12:24:37 RRSAgent has joined #eo 12:24:37 logging to http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-eo-irc 12:24:39 RRSAgent, make logs world 12:24:39 Zakim has joined #eo 12:24:41 Zakim, this will be 3694 12:24:41 ok, trackbot; I see WAI_EOWG()8:30AM scheduled to start in 6 minutes 12:24:42 Meeting: Education and Outreach Working Group Teleconference 12:24:42 Date: 29 May 2015 12:24:49 Chair: Shawn 12:24:54 Scribe: Sharron 12:27:29 WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has now started 12:27:36 + +1.512.202.aaaa 12:28:59 Regrets: Vivienne, Melody, AnnaBelle, Reinaldo (Maybe: Jon, Wayne, Andrew, Sylvie) 12:29:37 +Sharron 12:29:49 +??P6 12:30:05 Zakim, aaaa is me 12:30:05 +Brent; got it 12:30:22 zakim, ??P6 is me 12:30:22 +kevin; got it 12:30:31 zakim, call EricE-Skype 12:30:31 ok, yatil; the call is being made 12:30:32 +EricE 12:30:57 zakim, nick yatil is EricE 12:30:57 ok, yatil, I now associate you with EricE 12:31:03 zakim, mute me 12:31:03 EricE should now be muted 12:31:30 + +1.720.351.aabb 12:31:31 +Shawn 12:31:57 Agenda: https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/EOWG_Meetings#29_May_Teleconference_Agenda 12:32:24 + +1.512.876.aacc 12:32:25 Howard has joined #eo 12:32:29 + +41.78.629.aadd 12:32:53 zakim, aabb is Howard 12:32:53 +Howard; got it 12:33:11 zakim, aadd is Vicki 12:33:11 +Vicki; got it 12:33:16 zakim, who is on the phone? 12:33:16 On the phone I see Brent, Sharron, kevin, EricE (muted), Howard, Shawn, +1.512.876.aacc, Vicki 12:33:37 zakim, aacc is Lydia 12:33:37 +Lydia; got it 12:34:32 +PaulSchantz 12:34:37 Shawn: We have some specific items on the agenda and it is likely to be short. 12:34:49 Topic: Quick Start Tips 12:34:50 paulschantz has joined #eo 12:35:00 Shawn: Let's start by looking at titles 12:35:02 first page: http://w3c.github.io/wai-quick-start/index.html 12:35:11 survey results https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35532/eowg25052015/results#xq7 12:35:31 Shawn: Kevin, have you made changes based on this? 12:35:57 + +1.202.276.aaee 12:36:06 Kevin: Yes, the title changes from Vicki are the ones I chose to put in this draft with some minor changes. We can consider these, happy to change 12:36:52 Shawn: Thanks to everyone who put their ideas in the survey. I suggested that Kevin choose one to put in place but still open for discussion 12:37:03 Zakim, aaee is Jon 12:37:03 +Jon; got it 12:37:14 ...if everyone will skim the suggestions and then we can discuss 12:37:39 agenda+ to talk about "ensure" 12:37:49 agenda+ to talk about overlapping (e.g., alt) 12:38:16 jon has joined #eo 12:39:03 Andrew has joined #eo 12:39:19 q+ to note that many people will look at just one. also we hope they get passed around a lot -- so think "quick start tips" should be prominent... 12:40:03 [also, kevin, for "requirements" do we want to provide a printable version (possibly just a print style sheet) 12:40:39 Sharron: This makes good sense to me. Vicki's suggestion was a good one, navigation and page titles match as Melody noted in the survey 12:40:45 Can do a print style sheet 12:41:05 [wayne's students were gonna do one ages ago but never got to it :/] 12:41:15 ack me 12:41:15 shawn, you wanted to note that many people will look at just one. also we hope they get passed around a lot -- so think "quick start tips" should be prominent... 12:41:39 +Andrew 12:42:12 Shawn: Wanted to note that people will focus on just one of these docs. We hope people will be sharing these and if so, do we want Quick Start Tips to be prominent in the headings? 12:42:19 I think that makes sense. 12:42:50 q+ 12:42:53 zakim, who is on the phone? 12:42:53 On the phone I see Brent, Sharron, kevin, EricE (muted), Howard, Shawn, Lydia, Vicki, PaulSchantz, Jon, Andrew 12:43:08 ack k 12:44:30 Kevin: I wanted to check with you Shawn about what you mean by putting Quick Start Tips prominently in the heading...I have created side navigation that says Quick Tips are also avilable on...(other topics) 12:45:20 no 12:45:27 Shawn: Yes I saw that and appreciate that, but in the title do we need to echo the "Quick Start" verbiage to reiterate the fact that this is only a start 12:45:27 No 12:45:45 +1 to shawn 12:46:09 Andrew: We want to keep the headings precise, I don't see any value in adding "Quick Start" especially since it is elsewhere on the page. We don't want to overload the title 12:46:34 [[Quick Start: Design Tips]] 12:46:41 Vicki: I agree. The side navigation is sufficient to provide that consistency. 