18:54:38 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #aria-at
18:54:38 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/08/05-aria-at-irc
18:55:12 <Matt_King> MEETING: ARIA and Assistive Technology Community Group
18:55:20 <Matt_King> CHAIR: Matt King
18:55:23 <Matt_King> present+
18:55:28 <Matt_King> rrsagent, make log public
18:55:34 <Matt_King> rrsagent, make minutes
18:55:34 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/08/05-aria-at-minutes.html Matt_King
18:59:23 <Matt_King> agenda: https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/wiki/August-5,-2021-Community-Group-Meeting
19:03:30 <michael_fairchild> michael_fairchild has joined #aria-at
19:03:39 <michael_fairchild> present+
19:08:57 <Matt_King> TOPIC: August meetings
19:09:05 <s3ththompson> present+
19:09:09 <s3ththompson> scribe: s3ththompson
19:09:13 <Matt_King> Plan to skip August 12 meeting
19:10:05 <Matt_King> August 12 at 11 pacific will be sprint review./planning meeting for aria-at app. Noon pacific community group meeting cancelled.
19:10:11 <Matt_King> Next CG meeting August 19.
19:10:27 <Matt_King> TOPIC: Product Version Requirements
19:11:10 <Matt_King> Wiki page: https://github.com/w3c/aria-at/wiki/Product-Version-Requirements-for-Assistive-Technologies-and-Browsers
19:16:08 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: jumping to conclusion: test plan review does not require any specific browser/at version? test plan results collection do not require the same browser/at version?
19:24:45 <s3ththompson> James: do we give users options for versions or ask them to self-report?
19:24:51 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: right now it's a freeform entry
19:29:05 <s3ththompson> James: we really need full versions in exactly the same format
19:29:13 <s3ththompson> Hadi: we really want people using latest right?
19:39:35 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: it would be great to also have dates attached to all the versions in order to make historical comparisons
19:41:22 <s3ththompson> Seth: What is the implication on Test Reports? Test reports are kind of like a train that takes a while to get to the station (reviews take a while before publication)... doesn't it feel arbitrary that certain results are reviewed together just because they happened to left the station at the same time? what happens after that report gets published and someone comes back with the latest latest version
20:00:17 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: this basically means test reports are no longer needed. runs can be reviewed independently and would have their own status
20:03:15 <s3ththompson> Seth: I'm as eager as anyone else to make app work for the group... i just want to point out that there are some edge cases and ambiguities in the working mode that we need to address before even talking about the implications on the app / product
20:04:02 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: let's continue to review the working mode. action items: seth / rich / bocoup, provide comments by august 19
20:04:12 <s3ththompson> Seth: does this have any implication on deploy schedule?
20:04:15 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: no
20:05:24 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: we also need to clarify other parts of the working mode that are implicated by changes in the versioning requirements. for example, we need to clearly distinguish the different in status between reports and results (e.g. report is in draft, wide review... and also results can be reviewed)
20:05:39 <s3ththompson> James: by the way, it seems like vendors shouldn't need to approve results.
20:05:47 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: that's right, i think it's better if it
20:06:02 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: if it's just that they can object
20:06:20 <s3ththompson> James: and will browser vendors need a window to provide feedback too?
20:06:29 <s3ththompson> Matt_King: I don't think so
21:00:57 <Matt_King> rrsagent, make minutes
21:00:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/08/05-aria-at-minutes.html Matt_King
21:30:57 <Zakim> Zakim has left #aria-at