<scribe> scribe: SuzanneTaylor

MC: Today we will look at the Silver White Paper and our strategy overall/scope of the work

<CharlesHall> document link (again)?

MC: This bit here is something we'll want to discuss today, "The purpose of this group is to identify and understand the challenges in experiencing textual, visual or aural content that is delivered to an XR environment through the web."

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1om7h7HE-9sIPeBRmJrBSESQWsMGH8PysiWCpAUWXBUQ/edit#

CH: The first thing that comes to mind is that touch is not mentioned

ST: I had a similar comment and some examples in a comment

JS: Yes, or if the device is fixed to a wheelchair

MC: So, if one of these modalities is provided, another needs to be also

JO: Some of this might be worked out later or even in the user agent

MC: Okay, so perhaps we should just say "content"

JO: yes, keeping it general may help, since there may be more

CH: Yes, for example temperature could be a new modality down the road

JS: We might not need to separate out user agents at this time

<CharlesHall> +1

<ToddLibby> +1

group agrees to removing the sensory modalities from the key scope statement

MC: Suggests recording what hardware is available to the group

<CharlesHall> “through the web” can include APIs that leverage web services

ST: The overall scope statement mentions "Web" specifically. Is this a limit for the subgroup or WCAG 3?

JS: That's specifically a limit for XR in WCAG 3, based on the charter

MC: One way to discover guidelines is a gap analysis, and a list of examples to review can help with this

JS: The more the doc can directly point out next steps, the better

MC: Perhaps then we should start with looking at the current Success Criteria

JS: Personalization is another place the subgroup should focus attention for XR

<mikecrabb> Suzanne: Cleaned up supplemental infomration on types of XR and why it is included. All based on discussions from previous week

MC: For next time, I'll pull the existing SC into this document

<CharlesHall> +1

<ToddLibby> +1

group agree to meeting next on Dec 3

JS: are we going to plan to work on the outcomes that were not complete for the first draft?

MC: I will include them in the list of to-dos

JS: That's important to strenthen the next draft, so that it is clearly about XR and to show (and get feedback on) the level of innovation
... If we can focus on those in Dec, we might be able to even get these into the first draft

group agrees to put this on the agenda for next time

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)

Present: jeanne SuzanneTaylor mikecrabb ToddLibby CharlesHall JoshOConnor
Found Scribe: SuzanneTaylor
Inferring ScribeNick: SuzanneTaylor

WARNING: No "Topic:" lines found.


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: No "Topic: ..." lines found!  
Resulting HTML may have an empty (invalid) <ol>...</ol>.

Explanation: "Topic: ..." lines are used to indicate the start of 
new discussion topics or agenda items, such as:
<dbooth> Topic: Review of Amy's report


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.)