12:47:13 q+ 12:47:29 [[in response to AA: title seems too long IMO]] 12:47:30 zakim, who is on the phone? 12:47:30 On the phone I see Brent, Sharron, kevin, EricE (muted), Howard, Shawn, Lydia, Vicki, PaulSchantz, Jon, Andrew 12:47:48 Howard: I am not sure that I disagree exactly. But I am not sure there is enough to indicate that it is one connected resource. If there was a logo or something to subconsciously remind people of the interconnection. But I understand the point about not overloading the title as well. 12:48:08 Paul: I agree with Andrew and Vicki to not overload the title 12:48:33 [[[Quick Start: Design Tips] - doesn't make it clear which type of designer]] 12:49:11 [[and that's a good thing! ;)]] 12:49:13 Quick Start Tips:
12:49:13 Designing for Web Accessibility 12:49:32 I think we SHOULD add Quick Start when sharing via social media, email, etc. 12:50:05 q+ to say about avoiding leading with the same phrase 12:50:16 Shawn: There is a plan to put a short intro on each. 12:50:29 Metzessible has joined #eo 12:50:35 Lydia has joined #eo 12:51:02 Howard: Even if there is something just below the banner, a stylized indicator that this is one of the QuickStart Tips that would indicate to people that it was part of a suite of docs 12:51:04 q+ 12:51:05 q- 12:51:34 Designing for Web Accessibility - Quick Start Tips 12:51:40 ack k 12:51:40 kevin, you wanted to say about avoiding leading with the same phrase 12:52:27 Kevin: My concern was to front load with the key word or concept for scability. 12:52:55 ack a 12:53:03 Shawn: Yes on the Overview page. But if you are sharing just a single one of these, it may improtant for Quick Start to actually be frontloaded deliberately 12:53:45 [[what kind of designer would absolutely not benefit from the "designing" tips page? what is the level of noise in making the title overly precise vs making it short and more catchy?]] 12:54:20 Andrew: I was going to say something similar about front loading - do we want to lead with who it is for. If we have a brief description we may have more thoughts about what the title should be. Not sure what we want if it becoems a landing page. 12:54:38 Shawn: So let's think about that...how will people find this? 12:54:44 [[especially concerned about "front-end" and "champion in organization" limiters, btw]] 12:54:58 q+ 12:55:18 ack l 12:55:31 Andrew: Will probably not get there by landing on home page and navigating through. 12:56:11 Lydia: I like the short titles and how it is broken out, short catchy that leads people to just what they need for themselves. 12:56:45 I think people will get there from a search - designing for accessible web pages - or something 12:57:08 q+ to think SEO and heading 12:57:42 ...many of them will be looking for accessibility resources specific to themselves and their own role. 12:57:46 ack s 12:57:46 shawn, you wanted to think SEO and heading 12:58:20 Shawn: One of the things to think about in the title then is SEO so people will find it and click on it 12:58:35 scribenick: yatil 12:58:35 Scribe: EricE 12:58:52 … quick start probably not good for SEO but good for drawing attention. 12:59:30 q? 12:59:37 shawn: Shadi has mentioned that there is too much stuff in the title, we need to think about that for a bit. Anything else on SEO? 13:00:15 q+ to say "accessible" stand out 13:00:55 ack me 13:00:55 shawn, you wanted to say "accessible" stand out 13:01:03 vicki: Think people come through search engines, so titles are important. You search for things pertinent to your search. It is important to make clear in the search result that this is the information you need. 13:01:22 shawn: I think accessibility gets lost a bit… 13:01:47 … BTW: Wayne has mentioned that they would benefit from not having the WAI side nav. 13:01:55 Scribe: Sharron 13:02:26 Shawn: Kevin, do you need more info to proceed? 13:02:28 [[Quick Start: Tips Accessible Design]] 13:02:37 q+ 13:02:51 +1 ok for now 13:02:54 Kevin: There will be a need for more inut to come, but would I be wrong to say they are OK for the moment? 13:03:14 +[IPcaller] 13:03:16 zakim, ipcaller is me 13:03:16 +shadi; got it 13:03:17 Howard: Can you summarize what we decided? 