See also: IRC log
<JR> Scribe: AndrewR
JR - proposed change was to make it slightly shorter
JS would also like to shorten it
JR - didn't think it was necessary to tell people to go elsewhere to find certain information
JR - proposed shortening: This appendix contains definitions for all of the important and/or unfamiliar terms used in the normative parts of this specification, including terms used in the (link to conformance) section. All of these terms are linked at least from their first usage in the specification. Where appropriate definitions for these terms could be found in other W3C Recommendations,...
scribe: the source is designated by "[ ]". In some cases, editorial adaptation was required to make the definitions suitable for the ATAG 2.0.
General concensus of the group is the shortening is acceptable
<JR> ACTION: JS insert JR's text for Proposal for Glossary Appendix Introduction (#1 in http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20090114/results) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action01]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-81 - Insert JR's text for Proposal for Glossary Appendix Introduction (#1 in http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35520/20090114/results) [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
JT: unanimous acceptance of this
<JR> ACTION: JS insert JR's text for abbreviation (#2) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action02]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-82 - Insert JR's text for abbreviation (#2) [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
JT: the reason we have the distinction is because when something is web based we can use WCAG
GP: is there a difference is how we treat web based vs non web based?
JT: yes. Web based would have WCAG applied to it
JR: primary objection is the non-web-based is quite an awkward term
GP: people will probably call it non-browser based
<JR> authoring tool user interface (Web-based)
<JR> Any parts of an authoring tool user interface that are implemented using Web content technologies and are accessed by authors via a user agent..
<JR> ACTION: JS to Insert "authoring tool user interface (non-Web-based) Any parts of an authoring tool user interface that are not implemented as Web content and instead run directly on a platform that is not a user agent, such as Windows, MacOS, Java Virtual Machine, etc. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action03]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-83 - Insert \"authoring tool user interface (non-Web-based) Any parts of an authoring tool user interface that are not implemented as Web content and instead run directly on a platform that is not a user agent, such as Windows, MacOS, Java Virtual Machine, etc. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
TB: is the first use of the term
authoring tool linked to the glossary?
... the definition of authoring tool has implications for the
applicability / scope of the document so it's an important
subject
... all the significant definition should be consolidated in
the glossary
JR: trying to avoid duplicating
the language
... trying to define it in one place
... seems to be some confusion as to where that place should
be
<JR> JT: Idea change "Definition of authoring tool" to "Scope and Applicability"
<JR> JR: +1
<JR> TB: Reading from QA best practices....
<JR> JT: Authoring tool defintion stays in glossary
<JR> JR: Where should notes go
<JR> ACTION: JR to Put defintion of Authoring Tool back in Glossary, make a Scope and Applicability section out of list of tools and the 2 notes [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action04]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-84 - Put defintion of Authoring Tool back in Glossary, make a Scope and Applicability section out of list of tools and the 2 notes [on Jan Richards - due 2009-02-02].
JT: the only difference is "has the right" compared to "has a right"
<JR> ACTION: JS to Use new wording of "authoring permission" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action05]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-85 - Use new wording of \"authoring permission\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
JT: proposal unanimously accepted. Slight editorial change required.
JR: we're making a distinction by content that's only going to be seen by the author vs content that will be seen by others
TB: has reservations about our definition of author. It may cause us problems down the line.
JR: would you like us to drop it entirely?
TB: what would be lost if we did?
<JR> ATAG 2.0 defines an "authoring tool" as any software, or collection of software components, that authors can use to create or modify Web content for use by other people.
<JR> ATAG 2.0 defines an "authoring tool" as any software, or collection of software components, that authors can use to create or modify Web content.
<JR> ACTION: JR to Put "by other people" on agenda for next meeting [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action06]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-86 - Put \"by other people\" on agenda for next meeting [on Jan Richards - due 2009-02-02].
JR: [] means where we have "adapted" from somewhere else
<JR> ACTION: JS to Insert: [harmonized with EARL 1.0] [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action07]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-87 - Insert: [harmonized with EARL 1.0] [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
<JR> JT: Should we drop term "Content being edited"
<JR> JR: +1
AR: +1
<JR> ACTION: JS to Remove definition of term "Content being edited" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action08]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-88 - Remove definition of term \"Content being edited\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
<JR> ACTION: JS to Change "broad categories" to "types" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action09]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-89 - Change \"broad categories\" to \"types\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
JT: is the term we're defining "content (web)"
JR: WCAG say "content (web
content)"
... would we consider WCAG 1.0 a good enough standard to be
ATAG compliant against?
<JR> ACTION: JS to Use new defn of "content (Web)", not adding 2.0 to end of WCAG. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action10]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-90 - Use new defn of \"content (Web)\", not adding 2.0 to end of WCAG. [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
i had an official response from Shadi r.e. WCAG 1 / 2 which i posted on our blog - http://www.rnib.org.uk/wacblog/news/wcag-20-moves-to-proposed-recommendation/
<JR> ACTION: JS to Make change to "content rendering" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action11]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-91 - Make change to \"content rendering\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
<JR> ACTION: JS to Make change to "conversion" [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action12]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-92 - Make change to \"conversion\" [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
<JR> ACTION: JS to Make change to "authoring practice" incl bolding [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html#action13]
<trackbot> Created ACTION-93 - Make change to \"authoring practice\" incl bolding [on Jeanne Spellman - due 2009-02-02].
This is scribe.perl Revision: 1.133 of Date: 2008/01/18 18:48:51 Check for newer version at http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2002/scribe/ Guessing input format: RRSAgent_Text_Format (score 1.00) Found Scribe: AndrewR Inferring ScribeNick: AndrewR Default Present: jeanne, JR, andrewr, JuttaT, Tim_Boland, Sueann, Greg_Pisocky Present: jeanne JR andrewr JuttaT Tim_Boland Sueann Greg_Pisocky Agenda: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2009JanMar/0026.html Got date from IRC log name: 26 Jan 2009 Guessing minutes URL: http://www.w3.org/2009/01/26-au-minutes.html People with action items: jr js WARNING: Input appears to use implicit continuation lines. You may need the "-implicitContinuations" option.[End of scribe.perl diagnostic output]