19:52:52 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag
19:53:12 <wendy> RRSAgent, make log world
19:59:28 <Michael> Michael has joined #wai-wcag
19:59:42 <Gez> Gez has joined #wai-wcag
20:00:11 <MattSEA> MattSEA has joined #wai-wcag
20:00:16 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has now started
20:00:18 <Zakim> +Shawn
20:00:19 <bcaldwell> bcaldwell has joined #wai-wcag
20:00:40 <Zakim> +Matt
20:00:40 <nabe> nabe has joined #wai-wcag
20:01:10 <Zakim> +Wendy
20:01:13 <Zakim> +Gez
20:01:16 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
20:01:35 <Zakim> +??P2
20:01:47 <bcaldwell> zakim, ??P2 is Gregg_and_Ben
20:01:47 <Zakim> +Gregg_and_Ben; got it
20:01:51 <MattSEA> zakim, who's making noise?
20:01:55 <Zakim> + +1.973.944.aaaa - is perhaps Bengt_Farre
20:02:02 <Zakim> MattSEA, listening for 11 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gez (30%), [Microsoft] (36%), Gregg_and_Ben (13%), Matt (4%)
20:02:11 <MattSEA> zakim, mute [Microsoft] temporarily
20:02:11 <Zakim> [Microsoft] should now be muted
20:02:26 <Zakim> [Microsoft] should now be unmuted again
20:02:28 <MattSEA> zakim, mute Gez temporarily
20:02:28 <Zakim> Gez should now be muted
20:02:34 <Zakim> +Michael_Cooper
20:02:36 <Michael> zakim, I am Michael_Cooper
20:02:36 <Zakim> ok, Michael, I now associate you with Michael_Cooper
20:02:37 <Zakim> +Katie_Haritos-Shea
20:02:43 <Zakim> Gez should now be unmuted again
20:02:49 <Zakim> +John_Slatin
20:02:50 <MattSEA> zakim, who's here?
20:02:50 <Zakim> On the phone I see Shawn (muted), Matt, Gez, Wendy, [Microsoft], Gregg_and_Ben, Bengt_Farre, Michael_Cooper, Katie_Haritos-Shea, John_Slatin
20:02:50 <Zakim> On IRC I see nabe, bcaldwell, MattSEA, Gez, Michael, RRSAgent, Zakim, shawn, bengt, wendy, ChrisR, sh1mmer
20:02:54 <bengt> zakim, I am Bengt_Farre
20:02:54 <Zakim> ok, bengt, I now associate you with Bengt_Farre
20:03:09 <Zakim> +Avi
20:03:42 <wendy> zakim, [Microsoft] is Mike_Barta
20:03:42 <Zakim> +Mike_Barta; got it
20:04:10 <Zakim> +JasonWhite
20:05:13 <Zakim> +??P8
20:05:36 <MattSEA> zakim, who's making noise?
20:05:47 <Zakim> MattSEA, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gez (23%), Gregg_and_Ben (5%), John_Slatin (47%), Katie_Haritos-Shea (4%), ??P8 (28%)
20:05:57 <nabe> zakim, ??P8 is Takayuki_Watanabe
20:05:57 <Zakim> +Takayuki_Watanabe; got it
20:06:16 <nabe> zakim, I am Takayuki_Watanabe
20:06:16 <Zakim> ok, nabe, I now associate you with Takayuki_Watanabe
20:06:21 <Zakim> +Alex_Li
20:06:22 <nabe> zakim, mute me
20:06:22 <Zakim> Takayuki_Watanabe should now be muted
20:06:46 <Zakim> +Robert_Fentress
20:06:50 <gregg> gregg has joined #wai-wcag
20:06:52 <Zakim> +[IBM]
20:07:13 <RylaDog> RylaDog has joined #wai-wcag
20:07:26 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
20:07:29 <Zakim> -Takayuki_Watanabe
20:07:37 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gez (63%), Mike_Barta (5%), Gregg_and_Ben (100%), Alex_Li (9%), Robert_Fentress (4%), JasonWhite (30%)
20:08:26 <Zakim> +??P8
20:08:31 <nabe> zakim, ??P8 is Takayuki_Watanabe
20:08:31 <Zakim> +Takayuki_Watanabe; got it
20:08:39 <nabe> zakim, mute me
20:08:39 <Zakim> sorry, nabe, I do not see a party named 'nabe'
20:08:44 <nabe> zakim, I am Takayuki_Watanabe
20:08:44 <Zakim> ok, nabe, I now associate you with Takayuki_Watanabe
20:08:47 <nabe> zakim, mute me
20:08:47 <Zakim> Takayuki_Watanabe should now be muted
20:10:15 <wendy> zakim, who's on the phone?
