W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2006

RE: 16 March 2006 Minutes

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:52:59 -0600
To: "'WCAG-WG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005b01c649eb$a256d660$ee8cfea9@NC6000BAK>

As John mentioned in his original post -- 
       The phrase "suggest using EARL for conformance claims" is 
      the short title used for the entry in Bugzilla.


Under this topic we discussed a number of different ways to report and to
attach notations to web content regarding conformance claims.  No consensus
was reached so no decisions are recorded.   We don't record everything that
is said at a 4 hour teleconf.  We used to try to take notes but they were
short, incomplete and not really what people said.  Later people were
criticized for things they didn't say.   And people made reference to things
the 'group' said when it in fact didn't say that. Someone said that - or in
some cases - no-one said that.  it was just what the note taker who was
pounding away on their keyboard typed from snippets the could catch as the
conversation ran ahead.  Also, it took someone out of the call since they
had to do non-stop typing. 

So we now focus on capturing the topics, anything we agree on and action
items.  That already taxes our notetakers and we have to use several on a
call.   

We also do surveys of all issues in advance and can capture information off
of them in making decisions -- or for recording ideas if we don't make a
decision.   

At the meeting we told Sorcha that her comments on this would be added to
the open issue.  

This has been done.  See 

http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1896

they weren't lost and will be there when the issue comes up again.  

Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Paul Walsh, Segala
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:56 AM
To: 'John M Slatin'; 'Ben Caldwell'; 'WCAG-WG'
Cc: sorcha@segala.com; drooks@segala.com; 'Jo Rabin'
Subject: RE: 16 March 2006 Minutes


Hi John,

Please see comments/questions below.

      -----Original Message-----
      From: John M Slatin [mailto:john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu] 
      
      The phrase "suggest using EARL for conformance claims" is 
      the short title used for the entry in Bugzilla.

Can you point me to Sorcha's comments regarding 'Content Labels' - I only
see EARL in the minutes which is a different proposal. 
      
      Our minutes document resolutions.
      
      Please note that the WCAG WG has neither specified nor 
      recommended *any* particular format for conformance 
      claims. To date, we have said only what information 
      *must* be included in a conformance claim as well as some 
      information that *may* be included.
      
Yes I'm aware of this John but thanks anyway. This is why I'm asking the
group to *consider* referencing a method of demonstrating conformance levels
in a machine-readable format. This enables search engines and browsers to
make use of information to highlight websites that are accessible to the
individual needs of users.

Visual trustmarks are good but have limited benefit, they may only be
displayed on one or more pages and missed by visitors. Content Labels enable
you to make claims such as 'everything on this domain excluding this
particular URI'. This can be particularly useful for large sites making
adjustments over a long period of time. You can ultimately increase
accessibility awareness through making compliance more accessible to
organisations ;)

Sorry, I didn't mean to go into it here.

Cheers
Paul
      
      
      
      
      "Good design is accessible design." 
      John Slatin, Ph.D.
      Director, Accessibility Institute
      University of Texas at Austin
      FAC 248C
      1 University Station G9600
      Austin, TX 78712
      ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
      email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
      web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/
      
      
       
      
      
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Paul Walsh, Segala [mailto:paulwalsh@segala.com]
      Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 10:29 am
      To: John M Slatin; 'Ben Caldwell'; 'WCAG-WG'
      Cc: sorcha@segala.com; drooks@segala.com; 'Jo Rabin'
      Subject: RE: 16 March 2006 Minutes
      
      Hey John,
      
      Many thanks for the feedback. Everything you say should 
      be included in the minutes, this was my point. From the 
      minutes of the meeting, it would appear that only EARL 
      was discussed and Content Labelling wasn't talked about. 
      It's important to record all the key issues and decisions 
      of those issues, even if to say that they're still open. 
      Apologies for the tongue twister :)
      
      Regarding the incubator activity, nice to see you've 
      understood it well.
      Everything you say is true. We plan to come to a final 
      conclusion about the output of the activity by July! The 
      specification was written before we even launched the 
      activity so its like to need minor refinements only.
      
