14:44:17 RRSAgent has joined #wai-wcag 14:44:17 logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/05/21-wai-wcag-irc 14:44:24 zakim, this will be 9224 14:44:24 ok, Joshue108; I see WAI_WCAG()11:00AM scheduled to start in 16 minutes 14:44:33 rrsagent, make log world 14:44:45 Meeting: WCAG Working Group Meeting 14:44:51 chair: Joshue 14:45:28 agenda + WCAG Charter Refresh: 14:45:28 https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/CharterRefreshMay2013/ 14:45:40 agenda + WCAG2ICT Items: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/GenWCAG2ICT21st5th2013/ 14:57:52 WAI_WCAG()11:00AM has now started 14:57:59 +[IPcaller] 14:58:07 zakim, [IPcaller] is Joshue 14:58:07 +Joshue; got it 14:58:25 korn has joined #wai-wcag 14:58:37 Loretta has joined #WAI-WCAG 14:58:50 zakim, mute me 14:58:50 sorry, Joshue108, muting is not permitted when only one person is present 14:59:01 +Kathy 14:59:16 robin has joined #wai-wcag 14:59:48 +Peter_Korn 15:00:31 + +1.253.381.aaaa 15:00:46 zakim, aaaa is Robin 15:00:46 +Robin; got it 15:01:16 marcjohlic has joined #wai-wcag 15:01:40 +Marc_Johlic 15:02:24 +[IPcaller] 15:02:56 zakim, IPcaller is Loretta 15:02:56 +Loretta; got it 15:03:08 +Katie_HaritosShea 15:03:08 scribe: Peter Korn 15:03:13 +??P21 15:03:19 AWK has joined #wai-wcag 15:03:45 zakim, P21 is Leonie 15:03:45 sorry, Joshue108, I do not recognize a party named 'P21' 15:03:49 zakim, ??P21 is Leonie 15:03:49 +Leonie; got it 15:04:12 +Gregg_Vanderheiden 15:04:23 greggvanderheiden has joined #wai-wcag 15:05:04 tink has joined #wai-wcag 15:06:11 Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag 15:08:31 LW would like to see reference to older persons, in addition to persons with disabilities 15:09:42 +[IPcaller] 15:10:09 kerstin_probiesch has joined #wai-wcag 15:10:16 KW - are we calling out specific disabilities because we explicitly plan to work on them? ("cognitive, mobile, etc.") 15:10:36 zakim, mute me 15:10:36 sorry, kerstin_probiesch, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 15:10:40 JC - yes, these enumerated items ARE things we definitely want to focus on 15:10:52 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:10:52 On the phone I see Joshue, Kathy, Peter_Korn, Robin, Marc_Johlic, Loretta, Katie_HaritosShea, Leonie, Gregg_Vanderheiden, [IPcaller] 15:10:53 JC - list isn't exhaustive 15:11:02 KW - should we put HTML5, ARIA on this list as well? 15:11:02 zakim, ipcaller is me 15:11:02 +kerstin_probiesch; got it 15:11:07 zakim, mute me 15:11:07 kerstin_probiesch should now be muted 15:11:25 +Bruce_Bailey 15:11:36 JC - we are definitely doing work there, in a TF. Don't know we need to enumerate every domain in the charter. 15:12:09 JC - definitely consider adding HTML5, ARIA to the enumerated list 15:12:14 -Bruce_Bailey 15:12:21 +James_Nurthen 15:12:36 BBailey has joined #wai-wcag 15:12:53 jamesn has joined #wai-wcag 15:14:13 JC - now looking at "Explore needs for potential minor..." part of charter 15:14:59 JC - very much trying to ensure scope of charter is broad enough to cover new types of technologies 15:15:30 zakim, who is on the phone? 15:15:30 On the phone I see Joshue, Kathy, Peter_Korn, Robin, Marc_Johlic, Loretta, Katie_HaritosShea, Leonie, Gregg_Vanderheiden, kerstin_probiesch (muted), James_Nurthen 15:15:36 I'm here, but I don't have comments. I'm ok with the written points 15:16:42 GV - are we going to limit ourselves to "WCAG plus"? If we are looking at removing anything, we open ourselves to a huge process, with regulatory implications. 