20:10:15 <Zakim> On the phone I see Shawn (muted), Matt, Gez, Wendy, Mike_Barta, Gregg_and_Ben, Bengt_Farre, Michael_Cooper, Katie_Haritos-Shea, John_Slatin, Avi, JasonWhite, Alex_Li,
20:10:18 <Zakim> ... Robert_Fentress, [IBM], Takayuki_Watanabe (muted)
20:10:24 <Andi> Andi has joined #wai-wcag
20:10:41 <wendy> zakim, [IBM] is Andi
20:10:41 <Zakim> +Andi; got it
20:11:04 <Zakim> -Takayuki_Watanabe
20:11:50 <Zakim> +??P8
20:11:53 <nabe> zakim, ??P8 is Takayuki_Watanabe
20:11:53 <Zakim> +Takayuki_Watanabe; got it
20:11:56 <wendy> Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0593.html
20:11:56 <nabe> zakim, I am Takayuki_Watanabe
20:11:56 <Zakim> ok, nabe, I now associate you with Takayuki_Watanabe
20:12:00 <nabe> zakim, mute me
20:12:00 <Zakim> Takayuki_Watanabe should now be muted
20:12:10 <wendy> zakim, who's muted?
20:12:10 <Zakim> I see Shawn, Takayuki_Watanabe muted
20:12:17 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
20:12:29 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Gez (46%), John_Slatin (20%), Michael_Cooper (50%), Alex_Li (4%), Robert_Fentress (9%), Wendy (20%), JasonWhite
20:12:32 <Zakim> ... (30%)
20:12:36 <wendy> zakim, mute Gez
20:12:36 <Zakim> Gez should now be muted
20:12:48 <wendy> zakim, mute Robert
20:12:48 <Zakim> Robert_Fentress should now be muted
20:12:55 <wendy> zakim, mute Jason
20:12:55 <Zakim> JasonWhite should now be muted
20:13:02 <wendy> zakim, unmute Gez
20:13:02 <Zakim> Gez should no longer be muted
20:13:10 <wendy> zakim, unmute Robert
20:13:10 <Zakim> Robert_Fentress should no longer be muted
20:13:33 <wendy> zakim, mute Gez
20:13:33 <Zakim> Gez should now be muted
20:14:09 <Zakim> +??P12
20:14:10 <wendy> Topic: TTF update
20:14:19 <wendy> 1. published drafts of gateway, html, css last friday
20:14:22 <wendy> 2. working on test suites
20:14:35 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
20:14:47 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Mike_Barta (9%), Robert_Fentress (4%)
20:15:09 <wendy> Topic: javascript and alternatives
20:16:54 <wendy> jw what might conformance profiles look like?  not sure that we need them or that they will solve any problems.
20:17:23 <wendy> jw i worked through the guidelines and identified assumptions that were made about the type of content involved.
20:17:55 <wendy> jw that resulted in 8 properties that are assumed at various points in the guidelines.
20:18:18 <wendy> jw user interaction, non-text content, multimedia, etc. (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0518.html)
20:18:30 <wendy> jw gave examples of content using these characteristics.
20:18:54 <wendy> jw could use this analysis to clarify the assumptions being made in certain criteria (i.e., when to apply the criteria)
20:19:07 <wendy> jw might be useful to have slightly different tests based on the characteristics of the content.
20:19:49 <wendy> examples based on these characteristics: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0521.html
20:22:10 <wendy> zakim, mute jason
20:22:10 <Zakim> JasonWhite should now be muted
20:22:58 <wendy> q?
20:23:07 <wendy> zakim, ??P12 is Kerstin
20:23:07 <Zakim> +Kerstin; got it
20:23:12 <wendy> ack ??P12
20:29:19 <wendy> ack Andi
20:29:30 <wendy> asw What does the example mean?
20:29:45 <wendy> asw is javascript considered non-text?
20:30:24 <wendy> jw it has graphics in it, so it has non-text
20:31:34 <wendy> q+ to ask, "the cons of conformance profile"
20:31:54 <wendy> jw think we could make success criteria clearer so wouldn't need conformance profiles.
