IRC log of eo on 2006-05-05
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 12:28:47 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #eo
- 12:28:47 [RRSAgent]
- logging to http://www.w3.org/2006/05/05-eo-irc
- 12:28:55 [Zakim]
- Zakim has joined #eo
- 12:29:03 [justin]
- zakim, this will be eowg
- 12:29:03 [Zakim]
- ok, justin, I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM already started
- 12:29:18 [Zakim]
- +Jack
- 12:29:31 [justin]
- Meeting: EOWG
- 12:30:20 [justin]
- Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2006AprJun/0065.html
- 12:30:25 [shawn-brb]
- zakim, who is here?
- 12:30:25 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Bingham, Doyle_Saylor, Jack
- 12:30:26 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see RRSAgent, justin, shadi, Wayne, Andrew, shawn-brb
- 12:30:28 [judy]
- judy has joined #eo
- 12:30:54 [Zakim]
- +Judy
- 12:31:09 [Zakim]
- +Shadi
- 12:31:14 [Zakim]
- +Shawn
- 12:31:31 [Zakim]
- +Justin_Thorp
- 12:31:33 [Harvey]
- Harvey has joined #eo
- 12:32:12 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 12:32:12 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 12:33:05 [alan]
- alan has joined #eo
- 12:33:29 [Zakim]
- + +1.562.493.aaaa
- 12:33:46 [Helle]
- Helle has joined #eo
- 12:33:55 [justin]
- zakim, aaaa is Wayne
- 12:33:55 [Zakim]
- +Wayne; got it
- 12:34:07 [justin]
- Chair: Shawn
- 12:34:14 [Zakim]
- +??P6
- 12:34:44 [Zakim]
- +Sylvie_Duchateau\Tanguy_Lohéac
- 12:34:49 [justin]
- zakim, ??P6 is Alan
- 12:34:49 [Zakim]
- +Alan; got it
- 12:34:53 [Zakim]
- + +61.3.981.3.aabb
- 12:35:00 [Andrew]
- zakim aabb is Andrew
- 12:35:25 [justin]
- zakim, aabb is Andrew
- 12:35:25 [Zakim]
- +Andrew; got it
- 12:35:26 [Zakim]
- +Helle_Bjarno
- 12:35:27 [shawn-brb]
- zakim who is here?
- 12:35:30 [shawn-brb]
- zakim, who is here?
- 12:35:30 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Bingham, Doyle_Saylor, Jack, Judy, Shadi, Shawn, Justin_Thorp (muted), Wayne, Alan, Sylvie_DuchateauTanguy_Lohéac (muted), Andrew, Helle_Bjarno
- 12:35:33 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see Helle, alan, Harvey, judy, Zakim, RRSAgent, justin, shadi, Wayne, Andrew, shawn-brb
- 12:36:53 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 12:36:54 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 12:37:15 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 12:37:15 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 12:40:11 [alan]
- SH: Discuss "About Baselines" document content and distribution of material between it and Conformance document
- 12:40:41 [alan]
- SH: Try not to get too distracted by questions about usefulness of baseline concept.
- 12:41:42 [alan]
- WD: Group discussion on list was about fact that people don't understand the concept of baseline.
- 12:42:18 [Andrew]
- scribe: Alan
- 12:42:51 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 12:42:51 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 12:43:04 [Andrew]
- scribenick: alan
- 12:43:33 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 12:43:33 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 12:43:42 [alan]
- JT: What technology you need to access the content or that are used to create it.
- 12:44:11 [alan]
- WD: Technologies that author has to use to meet a particular conformance level.
- 12:45:07 [alan]
- HB: [technology] needed to access the information content. There is a tendency to design on the assumption that some user agents are available.
- 12:45:18 [alan]
- HB: Acceptable requirements.
- 12:46:02 [alan]
- SD: Set of technologies used to produce the website.
- 12:46:44 [shawn-brb]
- Alan: assumed agreement between developer & user
- 12:46:45 [alan]
- JW: Set of technologies assumed to exist.
- 12:47:07 [alan]
- AC: A kind of agreement between the producer and the consumer.
