:25 [tzviya]
- wrong link, https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-digipub-ig/2015Jul/0042.html
- 16:27:39 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: I want to keep the drama to a minimum. Vote based upon the information that is provided.
- 16:27:44 [ShaneM]
- ... do we have enough support from publishers.
- 16:28:13 [ShaneM]
- zakim, agenda?
- 16:28:13 [Zakim]
- I see 13 items remaining on the agenda:
- 16:28:14 [Zakim]
- 1. preview agenda with items from two minutes [from janina]
- 16:28:14 [Zakim]
- 2. Actions Review (Specs) http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/open [from janina]
- 16:28:14 [Zakim]
- 3. new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html [from janina]
- 16:28:15 [Zakim]
- 4. Community Groups http://www.w3.org/community/groups/ [from janina]
- 16:28:15 [Zakim]
- 5. Rechartering Progress [from See Below via janina]
- 16:28:15 [Zakim]
- 6. TPAC 2013 Update [from See Below via janina]
- 16:28:16 [Zakim]
- 7. ARIA.Next Items [from janina]
- 16:28:16 [Zakim]
- 8. Other Task Force Updates; COGA; SVG; HTML-A11Y--HTML Reorganization [from janina]
- 16:28:16 [Zakim]
- 9. MAUR Finalization (Redux) [from janina]
- 16:28:16 [Zakim]
- 10. Captcha, Multi-Factor Authentication Note Discussion [from janina]
- 16:28:17 [Zakim]
- 12. Other Business [from janina]
- 16:28:17 [Zakim]
- 13. next and future meetings http://www.w3.org/Guide/1998/08/teleconference-calendar#s_273 [from janina]
- 16:28:17 [Zakim]
- 14. be done [from janina]
- 16:28:55 [ShaneM]
- janina: judy might want to talk ahead of the task force meeting so that we can ensure that everything is covered.
- 16:29:01 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: we will need a really good minute taker
- 16:29:36 [ShaneM]
- janina: tzviya can go forward with invitations to the meeting.
- 16:29:57 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: do I need to add anyone else specifically to the list of invitees?
- 16:30:07 [ShaneM]
- tzviya: Just copy the dpub group and I will forward
- 16:30:20 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: I could copy the ePub list.
- 16:30:29 [ShaneM]
- tzviya: I will take care of forwarding.
- 16:31:10 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: ARIA 1.1 issues should be wrapped in the next month or two
- 16:31:21 [ShaneM]
- ... after the 13 August meeting we are going to start talking about test harnesses.
- 16:31:30 [ShaneM]
- janina: making good progress
- 16:31:38 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: Joanie is doing a great job as editor.
- 16:31:53 [ShaneM]
- zakim, take up item 5
- 16:31:53 [Zakim]
- agendum 5. "Rechartering Progress" taken up [from See Below via janina]
- 16:32:34 [MichaelC]
- -> http://www.w3.org/2015/08/draft-apa-charter updated draft APA charter
- 16:33:07 [ShaneM]
- janina: we have redrafted charters based upon balloting. Formal objections to both.
- 16:33:15 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: only the APA charters have changes of note
- 16:33:37 [ShaneM]
- ... scope section was redundant and confusing - asked to clarify without changing meaning.
- 16:33:48 [ShaneM]
- ... restructured within 4 groupings...
- 16:34:49 [ShaneM]
- ... avoiding major rewording to about a third go-around with the AC.
- 16:34:58 [janina]
- q?
- 16:35:20 [janina]
- ack r
- 16:35:43 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: where are task forces mentioned?
- 16:35:53 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: I don't have a section like that in the APA and ARIA charters
- 16:36:22 [ShaneM]
- janina: Task Forces are covered in the communications section
- 16:37:17 [ShaneM]
- Ryladog: Do we need to mention additional task forces and other deliverables (e.g., the web payments user accessibility requirements)
- 16:37:25 [ShaneM]
- janina: you could reasonably add Web Payments
- 16:37:32 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: I didnt mention it in the charter draft...
- 16:37:39 [ShaneM]
- janina: sure - you didn't know about it yet.
- 16:38:02 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: additional things are covered in the "including but not limited to" clause so we shouldn't make substantive changes.
- 16:38:15 [ShaneM]
- janina: yes. dont make changes that will cause a re-review.
- 16:39:00 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: there will be a web page that describes all the deliverables. That can be expanded as neede.d
- 16:39:07 [ShaneM]
- s/neede.d/needed./
- 16:39:20 [ShaneM]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 16:39:20 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/08/05-pf-minutes.html ShaneM
- 16:40:20 [ShaneM]
- cyns: a primary microsoft concern is that we produce "how to" and "requirements" documents.
- 16:40:51 [ShaneM]
- Ryladog: security group has a sort of checklist document with questions other groups should ask themselves. Should we do that?
- 16:40:57 [ShaneM]
- janina: Is that WTAG?
- 16:41:12 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: That is what WTAG is meant to do.
- 16:41:21 [ShaneM]
- cyns: I like the idea of a question format.
- 16:41:35 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: I feel the need for a comprehensive document. But checklists are important to working groups.
- 16:41:48 [ShaneM]
- ... we should have a checklist sooner than later so working groups have something to work with in the near term.
