- From: Rich Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 13:03:12 -0600
- To: ARIA Working Group <public-aria@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <997EE2F7-9EF4-4611-A4BE-575BA7BCD2BE@gmail.com>
https://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html <https://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html> IRC Text log: IRC log of aria on 2016-02-04 Timestamps are in UTC. 17:30:11 [RRSAgent] RRSAgent has joined #aria 17:30:11 [RRSAgent] logging to http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-irc <http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-irc> 17:30:13 [trackbot] RRSAgent, make logs world 17:30:13 [Zakim] Zakim has joined #aria 17:30:15 [trackbot] Zakim, this will be 17:30:15 [Zakim] I don't understand 'this will be', trackbot 17:30:16 [trackbot] Meeting: Accessible Rich Internet Applications Working Group Teleconference 17:30:16 [trackbot] Date: 04 February 2016 17:30:44 [richardschwerdtfeger] chair: Rich 17:31:00 [richardschwerdtfeger] meeting: ARIA Working group 17:31:12 [richardschwerdtfeger] RRSAgent, make log public 17:33:32 [joanie] present+ Joanmarie_Diggs 17:35:22 [mck] mck has joined #aria 17:36:24 [jamesn] jamesn has joined #aria 17:36:41 [jamesn] present+ JamesNurthen 17:36:51 [richardschwerdtfeger] present+ Rich_Schwerdtfeger 17:37:03 [fesch] fesch has joined #aria 17:37:31 [clown] clown has joined #aria 17:38:30 [jamesn] scribe: jamesn 17:38:52 [fesch] present+ fesch 17:39:14 [richardschwerdtfeger] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jan/0179.html <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aria/2016Jan/0179.html> 17:39:25 [jamesn] TOPIC: 7 day decision policy 17:39:27 [richardschwerdtfeger] https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/decision-policy <https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/decision-policy> 17:39:40 [jamesn] RS: wraps up tonight. Anyone have any objections to that 17:39:51 [clown] present+ Joseph_Scheuhammer 17:39:59 [jamesn] <silence> 17:39:59 [jamesn] </silence> 17:40:07 [jamesn] TOPIC: aria-grabbed and dropeffect 17:40:10 [jamesn] ACTION-1672? 17:40:10 [trackbot] ACTION-1672 -- Joanmarie Diggs to Mark aria-grabbed, aria-dropeffect as deprecated and provide reference definition of derprecated -- due 2016-02-03 -- PENDINGREVIEW 17:40:10 [trackbot] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1672 <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1672> 17:40:21 [joanie] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#aria-dropeffect <https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#aria-dropeffect> 17:40:50 [joanie] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#aria-grabbed <https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#aria-grabbed> 17:40:59 [clown] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#dfn-deprecated <https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#dfn-deprecated> 17:41:18 [jamesn] RS: reads the notes from the spec 17:41:20 [jamesn] "The aria-dropeffect property is expected to be replaced by a new feature in WAI-ARIA 2.0. Authors are therefore advised to treat aria-dropeffect as deprecated." 17:41:46 [jamesn] Deprecated 17:41:46 [jamesn] A deprecated role, state, or property is one which has been outdated by newer constructs or changed circumstances, and which may be removed in future versions of the WAI-ARIA specification. User agents are encouraged to continue to support items identified as deprecated for backward compatibility. 