20:32:14 <wendy> zakim, mute jason
20:32:14 <Zakim> JasonWhite was already muted, wendy
20:32:19 <wendy> ack robert
20:33:04 <wendy> rf it seems that some people are trying to apply this to flash as well (since only accessible on windows/pc). got me thinking about how to address this more globally.
20:33:58 <wendy> rf perhaps a diminished status for conformance in addition to the 3 levels that are there. you could meet all of the criteria to meet AAA, but this one thing could prevent you from claiming AAA.
20:34:05 <wendy> rf perhaps have A-
20:34:27 <wendy> rf that would say that what you developed is accessible to users using certain user agents/assistive technologies
20:34:58 <wendy> q+ to "summarize responses to A-"
20:35:02 <MattSEA> q+
20:35:25 <wendy> ack wendy
20:35:25 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to ask, "the cons of conformance profile" and to "summarize responses to A-"
20:35:49 <Michael> q+ to go back to separating digital divide re disabilities vs. digital divide re hardware/UA/AT
20:36:48 <wendy> ack matt
20:36:53 <wendy> ack alex
20:37:18 <wendy> al in some instances, some criteria are not applicable.
20:37:38 <wendy> al javascript is one example, acronyms is nother.
20:38:17 <wendy> al today's guidelines are written with the assumption that the content is a public site to be used by anyone. for intranets/corporate networks, it is a very different culture and set of requirements.
20:39:05 <wendy> al need to take into account business decisionws
20:39:49 <wendy> ack michael
20:39:49 <Zakim> Michael_Cooper, you wanted to go back to separating digital divide re disabilities vs. digital divide re hardware/UA/AT
20:41:02 <wendy> mc in the past we deliberately confounded them b/c accessibility was related to lack of technology. less the case today, but still the case.
20:41:14 <MattSEA> q+
20:41:23 <wendy> ack robert
20:41:47 <wendy> rf there is a conflation between universal design and accessibility for people with disabilities. there is overlap, but there are two issues.
20:42:03 <wendy> rf by not separating them, you discourage authors to try.
20:42:23 <wendy> rf there are handhelds without javascript as well.
20:43:22 <wendy> rf each level could have a minus and that would signify that while the resource is accessible w/disabilities if they have the right technology, it is not necessarily accessible using all technologies (all platforms or all user agents).
20:43:36 <wendy> rf would be a blanket. people could make AAA claim
20:43:47 <wendy> q?
20:43:50 <wendy> ack jason
20:44:24 <wendy> jw confusion between the profile idea and the issues surrounding principle 4.
20:44:35 <wendy> jw don't think that we have a proposal that connects the 2
20:45:41 <wendy> jw at level 1 under 4.2, set minimum requirements for the support that has to exist for the author to rely on particular technologies.
20:45:45 <wendy> zakim, who's making noise?
20:45:58 <Zakim> wendy, listening for 12 seconds I heard sound from the following: Katie_Haritos-Shea (16%), Robert_Fentress (3%)
20:46:03 <wendy> zakim, mute Katie
20:46:03 <Zakim> Katie_Haritos-Shea should now be muted
20:46:30 <wendy> jw issues: how refer to UAAG, how make level 1 criterion, etc.
20:46:54 <wendy> jw level 1 would be what is technically necessary
20:47:09 <wendy> ack matt
20:47:12 <wendy> zakim, mute jason
20:47:12 <Zakim> JasonWhite should now be muted
20:47:34 <wendy> m3m re: "- level" - we need less conformance levels, not more.
20:48:14 <wendy> m3m the point of what we are doing is to point out the requirements for accessibility. 
20:48:46 <wendy> q+ to say "summary, action item"
20:48:47 <PocketIRC> PocketIRC has joined #wai-wcag
20:48:56 <wendy> ack alex
20:49:09 <wendy> al it has nothing to do with lowering the bar, but that the bar doesn't make sense in all cases.
