trackbot, start meeting

<scribe> scribe: Joshue108

<jeanne> Meeting: Silver XR Subgroup

<jeanne> chair: MikeCrabb

XR Strategy

JOC: What is the purpose of this doc?

We need some more co-ordination if this is to be a stategy doc.

Can we discuss and clarify?

MC: I think we are aiming to create a document that would layout the plans for where we are going next and the scope for guideline development

Gap analysis also - and a strategy for the order of work.

JOC: So is this an internal document or being designed for any broader publication?

MC: I don't mind. Jeanne.

JS: I think for sanity sake, lets keep it internal.

We may in the future take sections and publish we could. but there would be an overhead.

JS: Better to just capture what we are looking at now. If it has broader value when we could look at it.
... Josh would that address concerns.

<mikecrabb> JOC: Good that we have discussed this, worry that if this was a wider strategy document there are other factors to consider

<mikecrabb> JOC: Would also need to be clarity around how this fits with definitions etc. with other W3C documents

<jeanne> JO: It's good that we discussed this. If it is a strategy document, then we need to address items that are missing, and make sure that the definitions and objectives are in line with wider W3C materials. If it is just internal and a scratch pad, then the concerns are not a problem.

<jeanne> ST: The definitions are vague, but the list of the examples should be kept.

<jeanne> JO: If it goes outside the group, then we need to be very careful to coordinate with other groups.

<jeanne> ... the Functional Needs are a good FYI for a gap analysis.

<jeanne> ... I recommend putting a note at the top saying that it is for internal use only

JOC: Does that make sense Suzanne?

ST: yes, and we should use this to capture any immediate concerns etc

MC: This will make it easier if it is internal, it is a little all over the place.
... We can also refine as we go.
... I'll add the note details later

JOC: I hope this all makes sense

MC: Yup
... So people have worked on different bits, any updates?

Or plans for next things?

ST: I'm starting to combined definitions

Under purposes of XR I suggested examples

Also some strategy information - that suggests purpose categories

If someone is working on a guideline, should there be examples?

If so should it be hear or somewhere else?

MC: One set of guidelines will be for applications, and the other will be for the devices themselves - and what their capabilities are.

You are right, we should think of device configurations.

And any related challenges.

JOC: When you are talking about different sets of guidelines, what do you mean?

MC: Like WCAG vs UAAG

JOC: That is worth discussing, two very different pieces of work

MC: So what is in scope?

JOC: +1

So how do we do that?

MC: Am not sure

JOC: Good answer

MC: We need to be clear if possible.

We need to identify the groups that have a stake in this.

<mikecrabb> JOC: When we were looking at RTC requirements, thought a lot of this would be in scope of WEBRTC, but this wasnt the case. Some broad/narrow dependencies with other groups

<mikecrabb> JOC: Finding out how these relate, is a good exercise - but is this outside of the scope for this group or is it worthwhile?

<mikecrabb> JOC: XR-WCAG and XR-UAAG are two very different things, so looking at scope would be challenging, but who is going to take responsibility for mapping area as a whole?

<mikecrabb> +1

MC: Its working out the mappings and the people that is a challenge

It would be helpful knowing who to go to.

These can be simple bullet points at the top of the document so show current areas we are working on or itemise the gap analysis

ST: Will we be expected to cover all of XR stuff in WCAG 3 or increment and cover as much as we can?

JOC: I think the later.

MC: Me too.

ST: we should have a priority section

JOC: +1 that would be useful

JS: If we keep the current Silver architecture, we can keep the current methods without having to do a new framework

We don't have to get e'thing done for publiction.

ST: Thats important - we should look at the 3.0 guidelines down the road - as some methods may not be able to be written now.

JOC: Like adding new techniqes to existing SCs

JS: right

Also as we do the gap analysis, we make sure the methods etc can be adapted to XR.

The guidelines and outcomes can be on a regular release schedule and the methods can be added at any point.

JOC: Sounds good

MC: That gives us a lot of stuff to work on.

I'll start to shorten it down.

JOC: I think a shorter, more focussed doc would be helpful for internal use.

MC: Should we have a priority section?

For the 'this is what we are working on' bit

Just so the group can focus.

JOC: Sounds good.
... A shorter less academic style doc would be great

MC: Any updates on the FPWD?

Jeanne?

JS: We were ready to publish, there were FOs to the CFC, so it is now going thru formal process to get resolved.

WIll take till end of the month..

But none of them were about substantive content issues

Nothing that is going to be hard to resolve- hope to publish after US thanksgiving - early Dec

MC: I saw a mail about making participation more accessible.

JOC: This was useful for me today - glad that we can focus on the doc better.

MC: Great, we will feedback to the wider group.

This is scribe.perl Revision of Date 
Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/

Guessing input format: Irssi_ISO8601_Log_Text_Format (score 1.00)

Default Present: jeanne, mikecrabb, Joshue108_, SuzanneTaylor

WARNING: Replacing previous Present list. (Old list: jeanne, SuzanneTaylor, mikecrabb, Joshue108_)
Use 'Present+ ... ' if you meant to add people without replacing the list,
such as: <dbooth> Present+ 

Present: jeanne mikecrabb Joshue108_ SuzanneTaylor
No ScribeNick specified.  Guessing ScribeNick: Joshue108_
Found Scribe: Joshue108

WARNING: No date found!  Assuming today.  (Hint: Specify
the W3C IRC log URL, and the date will be determined from that.)
Or specify the date like this:
<dbooth> Date: 12 Sep 2002

People with action items: 

WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines.
You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.


WARNING: IRC log location not specified!  (You can ignore this 
warning if you do not want the generated minutes to contain 
a link to the original IRC log.)