17:42:13 [jamesn] CS: from a UA perspective it sounds like if we haven't implemeneted it yet we should probably hold off doing it 17:42:25 [clown] http://w3c.github.io/aria/core-aam/core-aam.html#ariaGrabbedTrue <http://w3c.github.io/aria/core-aam/core-aam.html#ariaGrabbedTrue> 17:42:26 [jamesn] RS: we are not going to try to get 2 implementations 17:42:40 [jamesn] CS: would be nice if it gave some advice to UA as well as to authors 17:42:49 [jamesn] JD: thought about that for some time 17:43:04 [jamesn] implression I got is that if it is in the spec it is meant to be implemented 17:43:21 [jamesn] I didn't like the idea of telling UA that they must implement something that is going away 17:43:49 [jamesn] if I were reading that and there was a normative statement that UA need not implement it then would question why it were in the spec 17:44:14 [jamesn] CS: when a 3rd party test suite includes it then I want to be able to say I'm not going to do that 17:44:32 [jamesn] CS: basically this feature failed - and we are taking it out becuase it didnt get uptake 17:44:40 [jamesn] RS: Bryan implemented it 17:44:41 [clown] q+ to ask if a note or something else needs to be added to Core-AAM 17:44:48 [jamesn] we got 2 implementations 17:45:12 [jamesn] CS: middle ground like this may cause trouble - would like it if more crisp 17:45:47 [bgaraventa1979] bgaraventa1979 has joined #aria 17:46:06 [jamesn] MK: I think there are no WCAG techniques which refer to aria-grabbed and dropeffect 17:46:09 [bgaraventa1979] present+ Bryan_Garaventa 17:46:21 [jamesn] CS: is it required for a UA to support it to be in compliance with aria? 17:46:24 [jamesn] RS: yes 17:46:37 [jamesn] CS: for some period of time it is in this weird middle ground 17:47:02 [jamesn] JD: these properties are in the 1.0 spec - doesn't that mean you are not compliant with old aria 17:47:15 [jamesn] CS: if it is coming out then it is a waste of time to implement it 17:47:34 [jamesn] RS: ARIA 2 is a ways out - hope to do alot with the api work. 17:47:41 [jamesn] these are just a couple of properties 17:47:53 [jamesn] CS: a fairly chunky work item to actually get it to work 17:48:08 [jamesn] i could mape the properties but that is a waste of time as there is no user benefit 17:48:16 [jamesn] would be nice if it wern't this ugly story 17:48:35 [jamesn] RS: we are not going to haul it out. we need a proposal b4 we can think about replacing it 17:49:11 [jamesn] CS: it is in but it is bad. 17:49:37 [jamesn] MK: if you implement it - even once the new pattern is there then legacy implementations would still be valid. 17:50:00 [jamesn] unless there are conflicts then it is legit to support 1.1 features even after 2.0 is final 17:50:09 [jamesn] CS: this status is really complicated 17:50:24 [jamesn] MK: it doesn't eliminate the motivation to implement it 17:50:27 [jamesn] q+ 17:51:09 [jamesn] CS: I won't be able to sell working on a deprecated feature 17:51:10 [clown] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testresults?testsuite_id=1&testcase_id=92 17:51:11 [joanie] q+ To point out that "deprecated" is not the same as "obsolete" 17:51:33 [jamesn] RS: what peole want to do is use a mark capability 17:51:51 [jamesn] when it started there was no drap/drop in the browser which was consistent 17:52:07 [jamesn] was it alligned with html5? no. that is what we plan to do in the future 17:52:26 [jamesn] we are not going to haul it out - there are people that have implented this in applications 17:52:45 [jamesn] CS: I would prefer it was there or not there - not in the weird middle state 17:52:57 [jamesn] RS: apple and others wanted it in this middle state 17:53:25 [jamesn] CS: some guidance on UA as to what to do with a deprecated feature in the spec would be helpful 17:53:30 [jamesn] have an authors should 17:53:43 [jamesn] JD: I put it in the glossary 17:54:00 [richardschwerdtfeger] https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#dfn-deprecated <https://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/action-1672/aria/aria.html#dfn-deprecated> 17:54:09 [jamesn] you are already not comliant with a pretty old spec 17:54:16 [richardschwerdtfeger] q? 