W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-rd@w3.org > November 2012

Re: e2r: selection of papers and format of symposium

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:00:41 +0100
Message-ID: <50938BB9.9030809@w3.org>
To: Klaus Miesenberger <Klaus.Miesenberger@jku.at>
CC: RDWG <public-wai-rd@w3.org>
Hi Klaus,

If you and the other symposium co-chairs think that papers 5, 6, and 15 
would add valuable contribution to the symposium and the ensuing report 
then I'm certainly in favor for including them.

Do you expect to have a short break after these panel discussions then 
have another open discussion session after the break? I'm not sure what 
you mean by "Follow up discussion for interested people".

Best,
   Shadi


On 2.11.2012 09:50, Klaus Miesenberger wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
>
> unfortunatly Sandy blew away our telco this week  - I do hope that Simon and others are not affected too much by this.
>
> Following our timeline we have to notify submitters about acceptance or decline of papers for the symposium - that's what I wanted to discuss on Wednesday.
>
> Here is a proposal, following a chair meeting we did in Linz, for both acceptance and symposium structure (numbers refer to the list attached)
>
> A) Acceptance our of 17 submissions
> 1) Clear accept for 11 papers: 8, 11, 2, 3, 9, 12, 13, 17, 4, 16, 10
> 2) Tend to accept for 3 papers: 6, 5, 15
> 3) Not accept for 3 papers: 1, 7, 14
>
> Our suggestion is to accept 1) and 2) due to the following reasons:
> a) They all provide very valuable information on a new topic; pushing this field as a new research area merits to include a broad perspective
> b) It is hard to evaluate on basis of short abstracts. The difference in quality is not that high.
> c) And most important: Selecting these  14 papers would support a fine structuring of the symposium:
>
> B) Thematic Grouping of 14 papers:
> 1) Guidelines and WCAG update: 4,9,10
> 2) Tools: 2,(5), (6), 12, 13, (15), 17
> 3) Workflow, Process, Services: 3, 8, 11, 16
>
> C) Programme
> INTRODUCTION (5 min)
> Panel A: Guidelines (25 min)
>     - prepared questions to all panelists (15)
>     - open questions (10)
> Panel B: Tools (60 min)
>     - prepared question to all panelists (40)
>     - open questions (20)
> Panel C: Workflow, Process, Services (30 min)
>     - prepared questions to all panelists (20)
>     - open questions (10)
> Follow up discussion for interested people
> Before sending out notifications I wanted to ask if the group could basically agree to this strucutre. I will inform all contributors that the notification will be delayed till Monday. Therefore I would need feedback till Monday noon next week.
>
> Many thanks
> Klaus
>
>
>
> a.Univ.Prof.Dr. Klaus Miesenberger
> University of Linz, Institut Integriert Studieren
> Altenbergerstrasse 69, A-4040 Linz
> klaus.miesenberger@jku.at, http://www.integriert-studieren.jku.at/
> Tel: +43-732-2468-3751 Fax: ...-23751
> International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs, ICCHP: http://www.icchp.org
> International Camps on Computers&Communication, ICC: http://www.icc-camp.info/
> Association for the Advancement for Assistive Technology in Europe, AAATE: www.aaate.net
> eAccess+ The eAccessibility newtork: www.eaccessplus.eu
> Austrian Computer Society, OCG: www.ocg.at/
>

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)
Received on Friday, 2 November 2012 09:01:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 2 November 2012 09:01:15 GMT