20:50:17 <wendy> ack
20:50:28 <wendy> ack wendy
20:50:28 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to say "summary, action item"
20:50:33 <PocketIRC> hi,I and scano are travelling by train 
20:50:52 <wendy> zakim, unmute jason
20:50:52 <Zakim> JasonWhite should no longer be muted
20:52:38 <wendy> action: jason rework proposal (in a couple weeks)
20:52:43 <wendy> zakim, mute jason
20:52:43 <Zakim> JasonWhite should now be muted
20:53:49 <wendy> action: robert look at jason's proposals and if so inspired, propose another method to handle
20:53:57 <Zakim> -Robert_Fentress
20:54:19 <PocketIRC> /nick rellero
20:55:05 <PocketIRC> /nick rellero
20:59:53 <bcaldwell> q+
21:00:12 <bcaldwell> q-
21:00:21 <wendy> richard's response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0607.html
21:00:58 <wendy> martin's response: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0603.html
21:01:26 <wendy> asw programmatic objects, such as scripts, applets, and plug-ins
21:02:14 <wendy> wac's proposal: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0602.html
21:02:25 <wendy> asw people don't think PDF is a programmatic object, but it requires a plug-in
21:03:12 <wendy> Topic: WCAG 2.0 Overview
21:03:29 <wendy> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/sketchpad/wcag20-intro
21:06:11 <wendy> slh gives summary about WAI site design and purpose of overview.
21:06:38 <wendy> gv looks like overview should be separate document, but also might be good to have some version of it (or some part of it) in WCAG 2.0.
21:07:17 <wendy> slh a challenging question. if we decide to keep them separate and have less in 2.0, could do more to make people aware of intro document.
21:07:56 <wendy> slh advantages of separate document: it chunks things/helps with progressive disclosure
21:08:24 <wendy> slh on the other hand, no matter how much effort we make to point people to the effort, some people will have wcag 2.0 and nothing else. there is a balance.
21:09:12 <wendy> q+ to ask "diagram of relationships between chunks. general gateway issues/john's proposal/overview"
21:09:26 <wendy> slh lean towards separate
21:09:44 <wendy> gv gateway: we've talked about core techniques, general, etc. each suggests a different role.
21:09:54 <wendy> gv what does it look like to you?
21:10:19 <wendy> slh was involved in some of the ttf discussions with formatting of gateway
21:10:48 <wendy> slh WCAG 1.0 had a gateway that did not have content. core had general techniques. if take the current path that combines them, important not to call that gateway.
21:11:00 <wendy> slh someone who knows WCAG 1.0 thinks "gateway doesn't have content"
21:11:11 <wendy> slh if change function, good to change terminology.
21:11:47 <wendy> ack john
21:12:48 <wendy> js suggestion about organization of overview: instead of begin about differences, begin w/more direct desription of 2.0 and follow with differences.
21:14:02 <wendy> js wasn't aware that there was a WCAG 1.0 GAteway.  
21:14:20 <wendy> wac it was called "Techniques for WCAG 1.0" and provided gateway functionality but not called gateway.
21:14:40 <Zakim> -Kerstin
21:15:02 <wendy> js message Proposal: purpose and approach for Gateway - http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2004JulSep/0557.html
21:15:26 <wendy> js perhaps need a document like the Core Techniques for WCAG 1.0 that is more along the lines of design strategies.
21:15:57 <wendy> ack wendy
21:15:57 <Zakim> wendy, you wanted to ask "diagram of relationships between chunks. general gateway issues/john's proposal/overview"
21:17:44 <RylaDog> q+
21:18:05 <wendy> ack RylaDog
21:18:10 <wendy> zakim, unmute Katie
21:18:10 <Zakim> Katie_Haritos-Shea should no longer be muted
21:18:42 <wendy> khs useful to have it organized like this, why doesn't it just say checklist and techniques? gateway seems confusing rather than clarifying.
21:19:28 <wendy> khs having 2 gateway docs is confusing
21:19:43 <shawn> q+
21:20:06 <wendy> gv can't be an HTML checklist because you can't have an individual technology checklist
21:20:19 <wendy> ack shaw
21:20:39 <wendy> slh recommends "general techniques" if it includes content and pointers
21:20:54 <wendy> slh would be helpful to clarify that not going to have technology-specific checklists.
21:21:15 <wendy> slh the diagram is partly made up to have something to talk about
21:21:35 <wendy> gv HTML is never used alone (always use jpg and other formats)
21:21:38 <wendy> gv can't use css on its own
21:22:25 <wendy> gv because checklists are not normative, seeing them as being a checklist engine to specify which technologies are being used.
21:23:15 <wendy> wac how do test suites fits into?