17:54:28 [jamesn] JD: deprecation is not the same as obsolete 17:54:41 [jamesn] even in 2.0 the stupid thing will be around forever 17:55:24 [joanie] q- 17:55:25 [jamesn] becuase we dont like it and we don't want authors to do it 17:55:34 [jamesn] JS: IE passed this according to the test harness 17:55:47 [richardschwerdtfeger] q? 17:56:01 [clown] https://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/testharness/testresults?testsuite_id=1&testcase_id=92 17:56:02 [jamesn] CS: my issue is with deprecated more widely 17:57:08 [jamesn] CS: I would like it to be crisper 17:57:21 [richardschwerdtfeger] ack clown 17:57:21 [Zakim] clown, you wanted to ask if a note or something else needs to be added to Core-AAM 17:57:29 [jamesn] ack me 17:57:45 [jamesn] RS: are people ok with the text 17:57:58 [jamesn] MK: change to a future version not ARIA 2.0 17:58:06 [jamesn] RS: are people ok with that tweak 17:59:13 [richardschwerdtfeger] Propsosal: To accept Joanie’s changes regarding the deprecation notes on aria-grabbed and aria-dropeffect with the exception that it refer to a future version of WAI-ARIA and not specifically 2.0 17:59:37 [clown] +1 17:59:42 [joanie] +1 17:59:47 [jamesn] +1 17:59:53 [fesch] +1 18:00:00 [richardschwerdtfeger] RESOLUTION: Accept Joanie’s changes regarding the deprecation notes on aria-grabbed and aria-dropeffect with the exception that it refer to a future version of WAI-ARIA and not specifically 2.0 18:00:31 [richardschwerdtfeger] RRSAgetn, draft minutes 18:00:33 [jamesn] rrsagent, make minutes 18:00:33 [RRSAgent] I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html> jamesn 18:00:37 [richardschwerdtfeger] RRSAgent, draft minutes 18:00:37 [RRSAgent] I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html> richardschwerdtfeger 18:00:55 [richardschwerdtfeger] RRSAgent, make log public 18:01:43 [jamesn] TOPIC: Combobox 18:01:47 [jamesn] ACTION-1490? 18:01:47 [trackbot] ACTION-1490 -- Matthew King to Propose spec text edit for issue-610: comboboxes should allow complex children elements -- due 2016-02-03 -- OPEN 18:01:47 [trackbot] http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1490 <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1490> 18:01:48 [richardschwerdtfeger] https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1490 <https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/track/actions/1490> 18:02:01 [jamesn] RS: is there a branch? 18:02:20 [jamesn] http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/mck-action1490/aria/aria.html <http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/mck-action1490/aria/aria.html> 18:02:59 [richardschwerdtfeger] http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/mck-action1490/aria/aria.html#combobox <http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/mck-action1490/aria/aria.html#combobox> 18:03:15 [jamesn] MK: 10 changes 18:03:40 [jamesn] Objectives: 18:03:40 [jamesn] 1. Allow combobox to popup grid, tree, and dialog in addition to listbox. 18:03:40 [jamesn] 2. Allow aria-controls so screen reader users can see a rendering of the popup in reading mode. 18:03:40 [jamesn] 3. Remove ambiguities from the spec to improve understanding and simplify authoring. 18:03:42 [jamesn] 4. Do it all without breaking any existing implementations. 