Meeting minutes
<JF> we're 6 today
Reminder, W3C Events Team survey due 20 August 2021
Lionel_Wolberger: Reminder that this survey exists and the events team would like our input.
Set a owners for each TPAC meeting (COGA, i18n, Overview [silver, EPUB, Low vision])
<Lionel_Wolberger> https://
Lionel_Wolberger: We finalized our list of requested meetings last week and sent to APA.
… Now we need to decide on owners for the meetings.
… Also we need to work on the agendas.
janina: COGA was a very interesting meeting, with both APA and LisaSeemanKest suggested we could meet with COGA separately too.
LisaSeemanKest: COGA has agenda with i18n too.
janina: [requests info, in case we need to be aware of it]
janina: APA is working to coordinate with AGWG.
Lionel_Wolberger: Assigning owners... 1. Overview meeting.
janina: Chairs will own these (outreach needs to come from chairs).
Lionel_Wolberger: Was meaning topics, slides, etc.
Lionel_Wolberger: We thank the chairs for coordinating the meetings. Owner in this case is referring to agenda, slides, speakers, coping with last-minute changes, etc.
Lionel_Wolberger: This is ideally the subject matter expert; can be coordinating with others, too.
<LisaSeemanKest> i can
Matthew_Atkinson: (volunteers help with content, topic, talking to people)
LisaSeemanKest: (volunteers to be owner)
Lionel_Wolberger: Anyone else?
Lionel_Wolberger: Propose LisaSeemanKest is the owner, with Matthew_Atkinson as backup.
Lionel_Wolberger: any objections?
<JF> +1
janina: Expect that chairs will actually chair the meeting.
Lionel_Wolberger: Next: internationalization (i18n). janina?
janina: commented recently: https://
Lionel_Wolberger: also JF was interested, particularly around symbol order.
JF: janina and I are clear on the cause of the apparent disconnect, so happy to help.
JF: Having a roundtable discussion will help us resolve this.
Lionel_Wolberger: For this one we have janina (owner) and JF as backup.
Matthew_Atkinson: Are we still eager to resolve this before TPAC?
janina: Yes (referenced in GitHub comment)
Lionel_Wolberger: COGA: providing more details of implementation.
Lionel_Wolberger: For this specific meeting, who's the SME?
janina: (feels LisaSeemanKest has the expertise and may be able to help with recruitment)
LisaSeemanKest: Sounds similar to the overview meeting (from the other side).
janina: Having a facilitator-level meeting sounds like a good idea.
Lionel_Wolberger: General note that we are all encouraged to attend and contribute on the calls.
LisaSeemanKest: The desire for this meeting is to give an overview, what we've done in Module 1 and what we intend to achieve in Module 2. Might be good to have newer group members such as Lionel_Wolberger and Matthew_Atkinson involved on this one.
janina: So we're looking to provide an overview and moderate the conversation with COGA?
LisaSeemanKest: Yes - perhaps we could swap so that I'm owner of this call and Matthew_Atkinson is of the other one.
janina: Definitely important to have LisaSeemanKest's expertise on this particular meeting given the COGA connection.
Lionel_Wolberger: Is there any aspect of overload between the Overview and COGA meetings?
Lionel_Wolberger: What's the best way to help COGA—have LisaSeemanKest leading it, or someone else?
LisaSeemanKest: Agree, if I'm doing all the talking it may be unclear as to which meeting is which.
Lionel_Wolberger: Just to clarify, the owner won't necessarily be doing all the talking, but it sounds like it would be best for LisaSeemanKest to represent COGA in these meetings.
… Propose that we copy the Overview meeting above (with LisaSeemanKest as owner and Matthew_Atkinson as backup).
Lionel_Wolberger: Could help to have a co-chair as presenting/leading the meeting (but that doesn't mean they're the owner).
janina: There are some specific issues in Module 1 and some in Module 2 that are all derivative of COGA work, so this meeting is perhaps more focused.
Lionel_Wolberger: We have two choices: LisaSeemanKest as owner of the COGA meeting too, and who's the second: Lionel_Wolberger/Sharon, emphasizing the co-chairs' involvement, or Matthew_Atkinson (who will still be providing content/speaking).