- 12:47:26 [alan]
- DS: About being able to "do it" or "only just able to do it"
- 12:47:54 [shawn-brb]
- q+ to mention baseline before, versus after
- 12:48:39 [alan]
- JW: Set of technologies used to make a site, and expected to be available. And the levels available.
- 12:49:38 [alan]
- AA: Basic set of technologies assumed by the developers to allow access regardless of disability.
- 12:50:24 [alan]
- JB: The author's assumptions about the installed base...
- 12:51:25 [alan]
- SAZ: Set of technologies under which web content is available at the target conformance level.
- 12:52:06 [shawn]
- ack shawn
- 12:52:06 [Zakim]
- shawn-brb, you wanted to mention baseline before, versus after
- 12:54:28 [alan]
- JW: Wide range of opinions. Could be problematic.
- 12:55:01 [alan]
- WD: The concept of a contract needs to be discussed somewhere.
- 12:55:19 [alan]
- SH: Or agreement.
- 12:56:14 [alan]
- WD: The user isn't included very clearly.
- 12:58:03 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 12:58:03 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 12:58:48 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 12:58:48 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 13:00:06 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 13:00:06 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 13:00:10 [alan]
- SH: What would be a good short introduction?
- 13:00:30 [alan]
- JT: Get a clear idea looking at an example.
- 13:00:46 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 13:00:46 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 13:00:53 [alan]
- WD: Section about "How can we be sure a site is accessible?"
- 13:02:19 [justin]
- for me it was an example of a conformance claim not the example of a baseline section
- 13:02:47 [alan]
- AA: Teh bullet points about what they are not (not user agents..)
- 13:03:54 [Andrew]
- AA: leave out 'why wasn't UAAG used'
- 13:06:59 [alan]
- WD: Section made the document difficult to read.
- 13:07:53 [Andrew]
- AA: was surprised to find the Conformance stuff at the end of the 'about baselines' document - maybe it should be in a separate document?
- 13:08:03 [alan]
- SH: Baseline document v. Conformance
- 13:09:09 [alan]
- JB: Wanted to ask for opinions about a short intro section
- 13:11:21 [alan]
- Conformance document is REcommendation, can't easily be changed. Baselines and "Understanding" documents are Notes, so can be changed later.
- 13:12:51 [alan]
- SH: So what type of information should be included in each one?
- 13:16:34 [alan]
- JB: Needs to be shorter, to encourage people to use it.
- 13:16:55 [alan]
- JB: baseline material should be in the "Using" document.
- 13:19:54 [alan]
- AA: People find the Using document too long, say they'll have to rewrite it to use it.
- 13:20:25 [alan]
- AA: Reducing the Baslines material and putting it in Understanding is a good idea.
- 13:20:44 [alan]
- JB: Understanding is already too long.
- 13:21:00 [alan]
- SH: Need a short version.
- 13:21:26 [shawn]
- Alan: Examples taken out of conformance. Useful but not in normative.
- 13:21:36 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 13:21:36 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 13:23:08 [shawn]
- Alan: could be shortened. About starts out with [ ] before you get to it
- 13:23:56 [alan]
- HB: Introduction of the About document is too long.
- 13:26:44 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 13:26:44 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 13:27:21 [alan]
- WD: The part about what is abaseline is lost in the middle of the document.
- 13:28:26 [judy]
- q+
- 13:28:39 [shawn]
- ack judy
- 13:28:40 [Andrew]
- AA: maybe move to an 'endnote' on historical context
- 13:29:03 [shawn]
- question: what to do with justification & background on how the working gropu got there
- 13:29:11 [shawn]
- (also why not UAAG)
- 13:29:48 [justin]
- yep
- 13:29:49 [shawn]
- scribe: justin
- 13:30:54 [Zakim]
- -Alan
- 13:31:09 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 13:31:09 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 13:31:25 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 13:31:25 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 13:31:57 [justin]
- Shawn: What else might be put as more background?
- 13:32:13 [Zakim]
- -Wayne
- 13:32:25 [judy]
- jb proposed wording of comment 1: 1. Rename "background" section of "About baselines" to "Why baseline"; shorten it by 2/3; and change the perspective of "this is what the WG did" to "this is why baseline is needed."