18:04:20 [joanie] q+ To ask about dialog use case 18:04:24 [jamesn] MK: the impact is lightweight as most of this already works 18:04:45 [jamesn] important that screenreaders recognise aria-controls if we go that way 18:05:03 [jamesn] so escape works correctly to return focus 18:05:15 [jamesn] that is the only thing that doesn't work 18:05:19 [joanie] q- 18:05:25 [jamesn] q+ to explain dialog 18:05:53 [jamesn] MK: dialog is for example a date picker where there is a grid - and in addition to the grid have buttons next year previous year 18:06:37 [jamesn] JN: also have simple and advanced search buttons in a dialog 18:06:51 [jamesn] MK: right now use aria-owns to own the popup element 18:07:00 [jamesn] CS: controls makes my life much easier too 18:07:09 [jamesn] CS: controls works a lot better here 18:07:59 [jamesn] MK: 2 major problems for screen readers with owns.... have to distinguish the combo box from its children to extract the value. When in the reading mode the popup disaappears as you cant fit a grid in a listbox 18:08:19 [jamesn] MK: need them to be next to each other in the DOM so the "grid" appears next in the reading order 18:08:36 [jamesn] RS: have 4 notes in a row.... can we collapse them 18:08:46 [jamesn] MK: I see little relevance in note 4 18:08:57 [jamesn] RS: I would support deleting that 18:09:38 [jamesn] jamesn has joined #aria 18:10:27 [jamesn] RS: combobox - do we need an implicit orientation? 18:10:42 [jamesn] MK: the implicit orientation of listbox might be useful 18:10:47 [jamesn] clown: why for a listbox? 18:10:59 [jamesn] MK: so the arrow key is left/right or up down 18:11:19 [jamesn] clown: combo uses left/right for the edit field 18:11:27 [jamesn] MK: focus stays in the edit field 18:11:46 [jamesn] RS: not sure orientation is important on a combo box 18:12:00 [jamesn] MK: should pull out the orientation too 18:12:16 [jamesn] clown: default value is specified 18:12:34 [jamesn] JN: could it just be inheritance? 18:12:58 [jamesn] MK: changed combobox superclass to input not select 18:13:21 [jamesn] MK: in 1.0 there was a required owned element of textbox but the sample code didnt have that 18:13:40 [jamesn] RS: comboboxes and menus are the worst things to implement 18:14:01 [jamesn] BG: are you saying putting role combobox on an input is invalid? 18:14:03 [jamesn] MK: no 18:14:15 [jamesn] JUST about the example in the spec 18:14:19 [jamesn] s/JUST/just/ 18:14:40 [jamesn] RS: like the fact it is expanded to more use cases 18:15:00 [jamesn] i think orientation is irrelevant in this case so can take it off 18:15:07 [jamesn] RS: collapse the others 18:15:13 [jamesn] objections? 18:15:35 [jamesn] MK: expanded can move into the paragraph about expanded 18:15:50 [jamesn] take class note off it - as it is normative 18:16:02 [jamesn] RS: need to remove the default orientation of vertical 18:16:19 [jamesn] clown: have a problem with the aria-owns change 18:16:25 [jamesn] want it the way it was before 18:16:40 [jamesn] MK: that is problematic that owns doesn't work for a combo box 18:17:02 [jamesn] clown: who would own the list in the tree? 18:17:33 [jamesn] MK: would encounter the listbox 18:17:56 [jamesn] clown: comboboxes have existed on the desktop. the parent child relationship on the desktop is well defined 18:18:10 [jamesn] we are now saying that on the web these things are different 18:18:18 [jamesn] MK: don't have the DOM on the desktop 18:18:27 [jamesn] CS: desktop combo boxes are really different 18:18:39 [jamesn] desktop ones can only have a limited number of things 18:19:03 [jamesn] RS: if have a text field with role combobox - if use owns then have to have a child of a text box 18:19:24 [jamesn] RS: almost like you have to do one or the other - there has to be an association. 18:20:01 [jamesn] MK: said must have an association and leaves the choice to authors to use controls and owns 18:20:11 [jamesn] clown: say you may have both of these 18:20:21 [jamesn] MK: children appear inside their parents 18:20:25 [jamesn] clown: not at all 18:20:38 [jamesn] I take the parent/child relationship as a logical relationship 18:20:52 [jamesn] sometimes children appear inside their parents, sometimes they don't 18:21:27 [jamesn] MK: in a screenreader thing the parent owns the child 18:21:42 [jamesn] clown: the menu is a parent of the menu items etc. 18:21:47 [jamesn] to me this is the same