19:27:34 RRSAgent has joined #waicc 19:27:34 logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/12/07-waicc-irc 19:27:46 trackbot has joined #waicc 19:28:00 trackbot, start meeting 19:28:00 Sorry, but no Tracker is associated with this channel. 19:28:08 agenda? 19:28:09 janina has joined #waicc 19:28:57 tzviya has joined #waicc 19:29:10 present+ Janina 19:29:20 present+ Wilco 19:31:02 present+ 19:31:38 agenda+ Confirm scribe and any agenda additions 19:31:38 agenda+ Review of HTML -- change section to guide review 19:31:38 agenda+ Update on AG WG Charter review status, issues 19:31:38 agenda+ Call for stakeholders, Silver TF, pending AG WG charter 19:31:38 agenda+ Update on related accessibility standards processes (Europe, US, other) 19:31:39 agenda+ Current WG and TF work priorities, messaging needs 19:31:41 agenda+ WAI IG question on platforms 19:31:43 agenda+ Work items needing coord or cross-reviews between groups 19:31:46 present+ 19:31:47 agenda+ Milestones check, pending project management review 19:31:49 agenda+ Any other business? 19:31:51 agenda+ Next meeting: Dec 21; topic requests? 19:31:55 present+ Judy 19:32:56 scribe: Wilco 19:34:09 regret+ charles 19:34:12 regret+ Andrew 19:34:24 Ryladog_ has joined #waicc 19:34:24 regret+ Shadi 19:34:30 regret+ Brent 19:34:43 Present+ Katie_Haritos-Shea 19:35:16 zakim, take up next item 19:35:16 agendum 1. "Confirm scribe and any agenda additions" taken up [from Judy] 19:35:37 JB: added items from Charles 19:35:46 zakim, take up item 2 19:35:46 agendum 2. "Review of HTML -- change section to guide review" taken up [from Judy] 19:36:22 JB: There was a note from Charles on review. 19:36:34 ... want to check with Janina and Michael that you are aware 19:36:41 https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/HTML_5.2 19:36:46 Janina: I missed Charles note, now aware 19:37:09 Judy: Have you got what you need from this message? 19:37:27 Michael: APA looked at it 1.5 months ago, and is looking at it in 6 months once it matures further 19:37:50 Judy: There is a change section to guide the review 19:38:03 https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/changes.html 19:38:04 Michael: We used the change section, nothing new or pressing 19:38:45 ... I believe HTML publishes whether or not there is something interesting. Nothing interesting to spend time on right now 19:39:06 Janina: I believe the main focus now is to clear out things that aren't implemented 19:39:29 ... we looked at the change log. We will look again in a few months. 19:39:43 Michael: ARIA is also looking at this 19:40:06 ...to see if there any new ARIA features needed 19:40:11 Janina: This is one of the major things out of TPAC, ARIA looked at the features 19:40:25 Judy: Should other a11y groups look at this also? 19:40:42 Michael: I think the AG will need to look at it for Silver time frame 19:40:44 zakim, next item 19:40:44 agendum 1. "Confirm scribe and any agenda additions" taken up [from Judy] 19:40:54 zakim, close item 19:40:54 I don't understand 'close item', Wilco 19:41:05 zakim, close item 1 19:41:05 agendum 1, Confirm scribe and any agenda additions, closed 19:41:06 I see 9 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 19:41:06 3. Update on AG WG Charter review status, issues [from Judy] 19:41:50 Judy: Update of issues that are for discussion. 19:42:46 Michael: The AC got 30+ reviews. Some comments to request new leasons, not difficult to implement 19:43:05 s/leasons/liaisons/ 19:43:11 ... some bigger comments are on confusion about what ACT TF is, and proposed removing it or moving it to CG. 19:43:21 ... Possible that clearification is needed. 19:43:35 ... Other proposed that Silver is too long term and should be moved into incubation. 19:43:56 ... Others say the focus should be to complete WCAG 2.1, and not distractions from other projects. 19:44:10 ... More suggested that the focus should be on mobile. 19:44:47 s/on mobile./on mobile, and leave cognitive and low vision till later./ 19:44:47 ... We are in process of discussing this with the WG and with commentors. The WG does not intend to back off on COGA or LV work. They feel it is as mature as Mobile. 19:45:09 ... There are different oppinions about the timelines. I don't have a clear vision what the outcome would be. 19:45:39 Judy: Process wise, the W3C will look carefully at comments how they are raised, some raised as formal objections. 