15:16:46 thanks kerstin 15:17:35 GV - previous text noted that our work would be "backward compatible". We could put regulatory adoption on hold if we signal that WCAG 2.0 could be changed (e.g. WCAG 2.1) 15:18:05 JC - we need to have sufficient scope that (1) doesn't break anything that is stable, and (2) allows us to move in an iterative way. 15:18:35 GV - Maybe the topc should be "explore major/minor additions to WCAG" - looking at anything we missed, but won't go back and undo anything 15:19:10 JC - now looking at "Coordinate with other groups..." portion 15:19:33 zakim, unmute me 15:19:33 kerstin_probiesch should no longer be muted 15:19:38 JC - now looking at "General Comments on other aspects of the charter" section 15:21:29 JC - the charter doesn't lock us in religiously. We can re-charter if we need to. 15:21:48 JN - points out that re-chartering is a real pain; it shouldn't be something we think we want to do 15:22:17 +Bruce_Bailey 15:22:22 JN - the aim is a charter to take us through 3 years; we would re-charter only if we felt we really needed to 15:23:17 zakim, i am bruce 15:23:17 ok, BBailey, I now associate you with Bruce_Bailey 15:23:24 zakim, take up item 2 15:23:24 agendum 2. "WCAG2ICT Items: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/GenWCAG2ICT21st5th2013/" taken up [from Joshue108] 15:23:26 zakim, mute me 15:23:26 Bruce_Bailey should now be muted 15:25:33 RESOLUTION: accept charter with amendment to "Explore" section title, which replaced the word "updates" with "additions", so it becomes: "Explore needs for potential minor and / or major ADDITIONS to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines" 15:25:35 +Andrew_Kirkpatrick 15:25:56 zakim, unmute me 15:25:56 Bruce_Bailey should no longer be muted 15:26:12 zakim, mute me 15:26:12 Bruce_Bailey should now be muted 15:27:34 AWK - (still on previous agenda item) so we cannot remove/replace anything with this charter? 15:29:15 GV - Yes; we don't want to be able to change things in a way that is incompatible with WCAG 2.0. That could break test tools, regulations that have adopted WCAG 2.0, etc. 15:29:39 Zakim, who is talking? 15:29:50 korn, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: Joshue (63%), Gregg_Vanderheiden (50%), James_Nurthen (4%) 15:30:12 q+ 15:30:24 +q 15:30:40 zakim, mute me 15:30:40 Joshue should now be muted 15:31:09 GV - Likewise we don't want to do anything that might be seen as a reason to "wait for WCAG 2.1" vs. adopting 2.0. 15:31:11 zakim, unmute me 15:31:11 Joshue should no longer be muted 15:31:14 ack awk 15:31:23 zakim, mute me 15:31:23 Joshue should now be muted 15:32:01 AWK - What would be bad is making a decision to add/remove without having all the information. So that is why we had the language "collect requirements". 15:32:35 AWK - therefore it is part of our job to consider backward compatibility. So to only explore additions seems unnecessarily constraining. 15:33:08 q+ 15:33:37 zakim, unmute me 15:33:37 Joshue should no longer be muted 15:33:41 ack me 15:33:43 AWK - reluctant to say we can only add, because we haven't evaluated yet 15:33:58 q+ to say it would be better to be constrained to not introducing compatibilities rather than “additions” only versus “updates”. 15:34:01 +David_MacDonald 15:34:08 JC - whether it says explore... additions vs. updates, amounts to the same thing. We are exploring. 15:34:52 ack korn 15:35:31 PK: I agree. It amounts to the same thing. 15:35:36 David has joined #wai-wcag 15:36:01 PK: We can re-charter if we find new things in the next three years, the exploration isn't constrained. 15:36:06 zakim, mute me 15:36:06 Joshue should now be muted 15:36:35 PK: It may signal that we might do more, I am in favour of Greggs change without any change in the bullets. 