Re: Agenda

Me, too. - sorry.

-kerstin

Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG wrote:

> Me too...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cynthia Shelly (by way of Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>)"
> <cyns@Exchange.Microsoft.com>
> To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 11:55 PM
> Subject: RE: Agenda
>
> Regrets for tomorrow.
>
> Any chance we could move the 5.1/5.4 discussion to next week?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Jason White
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 6:05 PM
> To: Web Content Guidelines
>
> Thursday, 17 April, 2002, 20:00-21:30 UTC (4 PM US Eastern, 10 PM
> France, 6 AM Eastern Australia) on +1-617-761-6200, passcode 9224.
> IRC: irc.w3.org:6665, channel #wai-wcag
>
> Agenda
>
> 1. The WCAG working group Charter:
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003AprJun/0058.html
>
> We need to prepare a new public working draft of WCAG 2.0, taking
> account of those changes which have been made subsequently to the
> October 2002 public draft. For this purpose, several issues have been
> raised by the editors:
>
> 2. Checkpoint 1.2:
>     http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003AprJun/0056.html
>
> 3. Conformance: what do we wish to say in this public working draft,
>     pending resolution of the large issues pertaining to the
>     conformance scheme? The latest concrete proposal we have that seeks
>     to clarify the existing scheme is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003JanMar/0150.html
>
> 4. Overlap between level 2 and 3 success criteria of checkpoint 5.1,
>     and checkpoint 5.4.
>
> 5. Checkpoint 1.5: contrast ratios and requirements.
>
> The editors may be able to post proposals on each of these points before
> Thursday's teleconference.
>
> Other issues up for discussion:
>
> 6. categorization of guidelines: definitions of types or levels of
>     conformance.
>
> 7. The details of the WCAG 2.0 conformance scheme.
>
> 8. A checkpoint mapping and other issues surrounding the relationship
>     between WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 1.0 conformance schemes.