19:46:10 ... those all get looked at and discussed. The WG also looks back at its plans to see if they can come to agreement, also with those who support it. 19:46:18 MyNickname has joined #waicc 19:46:34 ... charter got significant support. We will try to move quickly, but it may take a bit time. 19:46:50 ... The proccess is managed by Wendy Selser, as by Andrew, Josh, Michael 19:47:10 s/Selser/Selzer/ 19:47:39 ... the original hope was that the charter could be process before the turn of the year, but if not hopefully the very beginning of January 19:47:42 q+ 19:48:22 ... some issues came up in the comments that we'll continue to watch. There seems continued pressure to keep charters short. That is W3C wide. But we have to look whether a longer charter can give more stability 19:49:07 ... there were 1 or 2 cases where a participant had supported but the AC Rep had not. That is something that is quite unusual 19:49:36 ... it is good that representatives in your group check with home base so that if there are potential objections, we can learn about those early. 19:50:24 Katie: I wonder if the charter issue will effect the date of FPWD 19:50:52 Judy: That is a concern, I think they are hoping to keep close to schedule 19:51:16 Michael: If we can get the charter approved by 1st or 2nd week of January, I'm not worried about FPWD 19:51:22 ... otherwise I'm worried 19:51:34 agenda? 19:51:58 zakim, take up next 19:51:58 agendum 3. "Update on AG WG Charter review status, issues" taken up [from Judy] 19:52:17 zakim, close item 3 19:52:17 I see a speaker queue remaining and respectfully decline to close this agendum, Wilco 19:52:28 regrets+ Liam 19:52:51 zakim, take up item 4 19:52:51 agendum 4. "Call for stakeholders, Silver TF, pending AG WG charter" taken up [from Judy] 19:53:37 kathy has joined #waicc 19:53:43 Judy: Jeane has alerted people to interest in getting stakeholders for silver 19:54:06 ... we got a request to retweet that. It may be a littl ackward if the existance of the taskforce is still in question. 19:54:20 ... as soon as the charter is approved it would be great to promote it more. 19:54:38 q+ 19:54:50 ack ryla 19:54:51 ack R 19:54:52 ack me 19:54:53 present+ Kathy 19:55:46 Josh: We think having the work of silver in the WG is a preference. I would like to support the preference of the people doing this work. If we need to make a case to support that I'm for that 19:56:45 Judy: I don't know if W3C proccess says something specific about how to way this. The dialoge is intended to capture the perspective from member organizations. 19:57:01 ... in some case it appears that people who support the work might not have said something. 19:57:25 q+ to comment on incubation 19:57:30 ... I'm happy to convey that to Wendy and if needed to Tim. I don't think there is a guarentee for that. 19:58:07 +1 to Tzviya 19:58:08 Tzviya: Incubation got popular lately. We've been pushing this into digital publishing. It is a different work flow and it does not suite every WG. 19:58:18 s/to Tim/to Tim, via Wendy./ 19:58:39 ... since it's so public, people sometimes are shy 19:59:31 judy: There is a group, web incubator group, to incubate the group for HTML. There is also incubatino through community groups 19:59:54 ... it was a request to rather move the silver work to an community group for incubation. 20:00:06 ... we didn't get asked to put the silver work into the incubation group 20:00:07 q+ 20:00:25 ack t 20:00:25 tzviya, you wanted to comment on incubation 20:00:28 agenda+ SC Managers in WCAG 2.1 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/SC_Managers_Phase1 20:00:33 Tzviya: yes that helps, but there is also controvercy about moving CG to WG 20:00:42 ack me 20:00:57 Michael: Also Tzviyas point on people's preferences for working is important 20:00:57 s/controvercy/controversy 20:01:22 q+ 20:01:43 Judy: My impression that there is some confusion on AT and UA for the Silver stuff. 20:02:11 ... and even some misunderstanding on how much time it took for WCAG to get tracktion. 20:02:35 ... it is also possible that Silver can clearify those aspects, and it could be reason to try to pull in stakeholders. 20:02:39 ack me 20:03:37 Josh: About UA and AT requirements, we had comments from Jeanne. She is willing to reassess UA and AT within the AG stack, if we need it to get the charter out. 20:04:20 ... That's a good thing, because it is an unknown quantity. Also the more we can disconnect UA requirements from UAAG and ditto for ATAG the better. 20:04:37 ... that could help us with the charter. 20:05:23 q+ 20:05:36 Judy: It's a tricky issue. The tendency could be to remove things, and sometimes it can be valuable if it can be clearified without removing things. That work may still be needed but wasn't understood. 20:05:49 ... Andrew had conversations to provide clearification. 20:06:07 ack me 20:06:07 ... I think we should avoid the reflex, make sure there is thoughtful conversation. 