See also: IRC log
<janina> /me Coming up ...
<scribe> scribe: Léonie
JS: Any additions to the
agenda?
... Hearing none. Any news?
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2017
MC: Please register.
... You must register if you attend in person.
... Early registration rate closes next week.
... Hotel reservations are already difficult to come by.
JS: Going over the notes on our
TPAC page.
... I presume CSS will look kindly on our request to
meet.
... Also presume we'll need to prep ahead of that
meeting.
... Want to make sure anything we present is done
efficiently.
... Terse summaries to maximise our time with the CSS WG.
... Co-ordination with ARIA and WebPlat on Input Events.
... Also the discussion about AOM.
JMD: Suggest different topics.
LW: The Editing TF meets on
Tuesday, and Web Components on Friday.
... Meeting planned with ARIA for 11am on Friday already.
https://github.com/w3c/WebPlatformWG/issues/93
LW: Please post a comment to
request time on that agenda.
... Our three agendas are found on the WebPlat repo as #93,
#94, and #95.
JS: Tuesday is ok for Input
Events for APA.
... The RQTF has been working away.
... We sent questions to Web Auth. We haven't received answers
though.
... We hope to meet with them at TPAC to discuss.
... If ARIA has items to discuss with Web Auth we could join
up.
<janina> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2017Sep/0003.html
JMD: We're looking for a joint meting slot?
JS: Yes, at a time that suits people dialling in from Western Australia.
JMD: Need to give this some
thought.
... We also have the joint TFs to consider.
... When you know the time of the RQTF/Web Auth meeting, let me
know and we'll attend if we can.
JS: Ok.
... Will be looking at version 2 of the Turing paper.
... The RQTF has been looking at this.
... RQTF is also looking at WebVR.
... The WebVR WG will not meet at TPAC though.
... The RQTF is putting together some questions.
... We will invite any WebVR people at TPAC to attend our
meeting if they wish.
... WebVR meets in December in Brussels.
... Would be good to send someone from APA/RQTF if
possible.
... We should have a Coga TF check in.
... Is there too much happening in AG WG to make a joint
meeting possible?
MC: We might as well try.
... There will be discussion about new SCs, so representation
from the various AG WG TFs seems likely.
JS: Web Payments.
... Not sure what to do with this, but think we need to do
something.
... Will continue to try and get hold of Katie.
MC: Katie is active on some
things now.
... One of their specs went to CR last week.
... There is clearly work happening, and happening without
us.
LW: Has Shane been active in Web Payments?
JMD: I know Shane is very busy ATM.
LW: If he's active there it means we have accessibility knowledge at source.
JS: The rest of my topics for
TPAC focus on procedural areas.
... It'll be six months since we released the self-assessment
tool.
... Don't think anyone has completed it yet.
... Should we make it mandatory?
MC: Don't think it's ready for
that.
... We could make it easier for people to complete.
... Presented it to team to get input.
... Had some limited input.
... We could also use it ourselves when we spec review.
LW: Could I suggest asking people
to complete it when they request wide review?
... APA is also good at starting reviews before a direct
request comes through.
... So visibility of the form may not be good across
chairs.
JS: Accessibility impact
statements in specs.
... We've received push back, feeling like second class
citizens compared to security and privacy.
MC: We would do a walkthrough of
specs that might benefit from it.
... It seems that now even when there are no security/privacy
concerns, those sections are still present in the specs.
... Pushback has often been that the sections should not just
point to another spec like WCAG.
... So if that isn't what's included, what should be?
... If we can figure that out it might help.
JS: Maybe point to specific SCs?
MC: Problem is that specs are not often/always related to web content.
LW: Is it worth drawing a sample of security/privacy sections in specs, in case we can learn something from the kind of information they include?
JS: I can do that.
<scribe> ACTION: Janina to review a sample of specifications to analyse their security and privacy sections. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2017/09/27-apa-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-2150 - Review a sample of specifications to analyse their security and privacy sections. [on Janina Sajka - due 2017-10-04].
UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: There is APIs
with no descriptions.
... Also Notes that go out without time for comments.
MC: We've discussed this within
the team.
... I'm not sure what APA can do in relation to either of these
items though.
LW: Is there anything that could be done within the Process about the Notes?
MC: My analysis is that the
Process allows Notes to go out without drafts.
... Suspect it'd be unlikely we'd be able to change the
Process.
... Maybe best practices instead.
JS: Perhaps someting to discuss with Judy, or the AB?
MC: Or the TPAC Wednesday break out sessions?
LW: Worth reaching out to the other horizontal review WGs?
MC: Not sure.
<MichaelC> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-apa/2017Jun/0003.html
JS: Anne and someone else from WWG will attend a telecon.
LW: I might have a conflict for that meeting now. Will check.
MC: Permissions is a new security spec.
JS: Want to look at that, but can think about it next week.
MC: Nothing that can't ait a week.
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.152 of Date: 2017/02/06 11:04:15 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: Joanmarie_Diggs Léonie MichaelC janina No ScribeNick specified. Guessing ScribeNick: tink Found Scribe: Léonie Found Date: 27 Sep 2017 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2017/09/27-apa-minutes.html People with action items: janina[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]