W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-apa@w3.org > August 2017

Minutes from 30 August

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>
Message-ID: <20170830170520.GB2237@rednote.net>

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:55:27 UTC