Lionel_Wolberger: Propose LisaSeemanKest is owner (seems natural); who should be second?
janina: I'm fine either way
0 (i.e. I'm fine either way too :-))
Lionel_Wolberger: how far apart will the meetings be?
janina: Likely not close together, but could the the next hour, or days apart. We try to honor timezones.
Lionel_Wolberger: proposes to keep it the same as the other meeting; objections?
(none from the group)
Lionel_Wolberger: decided.
Verify that TPAC meetings are set by APA
Lionel_Wolberger: will check up next week
janina: There should be more detail next week, but not times yet.
Blockers to CR? Summary and review of action items
JF: What's going to CR—all three modules, or the Explainer and Module 1?
Lionel_Wolberger: Module 1
janina: Updated WD of Explainer would be good.
JF: All edits done.
… Can we all go back and check the latest push is accurate?
… As mentioned last time, the structure of Modules 2 and 3 differs from Module 1 due to the passage of time.
… I have an open action item to reflect the structure of Module 1 in the others.
<Zakim> JF, you wanted to confirm scope of CR
JF: My goal is to get it done hopefully by the end of summer, though very busy for the moment.
janina: Prioritize Module 2 in case that needs to be included.
janina: We should all take a last read and decide if Module 1 is ready for CR. Aware of issue 144 as a blocker.
janina: Are there other open issues? We should check.
<Lionel_Wolberger> https://
janina: The process is: a formal resolution from this TF requesting APA publish a CR of Module 1, which will go to an APA CfC.
JF: I believe it's ready for final review by us before we ask APA to do that.
Lionel_Wolberger: What's the process for the resolution?
janina: (Explains it's around a RESOLUTION: issued in the minutes by the scribe.)
How we track actions: review of git, wiki & action tracker
<JF> Request that everyone do a review of the edits for Module 1: https://
Lionel_Wolberger: we have issues and actions in three places. What are the blockers to CR?
Issue disambiguation
<Lionel_Wolberger> https://
Issue disambiguation
<Lionel_Wolberger> https://
<Lionel_Wolberger> https://
Lionel_Wolberger: This list (of GitHub issues relating to the Content module) needs to be closed.
Lionel_Wolberger: Can we close #66?
Lionel_Wolberger: Propose we can close it because we've added a link to the wiki page, which addresses both Joanmarie and Matthew_Atkinson's concerns, which are related.
janina: Suggest we include a link in the issue when closing.
Matthew_Atkinson: I'd like to follow up on Charles' comments/suggestions on list about the code samples, which are in the Wiki page. Don't disagree with closing this issue given we have the review of approaches.
Lionel_Wolberger: Please respond to Joanmarie, give the link to the wiki page, clarify that link is in Module 1.
Matthew_Atkinson: will do
Lionel_Wolberger: Matthew_Atkinson mentioned that in closing #66 he'd like to make improvements to the table—any comments?
(none)
Lionel_Wolberger: Go for it.
Lionel_Wolberger: Is there any concern around the wiki being a living document?
janina: We know we'll have a second CR, so we have room for that to happen (we need something more permanent than data-).
Lionel_Wolberger: the next issue is https://
janina: This may be overcome by events; no longer active?
janina: We need two implementations eventually, to go beyond CR.
Lionel_Wolberger & janina: we should continue to reach out, but this is not a blocker.
<Lionel_Wolberger> https://
Lionel_Wolberger: JF: Were these changes implemented?
JF: There's no reference to prefers-reduced-motion in Module 1.
… I agree they're related, but they're also orthogonal. We've not gone that granular. We talk about animated GIFs but we also talk about scrolling content such as a stock ticker widget.
… also advertising.
… There's a relationship there but I'm leery about making explicit links.
<LisaSeemanKest> follow on meeting...
Lionel_Wolberger: We need a few more minutes discussion on this; next time.
Lionel_Wolberger: We'll deal with 170 next time. That leaves four more, from Matthew_Atkinson.
Lionel_Wolberger: Can you make suggestions by next time to help with getting to CR?
<becky> I am in personalization-plan if needed. I think Roy and Sharon are both out, though
Matthew_Atkinson: Yes (have made PRs for some; others need group discussions on some others).