Minutes of Authoring Tool Teleconference of June 2 2008

Minutes:http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html
IRC log: http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-irc

ACTIONS:
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* All to Send additions/revisions on ATAG2 
Implementation [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action01]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* GP will look at the earlier mapping with WCAG and 
evaluate if changes need to be made. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action05]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* Jeanne will make the agreed edits to the charter and 
send them to Judy. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action02]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* JR follow up with WCAG to determine if they are 
willing to change their organization of Guideline A.2.2 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action03]
*[NEW]* *ACTION:* JS and JR will review the ATAG documents and propose 
changes to the WCAG public comments. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action04]

Text of Minutes:

WAI AU
02 Jun 2008

Agenda

See also: IRC log
Attendees

Present
    jeanne, Jan, Treviranus, MichaelS, GPisocky, AnnM, Tim
Regrets
    Andrew_R., Roberto_S., Reed_S.
Chair
    Jutta Treviranus
Scribe
    Jeanne

Contents

    * Topics
         1. rechartering
         2. Face2face
         3. Harmonization with WCAG 2
         4. other success criteria harmonization
         5. WCAG2 checkpoints that are not covered in ATAG.
    * Summary of Action Items

 

<Jan> Scribe: Jeanne

<Jan> ACTION: All to Send additions/revisions on ATAG2 Implementation 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action01]

<Jan> Repository to JR/JS

JT: Legislation draft being presented that ATAG Authoring tools required 
for Accessibility Act Information Standard
rechartering

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/2008/draft_auwg_charter_27may08.html

JS: read from Mike's email 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2008AprJun/0059.html

MS: It caught my attention that I didn't know what it was.

JT: This is a text base criteria, first do this, then that.

JR: TB has a draft and some material for this.

<Tim> What is topic (I'm only on IRC today)

JT: There were many more if then dependencies in ATAG 1. It could be 
simplified.

topic is the charter and whether more information on test material is 
necessary in the charter

<Tim> thanks

JT: It gives us greater flexibility in coordinating with other groups.

RESOLUTION: Keep charter wording loosely worded on the Other 
Deliverables test materials.

JT: We will also work with EO and collaborate with them in creating an FAQ.

JR: "Other minor supporting documents for ATAG 2.0, e.g. FAQ, as required."

<Tim> do we need to be plugged in to the WAI-AGE TF (out of EO)?

JR: who do we say we have dependency on? With WAI-AGE, we may not have a 
dependency, but we may want to liaison with them.

<Tim> Also what about TSDTF (test sample development task force)?

<Greg> yes

JS: Do we need to adjust the milestones?

JR: do it.

JS: ACTION: Jeanne will adjust the milestones by two months for the charter.

JT: Getting it done earlier would be wonderful.

JR: Can we send it to WAI CG and Judy?

<Tim> I agree

<scribe> ACTION: Jeanne will make the agreed edits to the charter and 
send them to Judy. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action02]
Face2face

Mike will attend in person

AnnM needs the hotel details to determine whether she can attend.

Greg has a 90% chance of being there.

Tim is teaching a class and will be attending by phone.
Harmonization with WCAG 2

JR: this is a better organization of the material.
... Should we suggest it to WCAG?

AnnM: It's an improvement in my experience.

JR: Even if WCAG doesn't organize this way, should we still go ahead 
with this organization?
... WCAG is now calling it "Time Based Media". It's not a normative 
change, just a reordering.

<scribe> ACTION: JR follow up with WCAG to determine if they are willing 
to change their organization of Guideline A.2.2 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action03]

JR: We want to use the same terms, except in the places where we call 
out the differences.

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/TR/ATAG20/#glossary

<Jan> http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#glossary

JR: To properly harmonize, we need to use WCAG wording.

JS: Being close to WCAG is good enough, I don't like the use of Notes.

JT: If we want to use a different term, we should use a different word.

<Tim> I think we should use same terminology unless we can't and then we 
should document why we can't

GP: Harmonization means that we can propose better wording to them. We 
are not subordinent to them.

<Tim> don't disagree with that

MS: We should suggest the better wording to have better usability of the 
document.

JT: I think we should assess harmonization on a case by case basis to 
see where there is a better definition.

GP: If harmonization means negotiation and discussion, I agree, but not 
if harmonization means that WCAG dictates what we can say, no.

<scribe> ACTION: JS and JR will review the ATAG documents and propose 
changes to the WCAG public comments. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action04]

<Jan> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2008AprJun/0061.html
other success criteria harmonization

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2008AprJun/0061.html

Success Criteria in WCAG that don't have a 1 to 1 match with ATAG.

JR: is risk averse to changing normative text when there were no 
negative public comments.
WCAG2 checkpoints that are not covered in ATAG.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2008AprJun/0061.html near 
the bottom.

JR: ATAG doesn't cover resize of text, Reading level, images of text.

JT: But aren't these related to content rather than the tool?

AM: Is this menu options or chrome, or help text?

JR: both. Nothing is driven by content being authored.
... We didn't think that it was appropriate to require a tool to lower 
reading level for a technical audience, but the general poor quality of 
help systems might indicate that there should be some work here.

AM: There needs to be a level of explanation of the jargon.

JR: Can someone take this on? Can someone study whether or not the 
guidelines being missing is a problem?

GP: had done an earlier mapping that could be revived.

<scribe> ACTION: GP will look at the earlier mapping with WCAG and 
evaluate if changes need to be made. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action05]

Next meeting in two weeks on June 16.
Summary of Action Items
[NEW] ACTION: All to Send additions/revisions on ATAG2 Implementation 
[recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action01]
[NEW] ACTION: GP will look at the earlier mapping with WCAG and evaluate 
if changes need to be made. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action05]
[NEW] ACTION: Jeanne will make the agreed edits to the charter and send 
them to Judy. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action02]
[NEW] ACTION: JR follow up with WCAG to determine if they are willing to 
change their organization of Guideline A.2.2 [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action03]
[NEW] ACTION: JS and JR will review the ATAG documents and propose 
changes to the WCAG public comments. [recorded in 
http://www.w3.org/2008/06/02-au-minutes.html#action04]
 
[End of minutes]

Received on Monday, 2 June 2008 21:21:26 UTC