13:03:38 ack s 13:05:05 Shadi: I find some of the titles overly, unecessarily restrictive. For example, why is "front-end" in there, seems Ok for all developers. Adovacy may be internal but may also be external to an organziation. In making the titles longer, we are making them restrictive in a way that may cause people to miss or turn away. 13:05:26 s/organziation/organization 13:05:44 +1 to Shadi - which is what my title wording was based on in the survey question 13:05:51 Shawn: We do not have consensus yet on the titles and there are still several differnt opinions, so these are more like placeholders. So let's think of what we should do now. Kevin, can you summarize the options? 13:07:10 [tangent: "Authoring: Tips for writing accessible content for the web." -> Writing ] 13:07:31 Kevin: The current approach is to use the same phrase that is on the section overview. Starts with the activity or role and provides a short phrase that includes more info. Another option is to use Quick Start in the title and shorten the title, remove qualification info into a subtitle. There were other comments about the prominence of accessiiblity overall. 13:10:34 Brent: My response in the survey was to try to keep it as short and simple as possible. Designers may come from different perspectives as well as the other roles. As the conversation developed today, I am beginning to agree there is a need to tie it back to the QuickStart. I like the side navigation but also liked Howard's idea for a logo or banner or something that identifies that you are looking 13:10:35 at related resources. 13:11:04 +1 to Brent 13:11:05 ...but not in favor of lengthening the title, need to make titles not wordy. 13:11:57 Shawn: The other idea is that the title of each page is a common title "Design for Web Accessibility with an icon or something that identifies it as one of the Quick Start Tips 13:12:17 I like the icon idea at top 13:12:22 q+ 13:12:33 s/an icon/an icon, masthead, something that says quick start tips/ 13:13:07 ack k 13:13:13 Sharron: If we are thinking of visual iconography, we have to address the left navigation, distracting 13:13:22 Andrew: Agree 13:13:34 Andrew has joined #eo 13:13:40 jon has joined #eo 13:13:48 [[might be tough to get icons for these terms]] 13:14:27 [ I meant ONE overall banner, not icon for each ] 13:14:34 Kevin: "Design for Web Accessibility" form of titling works better for some than others. If I need to remove left hand nav, I will have to do more with the relation to the WAI styles and how that design might work. 13:15:38 Shawn: I wonder if we have thought enough about the issues of the site wrapper or if we should table that and bring it to the group later on. 13:17:26 ...a sub-topic then is a consideration of the overall navigation. When we expect people to remain within a specific tool (like WCAG-EM Report Tool) we present it without the WAI wrapper. With most other resources, however, we present it wihin the WAI site design. A benefit to that is that it encourages people to look through the left nav and investigate other resources. 13:17:58 q+ to mention bcase as an example http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/ 13:18:15 ...for some people, however, it creates clutter and distraction and for people like Wayne, it causes reading barriers. One suggestin has been to allow the sie nav to be collapsible. Initaial thoughts? 13:18:15 ack s 13:18:15 shadi, you wanted to mention bcase as an example http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/ 13:19:52 Shadi: The essence of the problem is that we need a new WAI web site design. In the interim, I wonder about the issues of consistency and the exploration potential. I wanted us to consider how the Business Case is presented. It is not ideal but support consistency and maintenance. 13:20:08 consistency is preferable unless a very good reason not to have it 13:20:37 q+ to note that a collapsing side nav requires some thought on how the main content flows 13:20:48 Sharron: If we make the side nav collapible would it be so everyway on the WAI site? 13:21:22 Shawn: It is a choice we could make 13:21:53 Andrew: It would make it less likely for people to explore resources. 13:22:22 ...there are a lot of issues to make that decision, especially site wide for a whole range of different types of users. 