15:36:38 zakim, unmute me 15:36:38 Joshue should no longer be muted 15:36:39 q+ 15:36:43 ack gregg 15:37:05 zakim, mute me 15:37:05 Joshue should now be muted 15:37:50 GV: Wording of WCAG from the start encompasses the idea that AT may advance; so if relying on AT & it can now do something it couldn't do before, we don't need to change the SC to cover it (e.g. zoom, which is now in browsers so the content doesn't have to self-zoom since essentially all browsers now do it) 15:39:03 q+ to ask Gregg if he views this change in wording as serving to state that we are not chartered to investigate the removal of any items in WCAG 15:40:56 GV - The key question we have is whether we are contemplating a non-backward-compatible WCAG update. 15:41:38 zakim, unmute me 15:41:38 Joshue should no longer be muted 15:42:14 GV - If we think there is something seriously broken, we should work on that. If not, then not. And if we discover a serious breakage within next 3 years, we can re-charter. 15:43:04 JC - feels we are getting a little derailed. We have discussed this a lot in last several weeks. We need to finalize the charter. 15:44:44 q+ 15:46:31 GV - charter is an extrodinarily meaningful document. Orignally talked about 2 parts: (1) additions to a 2.1, and (2) longer term look at where technology is going and whether we need to look at guidelines in an entirely new way [as a very long term thing]. Now these two things seem to have been mushed together, and very worried about uncertainty in short term. 15:47:20 ack bruce 15:47:21 Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to say it would be better to be constrained to not introducing compatibilities rather than “additions” only versus “updates”. 15:48:40 ack awk 15:48:40 AWK, you wanted to ask Gregg if he views this change in wording as serving to state that we are not chartered to investigate the removal of any items in WCAG 15:48:43 zakim, mute me 15:48:44 Bruce_Bailey should now be muted 15:48:52 BB - would like to clearly state intention to not break backward compatibility, but prefers the word "update" 15:49:02 q+ 15:49:37 ack david 15:49:38 AWK - don't want to hear "we can't even talk about x" if we have the word "addition" instead of "update". 15:50:49 ack greg 15:51:39 Ryladog has joined #wai-wcag 15:51:41 the intent is to maintain backward compatibility for any wcag 2.0 series guidelines while 15:51:56 +1 with Gregg and Andrew 15:52:05 q+ 15:52:25 carrying out more open discussions about how to craft future guidelines to address emerging technical environment 15:52:43 the intent is to maintain backward compatibility for any wcag 2.0 series guidelines while carrying out more open discussions about how to craft future guidelines to address emerging technical environment 15:53:28 q+ to ask for a stronger word than “intent” 15:55:09 ack james 15:56:25 JN - The charter as written doesn't seem to allow us to publish a new edition of WCAG. Is that something to state explicitly? 15:56:32 The "Out of Scoe" section clarifies Jame's concern 15:56:51 s/Jame's/James's 15:57:16 s/Out of Scoe/Out of Scope 15:57:30 q+ 15:58:23 -Gregg_Vanderheiden 15:58:43 ack bruce 15:58:43 ack bruce 15:58:44 Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to ask for a stronger word than “intent” 15:59:16 why is the meeting restricted? 15:59:25 I fell out and am not allowed to reenter 15:59:46 zakim, mute me 15:59:46 Bruce_Bailey should now be muted 15:59:56 and the meeting is still in progress? 16:00:15 trying to figure it out gregg 16:00:20 ah I have it 16:00:21 hold on 16:00:25 zakim, unmute 16:00:25 I don't understand 'unmute', BBailey 16:00:31 zakim, queue? 16:00:31 I see tink on the speaker queue 16:00:37 zakim, unmute me 16:00:37 Bruce_Bailey should no longer be muted 16:00:38 ack tink 16:00:47 +Gregg_Vanderheiden 16:00:55 zakim, mute me 16:00:55 Bruce_Bailey should now be muted 16:01:24 LJW - is there a tangible deliverable out of requirements gathering? 16:01:58 zakim, mute me 16:01:58 Joshue should now be muted 16:02:26 ack me 16:02:41 zakim, unmute me 16:02:41 Joshue should no longer be muted 16:03:01 AWK - in the deliverables section, we do say we will develop requirements 16:03:25 -Leonie 16:03:37 zakim, queue? 