- 16:41:58 [ShaneM]
- ... fill in and expand the check list going forward.
- 16:42:06 [ShaneM]
- Ryladog: shouldn't PF be writing that?
- 16:42:14 [ShaneM]
- janina: yes. and it is in the charter.
- 16:42:16 [janina]
- q?
- 16:42:49 [ShaneM]
- cyns: it may not be clear from the charter that we are doing this.
- 16:42:54 [ShaneM]
- q+ to ask about names
- 16:43:03 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: Judy likes WTAG
- 16:43:35 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM: Wouldn't clarifying trigger a re-review?
- 16:43:47 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: If it is just a clarification then it might not. Need guidance on that.
- 16:44:06 [ShaneM]
- ... i don't know how to clarify things that a) we don't know ourselves, and b) without being massively wordy.
- 16:44:25 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: The Cognitive stuff seems buried. There is already a task force. Why isn't it featured?
- 16:45:00 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: part of it might be that the group is part of the APA, but the deliverables might come out of WCAG and ARIA.
- 16:45:18 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: but COGA is important to industry. Cognitive accessibility is the next big thing.
- 16:45:59 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: Document does mention the deliverables and the taskforce.
- 16:46:44 [ShaneM]
- ... trying to avoid making substantive changes.
- 16:46:58 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: I am just wondering of it should be a bullet under the areas of work being done.
- 16:47:19 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: that would be a more substantial change - we can propose it and see what people say.
- 16:47:47 [ShaneM]
- janina: I am concerned that featuring one group will cause other groups to come forward and say "why isn't my group featured?"
- 16:48:05 [ShaneM]
- richardschwerdtfeger: yes but cognitive goes way beyond the 'content'. It is a very broad topic.
- 16:48:19 [ShaneM]
- janina: the charter is just about what we are spending time on and what we expect to publish.
- 16:48:30 [ShaneM]
- ... I am not to worried if something doesn't appear here prominently.
- 16:48:45 [ShaneM]
- ... we have other ways to promote work as it is developed.
- 16:49:25 [ShaneM]
- ShaneM: does anyone actually look at the charter other than us?
- 16:49:45 [Ryladog]
- Security and Privacy Questionnaire (fro spececifications) draft document: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy_and_security_questionnaire
- 16:49:47 [ShaneM]
- janina: Maybe. But we need to try to be clear. I prefer to under promise and over deliver.
- 16:50:13 [ShaneM]
- cyns: would a CAUR be a good thing to do for cognitive?
- 16:51:18 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: the charter allows us to work on cognitive and thats all we need.
- 16:51:34 [ShaneM]
- ... the question I was asked is does the reorganization lose any meaning.
- 16:52:30 [ShaneM]
- cyns: The AURs aren't really called out and they are valiable.
- 16:52:46 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: at the time this was written we didnt have the other AURs on our radar.
- 16:53:05 [ShaneM]
- cyns: maybe we could say "develop additional accessibility user guides / requirements"
- 16:53:07 [Ryladog]
- Self-Review Questionnaire: Security and Privacy: https://w3ctag.github.io/security-questionnaire/
- 16:53:19 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: Maybe. see if it clarifies and doesnt trigger a new review
- 16:54:28 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: I don't know what edits might trigger a new review.
- 16:56:27 [tzviya]
- tzviya has joined #pf
- 16:57:52 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- ?
- 16:57:56 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- q?
- 16:57:59 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: changes to work style are documented on the new web site.
- 16:58:02 [ShaneM]
- ack ShaneM
- 16:58:02 [Zakim]
- ShaneM, you wanted to ask about names
- 16:58:28 [MichaelC]
- -> http://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/decision-policy Proposed Decision Policy for APA
- 16:58:30 [ShaneM]
- ... PF has been operating under an informal decision policy.
- 16:59:05 [ShaneM]
- janina: thats only because we never wrote it up. But we have a 48 hour policy etc. and kept that in the charter. It is basically our current practice.
- 17:01:47 [ShaneM]
- janina: email archives are important. we do lots of things to help find things in our email. structuring subjects is a key tool
- 17:02:34 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: I have been writing a tool that sees minutes and updates the links to minutes on a page. An update to this will look for resolutions and capture those as well.
- 17:03:24 [ShaneM]
- cyns: there are people who really want us to use github for discussions
- 17:03:50 [ShaneM]
- MichaelC: we are attempting to accommodate everyone's desires. But just as we can't do only e-mail, we can't do only github
- 17:04:01 [ShaneM]
- cyns: the use case to think about is how to link all of them.
- 17:04:20 [ShaneM]
- janina: on going project. A 'bias' is just that. Any time you have one it is going to a problem for someone else.
- 17:05:11 [ShaneM]
- rrsagent, make minutes
- 17:05:12 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/08/05-pf-minutes.html ShaneM
- 17:13:10 [tzviya]
- tzviya has joined #pf
- 18:31:52 [asurkov]
- asurkov has joined #pf
- 20:29:21 [richardschwerdtfeger]
- richardschwerdtfeger has joined #pf
- 23:06:14 [asurkov]
- asurkov has joined #pf
- 23:15:03 [asurkov]
- asurkov has joined #pf