W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > May 2008

Comments on charter

From: Michael A Squillace <masquill@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 10:09:59 -0500
To: public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF478C30A3.57DB992E-ON8525744F.004F3121-8625744F.00531D48@us.ibm.com>
All:
I have the following comments on the proposed ERT charter at:

http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/charter4

, divided into editorial and substantive below:

Editorial:
1. Mission
- heading for mission is missing
- eliminate second 'to' in first sentence "...is to to develope..."
2. Deliverables - do we want to say something about starting work on a 
language for expressing test requirements, cases, criteria?
3. Timeline view summary: first item says April 2008; thought we were 
working on this now so do we want to say June 2008?

Substantive:
1. Success criteria (followed the PFWG's success criteria section for 
this). Question: Do we need this section since not all W3C groups seem to 
include it in their charter (e.g. AUWG):
- demonstrated successful implementation of Evaluation and Report Language 
(EARL) 1.0 Schema as a technique for reporting validation results in tools 
that perform compliance validations
- publication of EARL 1.0 Schema as a W3C recommendation
- publication of EARL 1.0 Schema supporting documents as W3C technical 
notes
Do we want to add something about test suites and about use of EARL to 
aggregate test results (i.e. as input rather than just as output)?
- do we want to add something about (2) under editorial comments?

2. Out of scope: Do we need this section? Do we anticipate working on 
non-W3C items?

3. Dependencies:
- WAI Protocols and Formats WG (from AUWG charter)
"
The Protocols and Formats WG (PFWG public page also available) is the 
primary conduit for describing and resolving dependencies between WAI 
groups and other W3C Working Groups. Consequently, requirements for 
dependencies between the AUWG and other W3C WG's are primarily channeled 
through the PFWG, and only groups with which AUWG requires direct 
discussions on dependencies are listed here. 
"
replacing AUWG with ERT WG?
- Internationalization activity: coordinate how to address 
internationalization in EARL reports; part of implementation concerns?
- WAI Education and Outreach WG: use EOWG to promote awareness of EARL 1.0 
Schema and supporting documents
- +1 for suggestions for updated charter


--> Mike Squillace
IBM Human Ability and Accessibility Center
Austin, TX

W:512.823.7423
M:512.970.0066

masquill@us.ibm.com
www.ibm.com/able



Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> 
Sent by: public-wai-ert-request@w3.org
05/19/2008 04:37 PM

To
public-wai-ert@w3.org
cc

Subject
Reminder: comments on HTTP-in-RDF and Content-in-RDF drafts







Dear group,

Ref:
  - http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/HTTP/WD-HTTP-in-RDF-20080220
  - http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/Content/WD-Content-in-RDF-20080327

Please find online the latest two editor drafts of the documents "HTTP 
Vocabulary in RDF" and "Representing Content in RDF", where were 
previously circulated on the mailing list.

In order to proceed with publication, we should finalize any open 
issues. Please send any remaining comments you may have to the mailing 
list so that we can resolve them during the coming call.

Note the editor notes in the HTTP Vocabulary in RDF document, some of 
these should be addressed before publication.

Regards,
   Shadi

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/ |
   WAI International Program Office Activity Lead   |
  W3C Evaluation & Repair Tools Working Group Chair |
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 2008 15:10:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 20 May 2008 15:10:48 GMT