- 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