Meeting minutes
APA Working Group Charter development and the RQTF contribution.
JW: We had an understanding from last time that APA are looking at us for some balance between deliverables and what we would work on again, strong commitment that may limit topics
<janina> https://
We discussed that the MAUR is up for review, and potential AI topics
that could be examples in a charter
JS: Thats fair
We should all read that.
Its good for the charter to be more general
SH: If we did revisit MAUR what is the process for bringing other in?
JS: All those people are still welcome.
Process is open - we could add a CG
Thats how Silver is working
JS: Also versioning up still gives credit to those on previous versions
JW: That is important.
<Groups wonders what Sylia Pfeiffer is up to>
JW: Any else?
JS: I'm comfortable with what we've got/
JW: We also discussed if we were to list RAUR and XAUR etc?
JS: Not sure if that was settled - no harm in listing them.
JS: We didn't discuss if RQTF needs to defend our publication, purpose etc
JOC: Why?
JS: To explain the background etc - we can do that.
We have something like that from Roy on Personalization.
JW: We are reaching agreement, comments?
JS: Are we saying we want to revisit the MAUR?
JW: No-one is speaking against that
SH: Its a great idea
RAUR and XAUR – review, issues, and progress toward publication.
JW: To summarize Josh is working on the issues we have addressed in recent meetings.
The XAUR, we are waiting review comments.
JS: Yes, I'm delayed in contacting Immersive Web
JS: We should re-read it.
We got good feedback at the 11th hour with RAUR.
JW: Lets add XAUR discussion for the next two weeks hence
Next week we have the WoT/APA call
JOC: We still have some RAUR issues to walk through
We still have 122, 123, 124
<jasonjgw> Josh: notes additional RAUR issues for discussion.
https://
etc
[ITU-T] 2.2 Routing and communication channel control #122
https://
The RQTF team seems to feel this requirement is already in RAUR https://
[ITU-T] 2.6 Emergency calls: Support for Real-time text (RTT) #123
https://
<SteveNoble> Josh: the and/or has captured the distinction - we asked for riche media but we have fall-back mechanisms
[ITU-T] 2.10 Live transcription and captioning support #124
https://
<SteveNoble> Commentator asks, "Isn’t live transcription and captioning same thing?"
The symbol needs to captioning specific
https://
We could solve this with REQ 12a: Honor user preferences relating to live transcription and captioning as well as provide support for signing or related symbol sets.
<SteveNoble> Judy: captioning can sometimes relate to recorded or live media, while live events will have live transcriptions
<SteveNoble> Janina: we are talking here about real-time, so the distinction seems moot
<SteveNoble> Josh: not a huge gain in making these distinction
• REQ 12a: Honor user preferences relating to live transcription, captioning and provide support for signing or an AAC related symbol set.
<SteveNoble> Janina: Could include something like "e.g., AAC"
• REQ 12a: Honor user preferences relating to live transcription, captioning and provide support for signing or related symbol set e.g. an AAC.
• REQ 12a: Honor user preferences relating to live transcription, captioning and provide support for signing or type of symbol set e.g. AAC.
<SteveNoble> Janina: useful to refer our suggested change to commenter
New User Needs documents
<jasonjgw> Josh: potential options have been raised for further user needs-related documents that could be developed.
<jasonjgw> MiniApp accessibility could lead to a document.
<jasonjgw> Voice interaction is another possibility.
<jasonjgw> Cosnideration has been given to supporting the work of Silver/WCAG 3 regarding speech interfaces.
<jasonjgw> MAUR is also on the lst.
<jasonjgw> Janina: MiniApps, voice agents, and MAUR.
SH: There is also remote meeting
JW: Thats on the agenda
JB: Just to comment on this
Regarding Mini Apps there is work on this via Roy
It could be helpful to work with him.
The question is how much of a deep dive would have to be done.
On Voice Agents area - there is a workshop in progress, a little on the backburner now.
Roy will have some input also into that.
The question is about efficiency.
We need to support out the level of involvement.
JS: Josh is talking about a user needs doc.
JB: This may not be the time to do that.
JS: Regarding MAUR - it exists because we had a need for supporting media in HTML 5.
There were many areas that needed to be specified.
JB: We are in a different situation now.
JS: How can we do that without articulating user needs and requirements?
JB: DOnt know.
JS: This is an old argument - to get involvement and capture use cases, before turning to specification writing.
JW: Natural language dialog systems are what we call them
JB: The Mini Apps and Smart Agent work is being led out of China.
JS: So are we going to get Josh working on one? Or is two a possibility?
JB: We have some resource here.
We could spread out the work a bit.
JOC: Lets come back to this
JW: Should Mini Apps remain on the agenda?
JS: Yes
JW: We can discuss in two weeks.
JW: Thanks everyone.