6 September 2001 WCAG WG

Present

• Loretta
• Wendy
• Charles
• Tim
• Jason
• Andi
• Paul
• Matt
• Katie
• Gregg
• Jo

Regrets

• Gregory

Microsoft presentation at F2F

Resolved: modify agenda for Monday afternoon and Tuesday morning to accomodate Microsoft presentation and discussion.

monday

• 1:30 - 3:30 Presentation and discussion with Microsoft product development groups
• 3:30 - 3:45 Break
• 3:45 - 5:30 Break into groups to work on SVG and ECMAScript techniques (prep for public working drafts)

tuesday

• 8:30 - 9:00 Continental breakfast
• 9:00 - 10:30 Discussion of comments from latest working draft of CSS Techniques and PDF Techniques

Action WC: post list of required readings w/

Techniques Drafts

JW HTML published this evening, PDF earlier today.

WC Would like to compare the 3 techniques documents. Very different. What format should they take? How do success criteria relate to techniques/technology-specific checkpoints.

JW I can take an action to write up a proposal and capture the issues.

KHS Take existing 3 differences, which is good for each and how they should organize the documents.

GV I think of them as being A, B, and C. A = general, non-technology specific, B = technology-specific things you had to do, C=in WCAG 1.0 is techniques, but notes about how to do it, code, informative info.

Action JW: Write up issues with technology-specific information and relation to non-tech info.

$Date: 2001/09/06 23:20:03 $ Wendy Chisholm