hierarchy 18:21:55 [jamesn] CS: depends what your goal is 18:22:06 [jamesn] we do the owns now and it doesn't work 18:22:18 [jamesn] so long as the control is there 18:22:29 [jamesn] MK: i don't think any AT would need both 18:22:36 [jamesn] clown: how do you know? 18:23:52 [jamesn] clown: willing to bet that in the a11y API it is a parent child relationship 18:23:58 [jamesn] MK: and that is a problem 18:24:06 [jamesn] clown: why? 18:24:44 [jamesn] RS: what do you do with ORCA 18:24:53 [jamesn] clown: the popup list becomes a menu 18:25:26 [jamesn] JD: right now combo boxes are not a browse mode thing. orca presents the focus and text changes 18:25:51 [jamesn] orca's treatment of them is you shouldn't care where the combo box comes from 18:26:01 [jamesn] clown: would orca be bothered by this? 18:26:25 [jamesn] JS: independent of ARIA there are combo box type things out there. ORCA has heuristics out there for stuff 18:26:50 [jamesn] it might matter in terms of NVDA and FF - at some point there was a lot of discussion about things there 18:26:55 [joanie] s/ORCA/Orca/g 18:26:58 [JF] JF has joined #aria 18:27:07 [jamesn] clown: doesnt change the tree 18:27:46 [jamesn] clown: i have no objection to adding controls 18:28:30 [jamesn] MK: the AT needs to know about the relationship 18:28:35 [ShaneM] present+ ShaneM 18:28:41 [jamesn] when something is a child and the value is from the content 18:29:25 [joanie] s/JS: independent/JD: independent/ 18:29:37 [jamesn] MK: when it popup up - number 1 - the popup is trigger from and by the combo box so will have the value from the relationship 18:29:43 [jamesn] RS: we have both cases covered 18:29:49 [jamesn] clown: why not both 18:29:54 [jamesn] what is the harm of both 18:30:20 [jamesn] MK: more concerned about how the screen readers render the popup in their virtual view 18:30:25 [jamesn] CS: dont really understand 18:31:02 [jamesn] BG: if you have role of combobox on an edit field and have the aria-owns is that it forces all the listbox content into the value of the edit field 18:31:08 [jamesn] CS: sounds like a bug in the screen reader 18:31:24 [jamesn] MK: that is what screen readers do with all contained elements 18:31:29 [richardschwerdtfeger] q? 18:31:47 [jamesn] the DOM tree is a tree. How would you ever make the decision as to what is inside the element and what is not 18:31:48 [jamesn] q- 18:31:52 [richardschwerdtfeger] ack jamesn 18:32:29 [jamesn] BG: also a compatibility thing. some things cant support interactive child elements 18:32:55 [jamesn] MK: sounds like we should have a side tutorial as to how screen readers work 18:33:08 [jamesn] RS: dont have the VO people here 18:33:21 [jamesn] MK: VO does the same thing 18:33:39 [jamesn] they represent every child relationship as a container and you drill into it 18:34:27 [jamesn] jamesn has joined #aria 18:34:42 [jamesn] rrsagent, make minutes 18:34:42 [RRSAgent] I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html> jamesn 18:35:34 [jamesn] CS: they are not children but they are pieces of a whole 18:35:41 [jamesn] RS: combo boxes with text fields in them... 18:36:03 [jamesn] RS: I don't have problems with Matt's wording 18:36:10 [jamesn] RS: need a vote 18:36:27 [jamesn] CS: we need controls but having both doesn't bother us 18:36:40 [jamesn] CS: what do you do with owns but leave controls off 18:36:50 [jamesn] right now it fails 18:37:18 [jamesn] RS: can anyone not live with Matt's text 18:37:27 [jamesn] clown: me - with respect to owns 18:40:20 [bgaraventa1979] can I also propose adding aria-valuetext for setting a value property association? 18:41:19 [bgaraventa1979] +q 18:42:50 [jamesn] JD: propose doing the notes as a seperate action 18:44:07 [richardschwerdtfeger] q? 18:44:55 [joanie] action: Joanmarie to address the non-normative notes which point out implicit values 18:44:55 [trackbot] Created ACTION-2011 - Address the non-normative notes which point out implicit values [on Joanmarie Diggs - due 2016-02-11]. 