<allanj> scribe: Jim
<Judy> clear agenda
<allanj> take up next
<allanj> katie: submit to WAI-IG a summary of discussion about APA notification an reqruitment
<allanj> janina: waiting to check on technology to help, rss...
<allanj> katie: explain APA, HTML5.1 etc.
<allanj> jb: watched IG list. what folks attend to ... work efficiency -- automation may be more efficient, but highlighting issues might help productive discussion
<allanj> ... try both, some complain there is a lot of noise on the list. is highlighted possible?
<allanj> katie: mini-summary first. then focus on things that need discussion, and ask for input
<Judy> ["PAUR" = Payments Accessibility User Requirements]
<allanj> janina: need to recruit in PAUR. filter what's appropriate to send to IG and what is not
<allanj> george: Monday, 3rd EPUB editors draft, techniques, and main document
<allanj> katie: do you want external comments
<allanj> george: yes, IG, higher ed, APA, etc.
<allanj> lisa: COGA in process of creating FPWD. ready in a week or 2. have a draft of proposed Success Criteria. when to ask for feedback
<janina> PAUR Draft: http://rawgit.com/w3c/apa/master/payment-accessibility-reqs/index.html
<allanj> jb: wrt cancelling. cancel if you must, its late, but now rather than later
<allanj> mc: Research at a little risk though still hoping to meet...trouble recruiting
<allanj> tzviya: DPUB hopes to send people to RQTF
<allanj> ... difficult time of year.
<allanj> Rich: group didn't realize that password is not so secure. browsers can auto-complete password. Want to look at other authentication mechanisms
<allanj> ... password is a problem for aging folk and others with cognitive issues
<allanj> ... need to look at other mechanism than password (HTML, COGA, others)
<allanj> jb: talk to relevant groups first, then go to TAG
<Ryladog_> Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea
<Ryladog_> JB: labelled ARIA semantics
<Judy> Tzviya: The Dpub ARIA TF has been talking about ARIA semantics
<Ryladog_> TZ: dpub TF has been talking about atstus of role element in ARIA. for accessibility only? or for other things
<Judy> ...we have been talking about whether ARIA elements should be used for accessibility only, or also ok for production
<Ryladog_> TZ: from a pub perspective we need a vocab that is extensible
<Judy> scribe: Ryladog
<Ryladog_> TZ: maps to AAPIs. With ARIA and accessibility on general - thinking is that ARIA should be for all users - at least in the WG
<Ryladog_> TZ: Things we want to see, assessment and mathmatics
<Ryladog_> RS: we broke it out so that main ARIA WG would not be held back. But one concern is not to spend cycles on mapping to aan AAPI
<Ryladog_> RS: We do have a mechanism already in ARIA and I would like to see us add it to the Mapping spec - anything that is not specificed - will not be mapped - unless it is really valuable to AT
<Ryladog_> RS: We do not want folks to have to review every single role/value
<Ryladog_> RS: If I dont have to worry about mapping I can get more stuff done
<Ryladog_> RS: whne we need to we can address mapping with the correct folks - but we need to go to the TAG to talk about this
<Ryladog_> RS: We are probably the best group for doing this mapping work though
<Ryladog_> RS: I would like to be ble to see the ePub folks do their work and run and not have them worry about the mapping
<Zakim> janina, you wanted to say APA will in any case be concerned for accessibility of D-Pub semantics, whichever WG they come from
<Ryladog_> JS: APAs horizontal role in W3C - I take that in the end-to-end
<Ryladog_> JS: we already have a concern form an ATAG view.
