Protocols and Formats Working Group Teleconference

09 Dec 2015

See also: IRC log


JF, LJWatson, Katie, Haritos-Shea, MichaelC, fesch, Janina, Cynthia


<janina> ack

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to ask about WAI IG announcement messages

preview agenda with items from two minutes

<Ryladog> what is the passocde for webex?

<Ryladog> what is the passocde for webex?

<scribe> scribenick: LJWatson

<Lisa_Seeman> can someone ping me the webex password

JS: COGA TF has two approaches to a gap analysis and would like opinions from both their parent WGs.

<Lisa_Seeman> thanks

APA Housekeeping Reminders http://www.w3.org/2015/10/apa-charter.html

JS: Invited experts can now join APA.
... We will close down the PF WG and infrastructure at the end of this year.
... We need to have all member organisations transferred before then.

MC: If you are an IE and haven't transferred, please do.

LS: I couldn't get access.

MC: Use your W3C password. If you still have trouble contact me offline.

JN: Still working on transferring.

JS: Will it be a problem before the end of December?

JN: ARIA should be ok, APA may be a problem.

JS: Microsoft hasn't joined.

CS: Will follow-up on that.
... Have we joined ARIA?

MC: Not yet.

JS: We will likely adopt the same approach as ARIA for the email list, to enable wide participation from the community.

Actions Review (Specs) http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/open

MC: Actions due in January for Cyns and Rich, actions due next week for Janina, James, LĂ©onie.


<trackbot> Sorry, but action-16669 does not exist.


<trackbot> action-1669 -- Katie Haritos-Shea to Look at data on the web best practices http://www.w3.org/tr/dwbp/ -- due 2015-10-21 -- OPEN

<trackbot> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/actions/1669

KHS: Hoping we can come back to this when we talk about requirements for APIs.
... Give me until January.

<MichaelC> action-1669 due 20 Jan 2016

<trackbot> Set action-1669 Look at data on the web best practices http://www.w3.org/tr/dwbp/ due date to 2016-01-20.

new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html

MC: Under CR
... CSS Custom Properties for Cascading Variables L1

<MichaelC> CSS Custom Properties for Cascading Variables Module Level 1

MC: Think we decided we didn't want to look at this, but can't be sure.

JS: Sounds correct to me.

MC: CSS Will Change module L1

<MichaelC> CSS Will Change Module Level 1

JN: Why is this CSS and not DOM?

MC: Assume it's because the CSS will change. Don't know though.
... Ok, no need to review.
... WD
... No FPWDs.

JS: Don't need to go through these now.

JF: Think we should get more clarity on Media Source Extensions (CR)
... It will allow JavaScript to be used to create broadcast playlists.
... It's a very technical document.
... If this functionality looks to string together media blobs, what happens to the supporting content?

JS: We can comment to say that we would like this document to acknowledge this point and show how alternative/supporting content should be handled.
... Do you think the spec is written in such a way that makes it difficult to understand the intent?

JF: There is some plain content, but there is a lot of procedural/API stuff.
... Outside of the intro it starts to get technical very quickly.

JS: What's the window for responding?

JF: Posted on 12 November.

JS: Think we should comment. Perhaps hold the HTML TF call tomorrow to discuss.
... Anything else?

JF: There is a large image in the spec. It has an alt but no detailed description for the pipeline.

KHS: Isn't it only the overview that should have the plain language?

JF: Even if that were the case, what they're attempting to do still isn't clearly defined enough.

JS: We should grep the spec to see how often key words like "captions" turn up.

JF: There is no mention of "captions" for example.

KHS: These APIs are intended to be very specific.

LW: Conversations in different places within W3 are leading towards the idea we can make APIs easier to understand by providing plain language/prose explanations.

Community Groups http://www.w3.org/community/groups/

<JF> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/wiki/Spec_Review/Community_Groups#New_Community_Groups_to_review

JF: Three CGs set up in September RDF Test suite curation, Social Economy, and Machine Learning Schema.
... The Machine Learning Schema may be of interest, prhaps with reference to COGA. It's tennuous at best though.
... They're looking to promote schemas for data mining and machine learning.
... Could argue that machine learning and learning algorithms are relevant to COGA.

JS: Suggest Markku Hakkinen looks at this.

