- From: Paul Walsh, Segala <paulwalsh@segala.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 18:48:06 -0000
- To: "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "'WCAG-WG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
-----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org No consensus was reached so no decisions are recorded. We don't record everything that is said at a 4 hour teleconf. We used to try to take notes but they were short, incomplete and not really what people said. Later people were criticized for things they didn't say. And people made reference to things the 'group' said when it in fact didn't say that. Someone said that - or in some cases - no-one said that. it was just what the note taker who was pounding away on their keyboard typed from snippets the could catch as the conversation ran ahead. Also, it took someone out of the call since they had to do non-stop typing. I hate to ask the question but can you be productive for 4 hours on a conference call? My two brains cells start to argue with each other after around 3 hours. I agree that documenting issues, tasks and resolutions is far more productive. At the meeting we told Sorcha that her comments on this would be added to the open issue. This has been done. See http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=1896 Apologies for not spotting this. I was looking for an issue with WCL XG, Content Label or RDF-CL in the title. For the record, EARL is a language and doesn't refer to 'Content Labels'. Content Labels refers to the WCL XG i.e.. the proposed replacement for PICS. PICS is an old W3C recommendation that doesn't do most of the Semantic stuff that RDF can do. In response to your question "By the phrase 'provide machine-readable conformance claims' does this mean to display conformance claims in a machine-readable format?", the answer is yes. Clear as mud? Thanks Paul
Received on Friday, 17 March 2006 18:48:29 UTC