- From: Karen Mardahl <karen@mardahl.dk>
- Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 00:03:11 +0100
- To: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
MINUTES from AUWG Teleconference on Monday, 20 December 2004 Attendees BF: Barry Feigenbaum KM: Karen Mardahl MM: Matt May TB: Tim Boland JR: Jan Richards Regrets: Jutta Treviranus ------- Agenda: ------- >>1. Last Call status report JR: Only one person has commented: TB. Charles McCathieNevile did send a mail about an Italian discussion on ATAG: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004OctDec/0117.html. The majority of us do need a translation into English. MM: Discussed ATAG 20 at Advisory Committee meeting in front of crowd and in talks with some vendors. Will remind A.C. reps at beginning of January about need for input. History shows that comments do tend to come at the last minute. Will send info to list about bugzilla, where we can report comments to both guidelines and techniques: www.w3.org/Bugs. >>2. QA Framework review TB: Made announcement to list: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004OctDec/0115.html QA would like input on what should be included in specs to make them useful. Tim has been to make a call for ATAG feedback by Jan. 28. Report 1) how technically sound this document is, and 2) is it usable in the format in which it is presented. Please provide feedback. The QA handbook, announced in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004OctDec/0121.html is really a note, but the spec GL is more important. Please come with technical comments. There are normative reqs in it, as well as informative best practices. >>3. Techniques tasks and timelines KM will follow up if changes submitted by JT and KM have been entered. JR: Need to identify areas in Techs that need work. Use bugzilla to report comments. Categories are ATAG 2.0 and ATAG 2.0 Techniques. Use what's online as base for new comments: ATAG: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-ATAG20-20041122/ TECHS: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-ATAG20-TECHS-20041122/ We can farm out tasks in next call. TB: Can we have template or common voice for presentation? JR: can you report that to bugzilla? JR: You are all encouraged to take a look at techs, especially ones that interest you and have comments ready for next call before next call. TB: What about strongly suggested comments that are almost normative? JR: No, they are not normative. Perhaps we need to check language. The doc itself is informative, but the "strongly suggested" is almost de facto. As far as we know, that which is strongly suggested is the only way one can hope to achieve conformance, that the item is really required to meet other requirements. Perhaps it is used unevenly across the document, and we could use a rewording. JR: Best to plan definite timeline in next call. Jan. 3rd is probably impractical, so next date is most likely Jan. 10th. JT will confirm at a later date. >>4. Other Ideas on the next F2F? Send to list. We know it won't be at TP: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2004OctDec/0126.html JR on leave until after March 21st. It's sensible to have F2F after close of last call comments, and with an notice of eight weeks and other conferences, probably looking at beginning of April. <end of minutes> Happy, healthy, peaceful holidays to all!
Received on Monday, 20 December 2004 23:03:07 UTC