W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-evaltf@w3.org > January 2013

Regrets: EvalTF agenda Telco

From: Moe Kraft <maureen_kraft@us.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:14:22 -0500
To: evelleman@bartimeus.nl
Cc: "public-wai-evaltf@w3.org" <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF552B7E51.39B742BE-ON85257B04.0053AE4A-85257B04.0053B82E@notesdev.ibm.com>
Regrets for today. Working on year end compliance reporting. 


From:   "Velleman, Eric" <evelleman@bartimeus.nl>
To:     "public-wai-evaltf@w3.org" <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>, 
Date:   01/30/2013 05:33 AM
Subject:        EvalTF agenda Telco

Dear Eval TF,

The next teleconference is scheduled for Thursday 31 January 2012 at:
  * 15:00 to 16:00 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)
  * 23:00 to 24:00 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

#2. New editor draft and DoC:
  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20130128>
  - <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/comments-20120920>

View changes here in diff version between 17 January and 28 January 

#3. EvalTF Survey 7 and 8 discussion
- <https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/48225/evaltfq8>
We will discuss open issues from the surveys. I will send around the links 
just before the meeting. We will include the following:

#4. Combining evaluations
How does combining evaluations relate to uniform accessibility support and 
use of tools and configurations. See discussion on the list:

Proposed resolution can be found in:

#5. Make sampling optional
Proposed resolution: Keep it non-optional until we have more backing info 
that random samples do not add to the results of the structured sample.
List: <

#6. Definition of random
Possible resolution: No definition or explanation, but we add to the 
reporting section: "describe how you selected the random sample."
List: <

#7. Size of the sample
There is more research necessary and coming up, but for the moment we 
should put something here that we can used for testing in the next Public 
Working Draft.

Proposed resolution (based on discussion on the list): "Include a random 
sample of at least 20 percent of the number of web pages that are in the 
structured sample or a minimum of 5 random web pages from the scope of the 
website into the sample (if available)."
List: <

#8. Other issues

Eric Velleman
Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 15:14:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:40:23 UTC