13:22:34 q+ on bcase 13:23:00 q- 13:23:30 Andrew: As we don't need all the space like we did with the WCAG-EM tool, I would be reluctant to remove the left nav. 13:24:26 q+ 13:24:29 Brent: I agree that if it is collapsed, people won't explore it. I am curious about feedback of the BizCase presentation and how people used it. Do people feel that they got lost? 13:24:32 ack b 13:24:32 Brent, you wanted to comment on bcase 13:24:44 q+ to say bcase diff 13:24:44 ...do the tabs keep people anchored within the same tools 13:24:52 q+ later 13:24:58 ack me 13:24:58 shawn, you wanted to say bcase diff 13:24:59 ...and do people even like that presentation? 13:26:02 Shawn: From my perspective, we have not done any user feedback sessins so we don't know for sure. Before we had the top and bottom navigation that th nav on the left was not sufficient. We added those tabs across the top and a Prev Next on the bottom. 13:26:20 ack shadi 13:26:31 q+ to say bcase diff 13:26:38 ack shadi 13:27:24 Shadi: I have heard from people outside within the context of WAI-AGE that some people were alerted to the fact that there were in a multi-page resource, but have also heard that people get lost becasue they do not realize the relationship between the resources. 13:27:35 ack me 13:27:35 shawn, you wanted to say bcase diff 13:27:37 ...a design aspect is needed to visually tie the pages together. 13:28:03 q+ to say “Developing a Web Accessibility Business Case for Your Organization” should be above the horizontal nav, “Overview” below, to make hierarchies clear 13:28:23 Brent: if it is not effective, Kevin should not pursue it. 13:28:45 ack e 13:28:46 EricE, you wanted to say “Developing a Web Accessibility Business Case for Your Organization” should be above the horizontal nav, “Overview” below, to make hierarchies 13:28:46 ... clear 13:28:49 +1 to Shawn's many users focusing on one page comment 13:28:54 [[not not effecitve but not the ultimate solution]] 13:28:55 I think that's a key point - these pages are less connected 13:29:01 +1 to Brent and Shawn 13:29:06 Shawn: Another distinction is that this one is not a resources that is as tightly connected. Some people are likely to look at just one resources. 13:29:50 Eric: I agree and think a bit of styling could address the problem and make it clear that these are related resources. 13:30:18 zakim, mute me 13:30:20 EricE should now be muted 13:30:22 Shawn: Other input? 13:31:06 Shawn: Several in the survey, people had left comments in Github 13:31:22 agenda? 13:31:30 zakim, up agenda 1 13:31:30 I don't understand 'up agenda 1', shawn 13:31:37 zakim, up item 1 13:31:37 I don't understand 'up item 1', shawn 13:31:43 zakim, take up item 1 13:31:43 agendum 1. "to talk about "ensure"" taken up [from shawn] 13:31:43 zakim, take up agenda 1 13:31:44 agendum 1. "to talk about "ensure"" taken up [from shawn] 13:34:11 [ e.g., "Ensure that all interactive elements are keyboard accessible" - "Make all interactive elements keyboard accessible" ] 13:34:30 zakim, who is on the phone 13:34:30 I don't understand 'who is on the phone', shawn 13:34:43 zakim, who is on the phone? 13:34:43 On the phone I see Brent, Sharron, kevin, EricE (muted), Howard, Shawn, Lydia, Vicki, PaulSchantz, Jon, Andrew, shadi 13:34:47 Brent: Ensure is a very strong word and needs to be there 13:35:28 Shawn: To me, ensure means I am checking that someone else has doen something 13:36:02 definition: make certain that (something) will occur or be the case / to secure or guarantee 13:36:25 Brent: It means I must take the responsibility to docuble check that something is done. 13:36:54 Shawn: If the task is something that you do, ensure is not the right word. 13:36:57 q+ 13:37:02 definition: When you ensure that something will happen, you guarantee it. 13:37:35 ...first it must be clear that the thing is done, then you ensure that it has been done. 13:37:37 ack k 13:37:39 I agree with shadi 13:37:46 Shadi: To me, it works either way. 13:37:48 me too 13:38:11 http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/ensure?s=t 13:38:26 It all depends on the role you have 13:38:30 Kevin: In terms of its meaning it is to make certain that something gets done. making sure that something happens. It works either way. 13:38:53 Shawn: For me it does not work, but it is not a huge show-stopper. 13:39:48 Brent: It is used in both ways so I am in favor of that as well. Either you do something to ensure it or you check to be sure something has been done. 13:39:48 [Thinks ensure is fine, make sure probably clearer.] 