- 13:33:08 [justin]
- Shawn: How about this is what baseline gets you
- 13:33:18 [justin]
- Shawn: That gets along with what wayne was saying
- 13:33:28 [justin]
- Harvey: Benefits of baseline
- 13:33:48 [justin]
- Shawn: Not benefits as a selling point...but this is why its needed and what it gets you
- 13:34:10 [justin]
- Shawn: this is what is good for accessibility and its useful for you
- 13:34:43 [shawn]
- q+ what baseline is first
- 13:34:53 [justin]
- Andrew: Before we go why baselines...we need a quick intro with what a baseline is
- 13:35:34 [judy]
- [jb gives updated wording in progress] Rename "background" section of "About baselines" to "Why baseline is needed"; shorten it by 2/3; and change the perspective of "this is what the WG did" to "this is why baseline is needed, and what it gets you."
- 13:35:44 [justin]
- jack: why a base line doesn't help me understand what a baseline is or what I should do about it
- 13:36:32 [justin]
- Shawn: rename it to something like...why baseline is needed
- 13:36:46 [judy]
- Rename "background" section of "About baselines" to "Why baseline is needed"; shorten it by 2/3; and change the perspective of "this is what the WG did" to "this is why baseline is needed, and what it gets you."
- 13:36:54 [judy]
- oops, same
- 13:37:22 [Harvey]
- HB (not HBJ) Need to integrate with W3C WD Conformance section that describes the "baseline"
- 13:37:41 [judy]
- fyi this is what we ended up w/:
- 13:37:42 [judy]
- 1. Rename "background" section of "About baselines" to something like "Why baseline is needed" or "Why baseline is useful"; shorten it by 2/3; and change the perspective of "this is what the WG did" to "this is why baseline is needed, and what it gets you."
- 13:38:02 [justin]
- Shawn: what is the first thing you get?
- 13:38:16 [justin]
- Shawn: Why you need it or a brief short what it is
- 13:39:13 [justin]
- Andrew: i vote for a what it is first....you have to go through a lot to find out what it is. There was quite a bit of difference between what people thought. It would be nice to lay it out before people go farther into the document.
- 13:40:29 [justin]
- Shawn: a short brief description of baseline...do we move the what is a baseline up
- 13:40:47 [Jack]
- Jack has joined #eo
- 13:40:52 [justin]
- Andrew: If we move it up...move examples back
- 13:41:10 [justin]
- Shawn: what about those first three paragraphs
- 13:42:59 [justin]
- Andrew: 1 and a bit of 3
- 13:43:04 [justin]
- Judy: 1 and 2
- 13:43:16 [justin]
- Harvey: Last half of 2 is a major message
- 13:43:21 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 13:43:21 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 13:43:37 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 13:43:37 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 13:44:03 [justin]
- Justin: rewrite the 3 paragraphs into one paragraph
- 13:45:06 [justin]
- Shawn; Take the main points of the first three paragraphs of what is a baseline and is move it to the beginning
- 13:45:23 [justin]
- Judy: What is baseline goes to three and a half pages
- 13:45:51 [justin]
- Shawn: Put the idea of what is a baseline at the very beginning
- 13:46:35 [judy]
- proposed wording for comment #2. Take the concepts from the first three paragraphs from the "What is a baseline" section, simplify them (try rewriting them into one short, simple paragraph), and put them at the very beginning of the "About Baseline" document.
- 13:47:18 [judy]
- s/one/one or two
- 13:47:33 [justin]
- Shawn: I would think like 2 paragraphs
- 13:47:47 [justin]
- Shawn: First paragraph should be the pitch...second is anything else
- 13:48:22 [justin]
- Shawn: What information is more what we have here? and what is more how we got here?
- 13:48:23 [Harvey]
- Should include a link to the normative Conformance section.