21:23:26 <wendy> gv css test suite is a series of html pages.
21:25:49 <wendy> discussion about test suites. chris' latest proposal.
21:25:54 <shawn> q+ to ask about "General Techniques" and "Checklist Generator"... and what we'll have for Nov WG releases, e.g. anything for checklists?
21:26:50 <wendy> gv that is not a test suite, that is an example
21:26:59 <wendy> gv these are not used to test pages, they are used to test tools.
21:29:27 <wendy> ack shawn
21:29:27 <Zakim> shawn, you wanted to ask about "General Techniques" and "Checklist Generator"... and what we'll have for Nov WG releases, e.g. anything for checklists?
21:30:14 <gregg> Q+
21:31:02 <wendy> gv include all pieces in the diagram whether they exist or not.
21:31:57 <wendy> gv the checklists into the test suites 
21:32:13 <wendy> gv if there is a checklist generator, it combines the four separate checklist "blocks" (from shawn's diagram)
21:33:01 <wendy> gv test suites must include teh good and bad (to test both false negatives and positives)
21:33:30 <RylaDog> Ciao.........I have a 5:30 telecon........I assuming we are not doing 1.2 for today
21:33:44 <Zakim> -Katie_Haritos-Shea
21:33:48 <wendy> mc the test suites are tied to the techniques and techniques are should be tied to checklist
21:34:00 <wendy> gv checklists should suffice by self
21:34:07 <wendy> slh checklists do not yet exist?
21:34:20 <wendy> gv many of the checklist points exist in the techniques, but the checklists do not yet exist.
21:34:54 <wendy> gv appreciate feedback about how to present all the information w/out totally overwhelming people. if dynamic, don't have to display all at once.
21:35:20 <wendy> gv there are many options (techniques) that are possible to satisfy criteria
21:36:59 <wendy> bc we'll have to look at the techniques and determine which are required at which levels and how to integrate. working on initial prototype for a checklist.
21:37:10 <wendy> bc as it is, have a lot of techniques loosely related to success criteria.
21:37:21 <wendy> gv also, a lot of advice that doesn't link direclty back to guidelines.
21:38:10 <wendy> gv a disadvantage about the checklist generator is that there is a lot of techniques that people may miss (if it disappears as a user selects/deselects options for generating checklist)
21:41:10 <Zakim> -Mike_Barta
21:41:13 <Zakim> -Michael_Cooper
21:41:14 <Zakim> -Matt
21:41:15 <Zakim> -Wendy
21:41:16 <Zakim> -Alex_Li
21:41:17 <Zakim> -Avi
21:41:18 <Zakim> -John_Slatin
21:41:19 <Zakim> -Gregg_and_Ben
21:41:20 <Zakim> -Gez
21:41:21 <Zakim> -Bengt_Farre
21:41:22 <Zakim> -JasonWhite
21:41:24 <Zakim> -Andi
21:41:26 <Zakim> -Takayuki_Watanabe
21:41:28 <Zakim> -Shawn
21:41:31 <Zakim> WAI_WCAG()4:00PM has ended
21:41:32 <Zakim> Attendees were Shawn, Matt, Wendy, Gez, Gregg_and_Ben, +1.973.944.aaaa, Michael_Cooper, Katie_Haritos-Shea, John_Slatin, Avi, Mike_Barta, JasonWhite, Takayuki_Watanabe, Alex_Li,
21:41:35 <Zakim> ... Robert_Fentress, Andi, Kerstin
21:41:36 <nabe> good bye
21:41:42 <shawn> shawn has left #wai-wcag
21:42:00 <nabe> nabe has left #wai-wcag
21:42:19 <bengt> zakim strange lists me as a number ..
21:42:55 <bengt> bengt has left #wai-wcag
21:47:07 <wendy> zakim, bye
21:47:07 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wai-wcag
21:47:11 <wendy> RRSAgent, bye
21:47:11 <RRSAgent> I see 2 open action items:
21:47:11 <RRSAgent> ACTION: jason rework proposal (in a couple weeks) [1]
21:47:11 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/09-wai-wcag-irc#T20-52-38
21:47:11 <RRSAgent> ACTION: robert look at jason's proposals and if so inspired, propose another method to handle [2]
21:47:11 <RRSAgent>   recorded in http://www.w3.org/2004/09/09-wai-wcag-irc#T20-53-49