14:54:18 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag-act
14:54:18 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2017/02/23-wcag-act-irc
14:54:20 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs public
14:54:23 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be
14:54:23 <Zakim> I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot
14:54:23 <trackbot> Meeting: Accessibility Conformance Testing Teleconference
14:54:23 <trackbot> Date: 23 February 2017
14:54:33 <Wilco> agenda?
14:55:00 <Wilco> zakim, clear agenda
14:55:00 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:55:15 <Wilco> agenda+ Review pull request 57 https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/57/files?diff=split
14:55:18 <Wilco> agenda+ Review pull request 58 https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/58/files?diff=split
14:55:20 <Wilco> agenda+ Review current editor's draft https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-framework.html
14:55:32 <Wilco> agenda+ Open Issues in Github https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/issues
14:55:34 <Wilco> agenda+ Next week, CSUN
14:55:38 <Wilco> agenda?
14:58:40 <rdeltour> rdeltour has joined #wcag-act
15:01:17 <maryjom> maryjom has joined #wcag-act
15:04:20 <shadi> present+
15:04:27 <Wilco> parent+
15:04:27 <rdeltour> present+
15:04:57 <Wilco> present+
15:04:58 <maryjom> present+
15:06:15 <agarrison> agarrison has joined #wcag-act
15:07:43 <agarrison> alistair present+
15:08:19 <MoeKraft> MoeKraft has joined #wcag-act
15:08:23 <MoeKraft> present+ MoeKraft
15:08:34 <MoeKraft> scribeNick: MoeKraft
15:08:40 <MoeKraft> zakim, take up next
15:08:40 <Zakim> agendum 1. "Review pull request 57 https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/57/files?diff=split" taken up [from Wilco]
15:08:58 <MoeKraft> Wilco: 2 pull requests remain
15:09:30 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Proposed wordsmithing from Romain
15:09:37 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Feedback looks good to me
15:10:27 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Romain reworded text of Implementation Validation
15:11:04 <MoeKraft> MaryJo: Editorial, The last sentence should read, "the expected result"
15:11:33 <MoeKraft> Wilco: updating pull request
15:11:59 <MoeKraft> Romain: I didn't know what you meant by list of pointers and then I reread and found definition. Maybe use a cross link here
15:12:23 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Makes sense. Not sure of common practice. Is this something we should have as definition?
15:12:35 <MoeKraft> Romain: Yes. This is common practice
15:12:51 <MoeKraft> Wilco: We don't have a list of definitions currently
15:13:28 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Have pointer link to selected item section
15:13:39 <rdeltour> clarification: I think bikeshed (the tool used for edting the documet) has facility for definition + cross-ref links, but I don't konw if it's a best practice in WCAG docs
15:14:07 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Ok, I will make that change.
15:15:23 <MoeKraft> Romain: We have link to selected item and we should also have a link to the outcome section for consistency
15:16:00 <MoeKraft> +1
15:16:01 <rdeltour> +1
15:16:04 <shadi> +1
15:16:11 <maryjom> +1
15:16:11 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Plus one to merge this in.
15:16:31 <MoeKraft> Wilco: RESOLUTION: Proposal accepted
15:16:48 <MoeKraft> zakim, take up next
15:16:48 <Zakim> agendum 2. "Review pull request 58 https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/pull/58/files?diff=split" taken up [from Wilco]
15:17:41 <Wilco>  making these rules interchangable, organizations are better document and share their method of testing.
15:17:48 <Wilco> By making these rules interchangable, organizations are better document and share their method of testing.
15:17:49 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Agrees with Romain's feedback regarding grammatical updates.
15:18:13 <MoeKraft> Wilco: What should this be? How should this sentence read?
15:18:44 <Wilco> By making these rules interchangable, organizations can better document and share their method of testing.
15:18:57 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Added the word "can"
15:19:46 <MoeKraft> Wilco: What about interchangeable?
15:20:29 <MoeKraft> Romain: I think of it as being able to be ingested by different things. I'm not sure interchangeable is correct. Rather a shared or common format.
15:21:31 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Rules are about setting policy and one way of doing that. If you want your QA team to manage executability, automated, semi-automated, manually, if they develop rules they use this format and another organization can pick it up.
15:21:39 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Can be shared with another organization
15:22:31 <shadi> q+
15:22:32 <MoeKraft> Romain: If we think of ruleset for a given tool, the implementation is not interchangeable.
15:22:39 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Correct but the document is
15:22:50 <Wilco> ack s
15:24:04 <MoeKraft> Moe: How about adoptable?
15:24:52 <Wilco> By adopting a standardized rule description format, organizations are better document and share their method of testing.
