- From: Velleman, Eric <evelleman@bartimeus.nl>
- Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:55:19 +0000
- To: "public-wai-evaltf@w3.org" <public-wai-evaltf@w3.org>
Dear Eval TF, The next teleconference is scheduled for Thursday 21 September 2011 at: * 14:00 to 15:00 UTC * 16:00 to 17:00 Central European Time * 10:00 to 11:00 North American Eastern Time (ET) * 07:00 to 08:00 North American Pacific Time (PT) * 22:00 to 23:00 Western Australia Time Please check the World Clock Meeting Planner to find out the precise date for your own time zone: - <http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meeting.html> The teleconference information is: (Passcode 3825 - "EVAL") * +1.617.761.6200 * SIP / VoIP -http://www.w3.org/2006/tools/wiki/Zakim-SIP We also use IRC to support the meeting: (http://irc.w3.org) * IRC server: irc.w3.org * port: 6665 * channel: #eval AGENDA: #1. Welcome #2. Discussing the requirements Please find the requirements page at: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20110915.html>. During our call, we will discuss the proposals made on the mailing list and in the previous call: <http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/conformance/ED-methodology-20110915.html>Proposed changes: a. Replace 'Critical path analyses' by 'complete processes' (like used in WCAG 2.0) b. In section Goals add: 'The methodology will cross-tested and will include a reference to the test results'. c. In section Goals add: Reason why we need the Methodology (Kostas) d. In section Goals: Do we want to add both preliminary and full evaluation? Proposal is to work on full evaluation of web pages and/or a full website. e. In section Scope make subheading: 'coordination with other groups' and use scope also for scope of the methodology (Detlev) f. In section Scope add: 'Members of the Task Force will monitor the work in the authoring tools accessibility guidelines (ATAG) working group: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/ and the developing ATAG2.0 specification'. g. Keep R03: Unique interpretation The Methodology is uniquely interpretable to people who want to use it. It should make it clear to users what they can do if they choose a certain evaluation approach in the document. h. Add requirement: Support for independent verification: The Methodology supports independent verification and quality control of the evaluation results. i. Add requirement: Objectivity: no objectivity, no standardized methodology? j. Add requirement: Validity #3. Face to Face meeting Who could host a meeting at CSUN or elsewhere? #4. Any other business Regards, Eric
Received on Wednesday, 21 September 2011 20:57:22 UTC