<Ryladog_> JS: So from an APA perspective it doesnt matter who produces this
<Ryladog_> JS: I am not sure that it can be solved in a non-WAI WG
<Judy> JB: Please look at charter scope: https://www.w3.org/2015/10/apa-charter.html#scope
<Ryladog_> JB: We need to refer to the charter scope of APA
<Ryladog_> JB: When you look at the scope there is some flexibility - so if there is some expansion of need - should it be in ARIA or some other location, that will need discussion
<Ryladog_> RS: A CSS TF to deal with interop - it hard to ally folks to focus on something if it is needed
<Ryladog_> RS: If you move this to another grroup these Ally folks might nnot be able to be as active
<Ryladog_> JB: there is already a discussion about ARIA with the tag
<Ryladog_> TZ: None of us want to undo - and we are happy working with ARIA WG - one we learned we may not have to worry about the mapping ourselves
<Ryladog_> JB: What are the next steps?
<Ryladog_> TZ: Continue discussing with in our TF, which Rich talks with the TAG about ARIA (continuing Michael in copy)
<Ryladog_> TZ: We will nnot publish CR
<Ryladog_> MC: Rich is the primary - I am supposed to be keeping it moving
<Ryladog_> JB: (providing clarification of MC comments)
<Ryladog_> JS: these issues several folks in APA do not see any issues except the longdef - extension was moved in
<Ryladog_> JS: Not sure it matters
<Ryladog_> JS: It was on an AC list
<Ryladog_> JB: It would be interesting to see that AC discussion
<Judy> JS: where was discussion about the extension
<Judy> ...think on AC list
<Judy> JB: interested in whether the additional details functionality of discoverability beyond assistive techs is still expected not to be available till html5.2
<Judy> JS: think that's the case
<Judy> JB: and whether implementations on longdesc had been dropped
<Ryladog__> Scribe: Katie Haritos-Shea
<Judy> JS: thinks still same as when qualified for CR
<Ryladog__> JB: Anything else on this?
<Ryladog__> JB: Who is going to followup on for tth longdesc issues?
<Ryladog__> JS: I will
<Ryladog__> JB: When is the timeline when it needs to be done?
<Ryladog__> JS: We do not see otther problems in the list
<Ryladog__> JS: we are due to do our quarterly review of that - but we are busy with spec reviews
<Ryladog__> MC: we are tracking workshops
<Ryladog__> MC: WebVR seems a priority but not sure if we have a way of addressing it
<Ryladog__> JB: Is anyone interested? it is a fun topic
<Ryladog__> JB: Katie might be able to help by submitting this workshop on the WAI IG but it would have to be someone who undersstands that use cases would need to be built
<Ryladog__> JB: any thought on this?
<Ryladog__> JS: Maybe we could use a brainstorm for user cases and ideas - Janina has idea for WebVR
<Ryladog__> KHS: Janina and I will coordinate
<Ryladog__> JB: Pending review requests - any FYIs on this item?
<Ryladog__> MC: I cant reeally filter for what we have already chatted about -
<Ryladog__> MC: ARIA 1.1 LC, Core-AAM, Graphics-AAM FPWD, SVG-AAM, Graphics Roles, ARIA Requirements FPWD, ARIA 1.0 Primer retired, ARIA 1.0 Practices retired, COGA Issue Papers, COGA Gap Analysis
<Ryladog__> MC: Public review on Understanding WCAG and WCAG Techniques and something else
<Ryladog__> MC: We are still working on WCAG 2 Errata - edited CR
<Ryladog__> MC: Dont know what the next steps would be
<Ryladog__> MC: We would liek to do these in the next couple of weeks - but not sure I will succeed
<Ryladog__> JB: Do you need review on your specs from other WAI groups? This is the time/place to do it
<Ryladog__> JB: I sw some WCAG TF groups asking for this - you could figure out when you want to do this
<Ryladog__> JB: Not hearing anything
<Ryladog__> JB: Meeting is going to be harder this next month. Next meeting could be July 27th, which would be 3 weeks from now
<Judy> Would people object to going off-cycle?
<fesch> no problem
<Ryladog__> JB: I will confirm on th list for July 27th
<Judy> JB: Presumed next meeting will be in three weeks, July 27, and JB will check on the list more broadly