20:06:43 Josh: Agree to a point, but I'm causions of scaring, as we are dealing with things we don't fully understand at the moment 20:06:59 s/there is a guarentee/there is a formula for how take into account the preferences of participants who are at the table/ 20:07:02 q+ 20:07:41 ... we may have a sense of things to do, and they think it be hand waving. We have to do things that clearify and do things on point. 20:08:18 ack judy 20:08:23 Judy: I think the scope of Silver isn't yet clear. It is getting clearer. 20:09:01 ... this is something that has to be wayed through the recharter process. This was on the agenda to explain about the process. 20:10:07 Judy: Are there any more questions on the process. 20:10:41 zakim, take up item 5 20:10:41 agendum 5. "Update on related accessibility standards processes (Europe, US, other)" taken up [from Judy] 20:11:35 Judy: Shadi and I are tracking these. In the case of WCAG it looks like some stuff in Europe may be intersecting. Shadi is tracking it more closely 20:12:11 ... There was in the parlement discussion on the applicability for mobile accessibility 20:12:35 ... they asked the EC to work on mobile accessibility work with a standards organization. 20:12:53 ... they became aware that WCAG WG was already working on that. So the question has to do how the timeline intersects 20:13:22 ... There have also been a few changes in the US. We don't know for sure how it will effect the 508 refresh 20:13:44 ... Also there is some standards work going on in China which may lead to futher harmonization with this group. 20:14:05 ... There is some work on adding a liaison to the group 20:15:23 Tzviya: No updates on liaisons. The majority of people that'd be a11y liaisons are already. There may be some new memberships. Ingrim joined W3C 20:15:33 ... I don't know if they will be leading groups. 20:16:04 s/, but I'm causions of scaring,/, 20:16:14 zakim, take up item 6 20:16:14 agendum 6. "Current WG and TF work priorities, messaging needs" taken up [from Judy] 20:17:09 Judy: Any comments on any of the work on WAI 20:17:15 q+ 20:17:18 q+ 20:17:26 q+ to say DPub CR 20:17:30 q+ to say Silver 20:17:40 q+ to say WCAG 2.1 FPWD 20:17:41 Kathy: We have a good group in the TF, but it's not clear what the TF role will be now the SCs have been proposed 20:18:05 ... the other concern is that key with these SCs is we must let people know about what mobile a11y is and what is applicable. 20:18:42 ... We don't have anything out there that says where mobile fits. We need to have a plan beyond the work of 2.1, to give visibility of what is mobile a11y and how WCAG applies 20:19:01 s/but I'm causions of scaring, as we are dealing with things we don't fully understand at the moment/. 20:19:19 ack k 20:19:45 Judy: I'm wondering if it makes sense to partner with Silver 20:20:18 q+ 20:20:26 ... There may be an opportunity for two stages. First to engage on the uptake of mobile SC, and then to work on Silver 20:21:14 ack me 20:21:14 MichaelC, you wanted to say DPub CR and to say Silver and to say WCAG 2.1 FPWD 20:21:16 Michael: DPUB WAI Module will go to CR next week 20:21:35 ... there are concerns about how Silver has been messaged 20:22:20 ... We should think about how to message it, when the taskforce messages it loudly and independenty. But we should set parameters. 20:22:46 ... WCAG 2.1 will also be a major message. We'll need to message how people interpret carefully 20:23:41 Katie: From a WG participant of WCAG, I'd like to have participants of all task forces to feel invited to participate in the working group. We can totally use their input on everything else 20:23:54 +1 to Katie 20:23:56 q+ 20:23:58 ... we welcome and would love to have everyone from the taskforces to become part of the major WG. 20:24:42 ack me 20:24:48 ack ryla 20:24:48 Josh: Agree with Katie. As we progress we need to get the input from all these people. We need them for the techniques and understanding documents 20:24:55 Judy: What about the ACT Taskforce 20:25:24 Wilco: I'm participating 20:25:25 Wilco: I regularly participate 20:25:35 agenda? 