9/11 Meeting

Next meeting Monday, 10:00-11:30 Eastern USA Time (GMT -05:00) on the MIT 
bridge (+1 617-258-7910).

Agenda

Three items, described below

Charter
Open AERT issues, especially how to write assertions about accessibility in 
machine readable form
Feeback on WAVE 2.0

==============================

First Agenda Item: Charter  (draft new charter at 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/erwg-charter-20000531.html )

- It's going to be one group again, just "ER Working Group", no longer any 
distinction between ER IG and ER WG

Mission.
Judy Brewer wrote:
ER WG: mission is unclear, some of it sounds more like the impact the group
wants to have on the field, rather than the scope of work that the group
will take on. i think what the group actually does is more along the lines
of developing techniques that describe how to evaluation and retrofit Web
pages according to WCAG 1.0; reviewing evaluation, retrofitting, and
transformation tools; tracking tools and related resources and maintaining
reference links to these; developing a limited number of tools where no
appropriate tools exist. also needs activity and history links, and needs a
good explanation for that history (e.g. that this new ER WG merges the two
previous ones, and links to those groups. By the way, might consider moving
ER WG activity back up to /WAI/ER once this charter goes into effect, no?
Does that make sense?)."

Success.
Judy wrote:
ER WG: the stated success criteria are very impact-oriented, and only
indirectly related to the actual work of the group -- how about some
concrete ones that relate more directly to production of ER WG deliverables?

Deliverables:
Judy wrote:
On
the "related deliverables" to make the ER WG role clearer, I'd suggest
stating simply: "Reviews of externally developed tools: review and provide
feedback to developers of blah blah blah."


-----------------

Second Agenda Items: Open Issues on AERT 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/ert/ert-open-issues.html

Especially, How do we describe accessibility of a document in machine 
readable form?  This would include assertions that there are problems, or 
there are no problems... for web page as a whole or individual elements.
E.g.

1. Simply add a class to each checked element.  E.g. if an image has ALT 
text that has been validated by a human, write

    <IMG class="access:ok"  src= etcetera etcetera>

2. Use RDF?  How? We need examples.  RDF was discussed at 
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/minutes/20000807.html which inlucludes references.

3. Other? E.g. meta tags?

-----------------
Third Agenda Item: The WAVE

If there's time start giving suggestions for new version of the WAVE
http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/

New Help Screens
Now handles Frames, SSL.
Provides icons for logical tags H1, H2, Lists,etc.  Also Access keys
Warns of mouseovers, javascript popups
Features "Add WAVE button to your browser"


--
Leonard R. Kasday, Ph.D.
Institute on Disabilities/UAP and Dept. of Electrical Engineering at Temple 
University
(215) 204-2247 (voice)                 (800) 750-7428 (TTY)
http://astro.temple.edu/~kasday         mailto:kasday@acm.org

Chair, W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Evaluation and Repair Tools Group
http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/IG/

The WAVE web page accessibility evaluation assistant: 
http://www.temple.edu/inst_disabilities/piat/wave/