      Also, an EU Safer Internet Plus project called Quatro 
      [1], has already created the schema for WAI Single-A, 
      Double-A and Triple-A conformance claims. So, this can be 
      referenced and/or used today. Note that ERCIM is one of 
      the project partners.
      
      Regarding the Web Content Label Working Group (WCL WG) 
      [2], WCAG could reference the output, so any 
      'refinements' made to the specification won't make any 
      difference and won't impact the WCAG document in any way.
      
      Does that help?
      
      [1] http://www.quatro-project.org/
      [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/wcl/wcl-charter-20060208 
      
      Cheers
      Paul
      
            -----Original Message-----
            From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org 
            [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
      John M Slatin
            Sent: 17 March 2006 14:57
            To: Paul Walsh, Segala; Ben Caldwell; WCAG-WG
            Cc: sorcha@segala.com; drooks@segala.com; Jo Rabin
            Subject: RE: 16 March 2006 Minutes
            
            
            Hello, Paul. I'll just jump in here.
            
            The Working Group did *not* reach a definitive decision 
            yesterday about referencing either EARL or WCL. The group 
            felt that we did not yet have enough information to reach 
            a sound decision on this important matter.
            
            Therefore, we decided to leave the issue open pending 
            further investigation. We welcome  additional information 
            about WCL, RDF-CL, etc.
            
            I did read the statement about the WCL Incubator Activity 
            that you sent us the other day. If I understood it 
            correctly, the W3C has not yet approved WCL. Again, if I 
            understood the document correctly, the XG's aim is to 
            explore the options for a new content labeling scheme; 
            one of the options under consideration is to consider 
            whether the existing RDF-CL is adequate for the purpose. 
            If my understanding is incorrect, please let me know!
            
            To reiterate: the issue remains open. We welcome 
            information that will help us learn more.
            
            Thanks so much!
            
            
            
            
            "Good design is accessible design." 
            John Slatin, Ph.D.
            Director, Accessibility Institute
            University of Texas at Austin
            FAC 248C
            1 University Station G9600
            Austin, TX 78712
            ph 512-495-4288, f 512-495-4524
            email jslatin@mail.utexas.edu
            web http://www.utexas.edu/research/accessibility/
            
            
             
            
            
            -----Original Message-----
            From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org 
            [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
      Paul Walsh, Segala
            Sent: Friday, March 17, 2006 5:14 am
            To: 'Ben Caldwell'; 'WCAG-WG'
            Cc: sorcha@segala.com; drooks@segala.com; 'Jo Rabin'
            Subject: RE: 16 March 2006 Minutes
            
            
            Ben,
            
            I'm unable to speak with Sorcha because our HQ are out 
            partying (St.
            Patrick's Day!). So, can you please direct me to the 
            section of the minutes that document Segala's request to 
            reference the use of Content Labels for conformance 
            claims? I notice you've included EARL, but I'm unable to 
            find Content Labels.
            
            I've CC'd David because he's a member of the ERT group 
            and Jo as he's a member of the WCL group with David.
            
            Kind regards,
            Paul 
            
                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org 
                  [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf 
      Of Ben Caldwell
                  Sent: 17 March 2006 00:39
                  To: WCAG-WG
                  Subject: 16 March 2006 Minutes
                  
                  
                  Hi all,
                  
                  Just posted the minutes from today's meeting:
                  
                  
      <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/03/16-wai-wcag-minutes.html>
                  
                  Please let me know if you spot any errors or 
      omissions,
                  
                  -Ben
                  
                  --
                  Ben Caldwell | <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu> 
      Trace Research 
                  and Development Center <http://trace.wisc.edu>
                  
                  
            
            
            
      
Received on Friday, 17 March 2006 17:53:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:45 GMT