- 13:48:46 [justin]
- Shawn: Why wasn't UAAG used
- 13:49:01 [justin]
- Andrew: Obviously its important otherwise they wouldn't have put it in here
- 13:50:12 [justin]
- Judy: We could have a core section...that goes into a more question and answer format
- 13:50:24 [justin]
- Judy: The H2s are more setup as questions
- 13:50:36 [justin]
- Judy: Its not set up as q&a document
- 13:51:20 [justin]
- Shawn: We need to distinguish between key information versus side info
- 13:51:50 [justin]
- Shawn: First section is the basics of what you need to know...separate section is why UAAG wasn't used
- 13:53:05 [justin]
- Harvey: The conformance section has a section about technology and the baselines
- 13:54:10 [justin]
- Judy: Let me read proposed changes #3
- 13:55:34 [justin]
- Shawn: The background and UAAG stuff needs to be very clear as side information
- 13:57:02 [justin]
- Shawn: What i heard andrew and wayne say and I agree with is that you have main information, what it is, the examples...then you have the end note
- 13:57:45 [shawn]
- short intro - explanation stuff incuding examples - appendix/endnote on background
- 13:58:27 [justin]
- Shawn: What do we do with the conformance information?
- 13:59:27 [justin]
- Shawn: Is there anything else that we would stick in the last section
- 13:59:35 [justin]
- Shawn: stuff that most people wouldn't need to know
- 14:00:06 [judy]
- draft wording for comment #3. Re-structure the document so that there is a short first section which gives you the basics of what baseline is, without any background or examples; then an explanation of essential things needed to apply baseline, including examples; and finally a Q/A section that includes less essential things that people may be wondering about, such as why UAAG wasn't used as the baseline.
- 14:02:01 [justin]
- Andrew: What about the background section? Where does that go? I would think the background goes into the q&a
- 14:02:06 [judy]
- s/baseline./baseline, and other info from the background.
- 14:02:56 [justin]
- Judy: I think we have to think of the total length of the impact of the support documents. Many people would be very selective about what they process. Whatever they put in this they would be very selective
- 14:03:08 [shawn]
- last part: "; and finally an ending section (more like appendix) (that might be in Q/A format) that includes background and less essential things that people may be wondering about, such as why UAAG wasn't used as the baseline.
- 14:03:51 [judy]
- s/and other info from/and selected other info from
- 14:03:52 [justin]
- Judy: Maybe the be concise and what needs to be said is another comment
- 14:05:10 [justin]
- Shawn: we need to say something like the ending section where additional important points...
- 14:06:14 [judy]
- draft wording for comment #3. Re-structure the document so that there is a short first section which gives you the basics of what baseline is, without any background or examples; then an explanation of essential things needed to apply baseline, including examples; and finally an ending section such as an appendix, that might be set up like a Q/A section, and includes other things that people may be wondering about, such as why UAAG wasn't used as the baseline and se
- 14:07:30 [justin]
- Shawn: Lets follow up with the length & the writing
- 14:10:56 [shawn]
- q+ to add some of the things that go in the beginning bit: Baselines are not audience abilities (& onesentence) & Baselines are not browser or AT specifications
- 14:12:06 [justin]
- Judy: Less discussing and more practical
- 14:13:17 [justin]
- Judy: people read with very straightforward non-academic
- 14:13:38 [justin]
- Shawn: less history discussion and more instruction
- 14:13:48 [Harvey]
- Be terse!
- 14:14:12 [justin]
- Judy: Now we need to turn this into more instructive material
- 14:15:17 [justin]
- Sylvie: I agree with less discussion and more instruction
- 14:15:50 [justin]
- Sylvie: I like the word practical.
