– DRAFT –
DXWG plenary
09 October 2018
<ncar> no time zone change in Brisbane, still 6am here
<SimonCox> I'm happy to keep it at 16:00 EST - when its all over it will be 8am Melbourne/Canberra/Wollongong, 7am Brisbane
Action: kcoyle to check time zone impacts
<trackbot> Created ACTION-229 - Check time zone impacts [on Karen Coyle - due 2018-10-16].
<annette_g> U.S. changes back on Nov. 4
<kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2018/10/02-dxwg-minutes
<SimonCox> Tell W3C that using any local timezone is a mistake - better to go neutral with UTC!
<annette_g> +1 to UTC
Resolved: approve Oct 2 minutes
PROPOSE: Accept minutes https://www.w3.org/2018/10/02-dxwg-minutes
<ncar> +0 not present
<azaroth> +1
"accept publication of 2nd PWD with the change of issue 411 plus editorial change on link to DATS, consider after publication comments made by annette_g as per action 227, send message to the list and wait until Friday this week."
annette_g: thought resolution was to make changes before 2PWD
kcoyle: changing minutes is hard, change it now
<SimonCox> Can't change existing minutes? In which case the whole business of reviewing and approving minutes is rather pointless!
alejandra: we agreed that once in issues we'd make sure we point to them and resolve _after_ publication
annette_g: thats true - wierd that resolution doesnt reflect it.
alejandra: added link to open issues, resolved #411, some of annette's comment resolved, issued closed. as a draft issues are still open
… link at bottom to all open issues
* try restarting "audio service" if in windows
Resolved: Accept minutes https://www.w3.org/2018/10/02-dxwg-minutes
<kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/track/actions/228
kcoyle: #228 closed
… #205 open
… #219 open
… #227 done
ncar: #224 - risk assessment - we have discussed and have timeline from Lars, notes taken, risks appear manageable will double check tomorrow.
alejandra: process manually takes fro git into W3C TR/ space - seems to have editors draft picked up
<AndreaPerego> close action-228
<trackbot> Closed action-228.
alejandra: for publication goes through a set of tools
… we still have some errors from those tools
… normative/non-normative - but two branches not easy to merge - in git point to specific state, 2PWD will point to 'state at publication'
… all sections must have ids
<alejandra> Pubrules tool: https://www.w3.org/pubrules/
* profile=WD :-)
...if we get it for next week should be fine
kcoyle: credit to alejandra - lots of work
<annette_g> vote of thanks to Alejandra!
<annette_g> +1
Action: ncar put conneg doc through wd check
<trackbot> Created ACTION-230 - Put conneg doc through wd check [on Nicholas Car - due 2018-10-16].
kcoyle: if possible worth checking regularly
<kcoyle> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_f5CAZv7rgUjJH5YXkmD6w5xS6GX5X2AmEp_LMptAfQ/edit#gid=0
kcoyle: other ideas other than posting to list?
<kcoyle> roba: kicking off a citizen scientist group who will be able to test this out
kcoyle: translate into other languages
alejandra: i can do spanish but wonder how much more feedback this will elicit?
kcoyle: at least announcement in other languages may help
<AndreaPerego> Where should these translation be published?
kcoyle: wiki page?
<SimonCox> Is this translation of the whole spec, or just the intro mail?
<alejandra> finding the email from last time would be useful
kcoyle: abstract or introduction
<alejandra> as it would probably be pretty similar
<alejandra> I think it was a google doc?
antoine: we've done a lot of updates - nick has progressed the large set of action
… now shows a fair account of where we stand
… contributions to the introduction from kcoyle, pwin, previously from phila
… merged now available, can continue to refine
… requirements listed - now the most authoritative set
kcoyle: we will set aside time at F2F to discuss - what is most useful focus?
antoine: have been making fast progress - hard to say in advance what is going to be most important at that time - but will find something useful.
kcoyle: spoke to LarsG - FPWD may be further off that TPAC deadline.
ncar: document has progressed - will be ready for Lars to review, and group will discuss tomorrow and bring back to group.
kcoyle: discussion with Lars - great to have by TPAC, but if missed its only a week impact.
… we have option to use F2F to bring group to speed. We shouldnt let deadlines "trip us up" - work towards quality.
kcoyle: we have asked Peter and Andrea to review
<annette_g> I was asked to review and did so a while ago.
ncar: we have a few trivial clean ups - but no substantial changes proposed for a long time
kcoyle: do members feel they have had opportunity to review?
<annette_g> oops, that was the guidance doc that I reviewed.
roba: should not influence timelines if we have a Note as a fall-back if Rec level not achievable
antoine: worried about FPWD without updating the UCR
roba: not sure how to process new requirements which say the same thing multiple different ways, and what UCR looks like.
Jaroslav_Pullmann: can start to work
… 2 weeks to F2F meeting - can have version
roba: does that address antoines concern?
antoine: yes
<kcoyle> https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/F2f4
<AndreaPerego> Thanks, bye bye!
<alejandra> thanks all
<annette_g> bye all!
Succeeded: s/Accespt/Accept/