- From: Karen Mardahl <karen@mardahl.dk>
- Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:51:51 +0100
- To: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
MINUTES from AUWG Teleconference on Monday, March 14, 2005 Attendees BF: Barry Feigenbaum KM: Karen Mardahl TB: Tim Boland JR: Jan Richards GP: Greg Pisocky Regrets JT: Jutta Treviranus ------- Agenda: ------- >1. F2F date setting. >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JanMar/0066.html Everyone present (and Jutta) seem to be fine with April 28-29 as mentioned: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JanMar/0066.html and http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JanMar/0067.html KM will phone in. Other participants are from "Desire to Learn" and Canadian government. JT will need to request exception re: 8 wks notice for meetings. Will be held in Kitchener, Ontario, Canada. Travel and hotel info will follow later. >2. Discussion and assignment of work items from the last call: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JanMar/0063.html Item (1) To get a proposed rewording of the bundling clause... TB has commented on list. JR: Just because a tool only covers some steps in a workflow, shouldn't prevent it from being ATAG-conformant. TB: A tool could seek conformance on its own, or be included in a process (with other tools) and the process could be conformant. These details would need to be worked out. JR: Tool requirements vs. process requirements? With bundling, you need to specify which checkpoints are covered by which tool. Could identify process and then tools in process. This would be identified as "the bundle" that would be aiming for conformance. This leads to Item (4) To get a proposal for looks at how the priorities might be reorganized around a single tool vs. whole process standpoint. JR: Had action to to examine more closely, and in response to TB, tried to include this. BF: Leads to question, how do we give tools partial credit? Don't want to ignore it. Manual options seem to be an escape clause. TB: Do we encourage tool developers to aim for higher standards, or do we reflect current market conditions? JR: Combination, just like UAAG and WCAG. We have relatively low entry point. TB: Factors that drive bundling? Market? JR: E.g. 2 tools working on their own. One discovers that bundled with other tool, can make a conformant process that is ATAG compliant - and without the other even knowing about it. This is not necessarily an attempt to make developers make business with others. JR: RE. manual methods of checking, etc. Wouldn't those looking for bundling partners want someone who can do things automated, rather than manual? BF: Partial credit could be granular. At the level of the four guideline. Item (3) To get a proposal to bring in UAAG and WCAG (for Web based tools) as a stand-in for ISO16071... We looked at Matt's work (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JanMar/0059.html) and it looks like good potential in this idea. Item (5) BR and GP to undertake to provide the group with assessments of how their primary tools (DreamWeaver, GoLive or Acrobat) do against ATAG. Due Mar. 21. => Jan to ask BF if he would like to join this effort. BF: Yes. BF: Note, too, a new free web project being developed: http://www.eclipse.org/webtools/index.html Might be nice to get this assessed but it would be huge task. Most important action items that need to be covered. 1) Can we get UAAG/WCAG to replace ISO16071? 2) Bundling - what are the different requirements, ideas about partial credits (BF), testing. JR: We need people to take on action items. Good if two people can take up an item and discuss on list as JR and TB did with bundling. Opens up discussion. KM: Losing overview due to all ideas coming in from all directions. Will try to set up guidelines that include the many ideas to try to put things in perspective. JR: Don't forget bugzilla. Find a bug that you can work on! >3. Including the new bundling proposal: >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2005JanMar/0064.html Discussed in Agenda 2. Next phone call March 21st.) <end of minutes>
Received on Monday, 14 March 2005 22:51:50 UTC