<scribe> ACTION: Suggest Markku to have RQTF to look at the Machine Learning Schema CG for a11y implications - due 15 Feb 2016 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/12/09-pf-minutes.html#action01]

<trackbot> Error finding 'Suggest'. You can review and register nicknames at <https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/Group/track/users>.

<scribe> ACTION: Markku to have RQTF to look at the Machine Learning Schema CG for a11y implications - due 17 Feb 2016 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/12/09-pf-minutes.html#action02]

<trackbot> Created ACTION-1759 - Have rqtf to look at the machine learning schema cg for a11y implications [on Markku Hakkinen - due 2016-02-17].

COGA TF Sync Up -- Lisa Seeman

LS: We have information in lots of different places.
... We need to put it into digestible form.
... It is a lot of work so we need to get it right.

<Lisa_Seeman> https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/cognitive-a11y-tf/wiki/Gap_Analysis_Summary#Summary_of_Issues

LS: There are two proposals. We've taken a single issue and put it into the different proposed formats, so people can look at both.

Approach 1 is a summary.

scribe: Each issue is summarised in about half a page.
... The solution is also summarised.
... Approach 2 is a table format.

<Lisa_Seeman> https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/table.html

scribe: The table contains all user needs and all user requirements, and how we will solve them.
... This resulted in a very long table.
... So we've grouped things with headings within the table.
... Another option would be to make each user need a separate table.

rssagent, make minutes

scribe: The question is do people feel we need the summary, the table, or both?
... If the table, then do we need one or both?

KHS: Why not the summary at the top of the table?

LS: Only reason is that it doubles the work.

JF: If you need help getting this written, I have someone on team interested in helping.
... I like the separated table instead of all users in a single table.

LS: We can't do it by user group. That would explode.
... We can do it by user requirement though.

JF: So user requirements would be good, but again separate tables.

LS: If we have a summary do we need the tables, or vice versa?

JF: People consume content differently. Having both seems like the optimum solution.

+1 to both summary and tables.

JS: Agree with JF.
... If you have a lot of people unfamiliar with the topic, focusing on the summary first might be a good approach.

LS: In a first WD getting the summary right, then adding the tables later?

JS: Yes.

LW: That seems like a good strategy.

JF: Yes.
... Introducing Kurt, my colleague at Deque who is interested in helping with this activity.

LS: Welcome Kurt. You need to join the calls so we can include you on the work.

KM: Will do.

LS: We can add you to whichever sub-group you'd like to be part of.

Other Business

<fesch> scribe: fesch

<MichaelC> Spec Review in APA wiki

<MichaelC> Spec Review Overview

mc: has a spec review wiki - will create a page when a spec is reviewed
... uses feature called subpages, helps keep them organized, wondering about naming pages
... each page has a link to the spec and a bullet list of activity
... over time we would look at page, and on review add a note
... when we have comments for the WG, we put a pointer in the list
... any input?

js: how hierarchical is it? As we grow we could get in trouble
... we need a log like requirement...

mc: we can add other categories...
... we could categorize them by technology, WG...
... could link to other things
... may have to use wiki search features or internet search features

js: think about this, would like to get started in January... would like to get it going... and have been asked to engage the wider community

Summary of Action Items

[NEW] ACTION: Markku to have RQTF to look at the Machine Learning Schema CG for a11y implications - due 17 Feb 2016 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/12/09-pf-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: Suggest Markku to have RQTF to look at the Machine Learning Schema CG for a11y implications - due 15 Feb 2016 [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2015/12/09-pf-minutes.html#action01]

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.144 (CVS log)
$Date: 2015/12/09 18:03:50 $

Scribe.perl diagnostic output

[Delete this section before finalizing the minutes.]
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.144  of Date: 2015/11/17 08:39:34  
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Succeeded: s/form both/from both/
Succeeded: s/Marku H/Markku Hakkinen/
Found ScribeNick: LJWatson
Found Scribe: fesch
Inferring ScribeNick: fesch
ScribeNicks: LJWatson, fesch
Present: JF LJWatson Katie Haritos-Shea MichaelC fesch Janina Cynthia
Found Date: 09 Dec 2015
Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2015/12/09-pf-minutes.html
People with action items: markku suggest

[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]