13:39:59 http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/ensure 13:40:15 agenda? 13:40:16 Howard: The alternative would be to use "make" 13:40:25 Shawn: Some don't like that. 13:40:42 Sharron: I like "make" it is more direct 13:40:43 zakim, take up next 13:40:43 agendum 2. "to talk about overlapping (e.g., alt)" taken up [from shawn] 13:41:12 s/ Some don't like that./ Some preferred ensure over make/ 13:41:14 +1 13:41:17 -1 13:41:20 q+ 13:41:27 Sharron: @@ discussoin 13:41:29 ack j 13:41:52 Sharron: The fact that we had this discussion shows that there is ambiguity around ensure, why not use make, it is clear. 13:41:59 My wife is a linguist - I could ask her. 13:42:13 +1 to Howard - get the pros! 13:42:15 Jon: Make is ambiguous to me. Ensure creates a connection. 13:42:17 [ me notes it doesn't have to be "make" -- there might be somehting better :-] 13:42:51 I vote for ensure 13:42:55 lol 13:44:45 zakim, flip a coin 13:44:45 I don't understand 'flip a coin', shadi 13:44:47 Shawn: Since we do not have consensus, maybe Kevin can work on that. There are preferences, but there was not a strong objection either way, leave for editor's discretion. 13:46:19 Shawn: There was an issue in early drafts of how some of the tips overlap roles. For example, al text...written by content developer but implemented by coder. Kevin, any discussion needed? 13:46:44 Kevin: The main overlapping issue was with images and how we needed to reference them in several places 13:48:08 [ /me agrees sometimes it is the designer -- e.g., the writer/author might not even know the image 'caue the designer does it. ] 13:48:18 [[please don't over complicate this - these are quick start tips for newbies]] 13:48:25 ...as I thought about it, the major responsibility lies within the authoring role. There is slight repsonsibility among designers but that is edgy. there is also the consideration of the developer to be sure they are properly plaicing alt text. I am not averse to put it into developing although I think that is more likely to be a matter of content management. 13:48:32 +1 to kevin's rationale 13:48:54 [ I also wonder if there are many real-life cases where no one writes it so the developer needs to -- e.g., small development shop.] 13:49:15 [[as per Shadi - they are tips, not a comprehensive "how to" manual]] 13:49:15 ...there is also quite a bit of overlap between managing and advocating. There are items there that require a bit of clarification. 13:50:23 [[and labels]] 13:50:33 Shawn: alt and overlap between managing and advocating, those are the only cases to consider? 13:50:39 Kevin: Yes for now. 13:50:42 +1 to Shawn's comment on small developer shops - but then they may be reading 'Authoring' as well 13:51:27 q+ 13:51:34 ack s 13:51:34 Vicki: I think alt considerations should be referenced in design so that they are aware. They may play a bit of all of those roles so it could be useful to remind people in all related roles. 13:52:53 Shadi: We have 9 tips in design as it is. We should not exceed between 7-9 tips for each. If we add alt, we might consider removing one. Some degree of overlap is OK and probably inevitable. I agree that clarity is needed between managing and advocacy. 13:53:12 ...my main point is priorities. If we add to a topic, should we drop another? 13:53:47 Andrew: and recall that it is a Quick Start, not an authoritative How To and we lead them to new resources. 13:53:48 http://w3c.github.io/wai-quick-start/designing.html 13:54:51 Shawn: Vicki, with that in mind would you be compfrtable leaving alt text out of design? 13:55:11 Vicki: If it is added at the bottom or soemhow referenced I might be OK with that. 13:55:26 ...even at the bottom with learn more 13:55:27 maybe learn more includes the tutorials 13:55:27 +1 to making it specific to each page -- eg "learn more about accessible design" 13:55:54 Shawn: So "learn more" would link to comething specific to that role? 13:56:36 Andrew: Related to developing, it does not need to be added since it is included in code validation. 13:58:21 +1 to alt for developer 13:58:30 Shawn: I propose that alt does belong on developing. I imagine there are many developers who receive content that does not have alt attached to it. Also even if someone is given alt if they do not realize the improtance they may think it unneeded and not put it in. It is easy, good for a tip. Finally, we don't have alot in this particular list so it would not be a burden. 