16:03:37 I see no one on the speaker queue 16:03:45 q+ 16:03:53 q- 16:04:05 JC - seems we aren't quite as close to finalizing charter as thought 16:04:42 q+ 16:05:29 ack korn 16:06:07 zakim, unmute me 16:06:07 Bruce_Bailey should no longer be muted 16:09:35 zakim, mute me 16:09:35 Bruce_Bailey should now be muted 16:09:43 RESOLUTION: re-open the charter discussion 16:10:40 zakim, unmute me 16:10:40 Bruce_Bailey should no longer be muted 16:10:50 zakim, queue? 16:10:50 I see no one on the speaker queue 16:12:21 zakim, take up item 2 16:12:21 agendum 2. "WCAG2ICT Items: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/GenWCAG2ICT21st5th2013/" taken up [from Joshue108] 16:12:34 zakim, mute me 16:12:34 Bruce_Bailey should now be muted 16:13:26 RESOLUTION: first 7 (of 8) survey items accepted 16:13:27 q+ 16:13:42 What are the common causes of confusion, and what can be done to fix them?'. 16:13:46 q+ 16:13:51 https://sites.google.com/site/wcag2ict/temp/document-organization-trial 16:14:01 ack, korn 16:14:05 First 7 items accepted are: General WCAG2ICT guidance for Principles and Guidelines, Definition for: changes of context, Definition for: structure, New text on Conformance notes, Satisfies a success criterion, Conformance, Accessibility Supported 16:14:06 ack korn 16:14:13 zakim, mute me 16:14:13 Joshue should now be muted 16:14:31 PK: This text displays a re-ordering of the blocks we put together. 16:14:44 PK: We quoted the WCAG SC and intent and then placed out changes into the doc. 16:15:02 PK: In this re-odering we quote the WCAG SC then put in our guidance and quote WCAG understanding. 16:15:18 :-) 16:15:21 q+ is this just for 1.1.1, or for al the SC? 16:16:14 q+ 16:16:31 zakim, unmute me 16:16:31 Joshue should no longer be muted 16:17:03 ack gregg 16:18:14 q+ To clarify that this is for all SC. 16:19:09 ack loretta 16:19:43 q+ 16:20:04 LGR - no objection in principal. Relies on TF to ensure there aren't changes to "understanding" text. Also would like to authorize TF to make editorial changes w/out needing to come back to WCAG WG each time. 16:20:21 +1 16:20:36 ack bruce 16:20:37 Bruce_Bailey, you wanted to clarify that this is for all SC. 16:20:39 ack Bruce 16:20:44 ack g 16:21:06 BB - would like to do both things: OK this change, and empower TF to make formatting/editorial changes. 16:22:15 RESOLUTION: accept survey item 8 - proposed re-org of WCAG2ICT presentation 16:23:05 RESOLUTION: I propose the WCAG WG delegates decisions on the WCAG2ICT doc to the WCAG2ICT editors, chairs. 16:23:50 -Katie_HaritosShea 16:24:18 s/I propose the/ 16:24:47 s/RESOLUTION: I propose the WCAG WG delegates decisions on the WCAG2ICT doc to the WCAG2ICT editors, chairs./ 16:25:50 RESOLUTION: WCAG WG delegates editorial decitions on WCAG2ICT document to the WCAG2ICT editors 16:26:03 s/decitions/decisions 16:26:42 -Joshue 16:26:59 -James_Nurthen 16:27:01 bye 16:27:01 -Gregg_Vanderheiden 16:27:02 -Loretta 16:27:06 -Robin 16:27:08 -Kathy 16:27:16 -kerstin_probiesch 16:27:55 Wrapping up minutes: 16:27:57 zakim, bye 16:27:57 leaving. As of this point the attendees were Joshue, Kathy, Peter_Korn, +1.253.381.aaaa, Robin, Marc_Johlic, Loretta, Katie_HaritosShea, Leonie, Gregg_Vanderheiden, 16:27:57 Zakim has left #wai-wcag 16:27:58 rrsagent, make log public 16:28:00 ... kerstin_probiesch, Bruce_Bailey, James_Nurthen, Andrew_Kirkpatrick, David_MacDonald 16:28:00 RRSAgentI have made the request, 16:28:01 rrsagent, make minutes 16:28:01 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/05/21-wai-wcag-minutes.html David 16:28:03 RRSAgent I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/24-text-minutes.html David 16:28:04 (then check URI and copy uri into an email, and copy text into the body of the email. 19:05:03 korn has left #wai-wcag