W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-rd@w3.org > June 2013

RDWG Charter comments and fixes

From: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:25:42 +0200
Message-ID: <51B876D6.5010501@w3.org>
To: RDWG <public-wai-rd@w3.org>
CC: Simon Harper <Simon.Harper@manchester.ac.uk>
Dear Group,

Thank you to all who reviewed and commented on the draft RDWG Charter.

Please find below the comments received on the draft RDWG Charter and 
some of the fixes that were already made to address them. Several are 
open and marked for discussion:

On 5.6.2013 18:36, WBS Mailer on behalf of luz.rello@upf.edu wrote:
>  and help identify potential > and help *to* identify potential

Done. Changed to "and helping to identify ...".

Note: Simon prefers the former wording.

> - in support of Deliverables 1, 2, and 3; > in support of Deliverables 1,
> 2, and 3 *(see bellow or see Section Deliverables)*. (Because it is the
> first time that the Deliverables are mentioned)

Unchanged. The term deliverable is fairly common in this context.

>  with Smart Images and Haptics in preparation. > with smart images and
> haptics in preparation. (Capital letters)

Done. Emphasized "Smart Images and Haptics" to indicate that it is a 
potential title for the upcoming topic.

>  Maybe order the "Potential future topics" alphabetically.

[open] Both Simon and Shadi feel ambivalent to this change.

>  Deliverable 2 & 3: Online Symposia and Research Reports > Deliverable 2
> & 3: Online Symposia and Research Reports (W3C Notes).
> (To match the previous subtitle)

Done. Changed source sentence from "Research Reports (W3C Note): A brief 
written synopsis of discussion" to "Research Reports: A brief written 
synopsis, as W3C Working Group Notes, of discussion".

>  The WAI Resarch and Development Working Group> Research


On 7.6.2013 07:51, WBS Mailer on behalf of kerstin.matausch@ki-i.at
> Changes to the Charter Text: Chapter 1.1 Success Criteria --> typing error
> "bi-Weekly"


> Chapter 2 --> The listed term "internationalization" might be ambiguous -
> for non-techies! Probably better to add a phrase or a definition, i.e. in
> computing, internationalization means adapting computer software to
> different languages, regional differences and technical requirements of a
> target market. Internationalization is the process of designing a software
> application so that it can be adapted to various languages and regions
> without engineering changes. (source:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalization_and_localization)
> - Reason for defining such terms: The more RDWG is promoting knowledge
> exchange / discussion of different accessibility matters, the more a
> collaboration of technically and non-technically oriented scientists is
> becoming essential. Although we're using the same language / terms, we
> don't mean the same things.

Unchanged. Not necessary to define these terms at this stage but when we 
get to the particular topic. The charter is not really an outreach 
vehicle but rather an internal definition for the scope of the group.

> Chapter 2.1 --> I assume you know that the links "online symposia", "Tips
> for Accessibility-Aware Research" are still broken.


> My proposal is to set links in the charter when the tips will become
> available.

Charter text is not usually changed without re-chartering of the group.

On 11.6.2013 14:51, WBS Mailer on behalf of shawn@w3.org wrote:
> * "and is available from the ERT WG home page" -> and is available from the
> RDWG home page


> * "material generated for the seminar" -> "material generated for the
> symposia"


> * "Note: The group will document significant changes from this initial
> schedule on the group home page.". Could put this just once at the
> beginning or end instead of in each section.


> * "and has been rechartered as a Working Group in 2010" -> and was
> rechartered as a Working Group in 2010


> * "Please also see the previous charter for this group.". Can delete; it is
> a repeat of link at end of the first sentence of this section "charter of
> July 2010"

Done. Added word "previous" before link to "charter of July 2010".

> * "Two hour online symposia". It seems best to leave
> the duration flexible. Sometimes we might want 3 hour or other.

[open] This was discussed, thought as a minimum but maybe confusing.

> * "Research Reports: A brief written synopsis". It seems these are much
> more robust than brief synopsis.


> Mostly for Shadi & Simon:
> * "To be successful, RDWG is expected to have 5 or more active participants
> for its duration.". This seems too low, although I'm happy to leave it to
> Shadi & Simon's advice.


> * About this Charter section. Typically there is a short sentence with
> bullets on what changed from the previous charter, or saying no significant
> changes if that is the case.

Could ask if requested to.

> * At the top is "Some communications between editors may be
> member-confidential." I think Judy also wants that repeated in the
> Communication section.

Could ask if requested to.

> * Is it realistic to expect the group to get to Prioritized Research
> Problems, Tips for Accessibility-Aware Research, and Research Resources in
> this period when there was little work on them in last period? (I have
> missed the recent teleconferences, and perhaps this was adequately
> addressed already. If so, please ignore my comment and accept my apologies
> for bringing up a closed issue.)

Discussed already. Last period we lost a lot of time in forming the 
group and its mechanics. Hope to focus more on the content now.

On 12.6.2013 11:18, WBS Mailer on behalf of an@ftb-volmarstein.de wrote:
> Section 1.1
> Ambigious word "bi-weekly" could mean "twice a week" or "every other week".
> Might be unclear for non-native speakers.

Changed to "meeting approximately every second week".

> Section 2
> List item 1: Suggested change "currency" -> "relevance"

[open] Currency implies time whereas relevance implies importance.

> List item 2: "Topics will be nominated, selected and prepared by RDWG
> participants in good standing." The main point of the symposia is to invite
> contributions from the accessibility community. Suggest to add a sentence:
> "The accessibility research community is invited to contribute to the
> symposia. The contributions are peer-reviewed and are published by the
> RDWG."

[open] Do we want to get into that level of detail here? maybe just link 
to the RDWG FAQ on symposia: http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/process ?

> List item 3: Suggested change "seminar" -> "symposium" (The word seminar is
> also used in the summary table. Suggest to use "symposium" consistently.)


On 12.6.2013 12:09, WBS Mailer on behalf of mhakkinen@ets.org wrote:
> I think a clear value of RDWG would be to
> identify research of immediate or near term value to active W3C standards
> activities. Granted RDWG is forward looking, I suggest there is a need to
> identify problematic areas existing in current activities (One that comes
> to immediate mind, No clear consensus on how to present long descriptions)
> and fast track science-based assessment of relevant research and practice,
> and if warranted, champion targeted usability/accessibility research to
> examine potential solutions.
> I would like to see the charter reflect this important role in a clear
> manner for RDWG.



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 Wednesday, 12 June 2013 13:26:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:33:44 UTC