W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-evaltf@w3.org > August 2012

EvalTF Agenda Telco

From: Velleman, Eric <evelleman@bartimeus.nl>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 21:24:38 +0000
To: "public-wai-evaltf@w3.org" <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3D063CE533923349B1B52F26312B0A46853E8F@s107ma.bart.local>
Dear Eval TF,

The next teleconference is scheduled for Thursday 9 August 2012 at:
  * 14:00 to 15:00 UTC
  * 15:00 to 16:00 UK Time
  * 16:00 to 17:00 Central European Time (time we use as reference)
  * 10:00 to 11:00 North American Eastern Time (ET)
  * 07:00 to 08:00 North American Pacific Time (PT)
  * 22:00 to 23:00 Western Australia Time

Please check the World Clock Meeting Planner to find out the precise date for your own time zone:
  - <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html>

The teleconference information is: (Passcode 3825 - "EVAL")
  * +1.617.761.6200
  * SIP / VoIP -http://www.w3.org/2006/tools/wiki/Zakim-SIP

We also use IRC to support the meeting: (http://irc.w3.org)
  * IRC server: irc.w3.org
  * port: 6665
  * channel: #eval


#1. Welcome, Scribe

#2. Review of new documents
Please review by Wednesday 15 August 2012 the new editor draft and the updated disposition of comments that should address the comments received and discussed over the past weeks:

Updated Editor Draft:
  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20120730>
Updated disposition of comments:
  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments>
Survey for comments:
  - <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/WCAG-EM20120730/>

The major changes are highlighted with notes in the Editor Draft. A full diff-marked version to the 27 March Public Draft is linked from the survey. The disposition of comments indicates the open comments, and provides references to previous surveys and discussion.

#3. Discussion in the Telco
Let us try to discuss the following comments that are still open during the Telco. Please also use the list:

Comment #19: Need to agree on opening an issue on "tolerance metrics" More explanation of the issue and proposed resolution:

Comment #12: Need to agree on update in editor draft. There is a clarification of the concept of use-case in the updated section 3.4.1 Step 4.a (Check for the Broadest Variety of Use Cases). Does this clarify use case sufficiently for the moment or should we open an issue on use cases and come back tot that in a later draft.

Comment #16: Need to resolve an objection. Is this objection solved by the updated section 3.5.3 Step 5.c (Provide a Performance Score (optional)? The section adds different scores. This methodology is not limited to automated evaluation or related sub-scores.

Comment #48: Need to resolve an objection. The rationale is as indicated in the objection very much stressing the need to make it non-optional. We can decide to make no change and keep it optional (1) because we want to stay on the SC level as in WCAG2.0 and/or (2) open an issue to discuss making Step 1.e non-optional. Please note the open ended nature of the techniques.

Comment #A1: Need to agree on the proposed resolution. The tekst says “..minimum set of web browsers and assistive technology to evaluate for shall be defined”. This is important because it is an important part of defining "accessibility support" Proposed resolution is therefore to make no change.

Comment #A4: Need to agree on the proposed resolution. See:

Comment #A6: Need to agree on the proposed resolution: Open an issue to further pursue the usage of the terms. See:

Comment #A7: Need to agree on the proposed resolution: See:

#5. TPAC in Lyon
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2012 21:25:08 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:21 UTC