- From: Colin Koteles <koteles@illinoisalumni.org>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:25:02 -0700
- To: <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <190bd01c341a1$2eea8f50$0a0c010a@mail2world.com>
Minutes of 3 July 2003 UAWG teleconf Roll call: Jon Gunderson (Chair) Dave Poehlman Cathy Laws Ian Jacobs Sean Stapleford Colin Koteles (Scribe) Topics: * User Agent charter * Face-to-face plans * Implementation report and test suite New action items generated: CK: Remove EMBED tests JG and/or CL: Look into finding someone at IBM to invite for pervasive computing discussions JG: check on invited expert status of current WG participants // Open action items: * Remove blink and marquee tests CK: Completed CK: Should we remove tests for EMBED? JG: OK. *** New Action: CK remove tests that include EMBED * Contact GW Micro about review JG: GW micro has submitted review, will look at this this afternoon * Add author stylesheet to individual evaluations JG: haven't added author style sheets * Create implementation report for IBM Home Page reader using HTML 4.01 test suites CL: have not heard from Jim Allen * Update XHTML 2.0 comments JG: IJ has updated XHTML 2.0 comments JG: Judy will review charter today DP: had telephone conversation with Eric, need to find somebody on the outside b/c of perceived need for more resources JG: will ping them // end of open action // Charter discussion JG: Draft charter - most W3C groups are out of charter. Technically not a working group w/o charter. JG: Next stage is for WG to approve charter and return to Judy, then to WAI, W3C, AC...long process JG: charter is an opportunity to recruit new members b/c charter is sent to W3C mailing list. JG: (review draft charter) [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/charter-2003-05-draft.html JG: Mission has changed and not changed. Still chartered to produce guidelines and help people use guidelines and produce new recommendations based on need of web community JG: Scope has changed to encompass pervasive computing *** New Action: JG and/or CL will look into finding someone at IBM to invite for pervasive computing discussions CL: Are you looking more for someone who is general pervasive computing expert? JG: yes (they don't need to join group, just get ideas how we can help make pervasive computing technologies more accessible) JG: goal at FTF is to discuss future directions for UAAG -- also wireless technologies JG: (Scope cont.): evaluate user agents, develop test suites, promote UAAG, review and comment on other WGs IJ: I will not be editing techniques document and I don't know if MM will JG: Deliverables: are we going to be publishing a new techniques document? IJ: Depends on future need for revisions, but won't need to actively work on techniques JG: Deliverables: HTML, CSS, audio, visual, SVG test suites. Collect information on user scenarios for new guidelines, produce minutes IJ: interesting discussion with (Dan Connelly?) - good to have requirements document for start on UAAG 2.0. Use requirements documents to tell stories about usage scenarios. Derive requirements from these scenarios. Evaluate new UAAG CPs against requirements document. Also, diff between 'desirable' requirements and 'must' requirements. JG: Dependencies: unchanged. JG: Duration: change from June 2004 to September or October 2004 JG: Success: if we complete deliverables IJ: New process document in effect July 1. WG members must go through expert invite process. This doc has clearer outline of WG participation and joining process. Want as many participants as possible, but W3C world like members whose organization is not W3C member to have organization join. IJ: four classes of participants in WG: chair (JG), team reps (IJ & MM), W3C member reps, expert reps invited by the chair *** New Action Item: JG check on invited expert status of current participants (discussion of separation of WG work and proprietary work ? W3C does not hold patents) JG: Is there consensus among members present? If so, I will forward draft charter to mail list for comments. If comments in next 2 weeks will address then, otherwise I will forward to Judy in two weeks. (No objections) // end charter discussion // FTF meeting plans JG: Will go ahead and make plans for FTF assuming charter will be approved. Want to make sure we have a charter in place before meeting. Will push meeting to October or November. CL: Can still come then. DP: May or may not be able to make it. Sean: I or another rep from my company can come. // end of FTF discussion // discussion of future UAAG concerns JG: Do not want to wait for last call, etc. for feedback from developers. Want to have a defined niche for pervasive computing and other emerging technologies. Need to see where we fit into puzzle. Get buy-in from developers at an early stage. Section 508 may help this. // end of discussion // Implementation report and test suite discussion work JG: New implementation report from GWMicro: Windows Eyes with IE - having some problems but will be up soon JG: Haven't identified bug with IR ? test suites weren't in report ? couldn't replicate problem IJ: Diff between raw report and loaded report? JG: My students are using it, and they're not having a problem. JG: Said for provision level, they felt they passed all tests. If true, UAAG can work with GWMicro for conformance claim. Can announce that someone else (GWMicro) made claim. CK: (Test suite) Have fixed broken links, frame tests, missing image files, etc..., have started working on new tests. JG, IJ, CK will discuss technical aspects of adding new tests post-telecon // end of IR and TS discussion JG: next meeting 31 july 2003 // end of telecon IJ, JG, CK: worked on IR and TS overview.html bugs
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 16:28:13 UTC