15:25:38 <MoeKraft> The Accessibility Conformance Testing Framework 1.0 (ACT Framework 1.0) is a specification designed to harmonize how accessibility rule are described for automated test tools, and how test procedures are written for quality assurance testing. By making these rules interchangable, organizations are better document and share their method of testing. An interchangable format is the first step in developing a harmonized approach for accessibility conforma[CUT]
15:26:10 <MoeKraft> Alistair: "defined format" Makes this easier to harmonize approach
15:27:23 <MoeKraft> Alistair: "By writing these tests in a defined format organizations are better able to document and share their method of testing"
15:28:02 <MoeKraft> Wilco: I like it. Works for me.
15:28:17 <MoeKraft> Moe: Would we drop the last sentence?
15:28:55 <MoeKraft> Wilco: How about "A standardized format is the first step in developing a harmonized approach for accessibility conformance testing."
15:29:20 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Is this too defined of a statement? We are looking for 1 ultimate test method. Do we need to soften it?
15:29:35 <MoeKraft> Alistair: As long as you write the tests in a defined format then okay.
15:30:01 <MoeKraft> Alistair: Enabling is better
15:30:13 <Wilco> The Accessibility Conformance Testing Framework 1.0 (ACT Framework 1.0) is a specification designed to harmonize how accessibility rules are described for automated test tools, and how test procedures are written for quality assurance testing. By writing these tests in a defined format, organizations are better able to document and share their method of testing. A defined format for writing tests is the first step in enabling a harmonized approach for acces[CUT]
15:30:25 <Wilco> conformance testing.
15:30:33 <rdeltour> +1
15:30:51 <MoeKraft> +1
15:31:01 <maryjom> +1
15:31:02 <agarrison> +1
15:31:10 <shadi> +1
15:32:02 <MoeKraft> RESOLUTION: Updated Abstract accepted. Will merge.
15:32:13 <MoeKraft> zakim, take up next item
15:32:13 <Zakim> agendum 3. "Review current editor's draft https://w3c.github.io/wcag-act/act-framework.html" taken up [from Wilco]
15:35:13 <MoeKraft> Alistair: Starting with "Because" is not good.
15:35:21 <MoeKraft> Alistair: Too many hyphens.
15:36:02 <MoeKraft> Alistair: 6.1.3 Outcome, should have hyphen in cantTell
15:36:58 <MoeKraft> `cantTell`: It is unclear whether or not the Test Target passes of rails the test
15:37:10 <MoeKraft> Shadi: This is from earl.
15:37:21 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Let's use titles instead. Looks nicer.
15:37:28 <Wilco> https://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Schema/#terms-instances
15:38:06 <MoeKraft> Alistair: It's nice to read the document.
15:39:47 <MoeKraft> Alistair: Would be good to see document every time
15:39:55 <MoeKraft> Romain: Continuous updates
15:41:59 <MoeKraft> Alistair: How about a retrospective every 3-4 weeks?
15:42:12 <MoeKraft> MaryJo: This is a good middle ground
15:43:27 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Clearly something we have to do right now. Make sure the document fits together.
15:44:03 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Over the next week or so, Moe and I have a lot of work to get this reading well.
15:44:23 <MoeKraft> Wilco: 6.1 is the only section under 6. Do we drop 6.1?
15:45:37 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Make 6.1 = 6.1, Make 6.1.1 =6.2, Make 6.1.2 = 6.3
15:46:15 <MoeKraft> Alistair: Makes sense to me.
15:47:09 <MoeKraft> I will create a draft that includes today's PRs.
15:47:53 <MoeKraft> Alistair: 5.1 "must be a CSS selector" sounds too harsh. Could be XPath
15:48:22 <MoeKraft> Alistair: How about? "When it's available, use this syntax..
15:49:05 <MoeKraft> Wilco: We just need some time to review this.
15:49:10 <MoeKraft> zakim, take up next
15:49:10 <Zakim> agendum 4. "Open Issues in Github https://github.com/w3c/wcag-act/issues" taken up [from Wilco]
15:50:21 <MoeKraft> We can close Issue #53
15:50:44 <MoeKraft> Close #36
15:51:11 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Many can be closed. Cleans up nicely.
15:52:33 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Mary Jo can you review #6, 7 & 8 to see if we have covered those?
15:52:39 <MoeKraft> zakim, take up next item
15:52:39 <Zakim> agendum 5. "Next week, CSUN" taken up [from Wilco]
15:53:08 <MoeKraft> Wilco: Shadi did you send out an email?
15:53:23 <MoeKraft> Shadi: No, haven't had a chance to call Redfield's yet
15:53:45 <MoeKraft> Wilco: No meeting next week. Will pick up in 2 weeks
15:54:22 <rdeltour> rdeltour has left #wcag-act
15:57:21 <shadi> trackbot, end meeting
15:57:21 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees
15:57:21 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Wilco, rdeltour, MaryJoMueller, Kathy, shadi, MoeKraft, maryjom
15:57:29 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
15:57:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2017/02/23-wcag-act-minutes.html trackbot
15:57:30 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye
15:57:30 <RRSAgent> I see no action items