18:45:52 [JF] Q+ 18:46:40 [MichielBijl] regrets+ MichielBijl 18:46:51 [jamesn] RS: you have modified autocomplete in this. 18:46:55 [JF] Present+ JF 18:47:15 [jamesn] MK: if you look at the 1.0 text then if keep the old meanings that is one of the major things behind the confusion 18:47:31 [clown] http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/aria.html#aria-autocomplete <http://rawgit.com/w3c/aria/master/aria/aria.html#aria-autocomplete> 18:47:32 [jamesn] MK: i removed 5 paragraphs 18:47:52 [jamesn] clown: the values are incomprehensible 18:48:05 [jamesn] MK: nobody knows what do to with them 18:48:09 [jamesn] clown: I do 18:48:17 [jamesn] RS: don't want to do this now 18:48:31 [jamesn] blowing out all the other ones too (deprecating them) 18:49:05 [jamesn] jamesn has joined #aria 18:49:32 [jamesn] MK: what is the challenge to get 2 extra values to be there 18:49:43 [jamesn] clown: sometimes quick, sometimes takes a long time 18:49:48 [jamesn] MK: this is simpler 18:49:57 [jamesn] clown: don't share that intuition 18:50:13 [jamesn] MK: if an author specifies true then can either map to inline or pass it through 18:50:30 [jamesn] RS: don't want this now 18:51:05 [jamesn] MK: in the core AAM the browsers can keep them 18:51:12 [jamesn] q? 18:51:13 [ShaneM] q? 18:51:22 [richardschwerdtfeger] q? 18:51:34 [richardschwerdtfeger] ack bgaraventa 18:52:18 [jamesn] JF: i kind of support MK in that adding them is beneficial - but again it is just a mapping issue. Adding true/false we will see what authors do 18:52:38 [jamesn] clown: how difficult would this be? 18:52:59 [jamesn] RS: havent canvassed people 18:53:42 [jamesn] CS: would be difficult for us an inline and list are very different with how we wire them up. in UIA a list is a combo box. inline is a bunch of things in the text pattern. 18:53:47 [jamesn] they are completely unrelated 18:53:50 [jamesn] q+ 18:54:02 [ShaneM] If there isn't agreement to do this, back burner it to aria 2? 18:54:14 [jamesn] MK: in UIA - if the author specifies the wrong thing will be brooken 18:54:24 [jamesn] CS: in UIA they are very different 18:54:32 [jamesn] MK: would have to map true to both 18:54:41 [JF] ack JF 18:54:56 [bgaraventa1979] sorry, back on the phone, my question is for aria-valuetext not aria-autocomplete 18:55:11 [jamesn] JN: if UIA is doing it differently then that is a good reason not to do it now 18:55:27 [jamesn] RS: have taken 30 mins for something i didnt want to open the can of worms on 18:55:40 [jamesn] MK: could change autocomplete guidance in combobox 18:56:04 [jamesn] MK: could be none or both as the only options that make any sense 18:56:20 [jamesn] RS: I would not accept the autocomplete changes 18:56:34 [jamesn] RS: if want to say something about what the author should do 18:56:40 [jamesn] that is fine 18:57:56 [jamesn] RS: can we have another version for next week? 18:57:59 [jamesn] MK: yes 18:58:19 [jamesn] rrsagent, make minutes 18:58:19 [RRSAgent] I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html> jamesn 18:58:55 [jamesn] BG: my question about aria-valuetext. If have role=combobox on an input field. If have it on a div then no value property available 18:59:10 [jamesn] MK: still think that sounds like a browser bug 18:59:39 [jamesn] BG: using a combo box has a span etc. 18:59:54 [jamesn] rrsagent, make minutes 18:59:54 [RRSAgent] I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html> jamesn 19:00:52 [richardschwerdtfeger] RRSAgent, make minutes 19:00:52 [RRSAgent] I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html <http://www.w3.org/2016/02/04-aria-minutes.html> richardschwerdtfeger Rich Schwerdtfeger
Received on Thursday, 4 February 2016 19:03:46 UTC