- From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>
- Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 13:05:20 -0400
- To: W3C WAI Accessible Platform Architectures <public-apa@w3.org>
Minutes from the Apa teleconference of 30 August are provided below as text,
and are available as hypertext at:
http://www.w3.org/2017/08/30-apa-minutes.html
W3C
- DRAFT -
Accessible Platform Architectures Working Group Teleconference
30 Aug 2017
See also: IRC log
Attendees
Present
janina, Joanmarie_Diggs, chaals, tink
Regrets
MichielBijl
Chair
janina
Scribe
janina
Contents
* Topics
1. preview agenda with items from two minutes
2. TPAC 2017 https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2017
3. Push API Next Steps
4. CSS Task Force -- Ian
5. Input Events -- Scheduled for Next Week
6. Actions Checkin (Specs) https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/products/8
7. new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
8. Proposal re review attributions -- Michael
9. Other Business
* Summary of Action Items
* Summary of Resolutions
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/2017/08/telecon-info_apa
<scribe> scribe: janina
preview agenda with items from two minutes
TPAC 2017 https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/wiki/Meetings/TPAC_2017
Push API Next Steps
mc: Unclear why an informative section would be judged "out of scope."
... Also unclear why a single individual can decide and close
... Seems insufficient communication
... Suggest we might need to inform Director commentor did not accept disposition--short of an FO
lw: Reason is editor empowered to determine
... Hard to include even informative when ref to outside spec--issues yet to be opened, and likely still open when Push goes TR
... Many specs reference Notifications API
... Seems slippery slope
cn: No objection on principle
... Problem content not specific to the spec it was to be included in
... Appropriate all kinds of places --
js: Asks whether Notification draft sufficient to file?
cn: Yes -- don't wait for code
mc: Experience was super concrete proposals is preferred -- description alone insufficient
<chaals> [I think what needs to be concrete is the clear problem statement, and I think that is in the proposal for Notifications]
mc: We have history of pointing to issues in other specs, esp WCAG
lw: RE should code be in the proposal ...
... would be useful, but it's already good enough to start the discussion
js: Raises the meta question of checking for a11y impact on any given spec
lw: Notes security and privacy are now given
mc; Spoke with Ralph about this --
mc: Belief that security and privacy sections generally needed, but a11y not generally needed
... Did encourage recommending impact sections
mc; Should be more than follow wcag
mc: Isn't that supposed to happen anyway?
js: Believe pointing to specific wcag provisions that are particularly applicable is valuable, given wcag is huge
mc: Devs don't always agree
cn: Have serious issue with a11y not as important/relevant as security/privacy
... Will take that up
... Clear Push can be used to do dumb things--like most any spec
... That alone isn't sufficient reason
... If WHAT drops the request entirely, aPA could write a note
mc: Suggest a running APA discussion on what our position on impact statements in specs should be
CSS Task Force -- Ian
Conversation with Johannes now scheduled for 13 Sep
Input Events -- Scheduled for Next Week
Actions Checkin (Specs) https://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/products/8
<MichaelC> https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Cloud_Browser_TF/UseCases
<MichaelC> action-2135 due 9 months
<trackbot> Set action-2135 Review cloud browser use cases https://www.w3.org/2011/webtv/wiki/Main_Page/Cloud_Browser_TF/UseCases due date to 2018-05-30.
<chaals> action-2141?
<trackbot> action-2141 -- Léonie Watson to Review verifiable claims data model and representations https://www.w3.org/tr/verifiable-claims-data-model/ -- due
2017-08-23 -- OPEN
<trackbot> http://www.w3.org/WAI/APA/track/actions/2141
new on TR http://www.w3.org/TR/tr-status-drafts.html
mc: Note updates to payments specs
Proposal re review attributions -- Michael
mc: Re ways to motivate people to do reviews for APA
... Would getting credit help?
... Idea is to point to APA reviewers when a spec does credite commentors
cn: Beware unintended consequences ...
... Believe pointing to actual comments and implementation in spec should suffice
<tink> Zakim: /me has to drop for another meeting.
Other Business
Summary of Action Items
Summary of Resolutions
[End of minutes]
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Present: janina Joanmarie_Diggs chaals tink
Regrets: MichielBijl
Found Scribe: janina
--
Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200
sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
Email: janina@rednote.net
Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup: http://a11y.org
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
Received on Wednesday, 30 August 2017 17:05:43 UTC