See also: IRC log
<scribe> scribe: Michael
Might be difficult to understand when you have to implement all or some technology specific techniques based on baseline, situation...
Looks a lot like a normative doc (though we know it isn't), how is it kept current as techniques added?
Come to think of it, what is process to vet new techniques?
Would like to see the different conformance levels in the doc
Discussed in the past having various queries to see various views of the stuff on the fly
Would be clearer if a table with checkboxes in a column
Would like to be able to check which "situation" is being used in a given situation, and only see the techniques relevant to that
Not sure if this should exist as a static document, only useful if dynamic and able to incorporate updates
Some of the dynamic abilities like technique submission from public really needed
state at Level 1 may not be doable or sufficiently important in all technologies
proposals at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-teamc/2006Jun/0010.html
concern that a requirement about setting focus could go awry
resolution: reject issue with following wording
<scribe> ACTION: Becky to modify proposed wording from proposal to add focus and state issues [recorded in http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes#action01]
Recommendations should be made to issue directly, using instructions at http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page#Group_Assignment_BY_GUIDELINE
proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-teamc/2006Jun/0011.html
resolution: reject issue, but propose advisory techniques to help mitigate
<scribe> ACTION: Becky to propose wording to explain why issue rejected [recorded in http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes#action02]
<scribe> ACTION: everyone to review proposals by end of day Tuesday so Andi can create survey [recorded in http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/06/05-wcag-teamc-minutes#action03]
hold to next week