13:58:43 Vicki +100 13:58:50 Vicki: +1 13:58:53 if we add, need to tell them who to get the text from 13:59:03 +1 13:59:12 I'll add my +1 13:59:49 Shawn: any objections? 13:59:59 zakim, close agenda 2 13:59:59 agendum 2, to talk about overlapping (e.g., alt), closed 14:00:00 I see nothing remaining on the agenda 14:00:51 -Lydia 14:01:03 Shawn: Kevin continues to work on these, please put on your "let's make this awesome" hat and continue to engage with his work. We will prompt you but you are encouraged to look and comment as you ahve time and inclination 14:01:19 Topic: Quick Ref redesign 14:01:58 Shawn: Eric is working on incorporating survey comments and feedback from AccessU. We can leave the survey open for yur comments. 14:02:10 ack me 14:03:00 Eric: I have little to sayabout it, I am working on making a more active view so we can have a design that we can use and discuss. I think it will be a good direction and we will see more next week. 14:03:05 zakim, mute me 14:03:05 EricE should now be muted 14:03:29 Shawn: And we may have opportunity for more informal testing/feedback in June. Will keep you posted. 14:03:43 Topic: Providing feedback on draft projects 14:03:43 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:03:43 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-eo-minutes.html yatil 14:04:44 s/sayabout/say about/ 14:04:46 Shawn: Wanted to provide an update and address any questions you may have about how to submit suggestions or comments. Previously we have asked for preliminary way to do requirements and early drafts. 14:05:10 ...soem find wiki hard to use and so feedback can be submitted via the survey or email to the list. 14:06:41 ...once a draft gets more robust, it is moved to GitHub where you can raise and issue, make a comment, suggest a change. That is the current process. Once a project moves to GitHub that becomes the preferred way to comment but if you are not comfortable with it, always able to submit via email or survey. 14:07:04 Sharron: prompted by ... 14:08:46 Andrew: Yes I could use a GitHub refresher. 14:08:56 agenda+ zakim & webex 14:09:57 -Vicki 14:10:10 zakim, take up next 14:10:10 agendum 3. "zakim & webex" taken up [from shawn] 14:10:33 +Vicki 14:11:45 I have lots of experience using Webex. 14:11:56 q+ 14:12:01 Shawn: zakim is going away, we will miss him. There are some barriers to WebEx but some advantages as well. I wanted to alert people to that it is likely to happen at the end of June. 14:12:15 Andrew_ has joined #eo 14:12:32 Jon: Could you use Google apps for nonprofits which is free? 14:13:24 ...you could get the Google apps for business but get them for free. You can create your own plugins and integration with internal systems and screen sharing etc. 14:13:34 google docs/apps has accessibility issues too (at least it did last time I investigated) 14:16:20 Jon: There is also the GoToMeeting with an improved UI and is used by a couple of ADA Centers and Blackboard. 14:16:51 -PaulSchantz 14:17:53 Shawn: I will put you in the loop with those who are making this decission, any other comments or questions? 14:17:53 -Jon 14:17:56 -Vicki 14:17:56 bye! 14:17:58 -shadi 14:18:00 -Howard 14:18:01 cisco is also a W3C member 14:18:03 -Shawn 14:18:04 -kevin 14:18:09 -Andrew 14:18:10 zakim, drop me 14:18:10 EricE is being disconnected 14:18:11 -EricE 14:18:13 -Sharron 14:18:18 -Brent 14:18:19 WAI_EOWG()8:30AM has ended 14:18:19 Attendees were +1.512.202.aaaa, Sharron, Brent, kevin, EricE, +1.720.351.aabb, Shawn, +1.512.876.aacc, +41.78.629.aadd, Howard, Vicki, Lydia, PaulSchantz, +1.202.276.aaee, Jon, 14:18:19 ... Andrew, shadi 14:19:11 Sharron has left #eo 14:20:49 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:20:49 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-eo-minutes.html yatil 14:21:40 s/bye!// 14:22:14 s/lol// 14:22:38 rrsagent, draft minutes 14:22:38 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-eo-minutes.html yatil 14:23:02 trackbot, end meeting 14:23:02 Zakim, list attendees 14:23:02 sorry, trackbot, I don't know what conference this is 14:23:10 RRSAgent, please draft minutes 14:23:11 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2015/05/29-eo-minutes.html trackbot 14:23:12 RRSAgent, bye 14:23:12 I see no action items