- 14:15:51 [Andrew]
- Sylvie: ... and more practical
- 14:16:51 [justin]
- Judy: I think we might be able to send this right over to the WCAG WG...we may park it on the list
- 14:17:42 [shawn]
- ACK SHAWN
- 14:17:42 [Zakim]
- shawn, you wanted to add some of the things that go in the beginning bit: Baselines are not audience abilities (& onesentence) & Baselines are not browser or AT specifications
- 14:18:25 [justin]
- Shawn: Andrew said early on in the baselines are not audiences or browser specifications
- 14:19:01 [shawn]
- in COMMENT about what goes at beginning, we add a sentence or so on "Baselines are not browser or AT specifications" and "Baselines are not audience abilities"
- 14:19:48 [justin]
- Judy: I am not comfortable with putting things in the intro about what baselines aren't
- 14:20:48 [justin]
- Judy: should stick with things about what they are. giving people what they aren't before presenting a clear picture is big
- 14:21:06 [justin]
- Shawn: I'd vote for including them something about them not being browser specifications
- 14:21:15 [shawn]
- in COMMENT about what goes at beginning, we add a sentence or so on "Baselines are not browser (or AT) specifications"
- 14:21:30 [shadi]
- q+
- 14:21:40 [justin]
- Judy: Expand what we are saying in comment #2
- 14:22:46 [shadi]
- ack me
- 14:22:54 [justin]
- Shadi: I am not sure if I agree...i agree that users will make the browser confusions...if we say what it isn't won't they say what is it
- 14:23:16 [justin]
- Judy: Include a few bullet points about what it is and then add one about what it isn't
- 14:24:49 [justin]
- Shadi: It is not about AT/users agents...it leaves a mystery about what it is...i like the suggestion if we give some hints about what it is..even if it is a pointer
- 14:25:06 [judy]
- 2. Take the concepts from the first three paragraphs from the "What is a baseline" section, simplify them (try rewriting them into one or two short, simple paragraph), and put them at the very beginning of the "About Baseline" document. [proppsed addition: If this can be done in a way that includes simple statements about baseline *is,* then add a brief statement that baseline is *not* browser or AT specifications]
- 14:26:38 [justin]
- Shawn: We need to get to how in this document there is info on conformance.
- 14:26:57 [justin]
- Shawn: I think most of it is right out of WCAG 2.0
- 14:27:02 [justin]
- Shawn: there is no pointer
- 14:27:55 [justin]
- Shawn: my proposal is that very near the beginning of the document that it points to the conformance section for more information. It takes out the any information here that is just a duplicate of what focuses on conformance in the conformance section
- 14:29:20 [justin]
- zakim, please unmute me
- 14:29:20 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should no longer be muted
- 14:30:14 [justin]
- zakim, please mute me
- 14:30:14 [Zakim]
- Justin_Thorp should now be muted
- 14:30:27 [Zakim]
- -Helle_Bjarno
- 14:32:31 [judy]
- draft comment: 5. Add a clear link to the conformance section from the intro to the baseline section, and remove redundant info about conformance from the baseline document. Note that, for now, we are not suggesting removing the baseline info from the conformance section.
- 14:33:48 [justin]
- Andrew: it captures the idea
- 14:34:25 [justin]
- Shawn: Will send to EO...if there is no comments...will send to Baseline editors
- 14:35:07 [justin]
- Judy: Was trying to turn it around with minimal editing
- 14:35:22 [justin]
- Judy: 2 business days
- 14:35:48 [justin]
- Shawn: Do we want to point to sylvie's specific comments
- 14:36:45 [justin]
- Shawn: Next week we are doing what suggest for the future and how information is handled between the different documents
- 14:36:53 [justin]
- Shawn: WCAG 2.0 is a w3c recommendation
- 14:37:13 [Zakim]
- -Doyle_Saylor
- 14:37:15 [Zakim]
- -Bingham
- 14:37:17 [Zakim]
- -Sylvie_DuchateauTanguy_Lohéac
- 14:37:18 [Zakim]
- -Jack
- 14:37:21 [Zakim]
- -Justin_Thorp
- 14:37:22 [Zakim]
- -Andrew
- 14:37:25 [Harvey]
- Harvey has left #eo
- 14:37:37 [judy]
- zakim, who's here?
- 14:37:37 [Zakim]
- On the phone I see Judy, Shadi, Shawn
- 14:37:38 [Zakim]
- On IRC I see Jack, alan, judy, Zakim, RRSAgent, justin, shadi, Andrew, shawn
- 14:37:46 [Zakim]
- -Shadi
- 14:41:05 [Zakim]
- -Shawn
- 14:41:07 [Zakim]
- -Judy
- 14:41:09 [Zakim]
- WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has ended
- 14:41:10 [Zakim]
- Attendees were Bingham, Doyle_Saylor, Jack, Judy, Shadi, Shawn, Justin_Thorp, +1.562.493.aaaa, Wayne, Sylvie_Duchateau\Tanguy_Lohéac, Alan, +61.3.981.3.aabb, Andrew, Helle_Bjarno
- 17:00:55 [Zakim]
- Zakim has left #eo