20:26:23 zakim, take up item 7 20:26:23 agendum 7. "WAI IG question on platforms" taken up [from Judy] 20:26:37 Katie: I've not watched that question 20:27:14 zakim, take up next item 20:27:14 agendum 7 was just opened, Wilco 20:27:37 zakim, take up next item 20:27:37 agendum 3. "Update on AG WG Charter review status, issues" taken up [from Judy] 20:27:38 zakim, close item 3 20:27:40 agendum 3, Update on AG WG Charter review status, issues, closed 20:27:40 I see 8 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:27:40 4. Call for stakeholders, Silver TF, pending AG WG charter [from Judy] 20:27:45 zakim, close item 4 20:27:45 agendum 4, Call for stakeholders, Silver TF, pending AG WG charter, closed 20:27:47 I see 7 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:27:47 5. Update on related accessibility standards processes (Europe, US, other) [from Judy] 20:27:48 zakim, close item 5 20:27:48 agendum 5, Update on related accessibility standards processes (Europe, US, other), closed 20:27:50 I see 6 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:27:50 6. Current WG and TF work priorities, messaging needs [from Judy] 20:28:01 zakim, close item 6 20:28:01 agendum 6, Current WG and TF work priorities, messaging needs, closed 20:28:02 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:28:02 8. Work items needing coord or cross-reviews between groups [from Judy] 20:28:11 zakim, close item 7 20:28:11 agendum 7, WAI IG question on platforms, closed 20:28:12 I see 5 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:28:12 8. Work items needing coord or cross-reviews between groups [from Judy] 20:28:19 zakim, take up next item 20:28:19 agendum 8. "Work items needing coord or cross-reviews between groups" taken up [from Judy] 20:28:55 Judy: Is there anything anyone is working on that another group needs to look at? 20:29:19 agenda? 20:29:19 ... There is some interesting work in progress in EO to improve discoverability of resources. That will be worth looking at some point in the coming month 20:29:41 zakim close item 8 20:29:44 zakim take up item 12 20:29:57 zakim, take up item 12 20:29:57 agendum 12. "SC Managers in WCAG 2.1 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/SC_Managers_Phase1" taken up [from Joshue] 20:30:38 Josh: Part of the review process, I haven't discussed this in detail with Andrew. This is a way to manage the review process. 20:31:06 ... people would select a few SC and become the manager of that. Ensure that feedback is incorporated, produce a new iteration, look to deduplicate. 20:31:18 ... there are many criteria, small amount of time. This could be a way to do it. 20:31:33 ... it's a draft, but it gives an overview. 20:31:57 "Request forbidden by administrative rules" 20:32:44 Judy: sounds very interesting. Would love to see 20:33:11 Tzviya: We've gone over a specific criteria. This worked well for us 20:33:46 .. We had 6 people on the call, Katie walked us through what we needed to do to get it into a proper format 20:34:14 Judy: I'm hearing this is an efficient way to get to language that is consensus ready 20:34:25 agenda? 20:34:38 zakim, close item 12 20:34:38 agendum 12, SC Managers in WCAG 2.1 https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/SC_Managers_Phase1, closed 20:34:40 I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:34:40 8. Work items needing coord or cross-reviews between groups [from Judy] 20:34:50 zakim, close item 8 20:34:50 agendum 8, Work items needing coord or cross-reviews between groups, closed 20:34:52 I see 3 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is 20:34:52 9. Milestones check, pending project management review [from Judy] 20:35:36 Judy: My undertanding that ?? was checking all the WG milestones, I wanted to check with everyone to ensure that you are looking at your milestones. 20:35:52 ... he will be asking about that pretty soon if not already. 20:36:17 s/that ?? was/that Philippe le Hegaret would be/ 20:36:28 Michael: Janina is keeping it on the agenda. We checked Milestones a month ago. WCAG we believe is also up to date 20:36:54 s/We checked Milestones/ARIA checked Milestones/ 20:37:04 Janina: The IQTF looks like it might take off. We had someone specifically take up captioning. I was happy to hear that 20:38:37 Judy: Next meeting, December 21 20:39:00 [JB: any regrets for Dec 21? any topic requests?] 20:39:07 Judy: Any regrets or topic request? No 20:39:08 MC plans not to attend 20:48:13 rrsagent, make log public 20:48:19 rrsagent, make minutes 20:48:19 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/07-waicc-minutes.html Judy 22:30:52 meeting: WAI Coordination Call 22:31:02 chair: Judy 22:32:07 regrets: Andrew, Charles, Shadi, Brent, Rich 22:33:18 present+ Josh 22:43:26 rrsagent, make minutes 22:43:26 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/07-waicc-minutes.html Judy 22:44:39 s/how these are raised/regardless of how these were raised/ 22:45:07 s/as by Andrew, Josh, Michael/in coordination with Andrew, Josh, Michael, myself/ 22:46:20 s/but the AC Rep had not/but the AC Rep objected/ 22:46:36 s/how to way this/how to weigh this/ 22:47:03 s/add a liaison to the group/adding liaisons/ 22:47:13 rrsagent, make minutes 22:47:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/12/07-waicc-minutes.html Judy 23:35:59 liam has left #waicc