9 April 2001 ERT WG Meeting Minutes

http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/2001/04/09-minutes.html

9 April 2001 ERT WG Meeting Minutes
Summary of action items and resolutions
Action LK: Post these questions to www-annotation, post pointer to WAI-ER.
How does Annotea handle documents that change. Part of relationships 
between docs?
Are the re plans to annotate annotatiosn?
How do you avoid annotation spam? A robot plastering advertising on popular 
web pages.
Are there annotations that are structured? Something other than freeform text?
Accessibility of Amaya?
No meeting next week (16 April)

Participants
·       Chris Ridpath
·       William Loughborough
·       Len Kasday
·       Wendy Chisholm
·       Harvey Bingham

New Tools
LK WatchFire
WC Also at CHI, lots of marketing about DiamondBullet.

ATAG tool
LK Anything else for this a.m.?
WL Mattias created an interface for the ATAG TECHS doc. Think we ought to 
think about interfaces for all our docs. Interfaces like WAVE and A-Prompt 
and less like W3C are something we should look into.
LK What do you mean?
WL The miles of boilerplate at the beginning.
WC Don't think we can get rid of the boilerplate, but stuff after that...
WL Put a "d" at the top that links to all the boilerplate in the world. Not 
everyone needs that.
/* looking at Mattias' interface to ATAG Techs */
WL Showing the kind of tool he is used to. It makes the other document 
something you can get into. It's like my checkpoint checker, but from a 
different point of view. where you make assertions based on checkboxes, 
could be converted to EARL (the manual check part).
LK It has a bunch of questions, are these 1 to 1 correspondence with 
requirements?
WL Not sure. We'll ask him at the meeting. This idea is persuasive. Just 
wanted to address the issue that some of these things can be done within 
our own bailiwick.
LK This is an example of a tool which instruments a document by having an 
external checklist which will link to the document itself.
HB Don't see any way to quantify that i've done 1/2 the images. Aren't we 
putting our assessments on documents as well as tools.
WL Have a different left frame when working with document rather than tool. 
If we're evaluating authoring tool accessibility not sure dealing with the 
documents it produces.Still thinking of it as a mock-up of a prototype.
HB Very interesting.
WL Some people hate it. Unless you have more than one view, you don't have 
enough.

Annotea
LK Let us read the pages then comment on it.
/* Introduction slide 2*/
LK it's attaching comments as well as processing them. They talk about a 
query language like SQL to pull things out of it.
HB Premise: not altering original document, but letting people know 
annotations exist.
WC Annotation server, set permissions on annotations. Configure to load 
annotations from various servers .
WL It would be neat if the W3C site was as fast as google.
LK It would be useful for this to run on something other than a W3C server. 
To put it on another server, what do?
WC Don't know.
/* Underlying Architecture - slide 4 */
/* Annotations are Statements - slide 5 */
/* Annotation Schema - slide 6 */
LK At the F2F RS talked about this. they just havfe a simpler way of doing 
it. Creator of statement is just another attribute of the statement.
HB Lots of potential attributes. For the document, you wouldl ike to know 
the creator. For the annotation you would like to know the document 
version. Date is not necessarily an adequate surrogate.
LK The property annotates. We asked if it points to a URL or URL+version.
WL If the document goes away, it's annotations go away?
HB Who owns the annotation, the annotator?
WC That's issue with dated URIs. Pro is that annotate to dated URI means 
that for future versions it may not apply. Con, is that what if it does 
still apply?
/* discussion about inaccessibility of this slide presentation as well as 
Amaya */
HB Re: spam, you might have some filtering based on author.
LK A signature as a solution.
WC You can filter by author, by server, and by type.
LK As far as authentication, who made the annotation, the filter by author 
is good as long as can authenticate.
WL Therefore prohibit anonymous, who is responsible for some of the world's 
best quotations.
LK Are there annotations that are structured? Something other than freeform 
text? If so, then EARL is just an application.
WC But they are RDF.
WL They make RDF out of someone saying "I hate this."
LK These are EARL requirements stated as questions.
WL Is it an activity?
WC It's a project. Marja is the lead. The home page has more info, 
including contributors and how to set up a server.
WL What is the review?
WC Don't think there is one.
LK PF would be the only one to do it. Currently, WAI is reviewing mail 
archives. Who is leading this?
WC Judy I imagine.
LK Amaya is a similar thing. Sounds like there is not a formal way of 
reviewing things that are not recommendations. Part of R&D activity.
WC hadn't thought about. Mostly thought about stuff outside of W3C, but yes 
this and Amaya are R&D.
LK who wants to infiltrate the www-annotation mailing list?
/* everyone already subscribed to too many */
Action LK: Post these questions to www-annotation, post pointer to WAI-ER.
How does Annotea handle documents that change. Part of relationships 
between docs?
Are the re plans to annotate annotatiosn?
How do you avoid annotation spam? A robot plastering advertising on popular 
web pages.
Are there annotations that are structured? Something other than freeform text?
Accessibility of Amaya?

Next meeting
WL and WC send regrets.
next week is cancelled.

$Date: 2001/04/09 15:28:16 $ Wendy Chisholm

--
wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
madison, wi usa
tel: +1 608 663 6346
/--

Received on Monday, 9 April 2001 11:58:42 UTC